| Downloaded from the National Library for the Environment | |
|
|
IB10074: Fishery, Aquaculture, and
Marine Mammal Legislation Eugene H. Buck August 28, 2001 CONTENTS
Fish and marine mammals are important resources in the open ocean and nearshore coastal areas. A diverse body of laws and regulations guides the management of these resources by a multitude of federal agencies. Reauthorization of major legislation in this issue area -- the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) -- is expected to be on the agenda of the 107th Congress, since the authorization of appropriations for both laws expired at the end of FY1999. In the 106th Congress, oversight hearings were held on implementation of various programs under these authorities and three bills were introduced to reauthorize the MSFCMA; no further action was taken. Commercial and sport fishing are jointly managed by the federal government and individual states. States manage fishery resources in inshore waters where 30% to 40% of the annual U.S. commercial harvest is taken. Beyond state jurisdiction and out to 200 miles, the federal government manages fisheries under the authority of the MSFCMA through the actions of eight regional fishery management councils. Beyond 200 miles, the United States participates in a multitude of international agreements relating to specific areas or species. Legislation related to commercial and sport fisheries enacted by the 106th Congress addressed numerous concerns, including regulation of large fishing vessels, reauthorization of the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act and the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act, prohibition of shark finning, coral reef conservation, authorization for new fishery survey vessels, new salmon restoration measures for the Army Corps of Engineers in the Columbia River basin, estuarine habitat restoration, a pilot program to insure wild salmon fishermen for harvest failure risks, and creation of a Commission on Ocean Policy. Aquaculture -- the farming of fish, shellfish, and other aquatic animals and plants in a controlled environment -- is expanding rapidly, both in the United States and abroad. In the United States, important species cultured include catfish, salmon, crawfish, shellfish, and trout. No major legislation related to aquaculture was enacted by the 106th Congress. Marine mammals are provided extensive protection under the MMPA. This Act authorizes restricted use ("take") of marine mammals and addresses specific situations of concern, such as dolphin mortality primarily associated with the eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery. Legislation enacted by the 106th Congress related to marine mammals included federal funding for marine mammal stranding programs, revocation of an MMPA exemption allowing subsistence hunting of Cook Inlet beluga whales, completion of the withdrawal of federal civil administration of the Pribilof Islands, and authorization to study the eastern gray whale. (Note that this issue brief references a number of useful Internet sites; these sites are hot-linked in the online version of this product.) On August 2, 2001, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 1367, authorizing actions to conserve and rebuild overfished stocks of Atlantic highly migratory species. On July 19, 2001, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on the Western Alaska and Western Pacific Community Development Quota Programs and on H.R. 553, the Western Alaska Community Development Quota Program Implementation Improvement Act. Commercial and Sport Fisheries: Background and Issues Historically, coastal states managed marine sport and commercial fisheries in nearshore waters, where most seafood was caught. However, as fishing techniques improved, fishermen ventured farther offshore. Before the 1950s, the federal government assumed limited responsibility for marine fisheries, responding primarily to international fishery concerns and treaties (by enacting implementing legislation for treaties; e.g., the Northern Pacific Halibut Act in 1937) as well as to interstate fishery conflicts (by consenting to interstate fishery compacts; e.g., the Pacific Marine Fisheries Compact in 1947). In the late 1940s and early 1950s, several Latin American nations proclaimed marine jurisdictions extending 200 miles offshore. This action was denounced by those within the United States and other distant-water fishing nations who sought to preserve access for far-ranging fishing vessels. Beginning in the 1950s (Atlantic) and 1960s (Pacific), increasing numbers of foreign fishing vessels steamed into U.S. offshore waters to catch the predominantly unexploited seafood resources. Since the United States then claimed only a 3-mile jurisdiction (in 1964, P.L. 88-308 prohibited fishing by foreign-flag vessels within 3 miles of the coast; in 1966, P.L. 89-658 proclaimed an expanded 12-mile exclusive U.S. fishery jurisdiction), foreign vessels could fish many of the same stocks caught by U.S. fishermen. U.S. fishermen deplored this "foreign encroachment" and alleged that overfishing was causing stress on, or outright depletion of, fish stocks. The unsuccessful Law of the Sea Treaty negotiations in the 1970s provided impetus for unilateral U.S. action. The enactment of the Fishery Conservation and Management Act (FCMA) in 1976 (later renamed the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act after the late Senator Warren G. Magnuson, and more recently the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/ after Senator Ted Stevens) ushered in a new era of federal marine fishery management. The FCMA was signed into law on April 13, 1976, after several years of debate. On March 1, 1977, marine fishery resources within 200 miles of all U.S. coasts, but outside state jurisdiction, came under federal jurisdiction, and an entirely new multifaceted regional management system began allocating fishing rights, with priority given to domestic enterprise. Primary federal management authority was vested in the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the Department of Commerce. The 200-mile fishery conservation zone was superseded by an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), proclaimed by President Reagan on March 10, 1983 (Presidential Proclamation 5030). Eight Regional Fishery Management Councils were created by the FCMA http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/councils/. Council members are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce from lists of candidates knowledgeable of fishery resources, provided by coastal state Governors. The Councils prepare fishery management plans (FMPs) for those fisheries that they determine require active federal management. After public hearings, revised FMPs are submitted to the Secretary of Commerce for approval. Approved plans are implemented through regulations published in the Federal Register. Together these Councils have implemented 39 FMPs for various fish and shellfish resources, with 7 additional plans in various stages of development. Some plans are created for an individual or a few closely related species (e.g., FMPs for red drum by the South Atlantic Council, for northern anchovy by the Pacific Council, and for shrimp by the Gulf of Mexico Council). Others are developed for larger species assemblages inhabiting similar habitats (e.g., FMPs for Gulf of Alaska groundfish by the North Pacific Council and for reef fish by the Gulf of Mexico Council). Many of the implemented plans have been amended (one more than 30 times), and three have been developed and implemented jointly by two or more Councils. The MSFCMA was last reauthorized in 1996 by P.L. 104-297, the Sustainable Fisheries Act http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/sfaguide/. This authorization expired in FY1999. Under initial FCMA authority, a substantial portion of the fish catch from federal offshore waters was allocated to foreign fishing fleets. However, the 1980 American Fisheries Promotion Act (Title II of P.L. 96-561) and other FCMA amendments orchestrated a decrease in foreign catch allocations as domestic fishing and processing industries expanded. Foreign catch from the U.S. EEZ declined from about 3.8 billion pounds in 1977, to zero in 1992 and subsequent years. Commensurate with the decline of foreign catch, domestic offshore catch increased dramatically, from about 1.6 billion pounds (1977) to more than 6.3 billion pounds (1993). Total (U.S. and foreign) offshore fishery landings from the U.S. EEZ increased about 24% between 1977 and 1986-1988 to a peak of 6.65 billion pounds, but declined slightly to stabilize over the next decade. Today, individual states manage marine fisheries in inshore and coastal waters (generally within 3 miles of the coast). Interstate coordination occurs through three regional (Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific) interstate marine fishery commissions, created by congressionally approved compacts. Beyond state waters, out to 200 miles, the federal government manages fish and shellfish resources for which FMPs have been developed under the MSFCMA. Individual states manage fishermen operating state-registered vessels under state regulations consistent with any existing federal FMP when fishing in inshore state waters and, in the absence of a federal FMP, wherever they fish. In 1999, U.S. commercial fishermen landed about 6.8 billion pounds of edible fish and shellfish http://www.st.nmfs.gov/commercial/index.html, worth almost $3.3 billion at the dock. Imports supplied another 3.9 billion pounds, worth about $9 billion. U.S. consumers spent more than $52 billion on edible seafood in 1999, with more than $35 billion of that amount spent in restaurants. Marine recreational anglers caught an estimated 329 million fish in 1999 http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/recreational/queries/index.html , of which the retained catch was about 199 million pounds. In 1996, a nationwide survey estimated http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/fishing.html, that recreational anglers spent almost $38 billion each year pursuing their sport. Background. The MSFCMA was last reauthorized in 1996 by P.L. 104-297, the Sustainable Fisheries Act http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/; authorization for appropriations expired on September 30, 1999. The 1996 amendments established fish conservation initiatives directing NMFS and regional councils to protect essential fish habitat, minimize incidental fish bycatch, and restore overfished stocks. In addition, a host of modifications to regional council management procedures and federal management policy were enacted. NMFS contends that implementation of the 1996 amendments has met many of the Act's objectives http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases99/jan99/noaa99-4.html; fishing industry and environmental groups have criticized NMFS and regional council implementation efforts. While environmental groups have expressed concerns that NMFS and regional councils have not been as responsive as needed on conservation measures, fishing industry representatives are concerned that too stringent an application of conservation measures may cripple commercial fishing and bankrupt many fishermen. A key issue in any reauthorization debate in the 107th Congress may be seeking a balance between conserving fish and maintaining a viable commercial fishing industry. Congressional Action. At issue for the 107th Congress will be the terms and conditions of provisions designed to reauthorize and amend the MSFCMA to address the concerns of various interest groups. For additional information on reauthorization issues in the 107th Congress, see CRS Report RL30215 (pdf), The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act: Reauthorization Issues for the 107th Congress. For a side-by-side comparison of the three bills introduced in the 106th Congress to reauthorize the MSFCMA, see CRS Report RS20788 (pdf), Legislation in the 106th Congress to Amend and Reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Hearings. On January 16, 2001, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a field hearing in Newport, OR, on the decline of the west coast groundfish fishery. On April 4, 2001, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held an oversight hearing on implementation of the Sustainable Fisheries Act and the Reauthorization of the MSFCMA. On May 2, 2001, the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Oceans and Fisheries held a hearing on S. 637 and individual fishing quota (IFQ) systems. On May 10, 2001, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held an oversight hearing on capacity reduction programs, federal investments in fisheries, and reauthorization of the MSFCMA. On June 14, 2001, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held an oversight hearing on ecosystem-based fishery management. On July 19, 2001, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on the Western Alaska and Western Pacific Community Development Quota Programs and on H.R. 553. On August 2, 2001, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 1367, authorizing actions to conserve and rebuild overfished stocks of Atlantic highly migratory species. Bills. H.R. 108 proposes a moratorium on bottom trawling and the use of other mobile fishing gear on the seabed in certain areas off the coasts of the United States. H.R. 470 would prohibit commercial harvesting of striped bass. H.R. 553 would modify the western Alaska community development quota program. On July 19, 2001, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 553. H.R. 644 would approve a governing international fishery agreement with Estonia. H.R. 1367 would authorize actions to conserve and rebuild overfished stocks of Atlantic highly migratory species; the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 1367 on August 2, 2001.. S. 637 would authorize the establishment of individual fishery quota (IFQ) systems. S. 973/H.R. 2376 would expedite assistance to address the commercial fishery failure in the Pacific Coast groundfish fishery. No action has been taken on any of these measures. S. 755/H.R. 1661 would extend state authority to manage the West Coast Dungeness crab fishery. H.R. 1661 was reported (H.Rept. 107-91) and passed by the House on June 6, 2001. H.R. 2570 was the first bill introduced in the 107th Congress proposing reauthorization and extensive amendment of the MSFCMA; no action has been taken on H.R. 2570. H.R. 2673 would amend the MSFCMA to prohibit offering for sale, selling, or purchasing shark fins. Section 2202 of P.L. 107-20 (H.R. 2216, FY2001 Supplemental Appropriations Act) amended the American Fisheries Act to alter provisions relating to the applicability of U.S. ownership standards to banks holding vessel mortgages. Background. Five species of salmon spawn in Pacific coastal rivers and lakes, after which juveniles migrate to North Pacific ocean waters where they mature. Since these fish may cross several state and national boundaries during their life spans, management is complicated http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/salmon/salmon.html. Threats to salmon include hydropower dams blocking rivers and creating reservoirs, sport and commercial harvest, habitat modification by competing resource industries and human development, and hatcheries seeking to supplement natural production but sometimes unintentionally causing genetic or developmental concerns. In response to declining salmon populations in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California, discrete population units have been listed as endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. For background on this issue, see CRS Report 91-267 ENR, Pacific Salmon and Steelhead: Potential Impacts of Endangered Species Act Listings, CRS Report 98-666 ENR, Pacific Salmon and Anadromous Trout: Management Under the Endangered Species Act, and CRS Issue Brief IB10072, Endangered Species: Difficult Choices. To address some of these concerns, the United States and Canada negotiated a bilateral agreement on Pacific salmon in 1985. However, by the mid-1990s, controversy stalled renegotiations to adjust cooperative management of these fish, and U.S.-Canada relations http://radio.cbc.ca/news/fish/ became more antagonistic, including the blockade of an Alaska state ferry by British Columbia fishermen in Prince Rupert, BC, in July 1997. This deadlock was resolved in June 1999 when a new accord was concluded. For additional information on the Pacific Salmon Treaty and new agreement, see CRS Report RL30234 (pdf), The Pacific Salmon Treaty: The 1999 Agreement in Historical Perspective. Congressional action. H.R. 1157 would authorize the Secretary of Commerce to provide financial assistance to Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho for salmon habitat restoration projects. H.R. 1157 was reported on June 12, 2001 (H.Rept. 107-95), and was passed, amended, by the House on June 13, 2001, by a vote of 418-6. Section 701(b) of S. 597 and §401 of H.R. 4 would allow federal hydropower licensees to propose alternative fishways to any required by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as long as the alternative is based on sound science and will result in equal or greater fish passage. H.R. 4 was passed by the House on August 2, 2001; the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources has held an extensive series of hearings on S. 597. H.R. 2409 would amend the Endangered Species Act to transfer responsibility for anadromous (e.g., salmon and steelhead trout) and catadromous fish to the Secretary of the Interior; no action has been taken on this measure. On March 21, 2001, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power held an oversight hearing on the Klamath Project in Oregon. H.R. 2573 proposes to direct NMFS to seek peer review and conduct studies on the impacts of Columbia River basin federal dams on salmon and steelhead trout; no action has been taken on this measure. Safety. S. 162/H.R. 2419 propose to amend the Internal Revenue Code to provide a business credit against income for the purchase of fishing vessel safety equipment; no action has been taken on either bill. Section 301 of H.R. 1099 and §401 of S. 951 would extend the authorization of the U.S. Coast Guard's Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel Safety Advisory Committee through FY2005. H.R. 1099 was passed by the House on March 22, 2001, by a vote of 415-0. Habitat. H.R. 325 and S. 678 (Fishable Waters Act of 2001) would amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to establish a program for fishery habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement; no action has been taken on these bills. Federal government structure. H.R. 375 proposes to eliminate the Department of Commerce and establish an independent National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; no action has been taken on this measure. Tax provisions. Section 105 of H.R. 546/H.R. 2111/H.R. 2761, §8 of S. 312/H.R. 2347, and §506 of H.R. 1018 would allow income averaging by commercial fishermen. S. 313, H.R. 662, §2 of S. 312/H.R. 2347, and §509 of H.R. 1018 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to allow commercial fishermen to establish tax-deferred Farm, Fishing, and Ranch Risk Management Accounts to shelter a portion of fishery income. No action has been taken on any of these measures. Seafood safety. S. 555 would require the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to establish a tolerance for methylmercury in seafood; no action has been taken on this measure. Bankruptcy. On March 15, 2001, S. 420 was amended in §1007 to include similar provisions for family fishermen as currently apply to family farmers under Chapter 12 of the bankruptcy laws. This measure, as amended, passed the Senate on March 15, 2001, by a vote of 83-15. On July 17, 2001, the Senate amended H.R. 333 to include the language of S. 420 relating to protection of family fishermen, and passed H.R. 333, as amended, by a vote of 82-16. On July 31, 2001, the House and Senate agreed to a conference on H.R. 333. State funding. Section 102(c) of H.R. 701/S. 1328 would authorize funding to states for fishery stock surveys, fishery observers in state or federal waters, coordination and preparation of cooperative fishery conservation and management plans, and preparation and implementation of state fishery management plans; no action has been taken on this measure. Atlantic salmon. S. 703/H.R. 2062 would extend the consent of Congress to the interstate compact relating to restoration of Atlantic salmon in the Connecticut River Basin and creating the Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission; no action has been taken on these measures. Miscellaneous reauthorizations. H.R. 1989 proposes to reauthorize 1) the Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act, 2) the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act, 3) the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act, 4) the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act, 5) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Fisheries Program Authorization Act, 6) the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of 1975, and 7) the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act of 1995. All authorizations would be extended through FY2006. The House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on this measure on June 7, 2001. Coral. H.R. 2272 would amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to provide debt relief to developing countries that take action to protect coral reef habitat; this measure was ordered reported (amended) by the House Committee on International Relations on August 1, 2001. Aquatic Nuisance Species. H.R. 2732 proposes to amend the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 to direct the Secretary of the Interior to prevent westward spread of aquatic nuisance species across the 100th meridian, monitor water bodies, and provide rapid response capacity in Western States; no action has been taken on this measure. Recreational Fishing. S. 1314 proposes measures to protect and enhance the public's ability to enjoy recreational fishing; no action has been taken on this measure. Quinault Claims. H.R. 2524/S. 1308 would establish the Quinault Permanent Fisheries Fund to manage funds received from the settlement of claims; no action has been taken on either measure. Hydropower and Fish. H.R. 1832 proposes to modify the federal licensing process to increase hydroelectric power generation; No action has been taken on this measure. Section 6403 of H.R. 4 and §404 of H.R. 2436 propose to study and implement increased operational efficiencies at hydroelectric power projects. H.R. 2436 was reported by the House Committee on Resources on July 25, 2001 (H.Rept. 107-160, Part 1). H.R. 4 was passed by the House, amended, on August 2, 2001. Aquaculture: Background and Issues Aquaculture is broadly defined as the farming or husbandry of fish, shellfish, and other aquatic animals and plants, usually in a controlled or selected environment. The diversity of aquaculture is typified by such activities as: fish farming, usually applied to freshwater commercial aquaculture operations (catfish and trout farms are examples http://www.usda.gov/nass/pubs/stathigh/1998/lv-aq.htm); shellfish and seaweed culture; net-pen culture, used by the salmon industry wherein fish remain captive throughout their lives in marine pens built from nets; and ocean ranching, used by the Pacific Coast salmon industry which cultures juveniles, releases them to mature in the open ocean, and catches them when they return as adults to spawn. Fish hatcheries are government and commercial aquaculture facilities that raise fish from recreational and commercial stocking as well as for mitigation of aquatic resource and habitat damage http://aquanic.org/. The United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization has characterized aquaculture as one of the world's fastest growing food production activities. World aquaculture production http://www.fao.org/fi/publ/circular/c886.1/c886-1.asp more than doubled in 10 years, from about 10 million metric tons in 1984 to a record 25.5 million metric tons in 1994, with a value of approximately $40 billion. U.S. aquaculture, until recently and with a few exceptions, has been considered a minor industry. By 1994, the U.S. aquaculture industry produced about 0.3 million metric tons with a farm gate value of $751 million http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/erssor/livestock/ldp-aqs/1998/aquaculture_outlook_03.05.98. With growth however, aquaculture operations are facing increasing scrutiny for habitat destruction, pollution, and other concerns. For more information, see CRS Report 97-436 (pdf), Aquaculture and the Federal Role. Bankruptcy. On March 15, 2001, S. 420 was amended in §1007 to include similar provisions for family fishermen (including aquaculture operations) as currently apply to family farmers under Chapter 12 of the bankruptcy laws. This measure, as amended, passed the Senate on March 15, 2001, by a vote of 83-15. On July 17, 2001, the Senate amended H.R. 333 to include the language of S. 420 relating to protection of family fishermen, and passed H.R. 333, as amended, by a vote of 82-16. On July 31, 2001, the House and Senate agreed to a conference on H.R. 333. Permitting. Section 103 of H.R. 897 would authorize Coastal Zone Enhancement Grants for development of a coordinated process among state agencies to regulate and issue permits for aquaculture facilities in the coastal zone; no action has been taken on this measure. Taxation. S. 455 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to exclude aquaculture businesses from qualified small business (QSB) stock provisions (§1202); no action has been taken on this measure. Country of Origin. H.R. 2439 would amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to require retailers of farm-raised fish to inform consumers of the country of origin of the commodities; no action has been taken on this measure. Aquacultural Research. Section 716 of H.R. 2646 would extend the authorization of appropriations for aquaculture research facilities of the U.S. Department of Agriculture from FY2002 to FY2011. This measure was reported by the Committee on Agriculture on August 2, 2001 (H.Rept. 107-191, Part 1). Marine Mammals: Background and Issues Due in part to the high level of dolphin mortality (estimated at more than 400,000 animals per year) in the eastern tropical Pacific tuna purse-seine fishery, Congress enacted the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) in 1972. The Act established a moratorium on the "taking" of marine mammals in U.S. waters and by U.S. nationals on the high seas. The Act also established a moratorium on importing marine mammals and marine mammal products into the United States. This Act protected marine mammals from "clubbing, mutilation, poisoning, capture in nets, and other human actions that lead to extinction." It also expressly authorized the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior to issue permits for the "taking" of marine mammals for certain purposes, such as scientific research and public display. Under the Act, the Secretary of Commerce, acting through NMFS, is responsible for the conservation and management of whales, dolphins, porpoises, seals, and sea lions]. The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), is responsible for walruses http://species.fws.gov/bio_walr.html, sea and marine otters, polar bears http://species.fws.gov/bio_pola.html, manatees http://species.fws.gov/bio_mana.html, and dugongs. This division of authority derives from agency responsibilities as they existed when the MMPA was enacted. Title II of the Act established an independent Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) and its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals to oversee and recommend actions necessary to meet the requirements of the Act. Prior to passage of the MMPA, states were responsible for marine mammal management on lands and in waters under their jurisdiction. The MMPA shifted marine mammal management authority to the federal government. It provides, however, that management authority, on a species-by-species basis, could be returned to states that adopt conservation and management programs consistent with the purposes and policies of the Act. It also provides that the moratorium on taking can be waived for specific purposes, if the taking will not disadvantage the affected species or population. It provides that permits may be issued to take or import any marine mammal species, including depleted species, for scientific research or to enhance the survival or recovery of the species or stock. It allows U.S. citizens to apply for and obtain authorization for the take of small numbers of mammals incidental to activities other than commercial fishing (e.g., offshore oil and gas exploration and development) if the taking would have no more than a negligible impact on any marine mammal species or stock, provided that monitoring requirements and other conditions are met. The Act's moratorium on taking does not apply to any Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo who resides in Alaska and who dwells on the coast of the North Pacific or Arctic Ocean, if such taking is for subsistence purposes or for creating and selling authentic Native articles of handicrafts and clothing, and is not done wastefully. The Act also authorizes the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing operations. In 1988, most U.S. commercial fish harvesters were exempted from otherwise applicable rulemaking and permit requirements for a 5-year period, pending development of an improved system to govern the incidental taking of marine mammals in the course of commercial fishing operations. This exemption expired at the end of FY1993, and was extended several times until new provisions were enacted by P.L. 103-238, which reauthorized the MMPA through FY1999. The eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery was excluded from the incidental take regimes enacted in 1988 and 1994. Instead, the taking of marine mammals incidental to that fishery is governed by separate provisions of the MMPA, and was substantially amended by P.L. 105-42, the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act. Marine Mammal Protection Act Reauthorization Background. The MMPA was reauthorized in 1994 by P.L. 103-238, the Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994; the authorization for appropriations expired on September 30, 1999. The 1994 amendments indefinitely authorized the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing operations and provided for assessment of marine mammal stocks in U.S. waters, for the development and implementation of take reduction plans for stocks that may be reduced or are being maintained below their optimum sustainable population levels due to interactions with commercial fisheries, and for studies of pinniped-fishery interactions http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/pubs/tm/tm28/areas.htm. For more on the 1994 amendments, see CRS Report 94-751 ENR, Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994. Congressional Action. At issue for the 107th Congress will be the terms and conditions of any provisions designed to reauthorize and amend the MMPA to address the concerns of various interest groups. For additional information on potential reauthorization issues in the 107th Congress, see CRS Report RL30120 (pdf), Marine Mammal Protection Act: Reauthorization Issues for the 107th Congress. State Funding. Section 102(c) of H.R. 701/S. 1328 would authorize funding to states for marine mammal stock surveys as well as preparation and implementation of state mammal management plans; no action has been taken on either measure. Taxation. S. 713 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to provide a charitable deduction for certain expenses incurred in support a Native Alaskan subsistence whaling; no action has been taken on this measure.. Whaling. H.Con.Res. 180/S.Res 121 would reaffirm U.S. opposition to commercial and lethal scientific whaling and suggest policy for U.S. participation in the 53rd annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission; no action has been taken on these measures. Glacier Bay. Section 130 of H.R. 2217 (FY2002 Department of the Interior appropriations) requires the National Park Service to prepared an environmental impact statement on vessel entries to Glacier Bay National Park to assess possible impacts on whale populations. This provision was added on the Senate floor; the Senate passed the amended H.R. 2217 on July 12, 2001. A conference is pending. North Atlantic Right Whales. S. 1380 proposes to coordinate and expand U.S and international programs to conserve and protect North Atlantic right whales; no action has been taken on this measure. DOD Compliance. Section 3(a) of H.R. 2154 would require the Department of Defense to fully comply with the MMPA; no action has been taken on this measure. The Bush Administration's proposed FY2002 budget for NMFS is more than $77 million larger than the Clinton Administration's proposed FY2001 budget, and more than $81 million less than the enacted FY2001 funding. Major reductions between the FY2001 enacted and the FY2002 request include the transfer of the $26.8 million "acquisition of data" line item out of NMFS to a different subactivity within the NOAA budget, one-time disaster and economic assistance funding of $40.4 million in the FY2001 budget, and completion or discontinuation of $39.2 million in new construction. Major increases include an additional $13.3 million for expanded annual fish stock assessments and $8 million to implement a National Fisheries Information System. On May 3, 2001, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on the FY2002 budget request for the NMFS. The House Committee on Appropriations reported H.R. 2500 (H.Rept. 107-139) with NMFS funding about $38.4 million less than the Administration's request. Major decreases by the House Committee included improved data collection for stock assessments ($12 million less than requested), National Fisheries Information System ($6 million less), vessel monitoring systems ($5.4 million less), and cooperative research by the Northeast Consortium ($5 million less). Major increases included Pacific coastal salmon recovery ($20 million more than requested) and Pacific Salmon Treaty implementation ($5 million more). The Senate Committee on Appropriations reported S. 1215 (S.Rept. 107-42) with NMFS funding about $40.5 million more than the Administration's request, and $78.9 million more than the House provided in H.R. 2500. Major increases included $54 million for fishery research vessel replacement and an additional $14.9 million for facility construction. Although the Senate recommendation on Pacific coastal salmon recovery appears to be a large increase at $133.9 million, this figure includes funds formerly located elsewhere within the NMFS budget. Table 1. NMFS Appropriations
Sources: Annual NMFS Budget Justifications, House and Senate Committee Reports, floor debates. * Department of State account, not included in NMFS total Related public laws and bills are discussed in the text of this document under "Background and Analysis." Fisheries P.L. 107-20 (H.R. 2216). H.R. 4 (Tauzin); H.R. 108 (Hefley); H.R. 325 (Tanner); H.R. 333 (Gekas); H.R. 375 (Royce); H.R. 470 (Pallone); H.R. 546 (Quinn); H.R. 553 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 644 (Gilchrest); H.R. 662 (Hulshof); H.R. 701 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 1018 (Toomey); H.R. 1099 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 1157 (Thompson of California); H.R. 1367 (Saxton); H.R. 1661 (George Miller); H.R. 1832 (Towns); H.R. 1989 (Gilchrest); H.R. 2062 (Olver); H.R. 2111 (Quinn); H.R. 2272 (Kirk); H.R. 2347 (Nussle); H.R. 2376 (Capps); H.R. 2409 (Otter); H.R. 2419 (Simmons); H.R. 2436 (Hansen); H.R. 2439 (Ross); H.R. 2524 (Dicks); H.R. 2570 (Farr); H.R. 2573 (McDermott); H.R. 2673 (Faleomavaega); H.R. 2732 (Baird); H.R. 2761 (Hooley): S. 162 (Collins); S. 312 (Grassley); S. 313 (Grassley); S. 420 (Grassley); S. 555 (Leahy); S. 597 (Bingaman); S. 637 (Snowe); S. 678 (Bond); S 703 (Smith of New Hampshire); S. 755 (Murray); S. 951 (Snowe); S. 973 (Wyden); S. 1308 (Murray); S. 1314 (Breaux); and S. 1328 (Landrieu). Aquaculture H.R. 897 (Saxton); H.R. 333 (Gekas); H.R. 2646 (Combest); S. 420 (Grassley); and S. 455 (Collins). Marine Mammals H.Con.Res. 180 (Delahunt); H.R. 701 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 2154 (Filner); H.R. 2217 (Skeen); S.Res. 121 (Kerry); S. 713 (Murkowski); S. 1328 (Landrieu); and S. 1380 (Kerry). Return to CONTENTS section of this Issue Brief. |