[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 101 (Thursday, July 28, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 28, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                    STATUS OF THE WORLD'S FISHERIES

  Mr. KERRY. Madam President, I would like to take this time to discuss 
an issue of grave concern to myself, my colleague from Massachusetts, 
the Senator from Rhode Island, and others. It is an issue of growing 
importance, not just to the United States but to countries all over the 
world; that is the increasing threat to the status of the world's 
fisheries and the management of our marine resources.
  It was not long ago that most people thought that the supply of the 
ocean resources was inexhaustible. Since the end of World War II, the 
world's seafood harvests have multiplied nearly fivefold, growing from 
an annual global catch of about 18 million metric tons to a peak of 
nearly 100 million metric tons. Scientists tell us today, however, that 
we are currently harvesting close to the maximum that the oceans will 
support.
  Since 1989, the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, 
known as the FAO, has reported that the world catch is in decline. 
Fishery statisticians tell us that they have seen a worldwide shift in 
catch to less valuable species, and most gains in the world harvest 
levels of the last 10 years have come from increased landings of 
smaller, lower value species, such as anchovies or mackerel.
  Taking this fact into account, the decline in fisheries and the 
harvest of fisheries all across the planet is extremely alarming. There 
is one simple fact that every industrial nation needs to address--and 
not enough are--and that is there are simply too many fishing vessels 
chasing too few fish.
  Even more telling is the fact that, today, despite a signficant 
increase in the number of vessels at sea and an increase in their 
fishing effort, there has been a decline in the world's catch. The size 
of the world's fishing fleets have increased three times in the last 
decade and modern vessels are now bigger and more efficient than those 
on the oceans 10 years ago.
  Today vessels are equipped with extraordinary state-of-the-art 
electronics, including sophisticated satellite navigation. They often 
employ advanced fishing techniques, such as helicopter spotting. This 
increase in the number of vessels and efficiency has simply outstripped 
the capacity of the oceans.
  Here in the United States, we are struggling to address the problem 
of overfishing off our own shores. Probably the best known example--and 
one of particular concern to myself and other New England Senators--is 
the collapse of the traditional groundfish stocks of cod and haddock in 
the North Atlantic.
  Just last year, the Commerce Department had to implement a very 
draconian amendment, amendment 5, in order to reduce the amount of time 
that our fishermen can fish, and, as a consequence, we had to seek 
emergency economic aid to help those fishermen affected.
  The failure of the longstanding New England fishery is having a 
devastating effect on the economies of coastal communities like 
Gloucester and New Bedford. I know the Senator from Rhode Island would 
agree that their fishermen are under enormous pressure, as would the 
Senator from Maine, our majority leader, and other Senators from other 
fishing States--California, Louisiana, the Carolinas, and others.
  Last week, another traditional fishery in New England made the front 
page of the Boston Globe. The headline read, ``Lobstermen hauling up 
empty traps; Many fear overfishing.'' The lobster is a venerated part 
of New England gastronomy and among our most unique and valuable 
natural resources. However, like many other New England fishing 
traditions, it could become part of our past, unless immediate steps 
are taken to strengthen the conservation of the stocks including more 
effectively limiting the amount of fishing effort. The answer to the 
question of who is responsible for the current sad state of our 
fisheries is not a simple one and has a long history. The New England 
lobster fishery, for instance, is subject to oversight and regulation 
by numerous State and Federal bureaucracies, including the State of 
Massachusetts, the State of Maine, the New England Fishery Management 
Council, Department of Commerce's National Marine Fisheries Service, 
and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.

  The length of the list will tell you why some fishermen say they are 
overregulated. The fact is, despite being overregulated, tough 
decisions have not been made; people who have been responsible for 
trying to curb the process have not done so; and most importantly, 
fishermen themselves, who for years under the management councils were 
given the responsibility to make the decisions to conserve, have not 
been conserving.
  So the system has obviously failed. It has not just failed here, it 
is in great jeopardy in other parts of the world. We have factory ships 
off our coast that come from all parts of the world. They sit several 
hundred miles off the coast just outside of our 200-mile exclusive 
economic zone where they simply stripmine the oceans.
  These are enormous problems. My hope is we can work together 
internationally to identify workable solutions. But we have to address 
the core of the problem, which is there are too many boats chasing too 
few fish all around the globe. In the last 20 years, the promise of 
profit from fishing and government-subsidized building programs by 
industrialized countries has overcapitalized the fleets in almost all 
fisheries of the world. I am told Iceland and the European Union could 
cut their fleets by up to 40 percent, and Norway could cut its fleet by 
50 percent, and all three nations would still be able to maintain the 
fishery harvests at today's level.
  That is an extraordinary statement. You could have 50 percent fewer 
Norwegian ships fishing and they could still come up with as much 
harvest as they have today.
  The other interesting point to note is that, as nations have 
increased their efforts in an attempt to increase the catch, we have 
created a perversely uneconomical system, where the world's fleets are 
now operating at a loss. The FAO reports that in 1989 fishermen spent 
$92 billion to land $72 billion worth of fish. So not only do we have 
an uneconomic, perverse market, but we also have a market that is 
disappearing by virtue of the amount of fishing effort. The FAO now 
estimates that 13 of 17 major ocean fisheries are in trouble and that 
roughly 60 percent of the stocks which they monitor are fully utilized, 
overexploited, or depleted.
  I think it ought to be clear to my colleagues why we should be 
concerned about this particular issue. Obviously, fish rank as one of 
the primary food sources in the world. There will be social and 
economic consequences of disastrous proportions if industrial fishing 
fleets are not controlled. We may have food shortages in developing 
countries worse than those we already witnessed, where fish already 
supply up to 40 percent of the dietary protein. If we want to look at 
crises in the making that we should proactively be doing something to 
prevent, this is one of them.
  Another concern is that we will lose the valuable renewable resource 
itself, and the associated economic opportunities that go with it. If 
managed properly, coastal fisheries are a sustainable industry that 
could be much more productive and much more profitable. But we are 
going to have to manage them properly in order to make that happen. 
Many of the most valuable species in the world's seafood markets are 
becoming harder to find and more costly as the fish stocks are depleted 
by pollution, by habitat destruction, and the relentless pursuit of the 
modern fishing fleet. This decline in population of fish has increased 
the competition among fishing nations for these particular resources.
  Nations and fishing fleets have responded to the increased 
competition in various ways--not all of them positive. Coastal nations 
have extended their management authority to 200 miles. Now, with 
diminishing fish stocks, tensions have between nations have risen. Just 
2 days ago, Canada attempted to extend jurisdiction in the Atlantic 
beyond the 200 miles in a frustrated attempt to protect its fisheries 
resulting in the Canadians arresting two New Bedford, MA fishing boats. 
I believe the Canadians are wrong because the vessels were involved in 
harvesting scallops which are not a sedentary species as the Canadians 
claim and, therefore, do not fit under the little-used provision of 
customary international law that they have tried to make this arrest 
on. I have called on the State Department to take immediate action to 
obtain the release of these fishermen and to lodge a formal protest 
against the Canadian Government. Despite their actions, the Canadians 
have underscored the need for all countries to work together to protect 
the world's vital fish stocks. We need to work to make that happen.
  In addition to the problems at our borders, distant water fishing 
fleets are now traveling the world, fishing legally and illegally in an 
effort to locate the dwindling stocks of valuable species such as 
bluefin tuna and swordfish. The race for these fish supplies has 
resulted in a dangerous worldwide trend in which routine fishing 
disputes are now escalating into major international incidents.
  In the Mediterranean and on the high seas, violations of the U.N. 
moratorium on the use of large-scale driftnets are a continuing 
concern. The world united in 1992, thanks to the efforts of Senator 
Stevens, myself, and the administration, with the United Nations, and 
banned the use of large-scale driftnets. But regrettably in the 
Mediterranean today, a large number of the Italian fishing fleet 
continues to use illegal driftnets, which are miles and miles of 
monofilament net that simply sweeps the ocean, entrapping all kinds of 
fish and other marine life. I am sickened to learn of their continued 
use in a desperate attempt to harvest the remains of once plentiful 
stocks. I am even more disheartened to hear reports that countries like 
Italy are attempting to take steps to legalize these activities in the 
world forum.
  Today, the Commerce and State Departments should be put on notice 
that I and others intend to press for action under the High Seas 
Driftnet Fisheries Enforcement Act to identify and notify nations 
suspected of conducting large-scale drift operations. In addition, we 
must be prepared to implement trade sanctions should such nations not 
agree to cease their illegal activities. The administration cannot 
afford to drag its feet. I echo the sentiments of the Senator from 
Alaska with respect to illegal Italian driftnetters--``All we need is 
one. If we have one confirmed driftnet that exceeds the limit in use in 
the world, I think that we ought to tell the United Nations we are 
prepared to help enforce the moratorium.'' That says it all.
  While worldwide depletion of fishery stocks is a very real threat, we 
must not underestimate our ability to address the problem. Nor must we 
fail to recognize that there are success stories on which we can build. 
First, despite the recent setbacks, we have made substantial progress 
in eliminating wasteful and destructive driftnets. Second, we now have 
in place a long-term agreement to allow U.S. tuna fishermen access to 
the rich tuna resources of the South Pacific. Third, the Senate 
currently is considering a new treaty and implementing legislation that 
will establish an international system to license, report, and regulate 
all vessels fishing on the high seas. Fourth, the United States 
recently joined with Russia and several other fishing nations to 
complete a new convention for managing fisheries in the central Bering 
Sea. Finally, although the condition of Atlantic bluefin tuna stocks is 
still a concern, I am optimistic that the U.S. investment in 
strengthening the International Convention for the Conservation of 
Atlantic Tunas [ICCAT] eventually will pay off in restoring depleted 
tuna stocks.
  With respect to other international efforts now underway, I am 
encouraged by the efforts of the United Nations Conference on Highly 
Migratory and Straddling Fish Stocks, as well as FAO efforts to develop 
an international code of conduct for responsible fishing. Such a code 
will promote compatibility between the activities and economic interest 
of responsible fishermen and the ecological principles of conservation. 
Developing a set of guidelines is important, particularly to reduce 
overcapacity of world fishing fleets. Without effective efforts to 
reduce global fleet size, fishing vessels displaced from one fishery 
will continue simply to migrate to another fishery, often exacerbating 
overcapitalization problems already present. The heart of the problem 
is that, in order to prevent long-term environmental damage and develop 
renewable fisheries, governments must be willing to enforce rules and 
regulations that forgo short-term unsustainable economic gains and the 
political pressures that they bring.
  The United States must exercise strong leadership in facing the 
challenge of building sustainable fisheries, not only in U.S. waters, 
but as a shared world heritage. We have a number of upcoming 
opportunities for demonstrating that leadership. First, we can complete 
action on a strong Magnuson Act reauthorization bill, ensuring the 
recovery and continued use of our domestic fisheries.
  Second, I applaud the efforts of the administration to renegotiate 
the Law of the Sea Convention and look forward to reviewing those 
efforts when the treaty comes before the Foreign Relations Committee 
and the Senate. Third, I think the time has come to reexamine the issue 
of U.S. participation in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization 
[NAFO]. Finally, we must push for effective domestic and global 
enforcement of the existing agreements and treaties. Without firm 
enforcement in the coastal waters and on the high seas, all of our 
well-intentioned efforts will be for naught.
  We are at a crossroads. We still have time to reverse the current 
trends and ensure that vital living marine resources are preserved. We 
must, however, be willing to take the difficult steps both domestically 
and internationally to move down the path toward creating sustainable 
global fisheries.
  I simply call my colleagues' attention to this extraordinary growing 
crisis which we must show leadership in trying to resolve.
  Mr. PELL addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. PELL. Madam President, I merely wanted to rise to congratulate 
the junior Senator from Massachusetts on his statement on fisheries. 
The fisheries today are being depleted, depleted, depleted, not only 
off New England, not only off the United States, but around the world.
  I think the consciousness of that has to be impressed on all our 
people. In addition, there will be signatures on the Treaty of the Law 
of the Sea tomorrow, and this is very good evidence why a universal law 
of the sea will help in fishery regulations.
  Mr. KENNEDY addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, just very briefly on the same issue, as 
my colleagues and friends Senator Kerry and Senator Pell have pointed 
out, we have had a very serious incident in which two boats from New 
Bedford were seized in Canadian waters in a legal dispute. The issue 
has not been resolved by the Department of State.
  These boats are now being held by Canadian officials. That is a 
deplorable situation. If we are attempting to try to manage the 
George's Bank with our Canadian friends, this is just the wrong way for 
them to go about it. It may be politically popular in Canada to seize 
American ships before they are going to crack down on their own 
violations, but it is intolerable from the point of view of American 
men and women who, after consulting with the State Department, moved 
ahead to try to make a living.
  This is a matter that I know many of us in New England are concerned 
about. I had the opportunity to talk with the American Ambassador to 
Canada, Tim Wirth, and I have been in touch with the Canadian 
Ambassador to the United States, to indicate that we find this to be an 
unacceptable, inappropriate type of behavior and we are going to work 
very closely with our President and the Secretary of State to try to 
address it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The distinguished Republican leader.
  Mr. DOLE. Madam President, is leader time reserved?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Leader time is reserved.
  Mr. DOLE. Madam President, if I could take about 3 minutes of that?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader has that right.

                          ____________________