Massachusetts
After Massachusetts fishermen were seen ‘targeting’ white sharks, state looks to better restrict shore-based shark fishing
It’s already illegal for fishermen to attract or capture a great white shark, but Bay State officials are proposing new rules to better restrict shore-based shark fishing after anglers were seen “targeting” the protected species along Cape Cod.
The white shark fishing issue came to a head last September when fishermen at a Wellfleet beach reportedly used a drone to drop bait near surfers to lure a white shark.
While this reported fishing activity violated the existing white shark rules, Massachusetts Environmental Police have had a tough time enforcing the regulations because it’s difficult to prove intent — and anglers will often claim they’re targeting other species of sharks, striped bass, or bluefish.
As a result, the state Division of Marine Fisheries is pitching more straightforward rules that would control white shark fishing to help with enforcement.
The regulations would ban shore-based shark fishing along the Massachusetts coast where white sharks are common, prohibit chumming when conducting any shore fishing, and limit the launching of baits to normal casting when shore fishing.
These rules would be in place along the Massachusetts coastline from the New Hampshire border through Chatham, including all of Monomoy Island, except for the shores inside Plymouth, Kingston, and Duxbury Bays.
“There have been increasing reports of people fishing for sharks from beaches, especially along the Outer Cape,” Megan Winton of the Atlantic White Shark Conservancy told the Herald. “We’re very supportive of the proposed regulations… They would be a step in the right direction.”
The waters along the South Cape and Islands, where recreational shark fishing for non-white shark species has historically occurred, are not included in the proposal.
Also, the state would exempt the shoreline inside the Three Bays system because there’s a traditional shore-based catch and release sand tiger shark fishery there.
Back in 2015 as Cape Cod was becoming a white shark hotspot, the state enacted emergency rules to address public safety concerns. The existing state regulations restrict the ability for fishers to target white sharks, and it’s illegal to attract or capture a white shark without authorization from the DMF director.
The state agency has limited the growth of activities that would put humans in contact with white sharks — like baited cage diving — but some shore-based anglers have been targeting and landing white sharks.
“They’ll post their video on social media because there are no bigger bragging rights,” Winton said.
Then the infamous incident happened at a Wellfleet beach last September, which the Provincetown Independent brought to light. Shore-based anglers were reportedly targeting sharks and were chumming off the beach, using drones to deploy baits, and doing so among a group of surfers.
The surfers claimed to have seen surfacing white sharks while in the water, and that they were “clotheslined” by the fishing gear. The fishermen suggested the surfers were intentionally interacting with the fishing gear, and claimed they were fishing for sharks other than whites.
“That incident put these regulations on everybody’s radar,” Winton said. “And raised this issue up the flagpole.”
The head of the Marine Fisheries Advisory Commission said he’s worried about the potential for shore-based shark fishing to expand.
“My concern is driven by both general interest in this animal and the substantial social media interest around shore-based shark fishing,” wrote Daniel McKiernan, director of the Marine Fisheries Advisory Commission. “Should this growth occur, it would substantially increase the risks to both the public and to white sharks.
“In response, DMF has developed a series of proposals that I view as being commonsense steps to make the existing regulatory framework more enforceable and constrain burgeoning fishing activities that may potentially lead to intended or unintended interactions with white sharks resulting in harm to the animal and a public safety risk,” he added. “My proposals are also informed by existing regulations in other jurisdictions with traditional shore-based shark fisheries, including New York and Florida.”
The state is proposing many other commercial and recreational fishing regulations.
The proposed amendments include: total length measurement and commercial size limits in the striped bass fishery; catch limits for false albacore and Atlantic bonito; commercial menhaden trip limit triggers and permitting; commercial summer flounder seasonal allocations; retention of oceanic whitetip sharks; documentation to possess or sell dogfish fins; and more.
The Marine Fisheries Advisory Commission is expected to vote on final DMF recommendations at their business meeting next week.
Originally Published:
The Farm Bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives April 30 could undermine a Massachusetts law aimed at preventing animal cruelty.
The sweeping agricultural bill includes a section called the “Save Our Bacon Act,” which prohibits state and local governments from having farm animal welfare protections that extend to products originating in other states.
The measure specifically targets Massachusetts and California state laws that prohibit certain farm animals from being held in extreme confinement.
Massachusetts Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, both Democrats, released a statement opposing the inclusion of the measure in the Farm Bill.
“This is a highly controversial and poisonous policy that ignores the will of the people. These state laws were overwhelmingly supported by a popular vote — they shouldn’t be overridden because of big-dollar lobbying,” the senators said in their statement. “We have significant concerns about the House-passed Farm Bill, including this overreaching and harmful provision that should not be in the Farm Bill and needs to be removed.”
What is Massachusetts’s Question 3?
In 2016, Massachusetts voters passed Question 3, or an Act to Prevent Cruelty to Farm Animals, with 78% of the vote.
The measure banned the sale of eggs, veal or pork from animals that were “confined in a cruel manner.” It eliminated enclosures that prevented an animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending their limbs or turning around freely.
All of these products sold in Massachusetts must be compliant, regardless of whether the animals were raised on farms in or outside Massachusetts. Therefore, out-of-state farms must comply with Question 3 in order to sell their products in Massachusetts.
Town Line cares for 50 cows, reserving some each year for meat to sell at its farm store.
The law is similar to California’s Proposition 12, which also lays out specific freedom of movement and minimum floor space requirements for how veal calves, breeding pigs and egg-laying hens are kept. It also doesn’t allow the sale of any products from animals confined in ways that don’t meet their standards, including those produced in other states.
What is the Save Our Bacon Act?
The Save Our Bacon Act seeks to block California’s and Massachusetts’s laws on out-of-state producers by saying that no state “may enact or enforce, directly or indirectly, a condition or standard on the production of covered livestock other than for covered livestock physically raised in such State or subdivision.”
The legislation would apply to any domestic animal raised for the purpose of human consumption or milk production, but not animals raised primarily for egg production.
Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, originally introduced the Save Our Bacon Act in July 2025.
“California’s Proposition 12 and Massachusetts’ Question 3 pose a major threat to family farms and food security — both in Iowa and across the country,” she said in a press release at the time. “The Save Our Bacon Act reaffirms livestock producers’ right to sell their products across state lines, without interference from arbitrary mandates.”
The act was added as a section in the Farm Bill, which was then passed by the House on a vote of 224-200. The bill next heads to the Senate, where its fate is unclear as lawmakers both across and within party lines have butted heads on several provisions.
This article originally appeared on Telegram & Gazette: Farm Bill provision threatens Massachusetts animal welfare rules
Fire broke out at an apartment building in North Attleborough, Massachusetts, on Monday afternoon, sending a column of smoke high into the air.
NBC affiliate WJAR-TV reports the smoke was visible from miles away from the building on Juniper Road.
More details were not immediately available.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
Life Care Center of Raynham has received a deficiency‑free inspection result from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, a distinction awarded to a small share of the state’s licensed nursing homes, according to a community announcement.
The inspection was conducted as part of the state’s routine, unannounced nursing home survey process overseen by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. These comprehensive, multi‑day inspections evaluate multiple aspects of facility operations, including staffing levels, quality of care, medication management, cleanliness, food service and resident rights.
State survey records show that Life Care Center of Raynham met required standards during its most recent standard survey, with no deficiencies cited, based on publicly available state data.
The announcement states that fewer than 8% of Massachusetts nursing homes achieve deficiency‑free survey results. That figure could not be independently verified through state or federal data and is attributed to the announcement.
In addition to the state survey outcome, the facility is listed as a five‑star provider for quality measures on the federal Medicare Care Compare website. The five‑star quality measure rating reflects above‑average performance compared with other nursing homes nationwide, according to federal rating methodology.
Officials said the inspection results reflect ongoing compliance with state and federal standards designed to protect resident health and safety. According to the announcement, the outcome is attributed to staff performance and internal quality practices.
This story was created by Dave DeMille, ddemille@gannett.com, with the assistance of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Journalists were involved in every step of the information gathering, review, editing and publishing process. Learn more at cm.usatoday.com/ethical-conduct.
-
Minneapolis, MN5 minutes agoMinneapolis grocery store owner charged in $1 million food assistance fraud
-
Indianapolis, IN11 minutes agoThese vacant school district properties will become affordable housing
-
Pittsburg, PA17 minutes agoMan shot and killed in East Hills
-
Augusta, GA23 minutes agoAugusta factory to produce key component for drugs to fight malaria
-
Washington, D.C29 minutes agoDC weather: Sunny, mild Tuesday; showers return Wednesday
-
Cleveland, OH35 minutes agoGuardians Set Off Alarm Bells for Kwan Yesterday
-
Austin, TX41 minutes agoCancer case highlights gaps in Texas protections for women firefighters
-
Alabama47 minutes agoAlabama House race in Jacksonville area draws a crowded field