top of page

How would the proposed Humboldt offshore wind project affect fishing in and offshore of Wigi/Humboldt Bay?

According to the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the construction and operation of wind turbines could negatively affect commercial, recreational, and Tribal fishing in a variety of ways, including:

  • Displacing fishermen from traditional fishing areas

  • Changing the distribution, abundance, and species composition of fish in an area

  • Causing economic losses

  • Increasing vessel traffic and competition for support services on shore

  • Disrupting vessel radar systems

  • Damaging or destroying fishing gear

  • Reducing safety at sea from increased vessel traffic and navigation challenges

Illustration of bottom trawling, one commercial fishery on the North Coast.

Bottom trawling, one commercial fishery on the North Coast.

Source: NOAA Fisheries (9)

In existing offshore wind projects, impacts to the fishing community have been mixed. For a current synthesis of interactions between offshore wind and fisheries see NOAA’s 2023 report (1) on the subject. On the East Coast, Vineyard Offshore (2) has set up a compensation fund for commercial fishers who have been displaced (3) by their offshore wind projects. At the same time, some recreational anglers who have fished off of fixed-bottom wind turbines on the East Coast have expressed the belief that the wind turbines have benefited their fishing (4). Fixed bottom turbines, like those on the East Coast, can act as artificial reefs which enhance fish habitat (5) and provide a convenient place from which to recreationally fish; floating wind turbines like those proposed off the coast of Humboldt may have the same effect (12). There are far fewer floating offshore wind turbines deployed around the world than fixed bottom turbines, so, less is known about their capacity to provide artificial habitat. However, it has long been known (10) that floating objects in the marine environment can attract fish and other large mobile animals. For example, a recent survey of floating offshore wind turbines off the coast of Scotland recorded 121 species (11) living under or attached to the floating turbines, including 48 species attached to the physical structure and 73 mobile species.

​

The two Humboldt Wind Energy Area (6) lease holders, RWE (7) and Vineyard Offshore (2) have developed a joint fisheries communications plan (8) with the following three objectives:

  • Ensure that fishing communities are informed of project activities in advance and aware of the opportunities to engage and provide input at each project phase. 

  • Cultivate a deep understanding of fisheries, fishery participants, and fishing communities to inform project design and activities. 

  • Facilitate communication, coordination, and collaboration with fishing communities to identify, avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to the extent practicable and promote mutually positive outcomes.

​

The plan identifies the commercial Pacific Coast groundfish trawl and fixed gear fisheries as those primarily operating inside the lease areas. Another potential conflict identified by fishers is the time’s when offshore wind turbines being transported to or from the heavy lift marine terminal will interfere with the federal navigation channel of Humboldt Bay. Through the plan, the companies hope to avoid and minimize conflicts with the fishing community. When both companies executed their leases, they set aside 5% of the total bid (8) specifically for Community Benefits Agreements (CBAs) for parties impacted by loss of use of the lease area (i.e. fishers). That means the companies have already set aside roughly $16.5 million for CBAs with the fishing community.

References​

  1. Hogan, F., Hooker, B., & Jensen, B. (2023). Fisheries and Offshore Wind Interactions: Synthesis of Science. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/49151 

  2. Vineyard Offshore. (n.d.). www.vineyardoffshore.com/california

  3. Berke, B. (2024, March 29). Fishermen displaced by offshore wind farm apply for compensation. The Public’s Radio. https://thepublicsradio.org/south-coast-bureau/fishermen-displaced-by-offshore-wind-farm-apply-for-compensation/

  4. Smythe, T., Bidwell, D., & Tyler, G. (2021, May). Optimistic with reservations: The impacts of the United States’ first offshore wind farm on the recreational fishing experience. Marine Policy, 127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104440

  5. The Nature Conservancy. (2024, June 4). Turbine Reefs: Designing Offshore Wind Power to Improve Habitat for Marine Life. www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-priorities/protect-water-and-land/land-and-water-stories/wind-turbines-restoring-habitat/

  6. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. (n.d.). Humboldt Wind Energy Area. www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/state-activities/humboldt-wind-energy-area

  7. RWE. (2024). https://americas.rwe.com/our-energy/offshore-wind/ 

  8. RWE, Vineyard Offshore. (2024, January 29). Fisheries Communications Plan. https://americas.rwe.com/-/media/RWE/RWE-USA/documents/rwe-vineyard-offshore-joint-fcp.pdf

  9. NOAA Fisheries. (2022, July 6). Fishing Gear: Bottom Trawls. www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/bycatch/fishing-gear-bottom-trawls

  10. Rountree, Rodney A. Association of fishes with fish aggregation devices: effects of structure size on fish abundance. Bulletin of Marine Science 44.2 (1989): 960-972. http://www.fishecology.org/cv/Rountree1989.pdf

  11. Karlsson, R., Tivefälth, M., Duranović, I., Martinsson, S., Kjølhamar, A., & Murvoll, K. M. (2022). Artificial hard-substrate colonisation in the offshore Hywind Scotland Pilot Park. Wind Energy Science, 7(2), 801-814. https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/7/801/2022/wes-7-801-2022.html

  12. Haberlin, D., Cohuo, A., & Doyle, T. K. 2022. Ecosystem Benefits of Floating Offshore Wind. Report for Simply Blue Energy Group. MaREI, University College Cork. https://tethys.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Haberlin-et-al-2022.pdf

bottom of page