[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 142 (Wednesday, November 1, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11466-S11469]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            STELLER SEA LION

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have been criticized in the national 
media and many of the local media here about the Steller sea lion rider 
that is on the Labor, Health and Human Services appropriations bill. 
Riders are really

[[Page S11467]]

emergency items of legislation that are necessary because of the time 
of year. We are about ready to end our deliberations and this is the 
only piece of legislation to which we could attach this provision.
  I want to take time now to explain why this is necessary. The Labor, 
Health and Human Services appropriations bill still contains this 
provision.
  The difficulty is that the National Marine Fisheries Service has shut 
down the Nation's largest fishery, and it does not even know why. In 
response to a lawsuit filed by extreme environmental groups, the 
National Marine Fisheries Service has failed to show any relationship 
between fishing and the Steller sea lion, which it considers to be 
endangered.
  These procedural failures have led a Federal judge to shut down all 
fishing in the 100,000 square miles which encompass the prime fishing 
grounds for pollock off Alaska. This is an area larger than the State 
of Oregon and twice the size of New York. It is a coastline which would 
stretch from the District of Columbia to Florida.
  The National Marine Fisheries Service continues to blame fishermen 
for the sea lion decline. Right now, Alaska fishermen and Alaska 
coastal communities are losing $1 million a day. If fishing does not 
resume in January, Alaska coastal communities will be ghost towns by 
the end of the year.
  The Alaska groundfish fishery accounts for 40 percent of America's 
commercial fish harvest. Alaskan cod, pollock, and other species are 
sold in grocery stores and restaurants throughout our Nation.
  Besides fishermen, the injunction that is in place impacts airlines, 
shipping companies, regional ports, and transportation labor. Alaska 
seafood exports contribute almost $1 billion towards our annual trade 
deficit. Most of that is exports to Asia. Incidentally, that is where 
we get most of our imports.
  Alaska's annual seafood processing payroll is about $240 million. 
That is the processing of this product alone. Seafood exports offset 
the transportation cost of consumer goods imported by at least 15 
percent. Dutch Harbor and Kodiak, two large seaports in my State, are 
the No. 1 and No. 4 fishing ports of the United States. Fishing in 
those communities pays the cost of teachers, police, firemen, and other 
public servants. The fishing industry is the only industry in those 
areas.
  This was all brought about because of biological opinions that have 
been issued by the Fisheries Service. The National Marine Fisheries 
Service found that fishing did not harm sea lions on five separate 
occasions in the last decade: Twice in 1991, twice in 1996, and again 
in March of 1998. In April of 1998, extreme environmental groups filed 
suit to shut down these fisheries. The National Marine Fisheries 
Service's next biological opinion reversed the position of that agency 
180 degrees. It reversed the prior five decisions and found that 
fishing had caused jeopardy to these sea lions.
  There was no scientific breakthrough that led to that decision. In 
fact, what happened was they changed the person who wrote the decision. 
The Federal judge rejected the scientific analysis in that biological 
opinion as inadequate.
  Today, the agency has still not justified the sea lion mitigation 
measures it wants to impose. Because of the agency's repeated failure 
to justify its own proposals, the judge shut down all fishing for 
pollock in this critical area. The new biological opinion is based upon 
a concept called ``localized depletion.'' This is the hypothesis of the 
biologist who put together the last biological opinion that the judge 
refused to accept.
  This is based on the idea that fishing vessels take food away from 
sea lions. There is no science to support that conclusion or that 
theory. In fact, the trawling that takes place for pollock occurs at 
depths below which the sea lions forage for food. Pollock schools are 
much larger than the entire fleet. They cover an area far beyond what a 
fleet could cover.
  I have a chart that shows the concentrated fishing efforts of the 
pollock fleet in a period of 4 weeks in 1995. The total efforts of this 
fleet failed to disperse the massive school of pollock. Beginning the 
26th of January, the pollock was concentrated. The next week it was 
still concentrated. The third week it was concentrated. The fourth week 
it was concentrated. Despite the fact the fleet was there on top of 
that pollock the whole time, the pollock did not move. In fact, the 
fishing effort did not disperse the pollock.
  The concept the biologist used was the fishing effort in an area is 
localized, and it depletes the pollock locally and, therefore, there is 
no food for the sea lions after the trawling takes place. That is 
absolutely not true. Pollock move around in natural migration patterns, 
not as a result of fishing effort.
  Few people realize this is the largest biological mass of fish in the 
world. It is an enormous fishery, and it has grown because of our 
fishing practices--it has not been depleted because of fishing 
practices.
  The National Marine Fisheries Service has failed to study the impact 
of predators on the sea lion population. We now see in Alaska soaring 
numbers of killer whales and falling numbers of sea lions and other 
species upon which the killer whale preys. Science shows that killer 
whales feed on juvenile sea lions, the same age class of sea lions that 
is causing the overall decline in that species.
  Recently, a killer whale washed up on a beach in Alaska. When it was 
examined, there were 14 steller sea lion tags in its stomach. One 
killer whale had eaten 14 sea lions.
  In addition, I hope Members have seen video footage of killer whales 
in our State that take sea lions right off the beach. It is a monstrous 
video that shows how these enormous killer whales come right up on the 
beach and take the sea lions off the beach. The National Marine 
Fisheries Service admits the killer whale is a predator and is a major 
cause of the declining sea otter population in our State, but it is 
unwilling to accept the fact that killer whales are involved in the 
decline of the sea lion.
  This is hard for us to understand, very frankly. There has been a 
shift in this decision, as I said, 180 degrees. We fail to understand 
why this monstrous agency, which I normally support, could be swayed by 
the decision of one man because of a lawsuit that was filed by extreme 
environmentalists.
  Most scientists now believe that sea lions are declining as part of 
their natural population cycle. I have another chart that shows this 
cycle. As the temperature and other conditions in the North Pacific 
have changed, the sea lions have declined and the pollock have 
increased. One of the things that has happened in the North Pacific is 
the abundance of high oil content fish, such as herring, has fallen 
while the low oil content species, such as pollock and cod, have 
increased. Published research shows that sea lions need to eat high oil 
content fish to survive.
  For instance, in southeastern Alaska where high oil content fish are 
still plentiful, a different subpopulation of steller sea lions is 
increasing in size while its western cousins are decreasing. We believe 
it is a problem of diet, as far as the sea lions' decline is concerned, 
and that those who assert that sea lions can survive on pollock alone 
are absolutely wrong.
  Some scientists believe pollock fishing in critical habitats actually 
helps sea lions. This is because the pollock off my State are highly 
cannibalistic. Adult pollock eat juveniles in very large numbers. 
Trawlers target adult pollock which are over 3 years of age, whereas 
sea lions eat the smaller juvenile fish that would otherwise be eaten 
by the cannibalistic adult pollock population.

  The net result of these ocean changes is that as our pollock 
population has increased, the sea lion population has decreased. Yet 
the decision of the biologist was that the reason for the sea lion 
population decline was the lack of availability of pollock. The 
National Marine Fisheries Service should know better than to shut down 
the largest private sector employer in Alaska without a good reason.
  Right now they do not have a reason based upon science. Their 
conclusion is based entirely upon a lawsuit filed by an extreme 
environmental group, which also has no science behind it. This is 
absolutely wrong. That is why I have insisted on keeping this rider in 
place which will allow the fishery to continue on the basis of the 
protections that were already in place to protect the sea lions.

[[Page S11468]]

  We have agreed not to invade the sea lion rookeries. In fact, we have 
set up protection areas around them. Our industry has contributed $1 
million toward sea lion research to help find out some of the reasons 
for their decline.
  We have appropriated a sizable amount of money to the National Marine 
Fisheries Service and the Alaska SeaLife Center to continue the 
research to find out why sea lions are declining. For myself and most 
of us who have spent our adult lives on the oceans around our State, I 
believe it is the overabundance of orcas, the killer whale population, 
that is causing the decline in the sea lions of the western population.
  I repeat. Under the rider, fishing will continue until July 1, 2001 
under all the restrictions that were in effect. These protective 
measures include restrictions on trawl fishing near sea lion rookeries, 
haul-outs, and foraging areas.
  There are no-entry zones for fishing vessels near sea lion rookeries 
and haul-outs.
  We have limitations on the harvest levels inside critical habitat.
  We have split the pollock season into four different seasons to 
reduce the impact on the areas where the sea lions are.
  We have reduced the daily catch rate through cooperative fishing. We 
have a very conservative process for setting the total allowable catch 
level, which actually is 13 percent lower than what would have been 
projected in 2001.
  We require Federal observers to monitor harvest levels, including 
harvests inside any critical habitat area. And there are additional sea 
lion mitigation measures that are in effect.

  We do not, however, believe there should be a complete cessation of 
this enormous fishery. This is an enormous fishery. Two and a half 
billion pounds of fish are brought ashore from this massive population 
every year. Yet as we show, as we take mature pollock, the pollock 
biomass continues to grow. If we do not take that mature pollock from 
this biomass, it will once again go back to eating its own young and 
decrease.
  So this rider is absolutely necessary to preserve the most massive 
and valuable fishery off our shores. I do hope those who criticize it 
will take time to read the opinions I am going to place in the Record.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
summaries of the opinions that were written, the conclusions and 
opinions written before the extreme environmentalists entered this 
issue, and the summary of the one that has been filed now by those who 
came on the scene after that lawsuit was filed.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

         Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
           Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, 
           Silver Spring, MD, March 2, 1998.
     Memorandum for: Dr. Gary Matlock, Director, Office of 
         Sustainable Fisheries.
     From: Hilda Diaz-Soltero, Director, Office of Protected 
         Resources.
     Subject: Endangered Species Act Section 7 Biological Opinion 
         on the Fishery Management Plan for the Gulf of Alaska 
         Groundfish Fishery, the 1998 Total Allowable Catch 
         Specifications, and the effects on Steller Sea Lions 
         (Eumetopias jubatus).
       Attached is the Biological Opinion on the effects of the 
     Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the Gulf of Alaska 
     groundfish fishery, the 1998 Total Allowable Catch 
     specifications and its effects on the endangered western 
     population of Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus). The 
     biological opinion concludes that the 1998 fishery is not 
     likely to jeopardize the continued existence and recovery of 
     Steller sea lions or to adversely modify critical habitat. 
     Please note that the biological opinion only addresses the 
     1998 fishery, not the continued implementation of the GAO FMP 
     for groundfish beyond 1998. The Alaska Region will need to 
     reinitiate section 7 consultation for the fishery in 1999 and 
     beyond.
                                  ____

         Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
           Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, 
           Silver Spring, MD, April 19, 1991.
     Memorandum for: The Record.
     From: William W. Fox, Jr.
     Subject: Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation 
         Concerning the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Groundfish 
         Fishery Management Plan and its Impacts on Endangered and 
         Threatened Species.
       Based on the attached Biological Opinion, we conclude that 
     the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) groundfish 
     fishery, as currently managed and conducted, is not likely to 
     jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or 
     threatened species under the jurisdiction of the National 
     Marine Fisheries Service.
       This opinion considers all aspects of the fishery including 
     the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) specifications for 1991. 
     Steller sea lion research efforts to assess the status of the 
     population and the factors involved in the population decline 
     will also continue. The available results will be used during 
     the 1992 specification process.
       The Steller sea lion final rule (November 26, 1990, 55 FR 
     49204) established 3-national-mile buffer zones around major 
     sea lion rookeries in the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea. 
     As outlined in the final rule, NMFS intends to undertake 
     further rulemaking after considering additional protective 
     regulations and the need for critical habitat designation for 
     Steller sea lions. NMFS will solicit comments from the 
     Steller Sea Lion Recovery Team, other experts, and the 
     general public on the need to modify the existing buffer 
     zones or to create additional buffer zones.
       An Incidental Take Statement is not included with this 
     Biological Opinion because a limited incidental take is 
     already authorized for Steller sea lions under Section 114 of 
     the Marine Mammal Protection Act (50 CFR 229.8). In addition, 
     the quota established in the regulations at 50 CFR 
     227.12(a)(4) has not been exceeded.
                                  ____

         Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
           Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, 
           Silver Spring, MD, April 19, 1991.
     Memorandum for: The Record.
     From: William W. Fox, Jr.
     Subject: Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation 
         Concerning the Gulf of Alaska Groundfish Fishery 
         Management Plan and Its Impacts on Endangered and 
         Threatened Species.
       Based on the attached Biological Opinion, we conclude that 
     the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) groundfish fishery, as currently 
     managed and conducted, is not likely to jeopardize the 
     continued existence of any endangered or threatened species 
     under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries 
     Service.
       This opinion considers all aspects of the fishery including 
     the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) specifications for 1991. 
     Currently, this includes only an interim TAC of 17,500 metric 
     tons (mt) for walleye pollock in the Western/Central 
     Regulatory Area and 850 mt in the Eastern GOA Regulatory 
     Area. The final pollock TAC specification for 1991 is still 
     under review. Steller sea lion research efforts to assess the 
     status of the population and the factors involved in the 
     population decline will also continue. The available results 
     will be used during the continuing 1991 TAC consultation and 
     during the 1992 specification process.
       The Steller sea lion final rule (November 26, 1990, 55 FR 
     49204) established 3-nautical-mile buffer zones around major 
     sea lion rookeries in the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea. 
     As outlined in the final rule, NMFS intends to undertake 
     further rulemaking after considering additional protective 
     regulations and the need for critical habitat designation for 
     Steller sea lions. NMFS will solicit comments from the 
     Steller Sea Lion Recovery Team, other experts, and the 
     general public on the need to modify the existing buffer 
     zones or to create additional buffer zones.
       An Incidental Take Statement is not included with this 
     Biological Opinion because a limited incidental take is 
     already authorized for Steller sea lions under Section 114 of 
     the Marine Mammal Protection Act (50 CFR 229.8). In addition, 
     the quota established in the regulations at 50 CFR 
     227.12(a)(4) has not been exceeded.
                                  ____

         Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
           Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, 
           Silver Spring, MD, September 20, 1991.
     Memorandum for: The Record.
     From: William W. Fox, Jr.
     Subject: Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation 
         Concerning the 1991 Gulf of Alaska Groundfish Fishery 
         Walleye Pollock Total Allowable Catch Specification.
       Based on the attached Biological Opinion, we conclude that 
     the fourth quarter 1991 Gulf of Alaska walleye pollock 
     fishery, as herein described, is not likely to jeopardize the 
     continued existence of any endangered or threatened species 
     under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries 
     Service.
       The management measures implemented with the 1991 GOA 
     walleye pollock total allowable catch (TAC) remain in effect. 
     To minimize the likelihood that the fourth quarter harvest 
     will exceed the 1991 TAC, NMFS will open the fishery for only 
     a predetermined period of time. Daily reporting of all 
     processors will be required, as well as 100 percent observer 
     coverage on vessels over 60 feet in length.
       An Incidental Take Statement is not included with this 
     Biological Opinion because

[[Page S11469]]

     a limited incidental take is already authorized for Steller 
     sea lions under Section 114 of the Marine Mammal Protection 
     Act (50 CFR 229.8). In addition, the quota established in the 
     regulations at 50 CFR 227.12(a)(4) has not been exceeded.
                                  ____


 [Excerpts From Biological Opinion on 2000 TAC Specifications for BSAI 
               and GOA Groundfish Fisheries, and the AFA]


                    reinitiation--closing statement

       This concludes formal consultation on the 2000 TAC 
     specifications for the BSAI and GOA groundfish fisheries, and 
     the American Fisheries Act. As provided in 50 CFR 402.16, 
     reinitiation of formal consultation is required where 
     discretionary Federal agency involvement or control over the 
     action has been retained (or is authorized by law) and if: 
     (1) the amount or extent of incidental take is exceeded; (2) 
     new information reveals effects of the agency action that may 
     affect listed species or designated critical habitat in a 
     manner or to an extent not considered in this opinion; (3) 
     the agency action is subsequently modified in a manner that 
     causes an effect to the listed species or designated critical 
     habitat not considered in this opinion; or (4) a new species 
     is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected 
     by the action. In instances where the amount or extent of 
     incidental take is exceeded, any operations causing such take 
     must cease pending reinitiation of consultation.
       The conclusions of this Biological Opinion were based on 
     the best scientific and commercial data available during this 
     consultation, NMFS recognizes the uncertainty in these data 
     with respect to potential competition between the western 
     population of Steller sea lions and the BSAI and GOA 
     fisheries for Pacific cod. NMFS also recognizes that it has a 
     continuing responsibility to make a reasonable effort to 
     develop additional data (51 FR 19952). To fulfill this 
     responsibility, NMFS has identified crucial information 
     necessary to address this question again in one year. That 
     information will result from analyses listed in the 
     Conservation Recommendations. NMFS will consider the results 
     of these studies as new information that reveals effects of 
     the agency action that may affect listed species or 
     designated critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not 
     considered in this opinion.

                           *   *   *   *   *



                               conclusion

       After reviewing the current status of the Steller sea lion, 
     the environmental baseline for the action area, the effects 
     of the proposed 1999-2002 Atka mackerel fishery, the 
     cumulative effects, and the conservation measures that will 
     result from recommendations of the NPFMC, it is NMFS's 
     biological opinion that the action, as proposed, is not 
     likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Steller 
     sea lion or adversely modify its critical habitat. Barring 
     any need for reinitiation prior to implementation of the 
     fishery in 2003, this opinion will remain in effect until the 
     end of calendar year 2002.
       After reviewing the current status of the Steller sea lion, 
     the environmental baseline for the action area, the effects 
     of the proposed 1999-2002 BSAI pollock fishery, and the 
     cumulative effects, it is NMFS' biological opinion that the 
     action, as proposed, is likely to jeopardize the continued 
     existence of the western population of Steller sea lions and 
     adversely modify its critical habitat.
       After reviewing the current status of the Steller sea lion, 
     the environmental baseline for the action area, the effects 
     of the proposed 1999-2002 GOA pollock fishery, and the 
     cumulative effects, it is NMFS' biological opinion that the 
     action, as proposed, is likely to jeopardize the continued 
     existence of the western population of Steller sea lions and 
     adversely modify its critical habitat.

                           *   *   *   *   *

       After reviewing the current status of the Steller sea lion, 
     the environmental baseline for the action area, the effects 
     of the 1999 BSAI and GOA groundfish fisheries with the TAC 
     levels proposed, the cumulative effects, and the conservation 
     measures that will result from recommendations of the NPFMC, 
     it is NMFS' biological opinion that the action, as proposed, 
     is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the 
     Steller sea lion or adversely modify its critical habitat. 
     This opinion is contingent upon development and 
     implementation of a reasonable and prudent alternative to 
     avoid jeopardy and adverse modification as found in the 
     December 3, 1998 Biological Option on the BSAI and GOA 
     pollock fisheries.
       This opinion will remain in effect until the end of 
     calendar year 1999, at which time the issue of competition 
     between these fisheries and Steller sea lions should be re-
     examined. The conservation recommendations provided below 
     include recommendations for studies to be completed in the 
     interim period. The results of those studies should 
     facilitate re-examination of the question of competition 
     between these groundfish fisheries and the Steller sea lion.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, there is no reason to interrupt this 
fishery. There is great reason to try to find out why the steller sea 
lion is declining. We have a massive effort to try to determine that. 
We will cooperate in any way we can to save this population. But we do 
not want to lose this massive biomass in the process.
  If this trawl fishery does not continue, it will decline back to 
where it was before the trawl fishery was started. I think those who 
criticize us would do well to study the science and talk to people who 
know something about these steller sea lions and the fisheries, and 
quit listening to these extremist political people who are involved in 
this process, as far as the environmental groups are concerned.

                          ____________________