[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 108 (Monday, July 28, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H5832-H5834]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MORATORIUM ON LARGE FISHING VESSELS IN ATLANTIC
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 1855) to establish a moratorium on large fishing vessels in
Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 1855
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. MORATORIUM.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any provision of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), no large fishing vessel may engage in
fishing for Atlantic herring or Atlantic mackerel within the
United States exclusive economic zone until--
(1) the National Marine Fisheries Service has completed a
new population survey into the abundance of the discrete
spawning stocks of Atlantic herring and Atlantic mackerel;
and
(2) the Secretary of Commerce has approved and implemented
fishery management plans developed by the appropriate
regional fishery management council for Atlantic herring and
Atlantic mackerel, which specifically allow large fishing
vessels to participate in those fisheries.
(b) Large Fishing Vessel Defined.--In this section, the
term ``large fishing vessel''--
(1) except as provided in paragraph (2), means a fishing
vessel (as that term is defined in section 3 of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C.
1802)) of the United States that is equal to or greater than
165 feet in length overall and has an engine of more than
3,000 horsepower; and
(2) does not include such a vessel that engages only in
processing fish harvested by fishing vessels of the United
States.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. Saxton] and the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie]
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton].
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just begin my very brief remarks by thanking the gentleman from
Hawaii for his ardent and helpful effort with regard to moving this
bill swiftly through the committee and bringing it here to the floor.
The gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie] and I have worked very
closely together and I want to express my deep appreciation to him at
this point.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support, obviously, of H.R. 1855, a
simple and straightforward measure that will place a moratorium on
large fishing vessels in the Atlantic mackerel and herring fisheries.
Why is congressional intervention and management of these two species
needed? Well, herring and mackerel are the two fisheries on the east
coast that have not been fished to death yet. Mackerel, the mackerel
world market and the prices have increased substantially because the
eastern European countries can no longer depend on Government support
and because the demand for mackerel and herring in those societies has
grown to an unprecedented level.
This has created an economic reason to fish on these two species and
it has created therefore new fishing pressure.
Herring has just recently recovered from being badly overfished. This
recovery caused serious pain among the New England fishermen who had to
find an alternative source of fish in order for them to survive. They
increasingly turned to cod and haddock at Georges Bank, which has since
been overfished and that fish stock has now crashed. Now herring is
being targeted once again.
Now it looks as though the Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries
are faced with a new disastrous threat. Large fishing vessels are
poised to enter these fisheries. High prices and the apparent abundance
of these species has attracted the attention of fishermen and
businessmen throughout the world who have responded by investing in
large fishing vessels to harvest this American resource for sale
overseas because there is no market here. The market is overseas.
The capacity of each of these vessels exceeds 50 metric tons per
year. That is a large fishing vessel, to say the least. One such vessel
plans to begin harvesting this fall. It is therefore imperative that we
establish safeguards to prevent another fishing disaster like those
suffered by redfish, shark, striped bass, as well as cod and haddock,
which I mentioned before.
There are a number of things that we need to point out. Fact No. 1,
we do not know with any certainty how many fish, that is, mackerel and
herring, there are. The National Marine Fisheries Service, which we
know as NMFS, has not done a stock assessment specifically on herring
and mackerel stocks. The only information we have on these species is
from a complex large pelagic survey that was done and incidentally,
just incidentally, mentions herring and mackerel. Therefore, fact No. 1
is that we do not know how many fish there are.
Fact No. 2, the moratorium is temporary in nature but it is also an
emergency measure. The moratorium on large fishing vessels will only
last as long as it takes the National Marine Fisheries Service to do a
separate stock assessment on herring and mackerel to find out how many
fish there are, two tremendously important east coast fisheries.
Imagine that, knowing how many fish there are before we begin to take
them in large numbers.
{time} 1415
So fact No. 2, we need to do stock assessments before additional
fishing pressure is brought to bear on these species.
Fact No. 3, the councils that care for these fisheries or regulate
these fisheries are moving quickly to preserve them as well, but they
need more time. The mid-Atlantic and New England fisheries management
councils have passed resolutions and motions to protect these fisheries
from overharvest. The councils need the time to react to what could be
a sudden unsustainable increase in the harvest. This bill gives them
the time to develop fishery management plans which do not exist at this
time.
Fact No. 4, the National Marine Fisheries Service has guessed that
the mackerel fishery can sustain only about 150,000 metric tons of
annual harvest. Three of these large vessels, which are poised to enter
this fishery, could easily meet and possibly exceed this harvest within
a single year. It is not clear that the resource can withstand this
fishing effort and remain healthy and viable. Therefore, we need to
take care of the management plan before this fishing pressure starts.
The National Marine Fisheries Service seems content to wait until the
stocks crash before taking action to protect these fisheries. That is
why we need this moratorium. As someone who has witnessed the pain and
suffering experienced by fishermen from New England, I do not believe
that we should fish now and pay later. We must end this cycle of
destroying our resources without knowing how much fishing pressure they
can endure. Help to conserve the Atlantic herring and mackerel stocks
by voting ``yes'' on this bill, H.R. 1855.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. ABERCROMBIE asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I would like to thank
the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton] for his kind remarks. I
would like, in addition, to cite the work of the staff with regard to
this and other bills, Mr. Speaker. It is outstanding work always.
Mr. Speaker, the remarks of the gentleman from New Jersey are such
that I think they make a compelling case in and of themselves. I would
like not to reiterate them but to amplify them somewhat.
The temporary moratorium on the entry of large fishing vessels into
these two fisheries will provide the East
[[Page H5833]]
Coast councils the opportunity they need to develop management plans to
protect the resources without the threat of overcapitalization. I think
that the gentleman from New Jersey has made a clear and compelling case
in that regard.
Too many fisheries in the United States are already overcapitalized,
and seasons that used to last for months are now over in days. In New
England, coastal communities have been devastated by the crash of cod
and haddock stocks. Mackerel and herring will be the only healthy
fisheries if they can survive the next several years, but not if those
stocks are suddenly being harvested by an influx of large vessels. Four
or five of these boats could eliminate the opportunities for fishermen
that have little else to depend upon.
It is time that we learn from the mistakes of the past and encourage
the proactive approach by the councils to the problems of
overcapitalization. This bill does that by giving the councils the time
to do their job. It will be good for the fishing industry and the fish,
and I urge Members to support the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine [Mr.
Allen].
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr.
Abercrombie] for yielding me this time, I thank the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. Saxton] for his leadership on this issue, and I thank both
of them on behalf of fishermen all throughout the State of Maine.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today as an original cosponsor of H.R. 1855. This
bill establishes a moratorium on the introduction of large fishing
vessels into the Atlantic Coast herring and mackerel fisheries until
comprehensive studies are conducted on the health of the spawning
stocks.
Several initiatives financed by foreign countries have surfaced which
focus on the use of very large offshore factory trawlers on the
Atlantic Coast to catch and process large quantities of mackerel and
herring. This is of great concern to local fishermen in Maine,
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey who are working to develop
these fisheries locally.
We are all aware of the devastating effect overfishing has had on our
ecosystem. European stocks have been severely overfished, accounting
for world interest in U.S. stocks. While our stocks are considered to
be strong, stocks of mackerel and herring, many in the industry do not
believe they are robust enough to withstand the take of large factory
trawlers. There is no Federal fishery management plan for herring and
the scientific information on the abundance of both species is
questionable.
Mr. Speaker, we simply cannot repeat the mistakes of the past by
overfishing and overcapitalizing our marine resources. This is
responsible legislation and I urge its passage.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts [Mr. Delahunt].
Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I want to extend my gratitude to the
chairman of the subcommittee, who has really provided some leadership
in this matter that concerns us all here.
More than 20 years ago my predecessor, Gerry Studds, in this Chamber
helped enact landmark legislation to ensure that foreign fleets would
no longer be allowed to deplete fish stocks off our coasts. Well, here
we go once more. Unless we vote today to approve H.R. 1855, factory
trawlers will return and will bring with them an updated high-tech
version of overfishing aimed at two of the few healthy stocks we still
have left, Atlantic herring and mackerel.
As the House deliberates today, at least one displaced factory
trawler is being retrofitted in Norway in preparation to set sail for
the waters off the New England coast. This one vessel alone is capable
of harvesting 50,000 metric tons of mackerel in 1 year, one-third of
the maximum sustainable yield for the whole Atlantic coast, not to
mention the likely impact of bycatch on haddock and scores of other
marine species.
We just do not know enough about the population dynamics of herring
and mackerel to risk placing such enormous new pressures on these
species, species on which the industry, marine mammals, coastal
communities and the entire coastal ecosystem depend. Without this bill,
we stand to repeat the mistakes of the past.
In the late 1960's and 1970's, large Russian and Polish vessels plied
our shores and threatened to decimate our fishing industry and our
stocks. It took the passage of the Magnuson Act to push them from our
waters, leaving what we thought was plenty of fish to go around.
Meanwhile, however, we allowed our own industry to expand. Soon it
was vastly overcapitalized, putting renewed pressures on groundfish. We
are all too aware of the consequences.
Yet less than a year after reauthorizing the Magnuson Act, we are
watching factory trawler vessels again prepare to invade our fisheries.
New England fishermen, stressed by declining stocks, higher prices and
a shortened season, face bleak times as we await the slow process of
rebuilding groundfish stocks.
Already, we have too many boats chasing too few fish and far too many
vessels that will never again go to sea at all. Without this bill,
local fleets trying to diversify their interests will be rewarded only
by drastic levels of new competition that will remain with us forever.
For the sake of both fish and the fishermen, it is my own hope that
the Fisheries Council will develop and implement management plans that
make further congressional action unnecessary. I strongly support H.R.
1855 because it encourages the council to complete this important work
and because it shows that we can learn from our mistakes.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Tierney].
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the ranking member for
yielding me this time, and also the chairman, who was kind enough to
carry through on his pledge made to me during the subcommittee hearings
in addressing my concerns with the unintended loopholes that were
originally in the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, before I comment on the present status of the issue, or
even the future, I feel it is important to take a look back at the
recent history of the fishing history in the United States,
specifically in the New England area.
It was barely 20 years ago that we faced the decimation of fishing
stocks because of overfishing. We face the prospect of repeating that
mistake. This time, however, the threat could be much larger.
While I respect my colleagues from the west coast who might oppose
this legislation, it is, in fact, the very current condition of the
North Pacific Pollock Fishery, located off the west coast, that leads
me to be concerned about the havoc these trawlers could wreak on the
herring and mackerel fisheries found in the Atlantic.
Mr. Speaker, we are trying to ensure the viability of our fishing
industry in the Northeast by preventing the factory trawlers from
overfishing the waters at the expense of fishermen whose very
livelihoods depend on a well-plenished fishery. While the herring and
mackerel stock are currently thriving, my concern is shared with the
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Delahunt] that by allowing these
factory trawlers in the area, we will place the smaller fishing boats
at risk once again. And these are, in fact, the same sized fishing
boats that suffered the blunt of the depleted stocks that occurred in
the 1970's.
Once these factory boats are in our waters, it would be extremely
difficult to control the size and scope of their catch. Our fishing
industry will never survive if we make that mistake.
Protecting the natural resource is intelligent public policy, whether
we are talking about the industry's interest or the public interest or
the interest of the conservation community. I support this moratorium
to allow the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Department of
Commerce time to complete the requirements as outlined in the bill.
Mr. Speaker, many of my constituents up in Gloucester, as well as
other areas of my district, are extremely concerned about this issue.
In fact, I know many of these people who have worked tirelessly on the
issue and support this bill are now watching the debate at this very
moment. I join them
[[Page H5834]]
in pressing for the necessary protection to continue the fishing
tradition that has been passed down from family to family, from
generation to generation. It is my hope that we will not inherit from a
previous generation the problem of depleting these much-needed
resources.
Again, I thank the ranking member and the chairman for providing me a
chance to have input in this process.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is
remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie]
has 10 minutes remaining and the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton]
has 14 minutes remaining.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Maine [Mr. Baldacci].
{time} 1430
Mr. BALDACCI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr.
Abercrombie] for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1855. As a cosponsor of
this legislation, I know that it is going to establish a moratorium on
entry of large fishing vessels in the Atlantic for herring and mackerel
fisheries.
Herring have provided a living for Mainers for well over 100 years.
From sardines and exports to lobster bait, the fishery continues to
play a prominent role in the economies of coastal communities.
Estimates and anecdotes suggest that a large herring fishery exists,
but the resource is poorly understood.
The National Marine Fisheries Service has not yet done a stock
assessment. While the resource appears to have potential, it is of
grave concern to most of the maritime community that there is no
fishery management plans in place and that there is no way to ensure
that the harvest is conducted at a sustainable rate.
The absence of sound science clearly impacts the ability of the
councils to develop or amend the appropriate fishery management plans.
It is clear that the councils are moving in that direction. I believe
that it is essential to develop the research that will serve as the
foundations for sound plans. This bill does just that. It calls for the
science to be conducted. It gives the councils the breathing room
necessary to develop solid plans.
What makes congressional action necessary is the prospect that
fishing efforts for the two species may rapidly overdevelop and include
very large freezer trawlers. This troubling scenario is compounded by
the very real possibility that this could all occur before
comprehensive plans are in place.
I would add that the moratorium would be temporary. It would remain
in place until the completion of population survey and the approval of
management plans. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1855.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, yielding myself such time as I may consume,
as has been stated here with regard to the species in question, there
is a significant population of herring and mackerel, and we believe
that it is important that we maintain a balance within the ocean
ecosystem and that this species should be protected from
overharvesting.
We do not want, in other words, history to repeat itself, as it did
with the shark population, when the National Marine Fishery Service, in
the 1980's, declared it an underutilized species. The species was
fished on with very, very heavy fishing pressure. And by 1993, the
National Marine Fisheries Service had to declare the shark fishery an
endangered fishery.
As with regard to other historical precedents, red fish in the Gulf
of Mexico, in 1980 it was declared an underutilized species, and by
1986, with the taking of more than 10 million tons a year, the species
became overutilized, overfished, and endangered.
Another example is with regard to an international problem with
regard to the Atlantic blue fin tuna. During the 1970's, blue fin were
abundant all over the north Atlantic and the south Atlantic, as well.
Today, the blue fin population, because of overfishing, is just 13
percent of what it was back in those years.
So, in order to avoid this occurrence with regard to herring and
mackerel, I urge passage of this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Goodlatte). The question is will the
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1855, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________