Congressional Record, Volume 146 Issue 128 (Friday, October 13, 2000)

[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 128 (Friday, October 13, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10552-S10555]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

TO COMPLETE THE ORDERLY WITHDRAWAL OF THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION FROM THE CIVIL ADMINISTRATION OF THE
PRIBILOF ISLANDS, ALASKA

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Commerce
Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 3417 and the
Senate then proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk
will report the bill by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

A bill (H.R. 3417) to complete the orderly withdrawal of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration from the
civil administration of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska.

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.

Amendment No. 4320

(Purpose: To reauthorize the Coastal Zone Management Act and the
Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act, and for other purposes.)

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, Senators Snowe and Kerry have an amendment
at the desk, and I ask for its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Lott] for Ms. Snowe, for
herself and Mr. Kerry, proposes an amendment numbered 4320.

(The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under
``Amendments Submitted.'')
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment
be agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 4320) was agreed to.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise to support H.R. 3417, the Pribilof
Islands Transition Act with the amendment I have offered. This bill, as
amended, contains a number of ocean, coastal, and fisheries related
titles that will result in major conservation gains for our nation's
marine resources at a time when we are placing enormous demands on
them. The bill not only attempts to provide additional environmental
protections through a number of state and local programs, but also
tools for better management.
Title I of this bill is the Pribilof Islands Transition Act. The
Alaskan Pribilof Islands in the Bering Sea were a former reserve for
harvesting fur seals. The Commerce Department, acting through the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has been
involved in municipal and social services on the islands since 1910. In
1983, NOAA tried to remove themselves from administering these
programs. However, despite the $20 million in funds the Pribilof
Islands received to replace future annual Federal appropriations, the
Pribilof Islanders claim that the terms of the transition process were
not met and the withdrawal failed.
This title authorizes $28 million over five years to again attempt to
achieve the orderly withdrawal of NOAA from the civil administration of
the Pribilof Islands. Additionally, it authorizes $10 million a year
for five years for NOAA to complete its environmental cleanup and
landfill closure obligations prior to the final transfer of federal
property to the six local entities. The Pribilof Islands have
historically been a very expensive program to the American taxpayers.
Congress expects that this title will provide a final termination of
NOAA's municipal and social service responsibilities on the islands and
a distinct end to federal taxpayer funding of those services.
Title II of this bill is the Coastal Zone Management Act of 2000,
which refines and reauthorizes funding for the nation's coastal zone
management program. This is the same language that was passed by
unanimous consent in the Senate on September 28, 2000. Not only is this
federal-state partnership important to my home state of Maine, but it
is also a significant management tool for coastal states throughout the
country. Despite the fact that the coastal zone only comprises 10
percent of the contiguous U.S. land area, it is home to more than 53
percent of the U.S. population, and more than 3,600 people relocate
there annually. Not only is it an important economic region, but the
coastal zone is also critical ecologically.
We are currently facing a very serious problem in the coastal zone in
the form of non-point source pollution. This type of runoff pollution
is degrading the condition of our coastal rivers, wetlands, and marine
environments. Compromising the environmental integrity of the coastal
zone can in turn have a large impact on the regions' economic viability
in a number of sectors, including tourism and fishing. The Coastal Zone
Management Act of 2000 addresses this issue by encouraging and funding
states to implement local solutions to their non-point source pollution
problems. We have not created any new mandates or programs addressing
non-point source pollution. Rather, the Coastal Community program can
be used at the states' discretion if they want to create and
implement local community-based solutions to problems, which would
include non-point source pollution control strategies and measures.

This title greatly increases authorization levels for the coastal
zone management program, allowing states to better address their
coastal management plan goals. While we have achieved many successes
through the CZMA, the states have made it clear that they can do more
and that they can raise additional funds to match the increased federal
funding. Therefore, we have authorized a total of $136.5 million for
fiscal year 2001 and increased authorization levels by $5.5 million a
year through fiscal year 2004. This total authorization includes an
increase for the National Estuarine Research and Reserve System (NERRS)
to $12 million in fiscal year 2001, with an additional $1 million
increase each year through fiscal year 2004.
Mr. President, Title III of the bill deals with the management of
several Atlantic coast fisheries. Subtitle A reauthorizes the Atlantic
Striped Bass Conservation Act (ASBCA). The ASBCA was originally passed
to help coordinate and improve interstate management of Atlantic
striped bass, an important commercial and recreational fish. Because
striped bass migrate along the eastern seaboard, it is imperative that
management measures be coordinated among the various states. The
rebuilding of striped bass populations is considered one of our
fisheries management success stories and it is critical that we
continue these efforts. This subtitle authorizes $1.25 million a year
for fiscal years 2001 through 2003 to carry out the provisions of the
act and another $250,000 to conduct a population study on the Atlantic
striped bass.
Subtitle B, the Atlantic Costal Fisheries Act of 2000, will
reauthorize the highly successful interstate program that manages
coastal fisheries that cross jurisdictional boundaries along the east
coast. The states have proven that joint management of these resources
is far more effective than a piecemeal approach by individual states.
In an effort to further increase the effectiveness of interstate
management, the states have initiated the Atlantic Coastal Cooperative
Statistics Program. This joint data collection and analysis program is
intended to meet the need for improved fishery statistics for
management purposes. It is a comprehensive effort to address all

[[Page S10553]]

areas and fisheries and could serve as a model for a national
cooperative statistics program. This subtitle authorizes $10 million in
fiscal year 2001, increasing the authorization by $2 million a year
until fiscal year 2005.
Subtitle C of this title deals with a significant problem facing the
Atlantic bluefin tuna, ABT, fishery. In 1998, the Highly Migratory
Species Advisory Panel unanimously requested and advised the Secretary
of Commerce to ban the use of spotter aircraft in the General and
Harpoon categories of the ABT fishery. Spotter aircraft tend to
accelerate the catch of the ABT, and thus can create significant
impacts on both the communities that depend on the fishery and the
conservation intentions of the ABT management plans. Because NMFS has
been unable to successfully implement a rule to ban the use of spotter
aircraft in the ABT fishery over the past two years, it has become
necessary for Congress to take legislative action. Subtitle C prohibits
the unfair use of spotter aircraft to locate or assist in fishing for
ABT in the General and Harpoon categories of the ABT fishery. This
action follows numerous public hearings held by NMFS and the discussion
of this issue at several Senate hearings. This provision passed by
unanimous consent in the Senate as part of an amendment to H.R. 1651,
the Fishermen's Protective Act, on June 26, 2000.

Mr. President, to many Americans, as well as myself, the practice of
shark finning is both wasteful and disturbing. Shark finning is a
method by which the dorsal fin and tail of a shark are cut off and
retained, while the rest of the shark carcass is discarded as waste.
Much of the fin product is then exported for sale to Asian countries.
Title IV, the Shark Conservation Act, attempts to address this problem
by prohibiting the domestic landing and at-sea transhipment of shark
fins. It also directs the Administration to begin international
negotiations to reduce foreign shark finning.
Title V of the bill is the Fishermen's Protective Act Amendments of
2000. It amends the Fishermen's Protective Act of 1967 to lengthen the
period during which reimbursement can be provided to owners of U.S.
fishing vessels for costs incurred when a vessel is illegally seized,
detained, or charged certain fees by a foreign country. Under the
title, the reimbursement period is extended until fiscal year 2003.
This provision passed by unanimous consent in the Senate on June 26,
2000.
Mr. President, title VI of the bill is the Yukon River Salmon Act of
2000. It creates a Yukon River Salmon Panel to advise both the
Secretary of State regarding negotiation of any international
agreements with Canada relating to management of Yukon River salmon
stocks and Secretary of the Interior regarding management of those
stocks. An Advisory Committee is created to make advisory
recommendations to a number of entities, including the Panel. A total
of four million dollars a year for fiscal years 2000 through 2003 is
authorized. Of these funds, up to $3 million a year can be used for a
Yukon River salmon survey, restoration, enhancement activities;
$600,000 of the total is to be available for cooperative Yukon River
salmon research and management projects. This provision passed by
unanimous consent in the Senate on June 26, 2000.
This bill also address the very serious problem of an aging fishery
research vessel, FRV, fleet. Because these vessels are used to conduct
the majority of fishery stock assessments, they are a critical tool for
improving management and regulation of our commercial fish species.
Over the past year, I have conducted a series of six hearings across
the country on fisheries management. At every hearing, the need for
more and better data was raised repeatedly by the witnesses. The
seventh title of the bill directs the Secretary of Commerce to acquire
vessels, authorizing $60 million a year for fiscal years 2002 through
2004. They will be outfitted with the latest technology and enable
innovative research. New England is in particular need of a replacement
FRV, since the current NOAA vessel, the Albatross IV, is 38 years old
and at the end of its useful life. Without a new vessel, the ability
for NOAA to collect long term fisheries, oceanographic, and biological
data in New England will be seriously compromised. I had offered this
provision as an amendment to the Fishermen's Protective Act which
passed by unanimous consent in the Senate on June 26, 2000.

Mr. President, the bill also makes significant conservation and
management improvements for our nation's coral reefs. Title VIII, the
Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000, requires the creation of a
national coral reef action strategy. Of particular note is the use of
marine protected areas to serve as replenishment zones. The U.S. Coral
Reef Task Force has called for setting aside 20 percent of coral reefs
in each region of the United States that contains reefs as no-take
areas. However, many of the U.S. islands that have coral reefs have
significant cultural ties to these reefs. It is imperative that any new
marine protected areas are developed in close cooperation with the
people of these islands and account for traditional and cultural uses
of these resources. Without such cooperation, there will not be public
support. The national strategy will address how such traditional uses
will be incorporated into these replenishment zones.
The national program will also incorporate such important topics as
mapping; research, monitoring, and assessment; international and
regional management; outreach and education; and restoration. According
to NOAA, the majority of our nation's coral reefs are within federal
waters, therefore it is expected that NOAA will continue to work
cooperatively with the states, territories, and commonwealths in the
development and implementation of coral reef management plans and shift
the burden of responsibility onto these states, territories, and
commonwealths.
The title also creates a new coral reef conservation program, which
will provide grants to states, governmental authorities, educational
institutions, and non-governmental organizations. This is intended to
foster locally based coral reef conservation and management. Creation
of a coral reef conservation fund is also authorized. This fund would
allow the Administration to enter into agreements with nonprofit
organizations to support partnerships between the public and private
sectors to further the conservation of coral reefs and help raise the
matching funds required as part of the new grants program.
The title authorizes a total of $16 million a year for fiscal years
2001 through 2004 to be spilt equally between the local coral reef
conservation program and national coral reef activities.
Title IX of the bill amends the American Fisheries Act to allow for
the participation of two additional catcher vessels in the Alaskan
pollock fishery. These vessels were able to demonstrate that they
should have been included in the Act when it passed in 1998. This title
also makes a number of minor technical changes to other fisheries laws.
Title X creates a new marine mammal rescue assistance grant program.
This new program will assist eligible marine mammal stranding network
participants by providing funding for recovery and treatment of marine
mammals. Grants can also be used for data collection and the continued
operation of these stranding centers. Efforts of these centers are
critical for the continued conservation and management of marine
mammals in our nation's waters. This program is authorized at $5
million for each of fiscal years 2001, 2002, and 2003.
I would like to thank Senator Kerry, the ranking member of the Oceans
and Fisheries Subcommittee for his hard work and support of this bill.
I would also like to thank Senator Inouye for his support, particularly
for his contributions to the coral reef conservation section of the
bill. In addition, I would like to thank Senator McCain, the chairman
of the Commerce Committee, and Senator Hollings, the ranking member of
the Committee, for their bipartisan support of this measure. We have
before us an opportunity to significantly improve our Nation's ability
to conserve and manage our marine resources and I urge the Senate to
pass H.R. 3417, as amended.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I rise to make a few remarks on H.R. 3417
and amendments to it that will pass the Senate today. It is a package
of several bills all designed to benefit our coastal

[[Page S10554]]

and marine environment. It is my hope, Mr. President, that the House of
Representatives will consider and pass the bill immediately. They are
sound proposals with broad support.
Since the day I first arrived in the Senate more than 15 years ago, I
have worked hard to address the many challenges confronting our common
ocean and coastal resources. After all, few states draw as much of
their national and regional identity from their coasts as does
Massachusetts. And I have been fortunate that the Commerce Committee
includes members of both parties who are ready and willing to work
together, to find compromise and pass sound legislation. In that
regard, I want to thank Senators Snowe, McCain and Hollings for their
work on this bill.
The major provisions of H.R. 3417, as amended, are the Pribilof
Islands Transition Act, the Shark Finning Prohibition Act, the Atlantic
Striped Bass Conservation Act, the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries
Cooperative Management Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, the
Fishermen's Protective Act Amendments, the Coral Reef Conservation Act
and the Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Act. Each of these major
proposals in the bill, except the corals bill, has already passed the
House, the Senate or both. The bill also includes a ban on the use of
spotter aircraft in certain bluefin tuna fishery categories. This
proposal has passed the Senate.
I would like to make a few short comments on the Coastal Zone
Management Act. To begin, I want to thank Senator Snowe, our chairman
on the Oceans and Fisheries Subcommittee on the Commerce Committee, for
putting this legislation on the Committee agenda this Congress and
working for its enactment.
Mr. President, when Congress enacted the Coastal Zone Management Act
in 1972, it made the critical finding that, ``Important ecological,
cultural, historic, and esthetic values in the coastal zone are being
irretrievably damaged or lost.'' As we deliberated CZMA's
reauthorization this session, I measured our progress against that
almost 30-year-old congressional finding. And, I concluded that while
we have made tremendous gains in coastal environmental protection, the
increasing challenges have made this congressional finding is as true
today as it was then.
It is clear from the evidence presented to the Committee in our
oversight process and from other input that I have received, that a
great need exists for the federal government to increase its support
for states and local communities that are working to protect and
preserve our coastal zone. To accomplish that goal, the Committee has
reported a bill that substantially increases annual authorizations for
the CZMA program and targets funding at controlling coastal polluted
runoff, one the more difficult challenges we face in the coastal
environment.
This reauthorization tackles the problem of polluted coastal runoff.
This is one of the great environmental and economic challenges we face
in the coastal zone. At the same time that pollution from industrial,
commercial and residential sources has increased in the coastal zone,
the destruction of wetlands, marshes, mangroves and other natural
systems has reduced the capacity of these systems to filter pollution.
Together, these two trends have resulted in environmental and economic
damage to our coastal areas. These effects include beach closures
around the nation, the discovery of a recurring ``Dead Zone'' covering
more than 6,000 square miles in the Gulf of Mexico, the outbreak of
Pfiesteria on the Mid-Atlantic, the clogging of shipping channels in
the Great Lakes, and harm to the Florida Bay and Keys ecosystems. In
Massachusetts, we've faced a dramatic rise in shell fish beds closures,
which have put many of our fishermen out of work.
To tackle this problem, the Coastal Zone Management Act of 2000
targets up $10 million annually to, ``assist coastal communities to
coordinate and implement approved coastal nonpoint pollution control
strategies and measures that reduce the causes and impacts of polluted
runoff on coastal waters and habitats.'' This is an important
amendment. For the first time, we have elevated the local management of
runoff as national priority within the context of the CZMA program.
Runoff is not a state-by-state problem; the marine environment is far
too dynamic. States share the same coastlines and border large bodies
of waters, such as the Gulf of Mexico, the Chesapeake Bay or the Long
Island Sound, so that pollutants from one state can detrimentally
affect the quality of the marine environment in other states. We are
seeing the effects of polluted runoff both in our coastal communities
and on our nation's living marine resources and habitats. Mr.
President, I'm pleased that we've included the runoff provision in the
bill. It's an important step forward and I believe we will see the
benefits in our coastal environment and economy.
The Coastal Zone Management Act of 2000, Mr. President, has been
endorsed by the 35 coastal states and territories through the Coastal
States Organization. It also has the endorsement of the Great Lakes
Commission, American Oceans Campaign, Coast Alliance, Center for Marine
Conservation, Sierra Club, Environmental Defense, California
CoastKeeper and many other groups. It's a long list that makes clear
that this is a consensus proposal. We heard from all sides and did our
best to fine compromise, and I believe that we succeeded.
I also want to make a short statement on shark finning. H.R. 3417
would prohibit the practice of shark finning. Sharks are among the most
biologically vulnerable species in the ocean. Their slow growth, late
maturity and small number of offspring leave them exceptionally
vulnerable to overfishing and slow to recover from depletion. At the
same time, sharks, as top predators, are essential to maintaining the
balance of life in the sea. While many of our other highly migratory
species such as tunas and swordfish are subject to rigorous management
regimes, sharks have largely been overlooked until recently.
The bill bans the wasteful practice of removing a shark's fins and
returning the remainder of the shark to sea. National Marine Fisheries
Service regulations in the Atlantic Ocean prohibit the practice of
shark finning, but a nationwide prohibition does not currently exist.
Shark fins comprise only a small percentage of the weight of the shark,
and yet this is often the only portion of the shark retained. The
Magnuson-Stevens Act and international commitments discourage
unnecessary waste of fish, and thus I believe this bill ensures our
domestic regulations are consistent on this point. Another goal of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act--the minimization of bycatch and bycatch
mortality--is an issue that I have been particularly committed to over
the years. Because most of the sharks caught and finned are
incidentally captured in fisheries targeting other species, I believe
establishing a domestic ban will help us further reduce this type of
shark mortality.

The next step in this process is to act internationally. At present,
foreign fleets transship or land approximately 180 metric tons of shark
fins annually through ports in the Pacific alone. The global shark fin
trade involves at least 125 countries, and the demand for shark fins
and other shark products has driven dramatic increases in shark fishing
and shark mortality around the world. International measures are an
absolutely critical component of achieving effective shark
conservation.
Finally, the bill authorizes a Western Pacific longline fisheries
cooperative research program to provide information for shark stock
assessments, identify fishing gear and practices that prevent or
minimize incidental catch of sharks and ensure maximum survivorship of
released sharks, and provide data on the international shark fin trade.
The United States is a global leader in fisheries conservation and
management. I believe this legislation provides us the opportunity to
further this role, and take the first step in addressing an
international fisheries management issue. In addition, I believe the
U.S. should continue to lead efforts at the United Nations and
international conventions to achieve coordinated international
management of sharks, including an international ban on shark-finning.
Mr. President, this package also includes a provision to ban the use
of spotter aircraft in both the harpoon and general categories of the
Atlantic bluefin tuna fishery. This has been an

[[Page S10555]]

ongoing issue in New England since 1996. Several of my Senate
colleagues, including Senators Snowe, Kennedy, Gregg, and Collins, have
asked the agency to ban aircraft in the past. Unfortunately Mr.
President, because aircraft do not catch fish, our legal system has
determined that the agency cannot regulate these aircraft. Let me point
out that the fisheries service has gone through two rounds of public
rulemaking on this issue and in both instances an overwhelming number
of public comments were in support of this ban. The Atlantic bluefin
tuna fishery is one of the last open fisheries in New England, and
spotter aircraft provide an unfair competitive advantage to those
fishermen who use them. Banning spotter aircraft will level the playing
field and provide the opportunity for thousands of New Englanders to
experience the thrill of landing a 400 pound bluefin tuna that,
depending on the quality of the fish, can easily be worth $10,000.
Mr. President, H.R. 3417 also includes an authorization for the
Secretary of Commerce to acquire fishery research vessels in 2002,
2003, and 2004 at a cost of $60 million. These state-of-the-art fishery
research vessels will replace a fleet of vessels that are becoming
technologically obsolete and reaching the end of their useful lives. In
New England, the primary vessel used for our stock assessments is the
38-year old Albatross IV. Over the years NOAA has assumed increased
responsibilities for managing our marine resources under the Magnuson-
Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act, the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, and the Endangered Species Act. It is absolutely
imperative that we give NOAA scientists the tools necessary to carry
out the mandates Congress has given them.
Mr. President, I sincerely hope that the House will move to pass this
legislation. This is a very reasonable proposal. Indeed, it includes
several proposals the House has initiated and passed. We have made
every effort to act on their priorities and we ask that they do the
same with our priorities.

atlantic striped bass conservation act

Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Mr. President, I rise today to applaud my
colleague from Arizona, Senator McCain, on his efforts to reauthorize
the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act in a package of oceans and
fisheries legislation. I would also like to reaffirm the continued
interest of the Committee on Environment and Public Works in this
important legislation, over which our two committees have traditionally
shared jurisdiction. As my colleague knows, this legislation is
critically important to the northeast.
The populations of striped bass, which can be found all along the
east coast, began to decline dramatically during the 1970s. In 1979,
Congress responded by authorizing the Emergency Striped Bass Study as
part of the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act. And in 1984, Congress
enacted the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act. This Act promotes a
coordinated Federal-State partnership for striped bass management. The
National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service have been jointly responsible for working with State agencies
to recover the fishery. Their efforts have been very successful. The
commercial catch of striped bass peaked in 1998 at 19 million pounds,
which is a dramatic increase from 1983 when the catch was 2.9 million
pounds.
Historically, both the Environment and Public Works Committee, which
I chair, and the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, which
is chaired by Senator McCain, have shared jurisdiction over the
conservation of striped bass. Because both the Department of Commerce
and the Department of the Interior are involved in the conservation of
the fishery, legislation to reauthorize the 1984 Atlantic Striped Bass
Conservation Act has always been of interest to both the Commerce
Committee and the Environment and Public Works Committee. The most
recent reauthorizing legislation, the Atlantic Striped Bass
Conservation Act Amendments of 1997, was sequentially referred, by
unanimous consent, to the Environment and Public Works Committee after
the Commerce Committee ordered the bill to be reported. The Environment
Committee then amended and reported the bill. It was signed into law on
December 16, 1997.
In order to facilitate passage of reauthorizing legislation this
year, I have agreed to the language being offered by Senator McCain in
H.R. 3417, as amended, the Pribilof Islands Transition Act, and will
not request sequential referral. However, I want to reaffirm, with the
agreement of my colleague, that this in no way affects the future
jurisdiction of the Environment and Public Works Committee over the
Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act.
Mr. McCAIN. As the Senator from New Hampshire stated, the Commerce
Committee and the Environment and Public Works Committee have
historically shared jurisdiction over the Atlantic Striped Bass
Conservation Act. Our two committees have in the past always worked
together to reauthorize and amend the Atlantic Striped Bass
Conservation Act. I expect that relationship to continue.
In order to facilitate the passage of this year's Atlantic Striped
Bass reauthorization, Subtitle A of Title III of H.R. 3417, as amended,
reauthorizes the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act. Although the
Pribilof Islands Transition Act and the other provisions in this
legislation are under the sole jurisdiction of the Commerce Committee,
I understand that my colleague from New Hampshire has reviewed and
approved the language contained in Title III; therefore, the shared
jurisdiction of the Commerce Committee and the Environment and Public
Works Committee over the conservation of Atlantic Striped bass should
not be altered.
Mr. LOTT. I ask unanimous consent the bill be read a third time and
passed, as amended, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table,
and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 3417), as amended, was read the third time and passed.

____________________