Order Code IB10139
CRS Issue Brief for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal
Legislation in the 109th Congress
Updated November 10, 2005
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
Pacific Salmon
Miscellaneous Issues
Aquaculture: Background and Issues
Miscellaneous Issues
Marine Mammals: Background and Issues
Marine Mammal Protection Act Reauthorization
Miscellaneous Issues
NMFS Appropriations
LEGISLATION


IB10139
11-10-05
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Legislation
in the 109th Congress
SUMMARY
Fish and marine mammals are important
ments to allow certain seasonal immigrant
resources in open ocean and nearshore coastal
seafood processing workers to enter the
areas. Many laws and regulations guide the
United States (§402 of P.L. 109-13), reaffirms
management of these resources by federal
state authority to regulate certain fishing
agencies.
activities to distinguish between state and
out-of-state residents (§6036 of P.L. 109-13),
Bills to reauthorize and amend major
allows hydropower licensees to propose alter-
legislation — the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
natives to fishways as long as the alternatives
Conservation and Management Act
would not diminish fish passage (§241 of P.L.
(MSFCMA) and the Marine Mammal Protec-
109-58), and comprehensively amends and
tion Act (MMPA) — have been introduced in
reauthorizes the Sport Fish Restoration Pro-
the 109th Congress; the authorization of appro-
gram to permanently appropriate boat safety
priations for both laws expired at the end of
funding and modify distribution of funds
FY1999. Bills offering extensive amendments
(Title X of P.L. 109-59).
to the MSFCMA include H.R. 1431 and S.
1224. H.R. 2130, H.R. 4075, and S. 1224
Aquaculture — the farming of fish,
propose extensive amendments to the MMPA.
shellfish, and other aquatic animals and plants
Recommendations by the U.S. Commission
in a controlled environment — is expanding
on Ocean Policy will likely play a role in
rapidly, both in the United States and abroad.
actions considered during the 109th Congress.
In the United States, important species cul-
tured include catfish, salmon, shellfish, and
Commercial and sport fishing are jointly
trout. Legislation related to aquaculture en-
managed by the federal government and indi-
acted by the 109th Congress extends protection
vidual states. States have jurisdiction gener-
to family fishermen (including aquaculture
ally within 3 miles of the coast. Beyond state
operations) under Chapter 12 of bankruptcy
jurisdiction and out to 200 miles, the federal
law (§1007 of P.L. 109-8).
government manages fisheries under the
MSFCMA through eight regional fishery
Marine mammals are protected under the
management councils. Beyond 200 miles, the
MMPA. With few exemptions, the MMPA
United States participates in international
prohibits harm or harassment (“take”) of
agreements relating to specific areas or spe-
marine mammals, unless restrictive permits
cies.
are obtained. It addresses specific situations
of concern, such as dolphin mortality, which
Legislation related to commercial and
is primarily associated with the eastern tropi-
sport fisheries enacted thus far by the 109th
cal Pacific tuna fishery. No legislation has yet
Congress extends protection to family fisher-
been enacted by the 109th Congress relating to
men under Chapter 12 of bankruptcy law
marine mammals.
(§1007 of P.L. 109-8), revises visa require-
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

IB10139
11-10-05
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
On November 7, 2005, the House Committee on The Budget reported H.R. 4241, within
which language would 1) amend the OCS Lands Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior
to issue regulations permitting the use of decommissioned offshore oil and gas platforms for
aquaculture or artificial reef use and 2) require a study of how the removal of offshore oil and
gas platforms and other OCS facilities might affect existing fish stocks and coral populations.
On November 7, 2005, a conference report was filed on H.R. 2862, proposing NMFS
appropriations for FY2006. The House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans
has scheduled a November 3, 2005 oversight hearing on invasive Asian carp in the Great
Lakes and Mississippi River System. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests has scheduled a November 2, 2005 hearing on
S. 1541, proposing to establish a cooperative cost-shared grant program to control and
mitigate the spread of invasive species on public lands. On October 27, 2005, the Senate
passed H.R. 889 (amended to incorporate the language of S. 1280), wherein language would
require the Coast Guard to integrate vessel monitoring system data into existing databases
to improve monitoring and enforcement of fishery law, require a Coast Guard report on
detection and interdiction of foreign fishing incursions, establish a pilot program for dockside
no fault/no cost safety and survivability examinations for uninspected commercial fishing
vessels; require the Coast Guard to continue to provide marine vessel safety training and cold
water immersion education and outreach programs for fishermen, and waive the Jones Act
for certain foreign vessels that have transported fish or shellfish in Maine waters. (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
CRS-1

IB10139
11-10-05
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. Protracted Law of the Sea Treaty
negotiations in the early and mid-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); see
[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.
Primary federal management authority was vested in the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS, also more popularly referred to as “NOAA Fisheries” — see [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 (see
[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 fishery management plans (FMP) 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 and NMFS
have developed and implemented 40 FMPs for various fish and shellfish resources, with 9
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 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 over 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 (see [http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/sfaguide/]). This
authorization of appropriations expired in FY1999.
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 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.
CRS-2

IB10139
11-10-05
In 2003, U.S. commercial fishermen landed about 7.5 billion pounds of edible,
unprocessed fish and shellfish (see [http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/commercial/index.
html]) from combined state, federal, and international waters, worth almost $3.2 billion at
the dock. Imports of mostly processed products supplied another 4.9 billion pounds, worth
about $11.1 billion. U.S. consumers spent an estimated $61.2 billion on edible seafood in
2003, with about $42 billion of that amount spent in restaurants and other food service
establishments. In addition, marine recreational anglers caught an estimated 452 million fish
in 2003, of which the retained catch was about 263 million pounds (see [http://www.st.nmfs.
gov/st1/recreational/index.html]). In 2001, a nationwide survey estimated that recreational
anglers spent almost $36 billion each year pursuing their sport (see [http://www.census.gov/
prod/www/abs/fishing.html]).
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 NMFS 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. NMFS contends that
implementation of the 1996 amendments has met many of the act’s objectives (see
[http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases99/jan99/noaa99-4.html]); fishing industry and
environmental groups have criticized NMFS and regional council implementation efforts.
While environmental groups have expressed concerns that NMFS 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 109th Congress may be seeking a balance between conserving fish and maintaining a
viable commercial fishing industry.
Congressional Action. At issue for the 109th 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 109th Congress, see CRS Report RL30215, The Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act: Reauthorization Issues
, by Eugene H.
Buck and Daniel A. Waldeck.
In the 109th Congress, §10206 of P.L. 109-59 (the Transportation Equity Act) clarified
the eligibility for communities to participate in the western Alaska community development
quota (CDQ) program. H.R. 889, as passed by the House on September 15, 2005, would
define community development plan in the context of the MSFCMA (§426) and modify
processors shares for crab fisheries in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (§427). On
October 27, 2005, the Senate amended H.R. 889 to incorporate the language of S. 1280
(deleting the two House fisheries provisions) and passed the amended H.R. 889. H.R. 1431
proposes to amend the MSFCMA to modify requirements for the appointment and training
of members of regional councils, and to modify how certain regional council committees and
panels conduct business. Section 1622 of S. 732, as reported on April 6, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-
53), proposes to repeal the P.L. 108-199 prohibition on FY2004 New England fisheries
expenditures (this provision appears to have already been repealed by §304 of P.L. 108-219).
CRS-3

IB10139
11-10-05
H.R. 2059 would prohibit all commercial fishing for Atlantic striped bass. On April 14,
2005, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans held an oversight hearing
on the relationship between the MSFCMA and the National Environmental Policy Act. H.R.
2112 would designate the exclusive economic zone of the United States as the “Ronald
Wilson Reagan Exclusive Economic Zone of the United States.” H.R. 2673 would place use
restrictions on certain bottom trawling gear, assist fishermen in switching to alternative gear,
and require federal studies to identify and map diverse bottom habitats. S. 1224 would
provide for increased efforts to protect deep sea corals and bottom habitat (Subtitle A and
§222 of Subtitle B in Title II) and would extensively amend the MSFCMA to implement
ecosystem-based management, further reduce bycatch, establish national policy for
individual fishing quotas, and modify the regional council fishery management plan process
(Title III). Section 304 of S. 1280 would require the Coast Guard to integrate vessel
monitoring system data into existing databases to improve monitoring and enforcement of
fishery law; §305 would require a Coast Guard report on detection and interdiction of foreign
fishing incursions. On July 28, 2005, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation reported (amended) S. 1280 (S.Rept. 109-114). On October 27, 2005, the
Senate amended H.R. 889 to incorporate the language of S. 1280 and passed the amended
H.R. 889. The House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans held field hearings
in Alaska on MSFCMA reauthorization on July 6, 2005 (Ketchikan) and July 8, 2005
(Kodiak). H.R. 3278 would establish national guidelines for individual fishing quota
programs. S. 1549 proposes to rationalize the Pacific whiting (hake) fishery. S. 1635 would
designate areas where trawling is permitted to protect deep sea corals and sponges. S. 1837
would amend the MSFCMA to add Rhode Island to the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council.
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 harvests, 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
Species Act. For background on this issue, see CRS Report 98-666, Pacific Salmon and
Anadromous Trout: Management Under the Endangered Species Act
, by Eugene H. Buck
and John R. Dandelski; and CRS Report RL31546, The Endangered Species Act and
Science: The Case of Pacific Salmon
, by Eugene H. Buck, M. Lynne Corn, Linda Parker, and
Pamela Baldwin.
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. 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
, by Daniel A. Waldeck and Eugene H. Buck.
CRS-4

IB10139
11-10-05
Congressional Action. In the 109th Congress, §1119(m) of P.L. 109-59 (the
Transportation Equity Act) limited the expenditures to no more than $10 million annually
from the Highway Trust Fund for federal forest highways to repair, maintain, or remove
culverts and bridges to facilitate fish passage. H.R. 1615 would require a National Academy
of Sciences analysis of federal salmon recovery efforts and a Government Accountability
Office study of the effects of partially removing four lower Snake River dams, and would
authorize partial removal of these four dams under certain conditions. S. 232 proposes to
authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to assist
in implementing fish passage and screening facilities at non-federal water projects. On
March 10, 2005, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources reported S. 232 (S.Rept.
109-31), and the Senate passed this measure on July 26, 2005. Section 3099(c)(2)(F) of S.
728, as reported (amended) by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works on
April 26, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-61), would authorize the FWS to manage bird colonies in the
proposed McNary National Wildlife Refuge, to reduce the loss of juvenile salmonids. On
May 24, 2005, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans held an
oversight hearing on the federal fish hatchery system. Section 4078 of H.R. 2864 would
require a feasibility study of fish passage improvements in Oregon; this bill was reported by
the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (amended, with the Oregon fish
passage language now at §4083) on June 24, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-154); the House passed this
bill (amended) on July 14, 2005 (fish passage language now at §4085).
Miscellaneous Issues
Bankruptcy. Section 1007 of P.L. 109-8 extends similar protection to family
fishermen as currently applies to family farmers under Chapter 12 of bankruptcy laws.
Seafood Processing. Section 402 of P.L. 109-13 revises requirements for H-2B
visas allowing certain seasonal immigrant seafood processing workers to enter the United
States. Section 203(a)(1) of H.R. 2870 would require the Labor Secretary to prohibit seafood
processing operations from employing minors.
State Management. Section 6036 of P.L. 109-13 reaffirms and clarifies the authority
of states to regulate certain hunting and fishing activities to distinguish between state
residents and non-residents.
Recreational Fishing. Funding of Aquatic Resources Trust Fund (ARTF) programs
was extended several times before a transportation bill was finally enacted — P.L. 109-14
(through June 30, 2005), P.L.109-20 (through July 19, 2005), P.L. 109-35 (through July 21,
2005), P.L. 109-37 (through July 27, 2005), P.L. 109-40 (through July 30, 2005), and P.L.
109-42 (through August 14, 2005). P.L. 109-59 (The Transportation Equity Act)
comprehensively amended and reauthorized the Sport Fish Restoration Program to
permanently appropriate boat safety funding and modify distribution of funds whereby all
accounts will annually receive a fixed percentage of the total fund revenue, eliminated the
ARTF to create a Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund, and modified the excise
tax on certain sport fishing equipment. P.L. 109-74 funded sportfishing and boating safety
programs from the Highway Trust Fund through the end of FY2005. (For background on the
ARTF and its programs, see CRS Report RS22060, The Aquatic Resources Trust Fund, by
Eugene H. Buck.) H.R. 1351 and S. 548 would establish a grant program to encourage
private landowners to provide public access for fishing and other outdoor recreation. Section
CRS-5

IB10139
11-10-05
5038(a) of H.R. 2864 would require a feasibility review of the Kings River (California)
Fisheries Management Program Framework Agreement; this bill was reported by the House
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (amended, with the Kings River language
now at §5045(a)) on June 24, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-154). The House passed H.R. 2864
(amended) on July 14, 2005, with the Kings River language at §5051(a).
Hydropower and Water Projects. Section 241 of P.L. 109-58 (Energy Policy Act
of 2005) allows federal hydropower licensees to propose alternatives to fishways required
by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as long as the alternatives would not diminish
fish passage. S. 232 proposes to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
Bureau of Reclamation, to assist in implementing fish passage and screening facilities at non-
federal water projects. On March 10, 2005, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
reported S. 232 (S.Rept. 109-31); the Senate passed this bill on July 26, 2005. Section
101(a)(7) of H.R. 737 would set a goal for Department of Energy hydropower programs to
decrease damage to fish and aquatic ecosystems. Section 201 of S. 753 and §2027 of H.R.
2864 would amend the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 to modify requirements
for mitigation for aquatic resource losses at Corps of Engineers projects. H.R. 2864 was
reported by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (amended) on June
24, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-154), and passed by the House (amended) on July 14, 2005.
Invasive Species. S. 363 and Title VII of S. 1224 would amend the Nonindigenous
Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act (NANPCA) of 1990 to promote the
development and adoption of new ballast water treatment technologies and standards; on July
21, 2005, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ordered S. 363
reported (amended). Section 12 of S. 793/H.R. 1636 would express the sense of Congress
that strong mandatory standards for ballast water be enacted. H.R. 1591 and S. 770 would
reauthorize and amend the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of
1990 to address ballast water management and other concerns. On June 15, 2005, the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation’s National Ocean Policy Study held
a hearing on ballast water management and threats to coral reefs. On September 9, 2005, the
House Committee on Government Reform’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs held a
field hearing in Fair Haven, MI, on ballast water management. (For background on ballast
water management, see CRS Report RL32344, Ballast Water Management to Combat
Invasive Species
, by Eugene H. Buck.) Section 7(d)(4) of H.R. 792 would allocate funds to
the State of Illinois for a project to establish a permanent invasive species barrier between
the Mississippi River and Lake Michigan. S.Con.Res. 12 would require that any agreement
signed by the United States not preclude measures to combat invasive species. S. 507 and
H.R. 1593 would authorize and establish the National Invasive Species Council. Section
4(b)(1)(C) of S. 508 would authorize Great Lakes Environmental Restoration Grants for
invasive species prevention and control. H.R. 1592 would authorize various marine and
freshwater research, development, and demonstration programs to address invasive species
concerns. H.R. 3049 and S. 1402 would amend the Lacey Act to add four species of carp to
the list of injurious species that are prohibited from being imported or shipped. S. 1541
would establish a cooperative cost-shared grant program to control and mitigate the spread
of invasive species on public lands; the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee
on Public Lands and Forests has scheduled a November 2, 2005 hearing on this bill. H.R.
3468 would establish specific procedures to address invasive species concerns in Hawaii.
The House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans has scheduled a November 3,
CRS-6

IB10139
11-10-05
2005 oversight hearing on invasive Asian carp in the Great Lakes and Mississippi River
System.
Habitat Restoration. S. 218 would amend the Food Security Act to authorize the
Natural Resources Conservation Service to establish a stream habitat improvement program,
funded at $60 million annually for FY2006-FY2008. S. 260/H.R. 2018 would expand the
authorization of the Secretary of the Interior to assist private landowners in restoring,
enhancing, and managing fish habitat on private land through the Partners for Fish and
Wildlife Program; the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works reported S. 260
(amended) on June 22, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-86), and the Senate passed S. 260 (amended) on
June 27, 2005. On September 23, 2005, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries
and Oceans held a hearing on S. 260 and H.R. 2018. Title V (Subtitle C) of S. 1224 would
establish a program to restore fishery habitat with annual authorized funding of $50 million
through FY2010. H.R. 3153/S. 1578 would reauthorize Upper Colorado and San Juan River
Basin endangered fish recovery programs; the Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on S. 1578 on October 6, 2005. Section
121 (Title I, Corps of Engineers) of H.R. 2419, as reported by the Senate Committee on
Appropriations on June 16, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-84), would authorize certain activities related
to the Middle Rio Grande ESA Collaborative Program beneficial to the silvery minnow. On
July 1, 2005, the Senate passed H.R. 2419 (amended). S. 1540 would authorize the Secretary
of the Army and the Secretary of the Interior to establish a program to improve water
management and contribute to the recovery of the endangered silvery minnow in the Middle
Rio Grande, New Mexico.
Corals and Coral Reefs. On March 1, 2005, the House Resources Subcommittee
on Fisheries and Oceans held an oversight hearing on the Coral Reef Conservation Act of
2000. H.R. 1996 would amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to provide for debt relief
to developing countries that take action to protect critical coral reef habitats. H.R. 2376
would establish the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands National Marine Refuge; §7(c) of this
bill would compensate fishermen displaced by refuge creation. Title II (Subtitle A and §222
of Subtitle B) of S. 1224 would provide for increased efforts to protect deep sea corals. H.R.
2673 would place use restrictions on certain bottom trawling gear and require federal studies
to identify and map diverse bottom habitats. S. 1390 would amend and reauthorize the Coral
Reef Conservation Act of 2000. On June 15, 2005, the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation’s National Ocean Policy Study held a hearing on threats to coral
reefs; the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ordered S. 1390
reported (amended) on July 21, 2005. H.R. 3469 would prohibit the import, export, and take
of certain coral reef species. S. 1635/H.R. 3778 would designate areas where trawling is
permitted to protect deep sea corals and sponges.
International Fisheries. Section 103(4) of S. 600 would authorize $25,123,000 for
“International Fisheries Commissions” for FY2006, and such sums as may be necessary for
FY2007; S. 600 was reported by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on March 10,
2005 (S.Rept. 109-35). Section 103(4) of H.R. 2601 would authorize $25,123,000 for
“International Fisheries Commissions” for both FY2006 and FY2007. H.R. 2601 was
reported (amended) on July 13, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-168), and passed by the House (amended)
on July 20, 2005. Section 6054 of H.R. 1268, as passed by the Senate (amended) on April
21, 2005, would have encouraged the government of Ecuador to enforce laws, prohibit
destructive fishing, and discourage illegal fishing in the Galapagos Islands; however, this
CRS-7

IB10139
11-10-05
language was deleted in conference (H.Rept. 109-72) and was not included in P.L. 109-13.
H.Con.Res. 168 would condemn the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for abducting
and holding captive certain Korean and Japanese citizens, including fishermen; the House
passed the measure (amended) on July 11, 2005.
Oysters. S. 728, as reported (amended) on April 26, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-61), would
specifically authorize projects to restore and rehabilitate oyster beds, bars, reefs, and shellfish
habitat in Chesapeake Bay (§3095) and in Long Island Sound (§3064). H.R. 2864 would
authorize a study of oyster habitat restoration in Delaware Bay (§1005(5)) and increase the
Corps of Engineers authorization for constructing oyster habitat in Chesapeake Bay (§5017).
H.R. 2864 was reported by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
(amended) on June 24, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-154), and passed by the House (amended) on July
14, 2005. H.R. 3110 would amend the Endangered Species Act to treat distinct population
segments of the Eastern oyster as separate species. On July 19, 2005, the House Committee
on Resources held an oversight hearing on the potential listing of the eastern oyster under the
Endangered Species Act. H.R. 3636 would suspend temporarily the duty on prepared or
preserved oysters, not smoked. Section 2(f) of S. 1494 would establish a stock enhancement
and habitat restoration program for Chesapeake Bay oysters.
Assistance. Section 104(b) of H.R. 27 proposes to amend the Workforce Investment
Act to specifically require state plans to discuss how states would address the employment
and training needs of dislocated fishermen. This bill was reported (amended) by the House
Committee on Education and the Workforce on February 25, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-9), with
supplement report filed March 1, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-9, Part II). On March 2, 2005, the
House passed H.R. 27, amended. Provisions in S. 1765/S. 1766/H.R. 3958 would provide
financial assistance to Louisiana fishermen and fishing vessel owners as well as targeted
assistance for menhaden and oyster fisheries; other funds would benefit fishery infrastructure
reconstruction, seafood marketing, and fishery habitat rehabilitation as well as fund Coast
Guard contracting of commercial fishing vessels to remove debris. Section 105 of H.R.
3754/S. 1692 would provide assistance to New England fisheries harmed by red tide. S.
1723 would authorize a $50 million grant program to maintain waterfront access for
commercial fishing and aquaculture.
Seafood Safety. S. 131 would amend the Clean Air Act to promote research to
clarify the contribution of U.S. electricity generation to mercury contamination in fish and
seafood. Section 12 of S. 730 would amend the Clean Air Act to require the EPA
Administrator to evaluate and improve fish consumption advisories concerning mercury
contamination of fish. Section 102 of H.R. 1507/S. 729 would consolidate food safety and
inspection programs, including seafood inspection. Section 2 of H.R. 2235 would require
labels to specify that certain fish and shellfish products are raw or partially cooked; §3 of this
bill would require labels to specify that certain fish or shellfish products have been frozen.
Trade. Section 343(b) of S. 14 would authorize a program for trade adjustment
assistance to commercial fishermen, fish processors, and fishing communities. S. 270 would
establish a framework for legislative and executive consideration of unilateral economic
sanctions against foreign nations. H.R. 3363 would amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to repeal
drawback and refund of duty requirements relating to imported salt for curing fish. H.R.
3635 would suspend temporarily the duty on certain sardines in oil, in airtight containers,
neither skinned nor boned. H.R. 3636 would suspend temporarily the duty on prepared or
CRS-8

IB10139
11-10-05
preserved oysters, not smoked. Section 301(b) of S. 1963 would clarify that commercial
fishermen are eligible for trade adjustment assistance.
Tax Provisions. Section 308 of S. 6 proposes to amend the Internal Revenue Code
to provide tax incentives for participation in the Fish and Wildlife Services’ “Partners for
Fish and Wildlife Program.” H.R. 629 would extend certain tax credits, beneficial to
American Samoa tuna canneries, through January 1, 2016. H.R. 3944 would amend the
Internal Revenue Code to allow fishermen a temporary credit against income tax to offset
high fuel costs. Section 203 of H.R. 3908 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to
exempt payments for certain landowner incentive programs that restore or protect habitat
from gross revenue.
Great Lakes. Section 4(b)(1)(D) of S. 508 would authorize state and local grants for
fish habitat improvement in the Great Lakes region. Title I of H.R. 2129 would reauthorize
various programs to restore fisheries and aquatic habitat in the Great Lakes. Section 5012
of H.R. 2864 would allow non-federal participants in Great Lakes fisheries restoration to
provide as much as 100% of their non-federal share through in-kind contributions. H.R.
2864 was reported by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (amended)
on June 24, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-154), and passed by the House (amended) on July 14, 2005.
Vessel Safety. Section 205 of S. 1280 would establish a pilot program for dockside
no fault/no cost safety and survivability examinations for uninspected commercial fishing
vessels; §216 of this bill would require the Coast Guard to continue to provide marine vessel
safety training and cold water immersion education and outreach programs for fishermen.
On July 28, 2005, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported
(amended) S. 1280 (S.Rept. 109-114). On October 27, 2005, the Senate amended H.R. 889
to incorporate the language of S. 1280 and passed the amended H.R. 889. S. 1473 would
amend the Internal Revenue Code to provide a business credit against income for the
purchase of fishing safety equipment.
Marine Debris. S. 362 and H.R. 3692 would establish NOAA and Coast Guard
programs to manage marine debris — including lost fishing gear — and address its adverse
impacts. The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported S. 362
(with amendment) on April 13, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-56), and the Senate passed this bill
(amended) on July 1, 2005. On September 29, 2005, the House Resources Subcommittee
on Fisheries and Oceans held a hearing on S. 362.
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. H.R. 1428 would reauthorize the
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. The House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries
and Oceans held a hearing on this bill on April 26, 2005. This measure was reported
(amended) on June 8, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-112), and passed by the House (amended) on June
27, 2005. On August 31, 2005, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
reported this bill (S.Rept. 109-127).
Marketing and Labeling. H.R. 710 would provide assistance for the construction,
improvement, and rehabilitation of farmers markets, including those selling local aquaculture
and commercial fishing products. S. 1300 would replace mandatory country-of-origin
labeling for seafood with a voluntary program. Section 2 of H.R. 3562/S. 1556 would make
the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act applicable to wild harvested fish and shellfish.
CRS-9

IB10139
11-10-05
Health Care. Section 2 of H.R. 525/S. 406 and §402 of H.R. 2203 would amend the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to authorize fishing industry associations
to provide health care plans for association members. On April 13, 2005, the House
Committee on Education and the Workforce reported H.R. 525 (H.Rept. 109-41); the House
passed this bill on July 26, 2005.
Tuna. H.R. 629 would extend certain tax credits, beneficial to American Samoa tuna
canneries, through January 1, 2016. S. 599/H.R. 2816 would modify the duty treatment of
tuna to specifically identify tuna packed in pouches, and would eliminate duties on certain
tuna products imported from cited ASEAN nations.
Artificial Reefs. Section 3505 of H.R. 1815, as reported (amended) by the Committee
on Armed Services on May 20, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-89), would require a strategy and
implementation plan to dispose of obsolete Maritime Administration vessels, including use
as artificial reefs. The House passed this measure on May 25, 2005. Section 6521(d) of H.R.
4241 would 1) amend the OCS Lands Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to issue
regulations permitting the use of decommissioned offshore oil and gas platforms as artificial
reefs, and 2) require a study of how the removal of offshore oil and gas platforms and other
OCS facilities might affect existing fish stocks and coral populations; this bill was reported
by the Committee on The Budget on November 7, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-276).
Hypoxia. Section 5018 of H.R. 2864 authorizes the Corps of Engineers to participate
in Gulf of Mexico hypoxia assessment efforts. This bill was reported by the House
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (amended) on June 24, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-
154), and passed by the House (amended) on July 14, 2005.
Jones Act. Section 211 of S. 1280 would waive the Jones Act for certain foreign
vessels that have transported fish or shellfish in Maine waters; on June 23, 2005, the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported S. 1280 (amended) on July
28, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-114). On October 27, 2005, the Senate amended H.R. 889 to
incorporate the language of S. 1280 and passed the amended H.R. 889.
Capital Construction Fund. S. 343/H.R. 2174 would permit qualified withdrawals
from the Capital Construction Fund for fishermen leaving the industry and for the rollover
of Capital Construction Funds to individual retirement plans.
Climate Change. H.R. 759 and §609 of H.R. 2828 would require the Secretary of
Commerce to prepare a report on the observed and projected effects of climate change on
marine life, habitat, and commercial and recreational fisheries.
Saltonstall-Kennedy Act. Section 7 of H.R. 1431 and §356 of S. 1224 would
amend and modify fishery funding under the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act. For background, see
CRS Report RS21799, Saltonstall-Kennedy Fishery Funding, by Eugene H. Buck
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
CRS-10

IB10139
11-10-05
of aquaculture is typified by such activities as: fish farming, usually applied to freshwater
commercial aquaculture operations (e.g., catfish and trout farms; see [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 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. With growth, 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.).
For more information, see CRS Report 97-436, Aquaculture and the Federal Role (Out of
print. For copies, contact author at gbuck@crs.loc.gov); and CRS Report RL32694, Open
Ocean Aquaculture
, by Rachel Borgatti and Eugene H. Buck.
Miscellaneous Issues
Bankruptcy. Section 1007 of P.L. 109-8 extends similar protection to family
fishermen (including aquaculture operations) as currently applies to family farmers under
Chapter 12 of bankruptcy laws.
Mitigation Hatcheries. Section 6007 of P.L. 109-13 increases the authorization to
$25 million for the design and construction of a multispecies fish hatchery at Fort Peck Lake,
Montana. H.R. 537 would authorize specific activities wherein National Fish Hatchery
production would compensate for the impacts of federal water development projects on
aquatic resources. On May 24, 2005, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and
Oceans held an oversight hearing on the federal fish hatchery system.
Assistance. S. 1316 would authorize the Small Business Administration to provide
emergency relief to shellfish growers affected by toxic red tide losses; the Senate passed this
bill on June 27, 2005. Section 2(g) of S. 1494 would authorize the Director of NOAA’s
Chesapeake Bay Office to make grants and enter into contracts that would promote
aquaculture development. S. 1636/H.R. 3702 would provide agricultural disaster assistance
to aquaculture producers that incurred losses for their 2005 crop due to damaging weather
or related conditions. Section 203 of H.R. 3809 would authorize payments of Commodity
Credit Corporation funds for any loss of catfish due to a 2005 hurricane; §4 of S. 1804 would
authorize payments of Commodity Credit Corporation funds for any crop loss (including
fisheries) due to a disaster. S. 1723 would authorize a $50 million grant program to maintain
waterfront access for commercial fishing and aquaculture. Various Louisiana aquaculture
operators harmed by Hurricane Katrina would receive assistance in S. 1765/S. 1766/H.R.
3958 — §525 would provide for an emergency distribution of antidumping duties collected
on imported Chinese crawfish to benefit Louisiana crawfish growers, a provision in Subtitle
L would provide funds for alligator farmers, and provisions in Subtitle D would fund oyster
hatcheries and restoration of oyster beds and reefs.
Marketing and Trade. H.R. 710 would provide financial assistance for the
construction, improvement, and rehabilitation of farmers markets, including those selling
products from local aquaculture and commercial fishing. The House Appropriations
Committee report (H.Rept. 109-102) on H.R. 2744 (FY2006 agriculture appropriations)
expresses concern about antibiotic contamination in imported farm-raised shrimp and
requests a report from the Food and Drug Administration on sampling of shrimp imports.
CRS-11

IB10139
11-10-05
The House passed H.R. 2744 (amended) on June 8, 2005. S. 1300 would replace mandatory
country-of-origin labeling for fish and seafood with a voluntary program. Section 2 of H.R.
3562/S. 1556 would make the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act applicable to farm-raised
fish and shellfish.
Open Ocean Facilities. S. 796 and §162(b)(3) of S. 1224 would prohibit the
issuance of permits for marine aquaculture facilities in federal waters until requirements for
such permits are enacted. S. 1224 also would establish a coordinated agency program for
offshore permitting (§161), designate NOAA as the lead federal agency for marine
aquaculture (§162(b)(1)), and require regulations that prohibit marine aquaculture where it
would damage or alter seafloor habitat or alter water quality (§222). S. 1195 would authorize
the Secretary of Commerce to establish and implement a regulatory system for offshore
aquaculture in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. Section 6521 of H.R. 4241 would amend
the OCS Lands Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to issue regulations permitting the
use of decommissioned offshore oil and gas platforms for aquaculture; this bill was reported
by the Committee on The Budget on November 7, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-276). For additional
information on offshore aquaculture development, see CRS Report RL32694, Open Ocean
Aquaculture
, by Rachel Borgatti and Eugene H. Buck.
Genetic Modification. H.Amdt. 241, offered on H.R. 2744 (FY2006 agriculture
appropriations) and subsequently withdrawn, would have prohibited the use of FY2006 funds
for the approval or process of approval of an application for an animal drug for creating
transgenic salmon or any other transgenic fish. For additional information on genetically
engineered fish, see CRS Report RL32974, Genetically Engineered Fish and Seafood, by
Rachel Borgatti and Eugene H. Buck.
Oyster Hatcheries. Section 3095 of S. 728, as reported by the Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works (amended) on April 26, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-61), would
specifically authorize projects to construct and upgrade oyster hatcheries in Chesapeake Bay.
National Marine Sanctuaries. Section 6(b) of S. 880/H.R. 1712 would prohibit
most aquaculture in the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary, the Cordell Bank
National Marine Sanctuary, and the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
Invasive Species. Section 305 of H.R. 1591/S. 770 would require efforts to promote
voluntary cooperative compliance by aquaculture operators in screening, monitoring, and
control of aquatic invasive species.
Disease. S. 572 and S. 573 seek to improve the federal response to agricultural
diseases, including diseases at aquaculture operations. The Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs reported S. 572 (amended) on September 27, 2005.
Coral. Under certain conditions, H.R. 3469 would exempt aquaculture operations from
restrictions on coral handling and encourage cooperative aquaculture ventures to propagate
coral reef species.
Tax Provisions. H.R. 3874 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to provide for
tax-exempt qualified small issue bonds to finance aquacultural processing property.
CRS-12

IB10139
11-10-05
Marine Mammals: Background and Issues
Due in part to 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. The MMPA established a moratorium on the “taking” of
marine mammals in U.S. waters and by U.S. nationals on the high seas and a moratorium on
importing marine mammals and products into the United States. The MMPA expressly
authorizes the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce to issue permits for the “taking” of
marine mammals for certain purposes, such as scientific research and public display. Under
the MMPA, 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. The MMPA
authorizes the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing operations.
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 assessing marine
mammal stocks in U.S. waters, for developing and implementing 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 studying pinniped-
fishery interactions. For more information on the 1994 amendments, see CRS Report 94-751
ENR, Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994 (Out of print. For copies, contact
author at gbuck@crs.loc.gov).
Congressional Action. At issue for the 109th 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. H.R. 2130 and H.R. 4075 propose various amendments
to the MMPA and authorize appropriations for several programs; the House Committee on
Resources reported H.R. 2130 (amended) on July 21, 2005 (H.Rept. 109-180). Title IV of
S. 1224 would amend the MMPA to encourage development of fishing gear less likely to
take marine mammals, expand fisheries required to participate in the MMPA incidental take
program to include recreational fisheries, and authorize appropriations for stock assessments
and observer programs; in addition, Title III (Subtitle C) would direct negotiation of
international agreements to better protect cetaceans from commercial fishing gear and
authorize a grant program to develop less harmful fishing gear. Section 206 of H.R. 2939
would transfer management of all marine mammals to NOAA. H.R. 3839 would amend the
MMPA to repeal the long-term goal for reducing to zero the incidental mortality and serious
injury of marine mammals in commercial fishing operations, and to modify the goal of take
reduction plans for reducing such takings. Section 25 of H.R. 3824, as passed by the House
(amended) on September 29, 2005, would declare that §7 consultation under the ESA is
equivalent to a §101 incidental take authorization required under the MMPA for receiving
dock building permits. For additional information on potential reauthorization issues in the
109th Congress, see CRS Report RL30120, The Marine Mammal Protection Act:
Reauthorization Issues
, by Eugene H. Buck.
CRS-13

IB10139
11-10-05
Miscellaneous Issues
Habitat. S. 260/H.R. 2018 would expand the authorization of the Secretary of the
Interior to assist private landowners in restoring, enhancing, and managing marine mammal
habitat on private land through the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program; the Senate
Committee on Environment and Public Works reported S. 260 (amended) on June 22, 2005
(S.Rept. 109-86), and the Senate passed S. 260 (amended) on June 27, 2005. On September
23, 2005, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans held a hearing on S.
260 and H.R. 2018.
Marine Debris. S. 362 and H.R. 3692 would establish NOAA and Coast Guard
programs to manage marine debris and address its adverse impacts. The Senate Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported S. 362 (with amendment) on April 13,
2005 (S.Rept. 109-56), and the Senate passed this bill (amended) on July 1, 2005. On
September 29, 2005, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans held a
hearing on S. 362.
Ocean Noise. Section 402 of S. 1224 would amend the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation Establishment Act to create a national ocean noise pollution research endowment
fund. For additional information on this issue, see CRS Report RS22158, Active Military
Sonar and Marine Mammals: Chronology with References
, by Kori Calvert and Eugene H.
Buck.
Small Cetacean Kills. S.Res. 99 would express the sense of the Senate condemning
the commercial slaughter of small cetaceans by certain nations and supporting certain
policies at the 57th Annual Meeting of the International Whaling Commission.
Climate Change. H.R. 759 and §609 of H.R. 2828 would require the Secretary of
Commerce to prepare a report on the observed and projected effects of climate change on
marine life and habitat.
Whaling. S.Con.Res. 33/H.Con.Res. 164 express the sense of the Congress regarding
the policy of the United States at the 57th Annual Meeting of the International Whaling
Commission. H.Con.Res. 267 would express the sense of Congress relating to Makah treaty
rights and whaling; the House Committee on Resources ordered this measure reported
(amended) on October 19, 2005.
Tuna-Dolphin. S. 270 would establish a framework for legislative and executive
consideration of unilateral economic sanctions against foreign nations.
Sea Otters. H.R. 2323 would require specific activities to promote southern sea otter
recovery and research.
Canadian Sealing. S.Res. 33 urges Canada to end commercial seal hunting.
CRS-14

IB10139
11-10-05
NMFS Appropriations
On February 7, 2005, the Bush Administration requested FY2006 funds for federal
agencies and programs, including $625.5 million in direct program funds for NMFS (see
Table 1) — this is a $51 million (7.5%) reduction from FY2005 direct program funding for
NMFS enacted in the omnibus appropriations bill, P.L. 108-447. The FY2005 omnibus
appropriations measure also authorized capacity reduction funding for the Southeast Alaska
purse seine salmon fishery ($50 million; §209, Division B), the Gulf of Mexico reef fish
longline fishery ($35 million; §218, Division B), the Bering Sea Aleutian Island non-pollock
groundfish fishery ($75 million; §219(b), Division B), the U.S. distant water tuna fleet ($40
million; Fisheries Finance Program Account, Division B), and the menhaden fishery ($19
million; Fisheries Finance Program Account, Division B); and increased the coordination of
interagency ocean science programs, including U.S. research and monitoring programs
related to seafood safety, and identified hypoxia and harmful algal blooms as important in
addressing the role of oceans in human health (Title IX, Division B). On March 10, 2005,
the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans held an oversight hearing on
NMFS’s FY2006 budget request. On June 10, 2005, the House Committee on
Appropriations reported H.R. 2862, proposing FY2006 funding for NMFS (H.Rept. 109-
118); the House passed this bill on June 16, 2005. The Senate Committee on Appropriations
reported H.R. 2862 (amended) on June 23, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-88), and the Senate passed an
amended H.R. 2862 on September 15, 2005. On November 7, 2005, a conference report was
filed on H.R. 2862 (H.Rept. 109-272).
Table 1. NMFS Appropriations
(in thousands of dollars)
FY2005
FY2006
FY2006
FY2006
FY2006
Enacted
Request
Hse. Pasd.
Sen. Pasd.
Confer.
Fisheries
377,390
351,932
322,105
377,484
359,438
Protected Resources
175,530
159,273
126,000
176,050
147,061
Habitat Conservation
53,248
34,096
36,000
58,580
47,280
Enforcement Surveillance
70,347
80,163
72,500
78,669
73,690
SUBTOTAL
676,515
625,464
556,605
745,783*
678,469*
Procurement, Acquisition, and
31,048
2,000
6,000
16,527**
17,500**
Construction
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery
88,798
90,000
50,000
90,000
67,500
Other Accounts
27,284
10,419
60
287
287
TOTAL
823,645
727,883
612,665
852,597**
763,756**
* Includes funds for “Alaska Composite Research and Development Program” — $55 million in Senate-passed
version and $51 million in the conference agreement.
**Does NOT include $55.5 million provided for fisheries survey vessel construction.
Sources: Budget Justifications, House and Senate Committee Reports, and floor debate.
CRS-15

IB10139
11-10-05
LEGISLATION
Fisheries
P.L. 109-8 (S. 256); P.L. 109-13 (H.R. 1268); P.L. 109-14 (H.R. 2566); P.L. 109-20
(H.R. 3104); P.L. 109-35 (H.R. 3332); P.L. 109-37 (H.R. 3377); P.L. 109-40 (H.R. 3453);
P.L. 109-42 (H.R. 3512); P.L. 109-58 (H.R. 6); P.L. 109-59 (H.R. 3); and P.L. 109-74 (H.R.
3649).
H.Con.Res. 164 (Delahunt); H.Con.Res. 168 (Hyde); H.R. 27 (McKeon); H.R. 525
(Sam Johnson); H.R. 629 (Faleomavaega); H.R. 685 (Sensenbrenner); H.R. 710 (Kaptur);
H.R. 731 (Udall); H.R. 737 (Woolsey); H.R. 759 (Gilchrest); H.R. 792 (Emanuel); H.R. 889
(Young of Alaska); H.R. 996 (Thomas); H.R. 1351 (Pomeroy); H.R. 1428 (Pombo); H.R.
1431 (Rahall); H.R. 1507 (DeLauro); H.R. 1591 (Gilchrest); H.R. 1592 (Ehlers); H.R. 1593
(Ehlers); H.R. 1615 (McDermott); H.R. 1636 (Farr); H.R. 1640 (Barton); H.R. 1815
(Hunter); H.R. 1996 (Kirk); H.R. 2018 (Sullivan); H.R. 2059 (Pallone); H.R. 2112 (Issa);
H.R. 2129 (Ehlers); H.R. 2174 (Capps); H.R. 2203 (Shadegg); H.R. 2235 (Pallone); H.R.
2376 (Case); H.R. 2601 (Smith of New Jersey); H.R. 2673 (Hefley); H.R. 2816 (Neal); H.R.
2828 (Inslee); H.R. 2862 (Wolf); H.R. 2864 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 2870 (Lantos); H.R.
3049 (Green of Wisconsin); H.R. 3110 (Jindal); H.R. 3153 (Cubin); H.R. 3278 (Allen); H.R.
3363 (Brady of Texas); H.R. 3468 (Case); H.R. 3469 (Case); H.R. 3562 (Hooley); H.R. 3635
(Tauscher); H.R. 3636 (Tauscher); H.R. 3692 (Pallone); H.R. 3754 (Pomeroy); H.R. 3778
(Shaw); H.R. 3809 (Peterson of Minnesota); H.R. 3908 (Blunt); H.R. 3944 (Allen); H.R.
3958 (Melancon); H.R. 4241 (Nussle); S.Con.Res. 12 (Feingold); S. 6 (Santorum); S. 10
(Domenici); S. 14 (Stabenow); S. 131 (Inhofe); S. 218 (Kohl); S. 232 (Smith); S. 260
(Inhofe); S. 270 (Lugar); S. 339 (Reid); S. 343 (Wyden); S. 352 (Mikulski); S. 362 (Inouye);
S. 363 (Inouye); S. 406 (Snowe); S. 421 (Lott); S. 507 (DeWine); S. 508 (DeWine); S. 548
(Conrad); S. 599 (Kerry); S. 600 (Lugar); S. 728 (Bond); S. 729 (Durbin); S. 730 (Leahy);
S. 732 (Inhofe); S. 753 (Feingold); S. 770 (Levin); S. 793 (Durbin); S. 797 (Murkowski); S.
1224 (Boxer); S. 1230 (Grassley); S. 1280 (Snowe); S. 1300 (Santorum); S. 1390 (Inouye);
S. 1402 (DeWine); S. 1473 (Collins); S. 1494 (Sarbanes); S. 1540 (Domenici); S. 1541
(Akaka); S. 1549 (Smith); S. 1556 (Wyden); S. 1567 (Stevens); S. 1578 (Allard); S. 1635
(Lautenberg); S. 1692 (Conrad); S. 1723 (Collins); S. 1765 (Landrieu); S. 1766 (Vitter); and
S. 1837 (Reed).
Aquaculture
P.L. 109-8 (S. 256) and P.L. 109-13 (H.R. 1268).
H.R. 537 (Deal); H.R. 685 (Sensenbrenner); H.R. 710 (Kaptur); H.R. 1591 (Gilchrest);
H.R. 1712 (Woolsey); H.R. 2744 (Bonilla); H.R. 3469 (Case); H.R. 3562 (Hooley); H.R.
3702 (Berry); H.R. 3874 (Fortenberry); H.R. 3958 (Melancon); H.R. 4241 (Nussle); S. 572
(Akaka); S. 573 (Akaka); S. 728 (Bond); S. 770 (Levin); S. 796 (Murkowski); S. 880
(Boxer); S. 1195 (Stevens); S. 1224 (Boxer); S. 1300 (Santorum); S. 1316 (Snowe); S. 1494
(Sarbanes); S. 1556 (Wyden); S. 1636 (Durbin); S. 1723 (Collins); S. 1765 (Landrieu); S.
1766 (Vitter); S. 1804 (Lincoln); and S. 1963 (Baucus).
CRS-16

IB10139
11-10-05
Marine Mammals
H.Con.Res. 267 (Pombo); H.R. 759 (Gilchrest); H.R. 2018 (Sullivan); H.R. 2130
(Gilchrest); H.R. 2323 (Farr); H.R. 2862 (Wolf); H.R. 2939 (Weldon); H.R. 3692 (Pallone);
H.R. 3824 (Pombo); H.R. 3839 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 4075 (Pombo); S.Con.Res. 33
(Snowe); S.Res. 33 (Levin); S.Res. 99 (Lautenberg); S. 260 (Inhofe); S. 270 (Lugar); S. 362
(Inouye); and S. 1224 (Boxer).
CRS-17