[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 4]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 4649-4650]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     INTRODUCTION OF THE MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND 
                 MANAGEMENT REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2006

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. WAYNE T. GILCHREST

                              of maryland

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 30, 2006

  Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, today, along with my distinguished 
colleagues, Representatives Ehlers, Bartlett, Leach, Farr, Castle, and 
Shays, I am introducing legislation to reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which provides the U.S. with 
authority to manage fisheries in U.S. waters. Our bill would enact 
critical updates to our current national fishery policy management that 
will ensure sustainable fisheries well into the future. I urge my 
colleagues to join us in cosponsoring H.R. 5051.
  Both nationally and globally, our fishery resources are stretched to 
meet increasing demand--Americans alone now consume over 4 billion 
pounds of seafood annually. Fishery management has improved greatly 
since the enactment of the Sustainable Fisheries Act in 1996. Yet too 
often, we continue to experience overfishing and overcapacity--too many 
boats and too few fish--throughout our Nation's oceans--a situation 
that is not sustainable over time. In national policy, we must make the 
sustainable harvest of our living marine resources and the ecosystems 
on which they depend our highest priority.
  I commend Chairman Pombo, Mr. Frank, and Mr. Young for their 
introduction of a comprehensive Magnuson-Stevens reauthorization bill, 
and I believe its close alignment with S. 2012 is a solid step forward 
in improving the health of our Nation's fisheries. However, I believe 
recent advances in marine science and a

[[Page 4650]]

greater understanding of our complex ocean ecosystems can help shape an 
even stronger bill. Our bill proposes to move fisheries management in a 
positive step toward ecosystem management, incorporating our vastly 
increased scientific understanding of ocean ecosystems and the rapidly 
developing body of experience in this approach gained by the Regional 
Fishery Management Councils in projects around the Nation. It would 
require the administration to develop comprehensive guidelines, with 
the councils, to support the drafting of Fishery Ecosystem Plans. 
Science on ecosystems is very advanced, to the extent that over 200 
scientists signed on to a scientific consensus statement on ecosystem 
management organized by the Communication Partnership for Science and 
the Sea (COMPASS) on March 21, 2005.
  For stocks that are designated as overfished, our bill proposes to 
require overfishing to end by a date certain. Currently, and as a 
result of a ruling by a Federal district court which held that 
overfishing could occur during the rebuilding of the stock, overfishing 
is a continuing problem for stocks in many parts of the Nation. Out of 
175 stocks in the Nation about which the status is known, 53 are 
overfished. Rebuilding time frames for some species have reached over 
40 years in length, during which overfishing may continue under current 
law. However, the administration supports ending overfishing by a date 
certain, well within a time in which Regional Fishery Management 
Councils could act, so that rebuilding time frames become less 
contentious. The Pombo-Young-Frank bill extends the rebuilding time 
frame for fisheries from the current 10 year limit under a wide range 
of circumstances, but does not address overfishing at all. This 
approach takes us backward, not forward in ensuring sustainable use of 
our fisheries.
  The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is very controvertial, 
as my colleagues know. The Senate, in its Magnuson-Stevens 
reauthorization bill, requires the administration to work between the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the White House 
Council on Environmental Quality to better integrate the process 
required by NEPA and the process required by Magnuson-Stevens for its 
Fishery Management Plan process. Given that the Resources Committee has 
held only one hearing on this issue, I believe this is the best 
approach. Providing the Secretary of NOAA with the authority to waive 
NEPA for Fishery Management Plans, as the Pombo-Young-Frank bill 
proposes, is too broad to capture potential pitfalls about which we are 
only beginning to understand.
  Finally, the most important aspect of fishery management is the 
containment of annual harvest limits within boundaries that support 
sustainability of fishery stocks. The number of overfished stocks 
demonstrates our failure to achieve this important limit. The Senate 
has been engaged in a productive negotiation over this issue--how to 
establish accountability for the administration and the Councils and to 
support stronger science in setting and achieving such limits. The 
Pombo-Young-Frank bill does include many provisions to strengthen the 
state of fishery management science and the use of science in 
management decisions, but does not address the need to ensure that 
fisheries are not stretched beyond the scientifically established 
limits it provides. While I believe neither the House nor the Senate 
has achieved consensus on this issue, our bill includes such 
accountability.
  It is our intention to constructively contribute to the coming debate 
in the House over national ocean fishery management by stressing policy 
to strengthen the conservation of ocean fish resources while supporting 
the extraordinary efforts of our administration and Regional Fishery 
Management Councils. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor H.R. 5051 and 
join us in this critical policy debate.

                          ____________________