[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 90 (Friday, June 25, 2004)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1248-E1249]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              THE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT REFORM ACT OF 2004

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. NICK J. RAHALL II

                            of west virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 24, 2004

  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, as Ranking Member of the Committee on 
Resources, today I am introducing a bill that would bring the 
management of our Nation's ocean fisheries into the 21st century. In 
this regard, l am pleased to note that the ``Fisheries Management 
Reform Act of 2004'' is being introduced with 15 original cosponsors 
including the gentleman from California, Sam Farr, who serves as co-
chair of the House Oceans Caucus.
  For my part, I am introducing this measure for two fundamental 
reasons. First, I believe that we have a responsibility to ensure that 
our fish stocks--a public resource that belongs to all Americans--will 
be managed sustainably and based on science, not politics. More 
importantly, because without sustainably managed fisheries, there will 
be no fishing industry at all. I do not come to this point lightly, and 
I appreciate the importance that this issue holds for many Members and 
their constituents.
  As it stands, two separate and well-respected commissions--the U.S. 
Commission on Ocean Policy and the Pew Ocean Commission--were both 
charged with reviewing our ocean management systems and both made 
recommendations regarding the need to reform our fisheries management 
system. Their reports represent several years of research by ocean 
experts who traveled to coastal communities dependent on commercial and 
recreational fishing. The Fisheries Management Reform Act of 2004 
represents the first legislation proposed to implement those expert 
recommendations. This is a small step of many that we, as Congress, can 
take to remedy a system of governance that has not done enough to 
protect our oceans and, consequently, the communities that depend on 
them.
  In this regard, the ``Fisheries Management Reform Act of 2004'' would 
require a broader public interest representation on the Regional 
Fishery Management Councils, the bodies that are stewards of our 
Nation's fisheries and are currently dominated by commercial and 
recreational fishing interests. I am aware of no other public trust 
resource where management decisions are being made by the very industry 
that is to be regulated. The bill would require training of all 
appointed members in fishery science and basic stock assessment, social 
science and fishery economics, and the legal requirements of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and other 
pertinent laws. Not only will these two provisions diversify the 
interests on the Council, but also ensure that those appointed are 
knowledgeable about fisheries management.
  Second, the bill would strengthen current conflict of interest 
provisions in the Magnuson-Stevens Act. An individual would not be 
allowed to vote on a Council decision affecting

[[Page E1249]]

their financial interests. Understanding the unique nature of fisheries 
management, I fully support and appreciate the participation of 
fishermen in the Council process. In instances where fishermen, 
commercial or recreational, are faced with decisions affecting their 
livelihood and simultaneously, the sustainability of the fishery, the 
current process puts these individuals in the compromised position of 
serving two masters. Generally, it is the fish stocks that pay the 
price.
  This legislation also would ensure science-based management of our 
fisheries. By allowing scientists to recommend appropriate catch limits 
and the Councils to determine how that catch should be allocated, this 
bill would remove council members from that untenable position of 
choosing between the health of the resource and catching enough fish to 
pay their health insurance. Scientists are better suited for 
determining sustainable harvest levels, while fishermen, who will 
remain an integral part of the Council process, should not have to be 
experts on the vast complexities of ocean science. Their expertise can 
be used best in managing and allocating the resource, and in developing 
improved fishing methods and technologies, without also being 
responsible for the status of the stocks.
  Not the timber industry, not the mining industry--as a matter of 
fact, no other industry I can think of is allowed to regulate itself 
like the fishing industry does. This system may have made sense when 
Congress first put it in place more than two decades ago, but it's 
clear now that a chronic condition of conflict of interest has created 
a system that is not working for fishermen or for the fishery 
resources. In fact, 76 stocks are overfished--over 35% of known stocks.
  I do not assume that this bill alone will ``fix'' in its entirety the 
current system. The U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy was clear that 
changes are urgently needed. This bill addresses just one of many 
problems plaguing ocean resource management. However, the principles of 
the bill--to manage fisheries for the public good, to reduce financial 
conflicts of interest, and to ensure that fisheries management is based 
on the best available science--are indisputable.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill in a bipartisan fashion. 
The fish do not vote, so I can not offer them as political capital. But 
if this bill were enacted, we will be better able to ensure sustainable 
fisheries on a continuing basis, as is required by law, but all too 
rarely accomplished under the current system. The long-term benefits 
would affect the constituents of every district in this country. 
Fishermen would be able to pass on their trade to their children. Our 
inland states would enjoy more fresh seafood caught in our domestic 
waters. And everyone would be able to catch a big one on their summer 
vacation.

                          ____________________