Atlantic Highly Migratory Species: Commercial Atlantic Blacknose and Recreational Atlantic Shark Fisheries Management Measures; Extension of Comment Period
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Atlantic Highly Migratory Species: Commercial Atlantic Blacknose and Recreational Atlantic Shark Fisheries Management Measures; Extension of Comment Period
- Posted
- Feb 25, 2026
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- May 29, 2026Anonymous AnonymousOpposeIndividual
A recreational diver and angler opposes the proposed relaxation of Atlantic shark regulations, arguing that sharks are essential apex predators for ocean health. The commenter contends that shark sightings in certain areas are due to environmental changes rather than overpopulation and urges the agency to prioritize scientific data over pressure from the fishing industry.
Read comment → - May 29, 2026Anonymous AnonymousOpposeIndividualRead comment →
- May 29, 2026Cam LarsenOpposeIndividualRead comment →
- May 29, 2026Anonymous AnonymousOpposeIndividual
A marine biology graduate argues against any regulations that would allow for the harming of sharks or other marine life. They emphasize the ecological importance of sharks and express concern over negative public perceptions and media-driven fear mongering.
Read comment → - May 29, 2026Katherine EversOpposeIndividualRead comment →
- May 29, 2026Chloe NoonanOpposeIndividualRead comment →
- May 29, 2026Grace Van de PasOpposeIndividual
The commenter, who identifies as an avid diver, opposes the proposed action because they believe it will lead to an increase in the taking of apex predators like sharks. They argue that sharks are essential for ocean biodiversity and that the proposal favors corporate interests over the preservation of wildlife.
Read comment → - May 29, 2026Anonymous AnonymousOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes the proposed changes, arguing that shark populations are declining and that the claim of overpopulation lacks scientific basis. They express concern that lowering size requirements will lead to the capture of more juveniles, further threatening the species' survival.
Read comment → - May 28, 2026Donna BorysOpposeIndividual📎 Attachment
Donna Borys opposes the proposed changes to Atlantic shark management measures, arguing that increased harvest flexibility and retention opportunities could undermine conservation progress and destabilize marine ecosystems. She advocates for continued precautionary management, improved monitoring, and research into nonlethal depredation mitigation instead of increasing harvest pressure.
Read comment → - May 28, 2026John Borys JrOpposeIndividual📎 Attachment
John Borys opposes the proposed increases in shark harvest flexibility and retention limits, arguing that these measures could reverse decades of conservation progress. He contends that increased shark depredation is a sign of recovering populations rather than overpopulation and advocates for a precautionary, science-based management approach.
Read comment →
