[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 62 (Wednesday, May 18, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 18, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                             U.S. FISHERIES

                                 ______


                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 18, 1994

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I am inserting my Washington Report for 
Wednesday, May 18, 1994 into the Congressional Record:

                      The Crisis in U.S. Fisheries

       ``There's plenty more fish in the sea'' is fast becoming an 
     outdated phrase. Major fishing areas around the world are in 
     serious decline. The depletion of U.S. fisheries is 
     especially acute in the New England area. Pollution and 
     changing weather patterns have contributed to the problem, 
     but most experts agree that overfishing--driven by growing 
     consumer demand, technological innovation, and poor 
     management policies--is the single leading cause. While the 
     depletion of fish stocks does not impact Indiana seriously, 
     Hoosiers are affected by the availability, cost, and the long 
     term viability of this food supply. The current situation has 
     sparked discussion about how to reverse the trend and ensure 
     the long term sustainability of marine resources. The 
     Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which 
     governs fishing in federally controlled ocean waters, is up 
     for reauthorization and several reforms are under 
     consideration.
       The New England Crisis: For more than 200 years, groundfish 
     species, such as cod, haddock, and flounder, have sustained 
     the New England fishing industry and, to a certain extent, 
     the region's economy. Over-fishing and habitat degradation 
     are jeopardizing this important resource.
       Some New England species have declined to the point where 
     they are commercially extinct--that is, rare enough that boat 
     owners cannot make money by fishing for them. New England 
     haddock catches fell by 90% between 1983 and 1990. The 1993 
     cod catch, down 19% from the previous year, fell to the 
     lowest level in 20 years. The situation is even worse in 
     Canada where cod fishing on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland 
     is now banned altogether. Fisheries in the West are also 
     under stress. Much has been written about the decline in 
     salmon stocks in the Pacific Northwest.
       Reasons for the Decline: Pollution is one factor that has 
     contributed to the decline in U.S. fisheries. For instance, 
     pollution off the North Carolina coastline has had the effect 
     of depleting life-sustaining oxygen for fish. Natural weather 
     cycles and unusual weather patterns have also caused fish 
     declines. On shore construction and development have 
     threatened certain fish stocks. Dams in the Pacific 
     Northwest, for example, have made it more difficult for 
     salmon species to reach their spawning grounds and, 
     consequently, have depleted the population.
       Still, overfishing is considered the primary cause for the 
     declines, and it continues despite federal efforts to protect 
     U.S. fisheries. The Act was enacted in 1976 in response to 
     concerns that foreign fishing fleets were systematically 
     overfishing U.S. waters. The law authorized the federal 
     government to regulate fishing activities up to 200 miles 
     offshore in an area known as the ``exclusive economic zone,'' 
     or EEZ. Eight regional councils set overall limits on the 
     number of fish that can be caught in a season, and allocate 
     the catch among user groups. The law has had the effect of 
     ``Americanizing'' the EEZ. The once-substantial share of fish 
     taken by foreign vessels has been reduced to zero.
       The Act, however, has not curbed overfishing by domestic 
     fishermen. Tax incentives and loan programs that followed the 
     1976 law encouraged U.S. fishermen to expand their fleets and 
     helped to create overcapacity in the industry: too many boats 
     and too many fishermen to harvest fish at sustainable or 
     profitable levels. In New England, the number of fishermen 
     harvesting groundfish more than doubled between 1976 and 
     1984. Over the same period, technological innovations were 
     making it possible to track and catch fish with increasing 
     proficiency.
       Protecting U.S. Fisheries: Several environmental 
     organizations filed suit in 1991 charging that the government 
     had failed to protect and rebuild New England groundfish 
     stocks as required by the Act. This case prompted the 
     government to issue regulations in January, 1994 to reduce 
     the rate at which groundfish are caught by roughly one-half 
     over the next five to seven years. These regulations, which 
     are being implemented, require fishermen to use nets with 
     larger holes; limit boats to 500 pounds of haddock per trip; 
     require many boats to carry electronic tracking devices; and 
     limit the number of days fishermen can spend at sea.
       Fishermen generally agree that action must be taken to 
     ensure the long term viability of the industry. Even so, many 
     fear that the new regulations will drive them out of 
     business. New restrictions mean higher costs for an industry 
     already in financial difficulty. Most boat owners are 
     independents with high fixed costs--as much as $10,000 a 
     month in loan payments and insurance--even if they never 
     leave port. A 10-day fishing trip can cost $10,000 in fuel, 
     ice, and food. In addition, the new wider-mesh nets (which 
     are in short supply) cost several thousand dollars each.
       New Approaches: President Clinton has provided some 
     assistance to New England communities affected by the 
     downturn. The money will be used to encourage economic 
     diversification and otherwise assist local fishermen. This 
     aid might help some fishermen in the short term, but it is 
     not a long term solution for the ailing industry.
       Congressional hearings on the Act have been held, and the 
     administration and Congress are reviewing alternatives for 
     making the industry sustainable in the long term. Possible 
     strategies include establishing a boat buyback program to 
     reduce the size of the fishing fleet; developing markets for 
     underutilized species; raising fish in controlled 
     environments (as is done with salmon); limiting access to 
     fish stocks in high demand; and improving coastal fish 
     habitats. It is essential that any reauthorization bill be 
     sensible, prudent, and based on sound science.
       Conclusion: The crisis in New England has focused attention 
     on how to better balance the goals of resource conversation 
     and job preservation. The current policy is not working and, 
     if left unchanged, would further decimate the New England 
     fisheries. Rebuilt stocks in New England and elsewhere will 
     eventually provide benefits to producers and consumers, but, 
     at the present, efforts to halt overfishing, restore the 
     depleted resource, and conserve habitats will decrease 
     revenues to fishermen and drive some out of business. The 
     industry will have to sustain some losses in the short term 
     if it is to remain viable in the long term.

                          ____________________