Order Code IB10109
Issue Brief for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal
Legislation in the 108th Congress
Updated February 6, 2003
Eugene H. Buck
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

CONTENTS
SUMMARY
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Commercial and Sport Fisheries: Background and Issues
Magnuson Act Reauthorization
Background
Congressional Action
Pacific Salmon
Background
Other Miscellaneous Issues
Aquaculture: Background and Issues
Miscellaneous Issues
Marine Mammals: Background and Issues
Marine Mammal Protection Act Reauthorization
Background
Congressional Action
Other Miscellaneous Issues
NOAA Fisheries Appropriations
LEGISLATION

---

IB10109
02-06-03
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Legislation
SUMMARY
Fish and marine mammals are important
a feasibility study of fish passage at Chiloquin
resources in open ocean and nearshore coastal
Dam, OR; authorized the waiver of state
areas. Many laws and regulations guide the
fishing regulations at military facilities; ex-
management of these resources by federal
tended the interstate compact relating to At-
agencies.
lantic salmon restoration for 20 years; ex-
tended Coast Guard fishing vessel safety
Reauthorization of major legislation —
programs; and extended priorities for Sea
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
Grant College Program competitive grants.
and Management Act (MSFCMA) and the
Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) —
Aquaculture — the farming of fish,
will likely be on the agenda of the 108th Con-
shellfish, and other aquatic animals and plants
gress, since the authorization of appropriations
in a controlled environment — is expanding
for both laws expired at the end of FY1999.
rapidly, both in the United States and abroad.
In the 107th Congress, reauthorization bills
In the United States, important species cul-
were introduced in the House and oversight
tured include catfish, salmon, shellfish, and
hearings were held in both Chambers. One
trout. Legislation related to aquaculture
House bill was reported and another was
enacted by the 107th Congress extended autho-
marked up, but neither was enacted.
rization for aquaculture research facilities,
reauthorized the National Aquaculture Act,
Commercial and sport fishing are jointly
defined what fish may be labeled and adver-
managed by the federal government and indi-
tized as catfish, and required labeling both
vidual states. States have jurisdiction gener-
farm-raised and wild fish as to country of
ally within 3 miles of the coast. Beyond state
origin and to distinguish between wild and
jurisdiction and out to 200 miles, the federal
farm-raised fish.
government manages fisheries under the
MSFCMA through eight regional fishery
Marine mammals are protected under the
management councils. Beyond 200 miles, the
MMPA. This Act authorizes restricted use
United States participates in international
(“take”) of marine mammals. It addresses
agreements relating to specific areas or spe-
specific situations of concern, such as dolphin
cies.
mortality, which is primarily associated with
the eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery.
Legislation related to commercial and
Legislation enacted by the 107th Congress
sport fisheries enacted by the 107th Congress
related to marine mammals required the Na-
provided funding for capacity reduction pro-
tional Park Service to prepare an environmen-
grams for New England fisheries; modified
tal impact statement on vessel entries to Gla-
terms of the American Fisheries Act; extended
cier Bay National Park to assess possible
state authority to manage West Coast Dunge-
impacts on whales and authorized the emer-
ness crab; required a report on efforts to ex-
gency towing of Alaskan subsistence-har-
pand promoting, marketing, and purchasing
vested whales to prevent loss.
U.S. pouched and canned salmon; authorized
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

IB10109
02-06-03
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
On February 3, 2003, the Bush Administration released its FY2004 budget request for
federal agencies, including $732 million for NOAA Fisheries. On January 23, 2003, the
Senate passed an amended H.J.Res. 2, to provide FY2003 appropriations for most fishery,
aquaculture, and marine mammal programs. On January 7, 2003, the 108th Congress
convened. (Members and staff may request e-mail notification of new CRS reports in the
areas of marine and freshwater fisheries, aquaculture, and marine mammal issues by
contacting Gene Buck at [gbuck@crs.loc.gov] and requesting to be added to his notification
list.)
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Commercial and Sport Fisheries:
Background and Issues
Historically, coastal states managed marine sport and commercial fisheries in nearshore
waters, where most seafood was caught. However, as fishing techniques improved,
fishermen ventured farther offshore. Before the 1950s, the federal government assumed
limited responsibility for marine fisheries, responding primarily to international fishery
concerns and treaties (by enacting implementing legislation for treaties; e.g., the Northern
Pacific Halibut Act in 1937) as well as to interstate fishery conflicts (by consenting to
interstate fishery compacts; e.g., the Pacific Marine Fisheries Compact in 1947). In the late
1940s and early 1950s, several Latin American nations proclaimed marine jurisdictions
extending 200 miles offshore. This action was denounced by those within the United States
and other distant-water fishing nations who sought to preserve access for far-ranging fishing
vessels. Beginning in the 1950s (Atlantic) and 1960s (Pacific), increasing numbers of
foreign fishing vessels steamed into U.S. offshore waters to catch the substantially
unexploited seafood resources. Since the United States then claimed only a 3-mile
jurisdiction (in 1964, P.L. 88-308 prohibited fishing by foreign-flag vessels within 3 miles
of the coast; in 1966, P.L. 89-658 proclaimed an expanded 12-mile exclusive U.S. fishery
jurisdiction), foreign vessels could fish many of the same stocks caught by U.S. fishermen.
U.S. fishermen deplored this “foreign encroachment” and alleged that overfishing was
causing stress on, or outright depletion of, fish stocks. The unsuccessful Law of the Sea
Treaty negotiations in the 1970s provided impetus for unilateral U.S. action.
The enactment of the Fishery Conservation and Management Act (FCMA) in 1976
(later renamed the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act and more recently
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA)
[http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/]) ushered in a new era of federal marine fishery
management. The FCMA was signed into law on April 13, 1976, after several years of
debate. On March 1, 1977, marine fishery resources within 200 miles of all U.S. coasts, but
outside state jurisdiction, came under federal jurisdiction, and an entirely new multifaceted
regional management system began allocating fishing rights, with priority given to domestic
enterprise.
CRS-1

---

IB10109
02-06-03
Today, individual states manage marine fisheries in inshore and coastal waters
(generally within 3 miles of the coast). Interstate coordination occurs through three regional
(Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific) interstate marine fishery commissions, created by
congressionally-approved compacts. Beyond state waters, out to 200 miles, the federal
government manages fish and shellfish resources for which fishery management plans
(FMPs) have been developed under the MSFCMA. Individual states manage fishermen
operating state-registered vessels under state regulations consistent with any existing federal
FMP when fishing in inshore state waters and, in the absence of a federal FMP, wherever
they fish.
Primary federal management authority was vested in NOAA Fisheries (formerly the
National Marine Fisheries Service [http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/]) within the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the Department of Commerce. The 200-mile
fishery conservation zone was superseded by an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ),
proclaimed by President Reagan on March 10, 1983 (Presidential Proclamation 5030).
Eight Regional Fishery Management Councils were created by the FCMA
[http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/councils/]. Council members are appointed by the Secretary of
Commerce from lists of candidates knowledgeable of fishery resources, provided by coastal
state Governors. The Councils prepare FMPs for those fisheries that they determine require
active federal management. After public hearings, revised FMPs are submitted to the
Secretary of Commerce for approval. Approved plans are implemented through regulations
published in the Federal Register. Together these Councils have implemented 39 FMPs for
various fish and shellfish resources, with 7 additional plans in various stages of development.
Some plans are created for an individual species or a few related ones (e.g., FMPs for red
drum by the South Atlantic Council, for northern anchovy by the Pacific Council, and for
shrimp by the Gulf of Mexico Council). Others are developed for larger species assemblages
inhabiting similar habitats (e.g., FMPs for Gulf of Alaska groundfish by the North Pacific
Council and for reef fish by the Gulf of Mexico Council). Many of the implemented plans
have been amended (one more than 30 times), and three have been developed and
implemented jointly by two or more Councils. The MSFCMA was last reauthorized in 1996
by P.L. 104-297, the Sustainable Fisheries Act [http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/sfaguide/].
This authorization of appropriations expired in FY1999.
Under initial FCMA authority, a substantial portion of the fish catch from federal
offshore waters was allocated to foreign fishing fleets. However, the 1980 American
Fisheries Promotion Act (Title II of P.L. 96-561) and other FCMA amendments orchestrated
a decrease in foreign catch allocations as domestic fishing and processing industries
expanded. Foreign catch from the U.S. EEZ declined from about 3.8 billion pounds in 1977
to zero since 1992. Commensurate with the decline of foreign catch, domestic offshore catch
in federal waters increased dramatically, from about 1.6 billion pounds (1977) to more than
6.3 billion pounds (1993). Total (U.S. and foreign) offshore fishery landings from the U.S.
EEZ increased about 24% between 1977 and 1986-1988 to a peak of 6.65 billion pounds, but
declined slightly to stabilize over the next decade.
In 2001, U.S. commercial fishermen landed about 7.3 billion pounds of edible,
unprocessed fish and shellfish [http://www.st.nmfs.gov/commercial/index.html] from
combined state, federal, and international waters, worth almost $ 3.1 billion at the dock.
Imports of mostly processed products supplied another 4.1 billion pounds, worth about $9.9
CRS-2

---

IB10109
02-06-03
billion. U.S. consumers spent an estimated $55.3 billion on edible seafood in 2001, with
about $38 billion of that amount spent in restaurants and other food service establishments.
In addition, marine recreational anglers caught an estimated 440 million fish in 2001, of
w h i c h t h e r e t a i n e d c a t c h w a s a b o u t 2 6 2 m i l l i o n p o u n d s
[http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/recreational/queries/index.html ]. In 2001, a nationwide survey
[http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/fishing.html] estimated that marine and freshwater
recreational anglers spent almost $36 billion each year pursuing their sport.
Magnuson Act Reauthorization
Background. The MSFCMA was last reauthorized in 1996 by P.L. 104-297, the
Sustainable Fisheries Act; authorization for appropriations expired on September 30, 1999.
The 1996 amendments established fish conservation initiatives directing NOAA Fisheries
and regional councils to protect essential fish habitat, minimize incidental fish bycatch, and
restore overfished stocks. In addition, a host of modifications to regional council
management procedures and federal management policy were enacted. NOAA Fisheries
contends that implementation of the 1996 amendments has met many of the Act’s objectives
[http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases99/jan99/noaa99-4.html]; fishing industry and
environmental groups have criticized NOAA Fisheries and regional council implementation
efforts. While environmental groups have expressed concerns that NOAA Fisheries and
regional councils have not been as responsive as needed on conservation measures, fishing
industry representatives are concerned that too stringent an application of conservation
measures may cripple commercial fishing and bankrupt many fishermen. A key issue in any
reauthorization debate in the 108th Congress may be seeking a balance between conserving
fish and maintaining a viable commercial fishing industry.
Congressional Action. At issue for the 108th Congress will be the terms and
conditions of provisions designed to reauthorize and amend the MSFCMA to address the
concerns of various interest groups. For additional information on reauthorization issues
likely to be discussed in the 108th Congress, see CRS Report RL30215, The Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act: Reauthorization Issues for the 107th
Congress. For a side-by-side comparison of the three bills introduced in the 106th Congress
to reauthorize the MSFCMA, see CRS Report RS20788, Legislation in the 106th Congress
to Amend and Reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act. A copy of a congressional memorandum, dated September 12, 2002, comparing House
and Senate proposals for amending the MSFCMA in the 107th Congress may be requested
by contacting Gene Buck directly at [gbuck@crs.loc.gov].
Pacific Salmon
Background. Five species of salmon spawn in Pacific coastal rivers and lakes, after
which juveniles migrate to North Pacific ocean waters where they mature. Since these fish
may cross several state and national boundaries during their life spans, management is
complicated. Threats to salmon include hydropower dams blocking rivers and creating
reservoirs, sport and commercial harvest, habitat modification by competing resource
industries and human development, and hatcheries seeking to supplement natural production
but sometimes unintentionally causing genetic or developmental concerns. In response to
declining salmon populations in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California, discrete
population units have been listed as endangered or threatened species under the Endangered
CRS-3

---

IB10109
02-06-03
Species Act. For background on this issue, see CRS Report 98-666 ENR, Pacific Salmon
and Anadromous Trout: Management Under the Endangered Species Act and CRS Report
RL31546, The Endangered Species Act and Science: The Case of Pacific Salmon.
To address some of these concerns, the United States and Canada negotiated a bilateral
agreement on Pacific salmon in 1985. However, by the mid-1990s, controversy stalled
renegotiations to adjust cooperative management of these fish, and U.S.-Canada relations
[http://radio.cbc.ca/news/fish/] became more antagonistic, including the blockade of an
Alaska state ferry by British Columbia fishermen in Prince Rupert, BC, in July 1997. This
deadlock was resolved in June 1999 when a new accord was concluded. For additional
information on the Pacific Salmon Treaty and new agreement, see CRS Report RL30234,
The Pacific Salmon Treaty: The 1999 Agreement in Historical Perspective.
Miscellaneous Issues
Trade. H.R. 155 proposes to modify subsidies beneficial to certain foreign competitors
with the domestic shrimp industry; no action has been taken on this measure.
Invasive Species. Section 6(c) of S. 144 would exclude state funding for noxious
aquatic weed control from a noxious weed control program. H.R. 266 proposes to authorize
the National Invasive Species Council. No action has been taken on either of these measures.
Hydropower. Section 102(a)(3)(H) of H.R. 238 would set a goal for Department of
Energy hydropower programs to decrease damage to fish and aquatic ecosystems; no action
has been taken on this measure.
Recreational Fishing. H.Res. 30 would express concern for continued U.S.
recreational fishing access to waters near the Revillagigedo Islands of Mexico; no action has
been taken on this measure.
Bankruptcy. H.R. 343 would extend similar protection to family fishermen as
currently applies to family farmers under Chapter 12 of bankruptcy laws; no action has been
taken on this measure.
Habitat. Section 108 of S. 256/S. 272 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to
provide tax incentives for participation in the Fish and Wildlife Services’ “Partners for Fish
and Wildlife Program” [http://partners.fws.gov/]. No action has been taken on either
measure.
Aquaculture: Background and Issues
Aquaculture is broadly defined as the farming or husbandry of fish, shellfish, and other
aquatic animals and plants, usually in a controlled or selected environment. The diversity
of aquaculture is typified by such activities as: fish farming, usually applied to freshwater
commercial aquaculture operat i ons (e.g., catfish and trout farms
[http://www.usda.gov/nass/pubs/stathigh/2002/livestock02.pdf]); shellfish and seaweed
culture; net-pen culture, used by the salmon industry, wherein fish remain captive throughout
CRS-4

---

IB10109
02-06-03
their lives in marine pens built from nets; and ocean ranching, used by the Pacific Coast
salmon industry which cultures juveniles, releases them to mature in the open ocean, and
catches them when they return as adults to spawn. Fish hatcheries are government and
commercial aquaculture facilities that raise fish from recreational and commercial stocking
as well as for mitigation of aquatic resource and habitat damage.
The United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has characterized
aquaculture as one of the world’s fastest growing food production activities. World
aquaculture production more than doubled in 10 years, from about 10 million metric tons in
1984 to a record 25.5 million metric tons in 1994, with a value of approximately $40 billion.
The FAO predicted world aquaculture production would reach 35 million metric tons in 2000
[http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/w7499e/w7499e22.htm]. U.S. aquaculture, until recently
and with a few exceptions, has been considered a minor industry. Despite considerable
growth, the domestic aquaculture industry faced strong competition in 2002 from imports of
foreign aquacultural products as well as competition from the domestic poultry and livestock
industries [http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/erssor/livestock/ldp-aqs/2002/aqs16.pdf].
With growth however, aquaculture operations are facing increasing scrutiny for habitat
destruction, pollution, and other concerns. The major statute affecting U.S. aquaculture is
the National Aquaculture Act of 1980, as amended (16 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.).
Miscellaneous Issues
Income Tax. Section 2(e) of S. 106 would specifically exclude small businesses that
raise fish from certain provisions modifying income tax on capital gains; no action has been
taken on this measure..
Bankruptcy. H.R. 343 would extend similar protection to family fishermen (including
aquaculture operations) as currently applies to family farmers under Chapter 12 of
bankruptcy laws; no action has been taken on this measure.
Marine Mammals: Background and Issues
Due in part to the high level of dolphin mortality (estimated at more than 400,000
animals per year) in the eastern tropical Pacific tuna purse-seine fishery, Congress enacted
the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) in 1972. While some critics assert that the
MMPA is scientifically irrational because it identifies one group of organisms for special
protection unrelated to their abundance or ecological role, this Act has accomplished much
by way of promoting research and increased understanding of marine life as well as
encouraging attention to incidental bycatch mortalities of marine life by the commercial
fishing and other maritime industries.
The Act established a moratorium on the “taking” of marine mammals in U.S. waters
and by U.S. nationals on the high seas. The Act also established a moratorium on importing
marine mammals and marine mammal products into the United States. This Act protected
marine mammals from “clubbing, mutilation, poisoning, capture in nets, and other human
actions that lead to extinction.” It also expressly authorized the Secretary of Commerce and
CRS-5

---

IB10109
02-06-03
the Secretary of the Interior to issue permits for the “taking” of marine mammals for certain
purposes, such as scientific research and public display.
Under the Act, the Secretary of Commerce, acting through NOAA Fisheries, is
responsible for the conservation and management of whales, dolphins, porpoises, seals, and
sea lions. The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS),
is responsible for walruses, sea and marine otters, polar bears, manatees, and dugongs. This
division of authority derives from agency responsibilities as they existed when the MMPA
was enacted. Title II of the Act established an independent Marine Mammal Commission
(MMC) and its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals to oversee and
recommend actions necessary to meet the requirements of the Act.
Prior to passage of the MMPA, states were responsible for marine mammal
management on lands and in waters under their jurisdiction. The MMPA shifted marine
mammal management authority to the federal government. It provides, however, that
management authority, on a species-by-species basis, could be returned to states that adopt
conservation and management programs consistent with the purposes and policies of the Act.
It also provides that the moratorium on taking can be waived for specific purposes, if the
taking will not disadvantage the affected species or population. Permits may be issued to
take or import any marine mammal species, including depleted species, for scientific research
or to enhance the survival or recovery of the species or stock. The MMPA allows U.S.
citizens to apply for and obtain authorization for the take of small numbers of mammals
incidental to activities other than commercial fishing (e.g., offshore oil and gas exploration
and development) if the taking would have only a negligible impact on any marine mammal
species or stock, provided that monitoring requirements and other conditions are met.
The Act’s moratorium on taking does not apply to any Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo who
resides in Alaska and who dwells near the coast of the North Pacific or Arctic Ocean, if such
taking is for subsistence purposes or for creating and selling authentic Native articles of
handicrafts and clothing, and is not done wastefully.
The Act also authorizes the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing
operations. In 1988, most U.S. commercial fish harvesters were exempted from otherwise
applicable rulemaking and permit requirements for a 5-year period, pending development of
an improved system to govern the incidental taking of marine mammals in the course of
commercial fishing operations. This exemption expired at the end of FY1993, and was
extended several times until new provisions were enacted by P.L. 103-238, which
reauthorized the MMPA through FY1999. The eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery was
excluded from the incidental take regimes enacted in 1988 and 1994. Instead, the taking of
marine mammals incidental to that fishery is governed by separate provisions of the MMPA,
and was substantially amended by P.L. 105-42, the International Dolphin Conservation
Program Act.
Marine Mammal Protection Act Reauthorization
Background. The MMPA was reauthorized in 1994 by P.L. 103-238, the Marine
Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994; the authorization for appropriations expired
on September 30, 1999. The 1994 amendments indefinitely authorized the taking of marine
mammals incidental to commercial fishing operations and provided for assessment of marine
CRS-6

---

IB10109
02-06-03
mammal stocks in U.S. waters, for the development and implementation of take reduction
plans for stocks that may be reduced or are being maintained below their optimum
sustainable population levels due to interactions with commercial fisheries, and for studies
of pinniped-fishery interactions [http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/pubs/tm/tm28/areas.htm].
Congressional Action. Likely at issue for the 108th Congress will be the terms and
conditions of any provisions designed to reauthorize and amend the MMPA to address the
concerns of various interest groups. For additional information on potential reauthorization
issues in the 108th Congress, see CRS Report RL30120, Marine Mammal Protection Act:
Reauthorization Issues for the 107th Congress.
Miscellaneous Issues
Tuna-Dolphin. S. 130 proposes to amend the labeling requirements of the Dolphin
Protection Consumer Information Act; no action has been taken on this measure.
NOAA Fisheries Appropriations
The Bush Administration’s proposed FY2003 budget for NOAA Fisheries ($741.2
million) was about $7 million larger than its proposed FY2002 budget, and about $34 million
less than the enacted FY2002 funding. Major reductions between the FY2002 enacted
appropriations and the FY2003 request included about $20 million less for construction, $20
million less for Pacific coastal salmon recovery, and about $27.5 million less for Pacific
Salmon Treaty matters. In addition, the FY2003 request proposed to terminate $83.3 million
for projects funded in FY2002. These reductions were partially offset by increases including
a new fishery research vessel ($45.5 million), Columbia River Biological Opinions
implementation ($12 million), modernization of annual fish stock assessments ($10 million),
Environmental Improvement and Restoration Fund ($5.6 million), modernization and
expansion of vessel management system program ($5.4 million), and National Observer
Program ($3.2 million). During the 107th Congress, the Senate reported a bill to appropriate
FY2003 funding for NOAA Fisheries; no House bill was reported. The 107th Congress did
not complete action on FY2003 appropriations for NOAA Fisheries.
In the 108th Congress, H.R. 247 has been introduced to provide FY2003 appropriations
for NOAA Fisheries. An omnibus measure, H.J.Res. 2, was amended in the Senate on
January 23, 2003, to provide FY2003 appropriations for all agencies (including NOAA
Fisheries) not yet funded for FY2003 (see Table 1, below). This measure is currently in
conference.
CRS-7

---

IB10109
02-06-03
Table 1. NOAA Fisheries Appropriations
(In thousands of dollars)
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
FY2003
FY2003
FY2004
Enacted
Enacted
Request
S.Rept.
(S.Amdt. to
Request
(107th)
H.J.Res. 2)
Fisheries
376,921
347,216
339,234
277,039
279,189
363,008
Protected
143,600
142,448
153,145
111,271
111,271
160,740
Resources
Habitat
48,193
54,485
45,527
40,151
53,201
46,512
Conservation
Enforcement
38,500
41,720
50,034
47,145
47,145
50,698
Surveillance
Base
not ident.
not ident.
not ident.
112,246
112,246
not ident.
Acquisition of
26,841
0
0
0
0
0
Data
SUBTOTAL
634,055
585,869
587,940
587,852
603,052
620,958
Construction
54,180
37,155
17,000
24,000
24,000
14,000
Fleet
8,282
0
0
50,874
50,874
0
Replacement
Pacific Coastal
89,803
110,000
90,000
95,000
78,650
90,000
Salmon
Recovery
Pacific Salmon
19,956
47,419
20,000
20,000
20,000
0
Treaty
Saltonstall-
4,828
11,127
4,127
not ident.
not ident.
218
Kennedy
obligations
Environmental
2,108
6,050
1,362
0
0
5,509
Improvement
& Restoration
Fund
Other
2,388
1,675
1,088
1,145
1,145
1,434
Accounts
TOTAL
815,599
799,295
721,517
778,871
777,721
732,139
Sources: Budget Justifications, House and Senate Committee Reports, and floor debate.
Additional directions in H.J.Res. 2 as passed by the Senate for the Department of
Commerce (including NOAA Fisheries) include:
! creation of a West Coast Groundfish Fishing Capacity Reduction Program;
! prohibition on use of Saltonstall-Kennedy funds for Atlantic salmon
aquaculture development;
CRS-8

---

IB10109
02-06-03
! designation of $20 million in Saltonstall-Kennedy funds to be used to
develop an Alaska seafood marketing program;
! direction that NOAA Fisheries establish a Regional Office for the Pacific
Area;
! designation of $3 million in funding to the Louisiana oyster industry affected
by hurricanes;
! designation of $1.75 million for marine invasive species concerns in the
North Pacific;
! increased legal and fiscal accountability for Pacific salmon recovery,
including expanded use of ESA §6 cooperative agreements with states and
tribes;
! evaluation of foreign compliance with dolphin conservation standards;
! direction that NOAA establish an Ocean Health Initiative, with $10 million
provided for critical research; and
! a report on progress of implementation on fishery management reforms
recommended by the National Academy of Public Administration and
National Research Council.
Further Provisions in H.J.Res 2
Other items (both bill language and the summary of the Senate amendment printed in
the January 15, 2003 Congressional Record) related to fishery, aquaculture, and marine
mammal programs included in the Senate-passed H.J.Res. 2, but not in the NOAA Fisheries
FY2003 appropriations above, include:
! reconsideration by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on benefits of
consumption of omega-3 fatty acids in salmon;
! directions to the FDA on seafood safety, including new technology
development, consumption of raw shellfish, contract renewal for Alaska
seafood processor inspections, and special circumstances with Hawaiian
seafood marketing;
! fishery disaster funds totaling $100 million: Hawaii ($5 million), Alaska
($35 million), Northeast multispecies capacity reduction ($10 million), West
Coast groundfish capacity reduction ($10 million), South Atlantic shrimp
($17.5 million), Gulf of Mexico shrimp ($17.5 million) and Atlantic blue
crab fishery ($5 million);
! the Marine Mammal Commission would receive $4 million from “Small
Business Administration, Salaries and Expenses” in addition to its regular
appropriation of $2.05 million;
! expanded Agricultural Research Service (ARS) collaborative research on
sustainable marine aquaculture systems;
! expanded ARS research to address seafood waste disposal concerns; and
! increased Fish and Wildlife Service funding for Atlantic salmon recovery.
FY2004 Administration Request
On February 3, 2003, the Bush Administration released its request for FY2004 funding
for various federal agencies and programs. Major increases in the requested $732 million
for NOAA Fisheries include: $3 million to expand fishery observer coverage in the
CRS-9

---

IB10109
02-06-03
Northeast; $3.1 million for implementing the 2000 Federal Columbia River Power System
Biological Opinion and Basin-wide Recovery Strategy; $3 million to continue modernization
and expansion of fishery stock assessments; $2.8 million to support efforts to reduce bycatch;
$2 million to fund consultations under §7 of the Endangered Species Act; and $2 million to
improve the understanding and prediction of climate change on major U.S. marine and
coastal ecosystems in the Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska. The major decrease is elimination
of the $20 million proposed in FY2003 under the bilateral Pacific Salmon Treaty for
capitalization of two enhancement and restoration funds.
LEGISLATION
Fisheries
H.Res. 30 (Cunningham); H.J.Res. 2 (Young of Florida); H.R. 155 (Paul); H.R. 238
(Boehlert); H.R. 266 (Ehlers); H.R. 343 (Baldwin); S. 144 (Craig); S. 256 (Grassley); and
S. 272 (Santorum).
Aquaculture
H.J.Res. 2 (Young of Florida); H.R. 343 (Baldwin); and S. 106 (Collins).
Marine Mammals
H.J.Res. 2 (Young of Florida) and S. 130 (Boxer).
CRS-10

---