When the Endangered Species Act hit close to home in Cameron

The Cameron Turtle Excluder Device Blockade of 1989

Some experiences in a career are carefully planned, while others arrive unexpectedly and leave an impression that lasts a lifetime. For me, one of those unforgettable experiences occurred in July 1989, when a group of commercial shrimpers completely blockaded the Calcasieu Ship Channel at Cameron, in protest of new federal regulations requiring Turtle Excluder Devices, commonly known as TEDs, in their shrimp trawls.

At the time, I was a relatively young, 33-year-old Extension Service/Sea Grant Marine Advisory Agent with the LSU AgCenter, serving commercial and recreational fishermen in Cameron and Calcasieu parishes. My job was primarily educational and advisory. I worked closely with fishermen on fisheries-related issues, but nothing in my training or experience had prepared me to become involved in a rapidly developing confrontation involving commercial fishermen, the U.S. Coast Guard, federal regulators, Louisiana State Police, the governor’s office and members of Congress.

It was an experience I will never forget...

Why TEDs became an issue

The controversy centered on the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and efforts to protect the endangered Kemp’s Ridley Sea turtle, one of the world’s most endangered sea turtles.

Kemp’s Ridleys were particularly vulnerable because most of the species’ nesting occurred along a relatively small stretch of beach on the Gulf coast of Mexico. Their numbers had declined dramatically because of the historic harvesting of turtle eggs, loss and disturbance of nesting habitat, and mortality associated with human activities, including accidental capture in fishing gear.

By the mid- to late 1980s, conservation officials were deeply concerned about the species’ survival. The number of nesting females had fallen to fewer than 300 in some years. Federal officials believed reducing the accidental capture and drowning of sea turtles in shrimp trawls was an important part of the recovery effort.

The proposed solution was Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs).

A TED is essentially a specially designed grid installed inside a shrimp trawl. Shrimp can pass through the grid and remain in the net, while larger animals such as sea turtles encounter the grid and are directed toward an escape opening. In theory, the device would allow shrimpers to continue harvesting shrimp while giving sea turtles an opportunity to escape.

From the shrimpers’ perspective, however, TEDs represented another federal regulation threatening an already difficult way of making a living. Many believed the devices could cause them to lose as much as 10 percent of their shrimp catch. For commercial fishermen operating on narrow profit margins, a 10 percent reduction could mean the difference between making a living and losing money.

There was also frustration because many shrimpers rarely, if ever, encountered a sea turtle while shrimping. They questioned why they should accept a significant reduction in their catch to protect an animal they seldom encountered while fishing.

The blockade begins

The controversy came to a head in Cameron in July 1989.

On Saturday morning, July 22, I received a telephone call from State Representative Randy Roach, whose legislative district included Cameron Parish. Randy and I had developed a close working relationship, particularly on issues affecting the commercial and recreational fishing industries in Cameron and Calcasieu parishes.

His message was direct: the Cameron shrimpers had completely blocked the Calcasieu Ship Channel.

The federal government was scheduled to begin enforcing the new TED requirements the following Monday. The shrimpers wanted implementation delayed so they could have additional time to negotiate what they considered more reasonable regulations with federal officials.

Randy asked me to meet him at the ship channel in Cameron to see whether we could help negotiate a peaceful resolution.

I had no idea what we were walking into.

When we arrived, we immediately encountered wives, family members and supporters of the shrimpers gathered near the channel. They came running toward our vehicles, asking whether Randy and I could help resolve the crisis.

I knew many of the fishermen personally, and that relationship proved extremely important. They knew I was not there as an enforcement officer or federal regulator. I was there as an Extension and Sea Grant educator who had worked with them and understood the importance of the commercial fishing industry to coastal Louisiana.

Still, the situation was extremely tense.

Communication was another challenge. Remember, this was 1989. There were no cell phones available to us. The primary way to communicate with the shrimp boats was through VHF marine radio.

Even more troubling was what was happening at the blockade itself. U.S. Coast Guard vessels were positioned near the line of shrimp boats attempting to force their way through the channel. At one point, water cannons were directed toward the shrimp boats in an effort to break up the blockade.

It was becoming increasingly dangerous.

Randy immediately contacted the Louisiana State Police and the office of Governor Buddy Roemer. He urged state officials to intervene and asked that the Coast Guard withdraw rather than further escalate the confrontation.

That intervention proved successful. The Coast Guard eventually turned around and returned toward its base in Lake Charles.

But the crisis was far from over.

The shrimpers’ demand was straightforward: delay implementation of the federal TED requirement and give fishermen and federal officials an opportunity to work out a more reasonable solution.

Because the regulations originated with the federal government, Randy and I realized that any meaningful resolution would require federal involvement. We turned to our U.S. Congressman, Jimmy Hayes.

Negotiations in the wheelhouse

The next step was one I certainly never anticipated when I began my career as an Extension agent.

After numerous conversations, we identified the shrimpers who appeared to be leading the protest and who could speak for the fishermen. Randy and I eventually traveled by small boat to the shrimp boat of the captain who had emerged as the group’s spokesman.

We climbed aboard and entered the wheelhouse.

From that shrimp boat sitting in the middle of the blockade, negotiations began.

Through the Coast Guard, we established a VHF telephone connection with Congressman Hayes. Randy and I explained the seriousness of the situation and asked him to help find a way to peacefully resolve the standoff.

The circumstances were becoming increasingly serious. The Calcasieu Ship Channel was effectively closed, halting commercial shipping traffic serving the Port of Lake Charles.

Adding to the complications, a major deep-sea recreational fishing tournament was taking place that same weekend. Recreational fishermen who had gone offshore for the tournament were unable to return through the blocked channel. What began as a dispute over fishing regulations had now become a significant transportation, economic and public-safety issue.

A peaceful resolution

What followed was more than 17 hours of negotiations involving Congressman Hayes, the U.S. Coast Guard, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, the Louisiana Governor’s Office, Louisiana State Police and representatives of the commercial shrimping industry.

The objective was simple: find a way to defuse the situation without anyone getting hurt.

Ultimately, federal officials agreed to briefly delay implementation of the TED requirements. That decision provided a much-needed cooling-off period—not only in Cameron but along the Gulf Coast, where other shrimper-led blockades were simultaneously occurring in Louisiana and Texas.

With the immediate deadline postponed, the Cameron shrimpers agreed to end their blockade and return to port.

The channel was reopened, the fishermen went home, and the immediate crisis ended peacefully.

For me, the fact that no one was seriously injured and that everyone eventually went home safely remains the most important outcome of this entire episode.

Lessons from the blockade

Looking back more than three decades later, I realize just how unprepared I was for what happened that weekend. I was an Extension educator, not a crisis negotiator. I had never been trained to mediate a confrontation involving commercial fishermen, federal regulators, state police and an Endangered Species Act that most fishermen were totally unaware of.

Yet the experience taught me several important lessons.

First, relationships matter. The trust Randy Roach and I had developed with the fishing community allowed us to enter a highly emotional situation and have conversations that might not otherwise have been possible.

Second, listening matters. The shrimpers wanted to be heard. They were not simply opposed to protecting natural resources. They were concerned about their livelihoods, their families and the economic future of their industry.

Finally, peaceful communication can make an enormous difference during a crisis. When emotions are high and people feel threatened, finding individuals whom all sides trust can help prevent a difficult situation from becoming a disaster.

The shrimpers ultimately did have to install TEDs in their nets several months later. Over time improvements in TED design and fishing-net technology helped address some of the fishermen’s concerns and reduced shrimp losses associated with the devices. However, TED requirements continue to be very contentious across the entire Gulf coast.

The broader lesson was equally important: conservation regulations often have real consequences for the people whose livelihoods depend upon natural resources. Finding the right balance between protecting endangered species and protecting the economic well-being of resource-dependent communities is rarely easy.

For a young Extension Service - Sea Grant agent in Cameron Parish, the July 1989 blockade was certainly a baptism by fire, and one I always hoped I would never have to face again.

I went to the Calcasieu Ship Channel that morning simply hoping to help resolve a difficult situation. I came away with a lifetime lesson in leadership, communication, trust and the importance of bringing people together when emotions are running high.

Most importantly, everyone went home safely.

Looking back today, I consider that a true blessing—and one for which I remain grateful.

Until next time,
Paul Coreil