FORT PIERCE, Fla. — A vote this week could reinstate shrimp trawling for the first time in decades in a protected area off the coast of Fort Pierce, despite opposition from scientists and conservationists who warn it could devastate one of the world's rarest coral reefs.
Records obtained by WPTV show at least seven of the 13 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council members who will vote on the proposal have disclosed financial conflicts of interest related to the fishing and shrimping industry.
The Oculina Bank, a rare deep-sea coral reef, became the country's first marine protected area after shrimp trawling wiped out nearly 90% of the reef by the early 2000s.
In our previous investigations, we showed how a Trump Executive order in April sparked a proposal to reopen up to 24 square nautical miles of the reef, an area larger than the island of Manhattan, to rock shrimp fishing once again.
Protecting Paradise
Scientists warn rare reef found only in Florida could be destroyed again
The council will vote January 23 on the proposal after the government shutdown delayed the original vote.
The proposal mirrors a nearly identical plan from 2022 that drew opposition from nearly 50,000 people who joined with the National Resources Defense Council to oppose it.
While the council approved that amendment, Coral Amendment 10, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration rejected it, saying the plan failed to show compliance with federal protections.
Mike Gravitz, senior policy advisor for the Marine Conservation Institute in Washington D.C., said the repeated attempts to reopen the reef are puzzling.
"It does feel like groundhog day, I gotta tell you. These are unique corals. They occur in reef structure, nowhere else in the world, and we're down to the last 10% of them," Gravitz said.
WATCH PREVIOUS: Protected ecosystem could be destroyed due to executive order
When asked why he thinks the council keeps proposing reopening the reef to shrimp trawling, he said he didn't know.
"Really, we don't understand, and they've never adequately explained," said Gravitz. "And, you know, the administration has changed, and they've become more interested in listening to the pleas from fishermen."
According to their financial disclosure forms, five council members directly profit from the shrimping or fishing industry. Three members own boats that fish or shrimp off Florida's coast, and one member, James Hull, owns a seafood business and restaurant that harvests shrimp near the Oculina Bank.
Council disclosure forms state members "may not vote on any council decision that would have a significant and predictable effect on a financial interest disclosed" in their report. So far, no members have recused themselves from voting on the proposal.
WPTV Investigates
Federal council to decide fate of rare coral reef amid shrimp trawling debate
"If there's a clear conflict of interest in an economic interest, then they should not be allowed to vote," said Dr. Sandra Brooke, vice chair of the council's own Coral Advisory Panel.
Brooke, a scientist on the council's own coral advisory panel, says the the panel was never consulted on the current proposal, despite repeated requests to be heard.
"The reasoning that the council gave us was that, well, we have your opinions on Coral 10, and so this isn't much different, so we really don't need your opinion on this one," Brooke said. "It sort of speaks to a little bit to the lack of transparency."
"If this were the Sistine Chapel, and somehow, God forbid, 90% of the Sistine Chapel were destroyed by fire or by something, we'd say we have to be extra protective of that last 10%," Gravitz said.
WATCH BELOW: 'That's an overwhelming majority of people who are absolutely opposed to this,' Jim Moir tells WPTV
Shrimpers argue the rock shrimp fishing industry is dying and needs access to new areas to survive.
"The shrimping industry is teetering on the brink of extinction," said Bob Zales, executive director of the Southeastern Fishing Association.
However, NOAA data shows rock shrimp brings in just $1 million annually for Florida's economy, raising questions about whether the environmental impact is worth the economic benefit.
Executive Director John Carmichael responded on behalf of council members, stating the council's conflicts of interest are governed by NOAA and federal law. He said the council "did not seek additional advisory panel comments" because the proposal "included the same action as Coral Amendment 10, which advisory panels discussed in detail."
The public can still submit comments for or against the proposal before Friday's vote.
To view the virtual meeting on Jan. 23, register here.
To submit public comment, click here.
This story was reported on-air by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy.