[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 151 (Tuesday, November 15, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12850-S12851]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. STEVENS (for himself, Mr. Inouye, Ms. Snowe, Ms. Cantwell, 
        Mr. Vitter, and Mrs. Boxer):
  S. 2012. A bill to authorize appropriations to the Secretary of 
Commerce for the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
Act for fiscal years 2006 through 2012, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, today I come to the Senate, along with my 
good friend and coauthor, Senator Dan Inouye of Hawaii, to introduce a 
bill to reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and 
Management Act.
  This legislation reauthorizes the law that manages and regulates 
fisheries in the United States exclusive economic zone. It is 
cosponsored by Senators Snowe, Cantwell, and Vitter.
  The law was originally enacted in 1976. A that time it was titled the 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Senator Warren Magnuson and I 
developed the law after Warren sent me to monitor the law of the sea 
negotiations, which took place all over the world. A concept considered 
during these negotiations was the expansion of a coastal nation's 
sovereignty over its seaward waters out to 200 miles.
  Warren and I took a bipartisan approach to the legislation and 
developed a bill that established our country's exclusive right to 
harvest fishery resources from 3 to 200 miles and put in place one of 
the most successful Federal-State management systems. This system 
recognized the complexity of our differing fish stocks and the unique 
regional approaches needed to manage these resources.
  This is now the seventh authorization of the act we created over 30 
years ago. It is the first reauthorization I have been a part of as 
chairman of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, which 
has jurisdiction over this legislation.
  The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 2005 
implements many of the recommendations made by the U.S. Commission on 
Ocean Policy--the first such commission authorized by Congress to 
review our nation's ocean policies and laws in over 35 years. This was 
coauthored by my great friend from South Carolina, Senator Ernest 
Hollings. The Commission's recommendations were important to the 
development of this act we present to the Senate today.
  The intent of this legislation is to authorize these recommendations 
and to build on some of the sound fishery management principles we 
passed in the Sustainable Fisheries Act in 1996, which was the last 
time we reauthorized the act.
  Our bill will preserve and strengthen the regional fishery management 
councils. The eight regional councils located around the United States 
and Caribbean Islands are a model of Federal oversight benefiting from 
local innovation and management approaches. This reauthorization 
establishes a council training program designed to prepare members for 
the numerous legal, scientific, economic, and conflict of interest 
requirements which apply to the fishery management process. In 
addition, this reauthorization addresses concerns over the transparency 
of the regional council process--it provides additional financial 
disclosure requirements for council members and clarifies the act's 
conflict of interest and recusal requirements.
  In order to prevent overfishing and preserve the sustainable harvest 
of fishery resources in all eight regional council jurisdictions, this 
bill mandates the use of annual catch limits which shall not be 
exceeded. Under the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act, overfishing of 
overfished stocks was to end. To meet this goal, we required the 
implementation of rebuilding plans which would restore any overfished 
species to sustainable levels. It has been almost 10 years since we 
passed the Sustainable Fisheries Act and overfishing of overfished 
stocks remains a significant problem. The legislation we are 
introducing today requires every fishery management plan to contain an 
annual catch limit which is set at or below optimum yield, based on the 
best scientific information available.
  This bill also requires that any harvests exceeding the annual catch 
limit be deducted from the annual catch limit for the following year.
  An important recommendation from the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy 
was to establish national standards for quota programs. Our legislation 
establishes national guidelines for the harvesting of fish for limited 
access privilege programs, which are also called LAPPs. These 
guidelines would require that any LAPP must accomplish important 
objectives, including: assisting in rebuilding an overfished fishery; 
reducing capacity in a fishery that is overcapitalized; promoting the 
safety of human life at sea; promoting conservation and management; and 
providing a system for monitoring, management, and enforcement of the 
program.
  The regional councils, the administration, and to a lesser extent the 
U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, all recommended we address the 
inconsistencies between the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the National 
Environmental Protection Act. They recommended we resolve timeline or 
``process'' issues which have required councils to spend much of their 
time and funding developing litigation-proof environmental impact 
statements and environmental assessments under NEPA.
  This bill provides a uniform process under which councils can 
consider the substantive requirements of NEPA while adhering to the 
timelines found in Magnuson-Stevens when they are developing fishery 
management plans, plan amendments, and regulations.
  Several of the provisions in this bill strengthen the role of science 
in council decisionmaking, which was another strong recommendation made 
by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. Our bill specifies that the 
scientific and statistical committees, called SSCs, are to provide 
their councils with on-going scientific advice needed for management 
decisions. This may include

[[Page S12851]]

recommendations on acceptable biological catch or optimum yield, annual 
catch limits, or other mortality limits. The SSCs are also expected to 
advise the councils on a variety of other issues, including stock 
status and health, bycatch, habitat status, and socioeconomic impacts.
  We have enhanced the overall effectiveness of this act by improving 
data collection and management. Our legislation authorizes a national 
cooperative research and management program, which would be implemented 
on a regional basis and conducted through partnerships between Federal 
and State managers, commercial and recreational fishing industry 
participants, and scientists. This will improve data related to 
recreational fisheries by establishing a new national program for the 
registration of marine recreational fishermen who fish in Federal 
waters. Our legislation also directs the secretary, in cooperation with 
the councils, to create a regionally based bycatch reduction 
engineering program which will develop technological devices and 
engineering techniques for minimizing bycatch, bycatch mortality, and 
post-release mortality.
  The Magnuson-Stevens Act has worked well. It has enabled effective 
conservation and management of our fishery resources and allowed for 
sustainable harvests. Both the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy and the 
Pew Oceans Commission singled out the fisheries managed by the North 
Pacific Council--which does not have an overfished or endangered 
species of fish--as an example of proper fisheries management.
  Let me say that again. They singled out the fisheries management by 
the North Pacific Council, which does not have an overfished or 
endangered species of fish, as an example of proper fisheries 
management.
  The council consistently sets an optimum yield far below the 
acceptable biological catch, and the fisheries in its jurisdiction have 
remained sustainable and abundant. That is the North Pacific Council, 
Mr. President. Our goal is to build upon this success and ensure the 
sustainability of this resource for generations to come.
  Unfortunately, management internationally and especially on the high-
seas is lacking. Industrial foreign fleets continue to expand and fish 
in remote and deep parts of the oceans. When we first developed this 
legislation over 30 years ago, such practices were unimaginable. The 
illegal, unreported, and unregulated--we call this IUU--fishing on the 
high-seas now threatens the good management taking place in U.S. waters 
that we control.
  Our bill strengthens U.S. leadership in international conservation 
and management. It requires the Secretary of Commerce to establish an 
international compliance and monitoring program and to provide Congress 
with reports on our progress in reducing IUU fishing. This bill also 
requires the Secretary to promote international cooperation and 
strengthen the ability of regional fishery management organizations to 
combat IUU and other harmful fishing practices. In addition, this 
legislation allows the use of measures authorized under the High Seas 
Driftnet Act to force compliance in cases where regional or 
international fishery management organizations are unable to stop IUU 
fishing.
  I have been pleased with the bipartisan approach we have taken on 
this bill. My co-chairman, Senator Inouye, and I have worked together 
on this reauthorization, and I look forward to working with my 
colleagues on the Commerce Committee to move this legislation forward.
                                 ______