Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal
Issues in the 112th Congress
Eugene H. Buck
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Harold F. Upton
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
November 6, 2012
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R41613
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Summary
Fish and marine mammals are important resources in open ocean and nearshore coastal areas;
many federal laws and regulations guide their management as well as the management of their
habitat. Aquaculture or fish farming enterprises seek to supplement food traditionally provided by
wild harvests.
Commercial and sport fishing are jointly managed by the federal government and individual
states. States generally have jurisdiction within 3 miles of the coast. Beyond state jurisdiction and
out to 200 miles in the federal exclusive economic zone (EEZ), the federal government (National
Marine Fisheries Service, NMFS) manages fisheries under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) through eight regional fishery management
councils. Beyond 200 miles, the United States participates in international agreements relating to
specific areas or species. The 112th Congress has enacted provisions to direct certain management
measures for U.S. tuna fishing under the authority of the Commission for the Conservation and
Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (P.L.
112-55); to authorize the Corps of Engineers to take emergency measures to exclude Asian carp
from the Great Lakes (P.L. 112-74); to create a Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund to promote
efforts to achieve long-term sustainability of the ecosystem, fish stocks, fish habitat, and the
recreational, commercial, and charter fishing industry in the Gulf of Mexico (P.L. 112-141); and
to extend the authority to make expenditures from the Highway Trust Fund and other trust funds,
including various programs under the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund, through
FY2014 (also in P.L. 112-141).
Aquaculture—the farming of fish, shellfish, and other aquatic animals and plants in a controlled
environment—is expanding rapidly abroad, yet with little growth in the United States. In the
United States, important species cultured include catfish, salmon, shellfish, and trout. The 112th
Congress has enacted provisions to direct the National Aquatic Animal Health Task Force to
establish an infectious salmon anemia research program (P.L. 112-55) and to authorize the Corps
of Engineers to transfer funds to the Fish and Wildlife Service for National Fish Hatcheries in
FY2012 to mitigate for fisheries lost due to Corps of Engineers projects (P.L. 112-74).
Marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). With few
exceptions, the MMPA prohibits harm or harassment (“take”) of marine mammals, unless permits
are obtained. It also addresses specific situations of concern, such as dolphin mortality associated
with the eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery. Other than annual appropriations, no marine
mammal legislation has been enacted by the 112th Congress.
The level of appropriations for fisheries, aquaculture/hatchery, and marine mammal programs
administered by the NMFS and the Fish and Wildlife Service is a recurring issue during the 112th
Congress due to pressures to reduce federal spending.
Congressional Research Service
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Contents
Most Recent Developments ............................................................................................................. 1
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Commercial and Sport Fisheries ...................................................................................................... 1
Background................................................................................................................................ 1
Current Performance Measures ................................................................................................. 4
Magnuson-Stevens Act .............................................................................................................. 5
Pacific Salmon ........................................................................................................................... 7
Additional Fishery Issues in the 112th Congress ........................................................................ 9
Habitat Protection and Restoration ................................................................................... 10
Sport Fisheries ................................................................................................................... 11
Invasive Species ................................................................................................................ 13
International Fisheries ....................................................................................................... 14
Tuna and Billfish ............................................................................................................... 15
Disasters and Recovery ..................................................................................................... 15
Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia ................................................................................. 16
Marketing and Trade ......................................................................................................... 16
Jobs .................................................................................................................................... 16
Marine Debris .................................................................................................................... 17
Seafood Safety .................................................................................................................. 17
Tax Provisions ................................................................................................................... 17
Fishing and Research Vessels ............................................................................................ 18
Colorado River .................................................................................................................. 18
Health ................................................................................................................................ 18
Striped Bass ....................................................................................................................... 18
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation ............................................................................. 18
Miscellaneous Fisheries Reauthorizations ........................................................................ 19
Legal Fees ......................................................................................................................... 19
Fishing Permits and Licenses ............................................................................................ 19
Accidents and Injury ......................................................................................................... 19
Coral .................................................................................................................................. 19
Insurance ........................................................................................................................... 19
Saltonstall-Kennedy Act .................................................................................................... 19
Government Reorganization.............................................................................................. 20
Aquaculture .................................................................................................................................... 20
Background.............................................................................................................................. 20
Aquaculture Issues in the 112th Congress ................................................................................ 21
Marine Mammals ........................................................................................................................... 24
Background.............................................................................................................................. 24
Marine Mammal Protection Act Reauthorization .................................................................... 26
Additional Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress ....................................................... 28
Habitat ............................................................................................................................... 28
Whaling ............................................................................................................................. 28
Sea Otters .......................................................................................................................... 28
Polar Bears ........................................................................................................................ 28
Miscellaneous Marine Mammal Issues ............................................................................. 28
Congressional Research Service
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Appropriations ............................................................................................................................... 29
National Marine Fisheries Service .......................................................................................... 29
Fish and Wildlife Service ........................................................................................................ 31
Marine Mammal Commission ................................................................................................. 32
Figures
Figure 1. U.S. Commercial Fish and Shellfish Harvest, 1976-2010 ................................................ 3
Tables
Table 1. NMFS Appropriations, FY2011-FY2013 ........................................................................ 30
Table 2. FWS Appropriations, FY2010-FY2013 ........................................................................... 31
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 32
Congressional Research Service
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Most Recent Developments
On October 5, 2012, President Obama signed P.L. 112-183 (H.R. 2706), prohibiting the sale of
billfish.
Introduction
Increasing use of marine resources is driving proposals for Congress and the Administration to
alter current relationships between environmental protection and sustainable resource
management. In response to reports by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy and the Pew
Oceans Commission noting declines in marine resources and shortcomings in what are perceived
as fragmented and limited approaches to resource protection and management in federal and state
waters,1 the Obama Administration released the final recommendations of its Ocean Policy Task
Force on July 19, 2010.2 A further concern is the increasing pressures and conflicts that arise from
economic activity associated with continued human population growth. A common concern is
habitat loss or alteration, due both to natural processes, such as climate variation and ocean
acidification, and to development, competition from invasive species, and other factors, primarily
related to economic and social interests. Congress faces the issues of how to balance these diverse
interests (which may fall on various sides of any given controversy), and whether to alter current
laws that promote the sustainable management of fishery and other marine resources and protect
the marine environment.
The primary laws governing fisheries, aquaculture, and marine mammals are the MSFCMA (16
U.S.C. §§1801 et seq.), the National Aquaculture Act of 1980 (16 U.S.C. §§2801 et seq.), and the
Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. §§1361 et seq.). Congress last reauthorized
and extensively amended the MSFCMA in the 109th Congress (P.L. 109-479); the current funding
authorization expires on September 30, 2013. The Marine Mammal Protection Act was last
reauthorized in 1994 by P.L. 103-238, and funding authorization expired on September 30, 1999.
Commercial and Sport Fisheries
Background
Historically, coastal states managed marine sport and commercial fisheries in nearshore waters,
where almost all seafood was caught. However, as fishing techniques improved, fishermen
ventured farther offshore. Before 1950, the federal government assumed limited responsibility for
marine fisheries, responding primarily to international fishery concerns and treaties (e.g., by
enacting laws implementing treaties, such as was done by the Northern Pacific Halibut Act in
1937) as well as to interstate fishery conflicts (e.g., by consenting to interstate fishery compacts,
such as was accomplished by enactment of the Pacific Marine Fisheries Compact in 1947). In the
1 See An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century, http://www.oceancommission.gov/documents/full_color_rpt/
000_ocean_full_report.pdf, and America’s Living Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change,
http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Protecting_ocean_life/
env_pew_oceans_final_report.pdf.
2 See http://www.whitehouse.gov/files/documents/OPTF_FinalRecs.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
1
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
late 1940s and early 1950s, several Latin American nations proclaimed marine jurisdictions
extending 200 miles or further 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,3 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 as well as
actions by other coastal nations provided impetus for unilateral U.S. action.4
Such unilateral action occurred when the United States enacted the Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (FCMA), later renamed the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management
Act and more recently the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(MSFCMA), ushering 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. This 200-mile fishery conservation zone was superseded by a 200-mile exclusive
economic zone (EEZ), proclaimed by President Reagan on March 10, 1983 (Presidential
Proclamation 5030).
With the enactment of the FCMA, 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
popularly referred to as NOAA Fisheries) within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce.5 In addition, the FCMA
established eight Regional Fishery Management Councils,6 with members appointed by the
Secretary of Commerce from lists provided by coastal state governors of candidates
knowledgeable about fishery resources.7 Each regional council prepares fishery management
plans (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 and NMFS have developed and implemented more than 40 FMPs for various fish
and shellfish resources, with additional FMPs 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
3 Subsequently 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.
4 The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was reported favorably in the 110th Congress by the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations (S.Exec.Rept. 110-9) on December 19, 2007.
5 NMFS programs are described in detail at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/.
6 Links to individual council websites are available at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/councils/.
7 For the 2010 report to Congress on council membership, see http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/reg_svcs/
Council_Reportocongress/2010ApportionmentReportToCongress.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
2
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
plans have been amended (one more than 30 times), and three have been developed and
implemented jointly by two or more councils.
Under initial FCMA authority, a substantial portion of the fish caught 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 EEZ waters increased
dramatically, from about 1.6 billion pounds (1977) to more than 6.3 billion pounds in 1986-1988.8
After this peak, annual landings hovered around 6 billion pounds until about 2006, when Bering
Sea pollock stocks began a decline and increased efforts to reduce overfishing in federal EEZ
waters began to take effect. Beginning in 2010, recovery of overfished stocks began to support
larger harvests (Figure 1).
Figure 1. U.S. Commercial Fish and Shellfish Harvest, 1976-2010
7
6
5
4
3
billion pounds 2
1
0
19
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
78
80
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
9
9
0
0
0
0
0
1
6
8
0
2
4
6
8
0
- No Data
Inshore State Waters
Offshore EEZ Waters
International Waters
Source: NMFS, Fisheries of the United States (various years), Current Fishery Statistics series.
Note: Total includes both industrial and edible fish and shellfish harvest.
8 This total includes both landings for human food and landings for industrial purposes (e.g., bait and animal food,
reduction to meal and oil, etc.).
Congressional Research Service
3
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Current Performance Measures
The economic status of U.S. commercial fisheries is updated and reported annually.9 In 2011 (the
most recent data available), U.S. commercial fishermen landed 7.9 billion pounds of edible,
unprocessed fish and shellfish from combined state, federal, and international waters, worth more
than $5.1 billion at the dock. U.S. imports of mostly processed edible products supplied 5.3
billion pounds, worth $16.6 billion. U.S. consumers spent an estimated $85.9 billion on edible
seafood in 2011, with $57.7 billion of that amount spent in restaurants and other food service
establishments. In addition, marine recreational anglers caught an estimated 345 million fish in
2011, of which the retained catch was about 201 million pounds.10 In 2011 (the most recent data
available), a nationwide survey, conducted every five years, estimated that recreational anglers
spent more than $41.8 billion pursuing their sport.11
NMFS reports annually on the status of fish stocks managed under the MSFCMA through two
determinations.12 For 2011, NMFS made determinations for 258 fish stocks and complexes,13
finding that 36 (14%) of them were subject to overfishing14 and 222 (86%) were not. In addition,
NMFS made separate determinations for 219 stocks and complexes, finding that 45 (21%) were
overfished15 and 174 (79%) were not. These numbers reflect an improvement in the overfishing
percentage compared to 2010 (when 16% were subject to overfishing) as well as an improvement
in the overfished percentage compared to that year (when 23% were overfished).16 In 2005,
NMFS began using these same fish stock status data to portray nationwide progress in addressing
overfishing through a numerical Fish Stock Sustainability Index (FSSI).17 Out of a possible
maximum FSSI score of 920, this index of success in curbing overfishing has increased (i.e.,
improved) from 481.5 (third quarter of calendar year 2005) to 600 (second quarter of calendar
year 2012).
9 For additional information on domestic commercial fisheries, see http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/commercial/
index.html. Additional data for 2011 are available at http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/fus/fus11/FUS_2011.pdf.
10 Recreational fishing programs at NMFS are discussed at http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/recreational/index.html.
11 Preliminary results of the 2011 survey can be found at http://library.fws.gov/Pubs/nat_survey2011-national-
overview-prelim-findings.pdf.
12 See http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/statusoffisheries/2011/RTC/2011_RTC_Report.pdf.
13 NMFS reviewed 537 individual stocks and stock complexes but had insufficient information to make determinations
on all of them.
14 A stock that is subject to overfishing has a fishing mortality (harvest) rate greater than the level that provides for the
maximum sustainable yield from this stock.
15 A stock that is overfished has a biomass level less than a biological threshold specified in that stock’s FMP.
16 For more background on overfishing, see CRS Report R42563, Ending Overfishing and Rebuilding Fish Stocks in
U.S. Federal Waters, by Harold F. Upton and Eugene H. Buck.
17 FSSI is a performance measure for the sustainability of 230 fish stocks selected for their importance to commercial
and recreational fisheries. The FSSI will increase as overfishing ends and stocks rebuild to the level that provides
maximum sustainable yield. FSSI is calculated by assigning a score for each fish stock based on rules available at
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/statusoffisheries/2012/second/Q2%202012%20FSSI%20Summary%20Changes.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
4
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Magnuson-Stevens Act
The MSFCMA was reauthorized in the 109th Congress by P.L. 109-479, the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006.18 Some of the major issues
addressed by this comprehensive measure included
• modifying requirements for appointing and training members of regional
councils as well as for conducting business by regional council committees and
panels to enhance transparency of the regional council process;
• setting a firm deadline to end overfishing by 2011 and modifying how depleted
fisheries are to be rebuilt;
• increasing the consideration of economic and social impacts in fishery
management;
• modifying research programs and improving data collection and management;
• increasing protection for deep sea corals and bottom habitat;
• implementing a pilot program of ecosystem-based management;
• promoting new gear technologies to further reduce bycatch;
• establishing national guidelines for individual fishing quota (limited access
privilege) programs;
• modifying regional council fishery management plan procedures, including better
coordination of environmental review under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. §§4321, et seq.);
• strengthening the role of science in fishery management decision-making; and
• authorizing appropriations for federal fishery management through FY2013.19
NMFS has summarized various tasks associated with implementing P.L. 109-479.20 Examples of
implementation activities include (1) a report by NMFS to Congress on implementing new
provisions relating to better control of illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing
activities;21 and (2) final guidance amending National Standard 1, designed to end overfishing
through new requirements for annual catch limits and other accountability measures.22 In
addition, NMFS released a new national policy encouraging the consideration and use of catch
shares as an alternative to managing fisheries through open access harvesting.23
18 For additional summary information on this measure, see http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/msa2005/
MSA%202006%20Implementation%20Overview.pdf.
19 For additional highlights and commentary on this enactment, see http://cbbulletin.com/Free/199763.aspx; a detailed
summary of enacted provisions is available at http://www.olemiss.edu/orgs/SGLC/National/Magnuson.pdf.
20 Available at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/msa2007/Reauthorization_tasks.pdf. Additional information on NMFS’s
implementation of P.L. 109-479 can be found at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/msa2007/.
21 Available at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/msa2007/docs/biennial_report011309.pdf.
22 74 Federal Register 3178-3213, January 16, 2009.
23 See http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/catchshare/docs/noaa_cs_policy.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
5
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
The 112th Congress considered a number of measures relating to MSFCMA. P.L. 112-10 included
language at Section 1349, Division B, prohibiting FY2011 expenditures to approve new limited-
access privilege programs under the MSFCMA for any fishery under the jurisdiction of the South
Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, New England, or Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. On
March 8, 2011, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held an
oversight hearing on evaluating the success of the MSFCMA in preventing overfishing and
rebuilding depleted fish populations. On June 20, 2011, the Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Government Affairs, Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, held a
hearing on the NMFS’s actions to improve its enforcement program and how NMFS is managing
funds to support the domestic fishing industry. On July 26, 2011, the House Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held an oversight hearing on
NOAA’s fishery science and its effect on jobs. On October 3, 2011, the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a field oversight hearing in Boston, MA, to review
fishery management plans affecting Massachusetts. On October 17, 2011, the House Committee
on Natural Resources held an oversight field hearing in Seattle, WA, on the scientific basis for
NMFS fisheries restrictions to protect Steller sea lions. On August 25, 2012, the House
Committee on Natural Resources held an oversight field hearing in Panama City, FL, on how
strengthening fisheries might strengthen the economy. In addition, bills introduced in the 112th
Congress address a number of issues.
• H.R. 1013 would amend MSFCMA to provide the New England Fishery
Management Council additional resources from the Asset Forfeiture Fund to
address research and monitoring priorities established by the council; on
December 1, 2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on
this bill. S. 1304 would make funds available to reimburse certain fishermen for
legal fees and costs incurred in connection with improper fines. S. 1312 would
establish a fisheries investment fund to assist fishermen with the costs of
regulatory compliance and to reimburse the legal fees incurred by certain
fishermen. H.R. 2610 would amend the MSFCMA to reform procedures for the
payment of funds from the Asset Forfeiture Fund; on December 1, 2011, the
House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on this bill.
• H.R. 1646 would amend MSFCMA to (1) require peer review of certain scientific
and statistical committee recommendations, (2) modify criteria for extending the
rebuilding period for overfished fisheries, (3) set a deadline for secretarial
decisions on disaster declarations, (4) modify criteria for limited-access privilege
program approval, and (5) establish criteria to be met before a fishery can be
closed; on December 1, 2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources held a
hearing on this bill. H.R. 2772 and S. 1678 would amend MSFCMA to permit
eligible fishermen to approve certain limited access privilege programs (LAPPs)
and provide for the termination of certain LAPPs; on December 1, 2011, the
House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on H.R. 2772.
• S. 632 and H.R. 3061 would amend MSFCMA to extend the authorized period
for rebuilding of certain overfished fisheries; on December 1, 2011, the House
Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on H.R. 3061. H.R. 6350 would
amend MSFCMA to provide additional flexibility for fishery managers,
additional transparency for fishermen, a referendum for catch shares, and
additional funding for fishery surveys.
• Section 308 of H.R. 2838 would require a report from the Secretary of Homeland
Security assessing the need for additional Coast Guard capability in the high
Congressional Research Service
6
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
latitude regions, including for fisheries enforcement. On October 3, 2011, the
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported this bill,
amended (H.Rept. 112-229). On November 15, 2011, the House passed this bill,
amended. On September 22, 2102, the Senate passed H.R. 2838 (amended),
deleting the House provision.
• Section 4 of H.R. 594 would amend MSFCMA to direct the Secretary, subject to
the availability of appropriations, to enter into contracts with, or provide grants
to, states for the purpose of establishing and implementing a registry program for
recreational fishermen; on December 1, 2011, the House Committee on Natural
Resources held a hearing on this bill.
• H.R. 2304 and S. 1916 would amend MSFCMA to modify how scientific
information is to be used in implementing annual catch limits; on December 1,
2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on H.R. 2304.
• H.R. 2753 would amend MSFCMA to require Internet access to Regional Fishery
Management Council meetings and meeting records; on December 1, 2011, the
House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on this bill.
• H.R. 6362 would direct the Secretary of Commerce to issue a fishing capacity
reduction loan to refinance the existing loan funding the Pacific Coast
Groundfish Fishery Fishing Capacity Reduction Program.
• S. 1371 and H.R. 4129 would amend MSFCMA to add Rhode Island to the Mid-
Atlantic Fishery Management Council. H.R. 5885 would add New York to the
New England Fishery Management Council.
• S. 238 would amend MSFCMA to require that annual fishery impact statements
evaluate the effects of management actions on fishing communities.
Pacific Salmon
Steelhead trout and five species of salmon spawn in Pacific coastal rivers and lakes, after which
juveniles migrate to North Pacific ocean waters where they mature before returning to the same
freshwater rivers and lakes to spawn. Management is complicated because these fish may cross
several state and national boundaries during their life spans, and their different subpopulations or
stocks intermingle on fishing grounds. In addition to natural environmental fluctuations, factors
influencing the abundance of salmon include hydropower dams that block rivers and create
reservoirs, sport and commercial harvests, habitat modification by competing resource industries
and other human development, and hatcheries seeking to supplement natural production but
sometimes unintentionally causing genetic or developmental concerns.
The Northwest Power and Conservation Council took the lead in the Columbia River Basin under
the 1980 Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act, by attempting to
protect salmon and their habitat while also providing inexpensive electric power to the region.
Under this effort, federal agencies and public utilities have spent hundreds of millions of dollars
on technical improvements for dams, habitat enhancement, and water purchases to improve
salmon survival. Recent years have seen an increased interest by state governments and tribal
councils in developing comprehensive salmon management efforts.
In response to declining salmon populations in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California,
discrete population units were listed as endangered or threatened species under the Endangered
Congressional Research Service
7
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Species Act.24 In 2006, a San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Agreement ended an 18-year
legal dispute over the operation of Friant Dam in California that had eliminated salmon from
much of this river. This agreement provides for river channel improvements and water flow to
sustain Chinook salmon upstream (south) from the confluence of the Merced River tributary
while reducing or avoiding water supply losses to Friant Division long-term water contractors
that may result from restoration flows provided in the agreement. Congress authorized the
implementation of this agreement through P.L. 111-11. In 2010, two agreements were concluded
for the Klamath River Basin to address fishery and water supply issues.
The 112th Congress has considered a number of measures related to Pacific salmon. On May 3,
2011, the House Committee on Agriculture and Committee on Natural Resources held a joint
oversight hearing on pesticide registration consultations under Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) related to ESA-listed salmon. On November 18, 2011, President Obama
signed P.L. 112-55 (H.R. 2112) into law, including language directing the National Aquatic
Animal Health Task Force to establish an infectious salmon anemia research program. Several
bills introduced in the 112th Congress may affect Pacific salmon.
• H.R. 1251, Section 108 of H.R. 1837, and Title V, Subtitle A, of S. 2365 would
provide congressional direction for Endangered Species Act (ESA)
implementation as it relates to operation of the Central Valley Project and the
California State Water Project; in addition, Section 203 of H.R. 1837 and Title V,
Subtitle B, of S. 2365 would repeal the San Joaquin Restoration Settlement.
Furthermore, Section 207 of H.R. 1837 and Section 519 of S. 2365 order that no
distinction be made under ESA between anadromous fish of wild and hatchery
origin in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their tributaries. On June 2
and 13, 2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power
held hearings on H.R. 1837. H.R. 1837 was reported (amended) by the House
Committee on Natural Resources on February 27, 2012 (H.Rept. 112-403), and
passed by the House (amended) on February 29, 2012. Section 308 of H.R. 1287
and S. 706 would prohibit the Bureau of Reclamation and California state
agencies from restricting operations for the Central Valley Project pursuant to any
ESA biological opinion under certain conditions.
• H.R. 1 (seeking to provide continuing appropriations for the remainder of
FY2011) includes language that would limit funding for the Pacific Coastal
Salmon Recovery Fund to $50 million (Section 1307, Division B, Title III) and
prohibit funds from being used by NMFS and FWS for implementing certain
actions described in a biological opinion for the operations of the Central Valley
Project and the California State Water Project (Section 1475, Division B,
Title IV).
• S. 962 and H.R. 1858 would reauthorize and amend the Northwest Straits Marine
Conservation Initiative Act, including authorizing county Marine Resources
Committees; one duty of these committee would be to assist in identifying local
implications, needs, and strategies associated with the recovery of Puget Sound
salmon. On February 27, 2012, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation reported S. 962 (S.Rept. 112-151).
24 For additional background on this issue, see CRS Report 98-666, Pacific Salmon and Steelhead Trout: Managing
Under the Endangered Species Act, by Eugene H. Buck and Harold F. Upton.
Congressional Research Service
8
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
• H.R. 946 and H.R. 3069 would amend MMPA to permit activities aimed at
reducing marine mammal predation on endangered Columbia River salmon; on
June 14, 2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries,
Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 946. On December
8, 2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources reported H.R. 3069 (H.Rept.
112-322). On June 19, 2012, the House passed H.R. 2578 after amending this
measure to include the language of H.R. 3069 as Title VII.
• On July 15, 2011, the House passed H.R. 2354 (amended), after adopting a floor
amendment (appearing in Section 614) that would prohibit Corps of Engineers
funding for activities related to the removal of Condit Dam on the White Salmon
River in Washington. This provision was not included when the Senate reported
this bill on September 7, 2011 (S.Rept. 112-75).
• Section 5 of H.R. 6247 would require power administrations to report the
customer’s share of the direct and indirect costs related to compliance with any
federal environmental laws related to conservation of fish and wildlife; Section 8
of this bill would prohibit bypassing turbines at federal dams when such action
would be harmful to endangered fish. On August 15, 2012, the House Committee
on Natural Resources held a hearing on this bill.
• S. 1401 would establish a Salmon Stronghold Partnership to promote
international and interagency cooperation to improve salmon management; on
January 30, 2012, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation reported (amended) the bill (S.Rept. 112-140).
• H.R. 2111 would (1) require a study by the National Academy of Sciences of
federal salmon recovery actions on the Columbia and Snake Rivers and (2)
declare that the Secretary of the Army may remove the four Lower Snake River
dams.
• Section 305(b) of S. 52 would reauthorize the Pacific Salmon Treaty Act through
FY2013; On January 26, 2012, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation reported this bill (S.Rept. 112-132).
• H.R. 4275 would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1991 with respect to the
application of this act to an employment discrimination lawsuit involving the
Wards Cove salmon cannery.
• H.R. 3398/S. 1851 would authorize restoration of the Klamath Basin and transfer
the PacifiCorps Iron Gate Hatchery facilities to the state of California.
Additional Fishery Issues in the 112th Congress
On October 4, 2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources held an oversight hearing on the
impact of the Administration’s National Ocean Policy and Council on jobs, energy, and the
economy; a second hearing on this issue was held on October 26, 2011. Legislation has been
introduced in the 112th Congress to address numerous issues related to fisheries.
Congressional Research Service
9
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Habitat Protection and Restoration
Division A, Title I, Subtitle F, of P.L. 112-141 created a Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund to
promote efforts to achieve long-term sustainability of the ecosystem, fish stocks, fish habitat, and
the recreational, commercial, and charter fishing industry in the Gulf of Mexico. Division A,
Section 312 of P.L. 112-81 amended the Sikes Act to modify how this act applies to state-owned
facilities used for national defense.
S. 1266 (S.Rept. 112-183), H.R. 872, Section 108 of H.R. 3323, Section 3999E of S. 1720, Title
VI of S. 2365, and S. 3605 would amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act regarding the regulation of the use of pesticides in or
near navigable waters; on March 29, 2011, H.R. 872 was reported by the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure (H.Rept. 112-43, Part I) and the House Committee on
Agriculture (H.Rept. 112-43, Part II). The House passed H.R. 872 on March 31, 2011. On June
21, 2011, the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry reported H.R. 872. H.R.
4318 would prohibit the use of any pesticide containing atrazine. Section 10016 of H.R. 6083
would restrict the modification, cancellation, or suspension of the registration of a pesticide on
the basis of the implementation of a biological opinion under the Endangered Species Act; on
September 13, 2012, the House Committee on Agriculture reported, amended, H.R. 6083
(H.Rept. 112-669), with the pesticide provision now in Section 10017.
Section 11 of S. 203 would amend the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to provide specific funding for
rescue, rehabilitation, and recovery of marine species, including marine birds and sea turtles.
Section 505 of H.R. 501/H.R. 1870 would establish an Ocean Resources Conservation and
Assistance Fund to provide specific support for rescue, rehabilitation, and recovery of marine
species; conservation of marine ecosystems; improvement of marine ecosystem resiliency; and
protection of marine biodiversity. H.Res. 80 would express the sense of the House in support of
the goals and ideals of National Marine Awareness Day, celebrating the diversity of marine
fisheries and wildlife and the richness of marine ecosystems. Section 2(c)(2) of H.R. 1505 would
extend the authority of the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive certain responsibilities under
the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act to secure the border
within 100 miles of any international land and maritime U.S. border. H.R. 1650 would amend
Section 307 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act of 1992
to establish a Chesapeake Bay coastal living resources management and habitat program. S. 1991
and Section 5 of S. 973 would create a National Endowment for the Oceans, with funding
(Section 6) for habitat restoration, protection, and maintenance, including analyses of ocean
acidification and minimization of ecosystem harm. S. 1201, S.Amdt. 2232 to S. 3240, and Title II,
Subtitle A of S. 3525 would authorize a national program to conserve fish and aquatic
communities through partnerships to foster habitat conservation; the Senate declined to consider
S.Amdt. 2232 when action was taken on S. 3240; on July 17, 2012, the Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works reported S. 1201 (S.Rept. 112-187). S. 1224 and H.R. 6060 would
amend P.L. 106-392 to maintain annual base funding for the Upper Colorado and San Juan River
fish recovery programs; on June 23, 2011, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Water and Power held hearings on S. 1224, and on July 10, 2012, the House
Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on H.R. 6060. On
September 14, 2012, the House Committee on Natural Resources reported H.R. 6060 (H.Rept.
112-672), and the House passed this bill on September 19, 2012. S. 1266 and H.R. 2325 would
establish a Delaware River Basin Restoration Program, including grants for restoration or
protection of fish and their habitat; on July 16, 2012, the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works reported (amended) H.R. 2993 would direct the Corps of Engineers to revise the
Congressional Research Service
10
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Missouri River Mainstem Reservoir System Master Water Control Manual and any related
regulations to delete fish and wildlife as an authorized purpose of the Corps. S. 1389 and Section
128(6) of S. 1596 would exempt from the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act the reconstruction
of any road, highway, or bridge damaged by a natural disaster; on September 21, 2011, the Senate
Committee on Appropriations reported S. 1596 (S.Rept. 112-83). S.Res. 281 designated
September 24, 2011, as “National Estuaries Day” and reaffirmed support for the scientific study,
preservation, protection, and restoration of estuaries; the Senate agreed to this measure on
September 23, 2011. Similarly, S.Res. 566 designates September 29, 2012, as “National Estuaries
Day”; on September 19, 2012, the Senate agreed to S.Res. 566. Section 402 of S. 1971 would
amend the Clean Water Act to elaborate on standards and adverse impact determinations for
cooling water intake structures. Section 4 of S. 2147 would establish an Arctic Ocean Research,
Monitoring, and Observation Program to offer grants for research and monitoring of Arctic
fisheries, including the distributions and ecology of Arctic cod and other forage fishes. Section 2
of H.R. 4314 would authorize coastal adaptation project grants, with one priority addressing
ocean acidification. H.R. 4408 would amend the Sikes Act to promote the use of cooperative
agreements for land management related to Department of Defense installations and to facilitate
interagency cooperation in conservation programs. S. 1991 would establish a National
Endowment for the Oceans. Section 4 of H.R. 6303 would authorize global science program
grants, with one priority addressing ocean acidification. Section 5 of H.R. 6247 would require
power administrations to report the customer’s share of the direct and indirect costs related to
compliance with any federal environmental laws related to conservation of fish and wildlife;
Section 8 of this bill would prohibit bypassing turbines at federal dams when such action would
be harmful to endangered fish. On August 15, 2012, the House Committee on Natural Resources
held a hearing on H.R. 6247.
In addition, a number of bills in the 112th Congress propose to address various water quality and
aquatic/marine ecosystem restoration issues more generally; for more information on these issues,
see CRS Report R41594, Water Quality Issues in the 112th Congress: Oversight and
Implementation, by Claudia Copeland, and CRS Report RL34329, Crosscut Budgets in
Ecosystem Restoration Initiatives: Examples and Issues for Congress, by Pervaze A. Sheikh and
Clinton T. Brass.
Sport Fisheries
P.L. 112-5 extended the authority to make expenditures from the Highway Trust Fund and other
trust funds, including various programs under the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund,
through the end of FY2011. P.L. 112-30 extended the authority to make expenditures from the
Highway Trust Fund and other trust funds, including various programs under the Sport Fish
Restoration and Boating Trust Fund, through March 31, 2012. P.L. 112-102 extended the
authority to make expenditures from the Highway Trust Fund and other trust funds, including
various programs under the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund, through June 30,
2012. P.L. 112-140 extended the authority to make expenditures from the Highway Trust Fund
and other trust funds, including various programs under the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating
Trust Fund, through July 6, 2012. Division C, Title IV, and Division D, Section 40101(b), of P.L.
112-141 extended the authority to make expenditures from the Highway Trust Fund and other
trust funds, including various programs under the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund,
through FY2014.
Section 9(b)(2)(D) of S. 351 and Section 13(2)(D) of S. 352 would designate a portion of
revenues from certain oil and gas leasing in Alaska for the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish
Congressional Research Service
11
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Restoration Fund. H.R. 4650 and S. 3195 would suspend temporarily the duty on certain fishing
reels.
Section 311 of H.R. 1287, S. 706, and Section 4140 of S. 1720 would prohibit the Claims and
Judgment Fund of the United States Treasury from paying legal fees of an environmental
nongovernmental organization related to any action that prevents, terminates, or reduces access to
or the production of a resource by commercial or recreational fishermen. H.R. 1444 would
require that fishing be a recognized use in management plans for federal lands under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture; on September 9, 2011,
the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands held a
hearing on this bill. S. 901 and H.R. 1997 would fund projects to secure recreational public access
to federal public land that has significantly restricted access for fishing. Section 2(b)(2) of S.
1265, Section 3 of H.R. 6086, and Section 1701(e) of H.R. 14/S. 1813, as passed (amended) by
the Senate on March 14, 2012, would amend the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act to
specify that at least 1.5% of the annual authorized funding amount be made available for projects
that secure recreational public access to existing federal public land for hunting, fishing, and other
recreational purposes. On April 24, 2012, the Senate passed H.R. 4348 after amending this
measure to substitute the language of S. 1813, as amended; in conference, this provision was
deleted (H.Rept. 112-557). H.R. 2834, Title I of H.R. 4089, and S. 2066 would direct federal
public land management officials to facilitate use of and access to federal public lands and waters
for fishing; on September 9, 2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on National
Parks, Forests, and Public Lands held a hearing on this bill. On July 19, 2012, the House
Committee on Natural Resources reported (amended) H.R. 2834 (H.Rept. 112-609, Part I). On
April 13, 2012, the House Committee on Natural Resources reported (amended) H.R. 4089
(H.Rept. 112-426, Part I); the House passed this measure on April 17, 2012. H.R. 6086 would
direct federal public land management agencies to report on public access to federal public lands
for fishing and other recreational purposes.
S. 1555 and H.R. 3429 would authorize the use of certain offshore oil and gas platforms in the
Gulf of Mexico for artificial reefs. S.Amdt. 2232 to S. 3541 (Section 13303) and Section 123 of
S. 3525 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to develop a plan to assess how removal of
decommissioned offshore oil and gas platforms might relate to creation of artificial habitats that
enhance fishing; the Senate declined to consider S.Amdt. 2232 when action was taken on S. 3240.
H.R. 6208 would temporarily limit the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to require or
authorize the removal or movement of offshore oil and gas facilities.
H.R. 1443 seeks to prevent restrictions on traditional fishing implements (e.g., lead sinkers),
including a provision to makes states and territories ineligible for federal Sport Fish Restoration
funds if traditional fishing implements are restricted. H.R. 1445 would prohibit the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating, based on material composition, any
type of fishing tackle, while H.R. 1558, Title IV of H.R. 4089, S. 838, S.Amdt. 2232 to S. 3240
(Section 13301), and Section 121 of S. 3525 would amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to
modify the jurisdiction of the EPA with respect to certain sport fishing articles (e.g., lead sinkers);
the Senate declined to consider S.Amdt. 2232 when action was taken on S. 3240. On April 13,
2012, the House Committee on Natural Resources reported (amended) H.R. 4089 (H.Rept. 112-
426, Part I); the House passed this measure on April 17, 2012.
Several bills would modify (Section 4(b) of S. 108 and Section 5(b) of S. 1069) or temporarily
suspend (S. 2879 and S. 2880) the tariff on vulcanized rubber felt or lug boot bottoms for use in
fishing waders. H.R. 2351 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to continue stocking fish in
Congressional Research Service
12
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
certain lakes in the North Cascades National Park, Ross Lake National Recreation Area, and Lake
Chelan National Recreation Area; on September 15, 2011, the House Natural Resources
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands held a hearing on this bill. This bill
was reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on December 1, 2011 (H.Rept. 112-
305), and passed by the House on December 7, 2011. H.R. 3074 would amend the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act to delegate to states the authorities of the Secretary of the Interior under that act with
respect to cormorants. Section 4 of H.R. 594 would amend MSFCMA to direct the Secretary,
subject to the availability of appropriations, to enter into contracts with, or provide grants to,
states for the purpose of establishing and implementing a registry program for recreational
fishermen; on December 1, 2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on
this bill. H.R. 5797 and S. 3251 would exempt vessel owners and operators on Mille Lacs Lake,
MN, from federal laws applicable to navigable waters; on July 31, 2012, the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure reported (amended) H.R. 5797 (H.Rept. 112-634), and the
House passed this measure (amended) on August 1, 2012. H.Res. 801 would recognize anglers
and fishery management agencies for their role in restoring fish populations.
Invasive Species
On July 13, 2011, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittees on
Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation and on Water Resources and Environment, held a joint
hearing on ballast water discharge regulation. Section 5 of S. 1430 would authorize a “green
ships” program, with one element focusing on identifying, evaluating, testing, demonstrating, and
improving marine technologies for controlling aquatic invasive species; on December 7, 2011, the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported (amended) this bill
(S.Rept. 112-99). H.R. 2840 would amend the Clean Water Act to add a new Section 321 to
implement ballast water management and standards related to discharges from commercial
vessels; on November 3, 2011, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
reported (amended) this bill (H.Rept. 112-266). On November 4, 2011, the House, by floor
amendment, added the language of H.R. 2840 as Title VII of H.R. 2838; the House passed H.R.
2838 (amended) on November 15, 2011; on September 22, 2012, the Senate passed H.R. 2838
(amended), deleting the House title amending the Clean Water Act. Section 459 of H.R. 2584, as
reported by the House Committee on Appropriations on July 19, 2011 (H.Rept. 112-151), would
prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from providing funds to any Great Lakes
state that has a more stringent performance or ballast water exchange standard than either a
revised Coast Guard standard or the International Maritime Organization standard; however,
FY2012 appropriations for EPA, included in P.L. 112-74, contain no similar provision. S. 3332
and S. 3570 would establish nationally uniform standards governing ballast water discharges.
Section 105, Division B, of P.L. 112-74 authorized the Corps of Engineers to take emergency
measures to exclude Asian carp from the Great Lakes. H.R. 892 and S. 471 would direct the
Corps of Engineers, U.S. Geological Survey, and FWS to take measures to control the spread of
Asian carp, including studying the feasibility of the hydrological separation of the Great Lakes
and Mississippi River Basins. H.R. 2432 would require the Corps of Engineers to prepare an
economic impact statement before carrying out any federal action relating to the Chicago Area
Water System. H.R. 4146 and S. 2164 would authorize the Army Corps of Engineers to take
actions to manage Asian carp traveling up the Mississippi River in the state of Minnesota. H.R.
4406 and S. 2317 would direct the Army Corps of Engineers to complete the Great Lakes
Mississippi River Interbasin Study within 18 months, focusing on the permanent prevention of
the spread of aquatic nuisance species between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River Basins.
H.R. 6348 designates the Army Corps of Engineers as the lead federal agency for Asian carp
Congressional Research Service
13
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
control and expands authorization of Corps activities to control Asian carp. H.R. 6385 would
direct a multiagency effort to slow the spread of Asian carp in the Upper Mississippi and Ohio
River basins and tributaries.
H.Res. 132 would express the need to raise awareness and promote capacity building to address
the lionfish invasion in the Atlantic Ocean. Section 3 of S. 432 would amend the Lake Tahoe
Restoration Act to require FWS to deploy strategies to prevent the introduction of aquatic
invasive species into the Lake Tahoe Basin; on February 7, 2012, the Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works reported (amended) S. 432 (S.Rept. 112-148), with the invasive
species provisions in Section 7. Section 2 of H.R. 4314 would authorize coastal adaptation project
grants, with one priority addressing invasive species. On April 26, 2012, the Senate Committee on
Appropriations reported S. 2465 (S.Rept. 112-164), with language seeking to encourage the
Bureau of Reclamation, in partnership with the Bonneville Power Administration, to continue its
efforts to develop invasive zebra and quagga mussel vulnerability assessments for federally
owned hydropower projects. H.R. 6007 and S. 3543 would exempt from the Lacey Act certain
water transfers by the North Texas Municipal Water District and the Greater Texoma Utility
Authority for zebra mussel control; on July 19, 2012, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee
on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 6007. On September
10, 2012, the House Committee on Natural Resources reported H.R. 6007 (H.Rept. 112-657) and
the House passed this measure. S. 3606 and H.R. 5864 would modify the regulatory process for
injurious wildlife to prevent the introduction and establishment of nonnative species.
International Fisheries
Section 113 of P.L. 112-55 directs certain management measures for U.S. tuna fishing under the
authority of the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish
Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. On May 23, June 14, and June 28, 2012, the
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations held hearings on the United Nations Convention on Law
of the Sea. On November 14, 2011, the Obama Administration transmitted the 2009 Agreement
on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated
Fishing to the Senate for advice and consent on ratification; S. 1980 would implement this
agreement, and was ordered reported on July 31, 2012, by the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation. S. 52 and H.R. 4100 would amend various statutes implementing
international fishery agreements to deter and combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU)
fishing; additional provisions (Title IV in S. 52; Title II in H.R. 4100) would amend the Tuna
Conventions Act of 1950 to implement the Antigua Convention; on June 19, 2012, the House
Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs held a
hearing on H.R. 4100. On January 26, 2012, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation reported S. 52 (S.Rept. 112-132). H.Res. 47 would express the sense of the House
of Representatives urging that the parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) adopt stronger protections for sharks and bluefin tuna.
S.Res. 227 would call for the protection of the Mekong River Basin and increased U.S. support
for delaying the construction of mainstream dams along the Mekong River. Section 801 of H.R.
2583 expresses the sense of Congress that timely reporting by fisheries commissions that
sufficiently explains commission activities and the disposition of commission resources is
necessary to maintain public support for their continued funding; Section 104(4) of H.R. 2583 as
well as Section 703(e) of S. 1426 would authorize $31.3 million for International Fisheries
Commissions in FY2012. On September 23, 2011, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
reported H.R. 2583, amended, with the provision on fishery commission reporting at Section
1147 (H.Rept. 112-223). Section 107 of S. 1426 would extend the period for reimbursement of
Congressional Research Service
14
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
seized commercial fishermen under the Fishermen’s Protective Act from 2008 to 2013. S. 1601
and H.R. 6018 would authorize $36.3 million for International Fisheries Commissions in
FY2013; on July 17, 2012, the House passed H.R. 6018 (amended). H.R. 6038 and S. 3356 would
require a GAO study of U.S. international conservation policies and programs, specifically
including illegal fishing, and direct the President to develop and implement a comprehensive
International Conservation Strategy. S. 3518 would make it a principal negotiating objective of
the United States in trade negotiations to eliminate government fisheries subsidies.
Tuna and Billfish
On October 5, 2012, President Obama signed P.L. 112-183 (H.R. 2706), prohibiting the sale of
billfish. Section 113 of P.L. 112-55 directs certain management measures for U.S. tuna fishing
under the authority of the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly
Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. H.R. 1806 would amend the
Endangered Species Act to provide that bluefin tuna not be treated as an endangered or threatened
species. S. 52 and H.R. 4100 would amend the Tuna Conventions Act of 1950 to implement the
Antigua Convention; in addition, S. 52 would amend the MMPA to authorize appropriations
thorough FY2013 to study of the effect of intentional encirclement (including chase) on dolphins
incidentally taken in purse seine fishing for yellowfin tuna in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean.
On January 26, 2012, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported
S. 52 (S.Rept. 112-132); on June 19, 2012, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on
Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 4100. Section 605 of H.R.
2838, as reported on October 3, 2011 (H.Rept. 112-229), would extend the authorization to
engage foreign citizens in the U.S. distant water tuna fleet. On November 4, 2011, the House, by
floor amendment to H.R. 2838, added language proposing to give distant water tuna vessels in the
western Pacific Ocean the option of using Guam as their required port of call in order to meet
U.S. maritime regulations. On November 15, 2011, the House passed H.R. 2838 (amended); on
September 22, 2012, the Senate passed H.R. 2838 (amended), deleting both House provisions on
the U.S. distant water tuna fleet. Section 2(e) of S. 2062 would amend the Lacey Act to remove
the exemption from Lacey Act enforcement for taking of highly migratory species in violation of
foreign law where the United States does not recognize foreign jurisdiction over highly migratory
species.
Disasters and Recovery
Division A, Title I, Subtitle F, of P.L. 112-141 (H.R. 4348) created a Gulf Coast Restoration Trust
Fund to promote consumption of Gulf of Mexico seafood as well as efforts to achieve long-term
sustainability of the ecosystem, fish stocks, fish habitat, and the recreational, commercial, and
charter fishing industry in the Gulf of Mexico.
S. 653 and H.R. 1336 would require the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to
establish a Southeast Hurricanes Small Business Disaster Relief Program for losses caused by
Hurricane Katrina of 2005, Hurricane Rita of 2005, Hurricane Gustav of 2008, or Hurricane Ike
of 2008. H.R. 1228 and S. 662 would require EPA to enter into an arrangement with the National
Academies to preliminarily evaluate the natural resource damages from the Deepwater Horizon
Oil Spill; on June 28, 2011, the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Water
and Wildlife held a hearing on S. 662. Section 204 of H.R. 3757 would amend the Clean Water
Act to elaborate on how closing and reopening of fishing grounds following an oil spill is to be
managed. S.Amdt. 2187 to S. 3240 would extend emergency disaster loans under the Farm
Congressional Research Service
15
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Service Agency (FSA) to commercial fishermen; S.Amdt. 2188 to S. 3240 would extend the non-
insured crop assistance program under FSA to commercial fishermen; and S.Amdt. 2206 to S.
3240 would extend FSA operating loans to commercial fishermen. On June 21, 2012, the Senate
passed S. 3240 with the provision relating to emergency disaster loans included (Section 5001).25
Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia
On June 1, 2011, the House Science, Space, and Technology Subcommittee on Energy and
Environment held a legislative hearing on harmful algal bloom and hypoxia research. H.R. 2484
and S. 1701 would amend and reauthorize the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and
Control Act of 1998 (through FY2015) to include a comprehensive strategy to address harmful
algal blooms and hypoxia and to provide for the development and implementation of a
comprehensive research plan and action strategy to reduce harmful algal blooms and hypoxia; on
December 16, 2011, the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology reported
(amended) H.R. 2484 (H.Rept. 112-333, Part I). On November 2, 2011, the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation ordered S. 1701 reported (amended). Section 7 of S.
1582 and Section 13 of H.R. 3690 would direct EPA to complete a study and report to Congress
on available scientific information relating to the impacts of nutrient excesses and algal blooms
on coastal recreation waters. H.R. 3570 would amend the Oceans and Human Health Act to
require coordination with programs under the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and
Control Act.
Marketing and Trade
Section 7 of H.R. 480 would establish a Gulf of Mexico seafood marketing program. Several bills
would modify (Section 4(b) of S. 108 and Section 5(b) of S. 1069) or temporarily suspend (S.
2879 and S. 2880) the tariff on vulcanized rubber felt or lug boot bottoms for use in fishing
waders. Section 7004 of S. 1773/H.R. 3286 would amend the Farmer-to-Consumer Direct
Marketing Act of 1976 to establish a local marketing promotion program for fishing cooperatives
or other business entities or a producer or fisher network or association, including community-
supported fishery networks or associations. H.R. 4650 and S. 3195 would suspend temporarily
the duty on certain fishing reels. H.R. 5071 and S. 2556 would extend the temporary suspension
of duty on oysters (other than smoked), prepared or preserved. H.R. 6200 would seek to address
seafood fraud by requiring labels to identify species, origin, and fishing gear used for both
domestic and imported fish and would require a plan to coordinate FDA and NMFS seafood
inspection. S. 3518 would make it a principal negotiating objective of the United States in trade
negotiations to eliminate government fisheries subsidies. S. 3615 would promote national seafood
marketing efforts through the creation of a National Seafood Marketing and Development Fund
and Regional Seafood Marketing Boards.
Jobs
Section 7(b)(2)(H) of H.R. 192/S. 179 would promote cooperative research and education efforts
with commercial fishermen operating within the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine
Sanctuary and the Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary; on February 27, 2012, the Senate
25 The Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry filed a written report on S. 3240 on August 28, 2012
(S.Rept. 112-203).
Congressional Research Service
16
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported S. 179 (S.Rept. 112-149). H.R.
594 would establish a jobs creation grant program to support cooperative research and
monitoring, recreational fishing registry programs, marine debris removal, and restoration of
coastal resources; on December 1, 2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources held a
hearing on this bill. H.R. 3109 would amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to
require establishment of a Working Waterfront Grant Program to preserve, protect, and expand
coastal access for persons engaged in water-dependent commercial activities. Section 39 of H.R.
1026 would direct the Federal Emergency Management Agency to study the impacts of the
National Flood Insurance Program on harbor areas that are working waterfronts.
Marine Debris
H.R. 1171 and S. 1119 would reauthorize (through FY2016) and amend the Marine Debris
Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act; on April 25, 2012, the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported (amended) S. 1119 (S.Rept. 112-161). On
December 15, 2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans,
and Insular Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 1171. On July 9, 2012, the House Committee on
Natural Resources reported (amended) H.R. 1171 (H.Rept. 112-584, Part I); and on July 17, 2012,
the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported (amended) this bill (H.Rept.
112-584, Part II). On August 1, 2012, the House passed H.R. 1171, amended. H.R. 6251 would
amend the Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act to establish an expedited
award process for grants to address marine debris emergencies.
Seafood Safety
S. 50 would direct the Departments of Commerce and of Health and Human Services, the Federal
Trade Commission, and other federal agencies to combat seafood fraud26 and coordinate and
strengthen programs to better ensure that seafood in interstate and foreign commerce is fit for
human consumption; on January 26, 2012, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation reported this bill (S.Rept. 112-131). H.R. 832 would require research on the safety
of Gulf of Mexico seafood, including levels of elevated hazardous substances. S. 1183 and H.R.
3391 would establish a program to monitor long-term changes in mercury and methyl mercury in
fish and other aquatic organisms. Section 4 of S. 1582 would direct EPA to develop updated
recommendations on testing for mercury affecting the waters of the Great Lakes, including fish
tissue.
Tax Provisions
Section 202(a)(74) of S. 13 would repeal Section 7873 of the Internal Revenue Code relating to
federal tax treatment of income derived by Indians from exercise of fishing rights secured by
treaty. H.R. 278 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to provide for tax-exempt qualified
small issue bonds to finance fish processing property. Section 5 of H.R. 390 would amend the
Internal Revenue Code to provide for an exclusion from the gross estate for certain farmlands and
lands subject to qualified conservation easements managed to provide habitat in support of fish
and wildlife-dependent recreation. H.R. 6276 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to provide
for Commercial Fishing, Farm, and Ranch Risk Management Accounts.
26 See CRS Report RL34124, Seafood Marketing: Combating Fraud and Deception, by Eugene H. Buck.
Congressional Research Service
17
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Fishing and Research Vessels
H.R. 2241 and S. 1208 would provide an election to terminate certain capital construction funds
without penalties. H.R. 3472 and S. 1890 would establish standards and procedures for disposal
of forfeited fishing vessels; on June 19, 2012, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on
Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 3472. Section 610 of S.
1665, as reported (amended) by the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on
January 26, 2012 (S.Rept. 112-135), would direct the NOAA Administrator to give special
consideration to stated factors related to designating a homeport for the FSV Henry E. Bigelow.
Section 302 of H.R. 5887 would delay certain safety requirements for fishing vessels.
Colorado River
S. 1224 and H.R. 6060 would amend P.L. 106-392 to maintain annual base funding for the Upper
Colorado and San Juan River fish recovery programs; on June 23, 2011, the Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power held hearings on S. 1224, and on July 10,
2012, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on H.R.
6060. On September 14, 2012, the House Committee on Natural Resources reported H.R. 6060
(H.Rept. 112-672).
Health
Section 232(a) of H.R. 105/H.R. 3000, Section 501(a) of H.R. 299, Section 201(a) of H.R.
397/H.R. 6299, Section 2(a) of H.R. 1050, and Section 621(a) of H.R. 3682 would amend the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA; P.L. 93-406; 29 U.S.C. §§1001, et
seq.) to authorize fishing industry associations to provide health care plans for association
members. H.R. 3570 would amend and reauthorize the Oceans and Human Health Act through
FY2015.
Striped Bass
H.R. 3906 would amend the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act to allow recreational fishing
for Atlantic striped bass in the Block Island Sound transit zone. Section 3 of H.R. 6096 would
reauthorize the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act through FY2017. On July 19, 2012, the
House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a
hearing on both these bills.
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
S. 1494, Section 243 of S. 3525, and H.R. 6441 would reauthorize and amend the National Fish
and Wildlife Foundation Establishment Act. On April 24, 2012, the Senate Environment and
Public Works Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife held a hearing on S. 1494, and on September
19, 2012, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works reported (amended) S. 1494
(S.Rept. 112-215).
Congressional Research Service
18
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Miscellaneous Fisheries Reauthorizations
H.R. 6096 would reauthorize the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act, Atlantic Striped Bass
Conservation Act, Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act, and Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention
Act through FY2017. On July 19, 2012, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries,
Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a hearing on this bill.
Legal Fees
Section 311 of H.R. 1287, S. 706, and Section 4140 of S. 1720 would prohibit the Claims and
Judgment Fund of the U.S. Treasury from paying legal fees of an environmental non-
governmental organization related to any action that prevents, terminates, or reduces access to or
production of a resource by commercial or recreational fishermen.
Fishing Permits and Licenses
H.R. 1210, S. 608, and Section 406 of H.R. 2838 would limit maritime liens on fishing permits
and licenses. On October 3, 2011, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
reported H.R. 2838 (amended), with this provision in Section 405 (H.Rept. 112-229). On
November 15, 2011, the House passed H.R. 2838 (amended); on September 22, 2012, the Senate
passed H.R. 2838 (amended), deleting the House provision limiting maritime liens..
Accidents and Injury
Section 2(2) of S. 475 would prohibit funding of National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health’s Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing Program, which seeks to eliminate occupational
diseases and injuries among workers in these industries through research and prevention.
Coral
S. 46 and H.R. 738 would amend and reauthorize the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000
through FY2015 (H.R. 738) or FY2016 (S. 46). On September 12, 2012, the Senate Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported S. 46 (S.Rept. 112-210).
Insurance
Section 39 of H.R. 1026 would require the Federal Emergency Management Agency to study the
impacts of the National Flood Insurance Program on harbor areas including commercial and
recreational fishing.
Saltonstall-Kennedy Act
S. 2184 and H.R. 4208 would amend the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act to establish a Regional
Fisheries Investment Grant Program.
Congressional Research Service
19
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Government Reorganization
Section 202(b) of S. 1116 would transfer all NMFS functions to the Fish and Wildlife Service in
the Department of the Interior.
Aquaculture
Background
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.27 The diversity of aquaculture
is typified by such activities as freshwater fish farming (e.g., catfish and trout farms);28 shellfish
and seaweed culture; net-pen culture, used by the salmon industry, wherein fish remain captive
throughout their lives in marine pens; and ocean ranching, used by the Pacific Coast salmon
industry, whereby juvenile salmon are cultured, released to mature in the open ocean, and caught
when they return as adults to spawn. Fish hatcheries can be either publicly or privately operated
to raise fish for recreational and commercial stocking as well as to mitigate aquatic resource and
habitat damage.
The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has characterized aquaculture as one of the
world’s fastest-growing food production activities. World aquaculture production grew from
approximately 1 million metric tons in the early 1950s to 51.7 million metric tons in 2006 (the
most recent FAO data available).29 Meanwhile, the harvest from wild populations has been static
for the last two decades, and further growth of fish production for human consumption is
expected to rely on aquaculture. In 2006, FAO estimated that 47% of all fish consumed by
humans came from aquaculture. FAO predicts that world aquaculture production could exceed
130 million metric tons by 2030, more than double the current wild fish harvest for human
consumption.30
U.S. aquaculture, until recently and with a few exceptions, has been considered a minor
industry.31 The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 2005 Census of Aquaculture reported that U.S.
sales of aquaculture products had reached nearly $1.1 billion, with more than half this value
produced in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.32 The domestic aquaculture industry
faces strong competition from imports of foreign aquacultural products, from the domestic
poultry and livestock industries, and from wild harvests. In addition, aquaculture operations face
increasing scrutiny for habitat destruction, pollution, and other concerns. The major federal
27 For more background information, see CRS Report RL32694, Open Ocean Aquaculture, by Harold F. Upton and
Eugene H. Buck, and out-of-print CRS Report 97-436, Aquaculture and the Federal Role, by Geoffrey S. Becker and
Eugene H. Buck, available from Eugene Buck at gbuck@crs.loc.gov.
28 For statistics on freshwater production, see http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2002/Aquaculture/index.asp.
29 For more details, see ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0250e/i0250e01.pdf.
30 For a discussion of FAO projections for 2030, see http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5648e/y5648e07.htm#bm07.1.
31 NMFS has produced a short video on U.S. aquaculture, available at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/
homepage_stories/aquaculture_video.html.
32 See http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2002/Aquaculture/AQUACEN.pdf. For the latest information on
domestic production and statistics, see http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/MannUsda/viewDocumentInfo.do?
documentID=1375.
Congressional Research Service
20
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
statute affecting U.S. aquaculture is the National Aquaculture Act of 1980, as amended (16 U.S.C.
§§2801 et seq.). The purpose of this act is to ensure coordination of various federal programs and
policies affecting the aquaculture industry, and to promote and support aquaculture research and
development.
In October 2007, NOAA released a 10-year plan for its marine aquaculture program.33 On June 9,
2011, the Department of Commerce and NOAA released complementary national aquaculture
policies to address concerns related to aquaculture development in the EEZ.34 Legislation to
modify the regulatory environment and promote the development of U.S. offshore, open-ocean
aquaculture was introduced in the 110th Congress, but was not considered by either chamber, and
was not reintroduced in the 111th Congress.
In 2009, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council voted to approve a plan to issue
aquaculture permits and regulate aquaculture in federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico. NOAA is
also developing a national aquaculture policy to complement this action. Environmentalists and
some fishing industry representatives have opposed the plan because of concerns related to
environmental protection and potential harm to wild fish populations. Many who oppose the plan
support a precautionary approach and development of national aquaculture standards. In response
to these concerns, legislation to establish a regulatory system for offshore aquaculture in the U.S.
EEZ was introduced during the 111th Congress, but was not considered on the floor in either
chamber.
Aquaculture Issues in the 112th Congress
The 112th Congress has considered a number of measures related to aquaculture. On March 30,
2012, the House Committee on Agriculture held a field hearing in State University, Arkansas,
including concerns about constraints on transport of aquaculture products under the Lacey Act.
P.L. 112-55 included a provision directing the National Aquatic Animal Health Task Force to
establish an infectious salmon anemia research program. P.L. 112-74 included a provision
authorizing the Corps of Engineers to transfer to the Fish and Wildlife Service as much as
$3,800,000 for National Fish Hatcheries in FY2012 to mitigate for fisheries lost due to Corps of
Engineers projects. In the 112th Congress, several additional measures have been introduced that
could affect aquaculture:
• S. 229, H.R. 520, and H.R. 3553 would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act to require labeling of genetically engineered fish. S. 230 and H.R.
521 would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to prevent the
approval of genetically engineered fish for human consumption. Section 744 of
H.R. 2112, as passed by the House on June 16, 2011, would have prohibited the
Food and Drug Administration from spending FY2012 funds to approve any
application for genetically engineered salmon. On September 7, 2011, the Senate
Committee on Appropriations reported H.R. 2112, without the prohibition on
FDA related to genetically engineered salmon (S.Rept. 112-73), and this
provision was not in the enacted P.L. 112-55. S. 1717 would prohibit the sale of
33 Available at http://aquaculture.noaa.gov/about/tenyear.html.
34 The NOAA policy is available at http://aquaculture.noaa.gov/pdf/noaa_aquaculture_policy_2011.pdf; the
Department of Commerce policy is available at http://aquaculture.noaa.gov/pdf/doc_aquaculture_policy_2011.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
21
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
genetically altered salmon. On December 15, 2011, the Senate Commerce,
Science, and Transportation Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries,
and Coast Guard held an oversight hearing on the environmental risks of
genetically engineered fish. On May 24, 2012, S.Amdt. 2108 to S. 3187 was
defeated, proposing to prohibit approval by FDA of genetically engineered fish
unless NOAA concurred with such approval.
• H.R. 1149, H.R. 2009, S. 1085, and S. 1564 would amend the Clean Air Act to
include algae-based biofuel in the renewable fuel program; H.R. 1149, S. 748,
Section 6 of S. 1185/H.R. 2231, Section 503 of S. 1294, Section 105 of S. 2204,
and Section 304 of S. 3521 would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
include algae-based biofuel in the cellulosic biofuel producer credit. Section 5 of
S. 937/H.R. 2036 and Section 222 of H.R. 2133 would provide additional
incentives for algae-based fuel production. Section 9010 of S. 3240 would
exclude algae from eligibility for a biomass assistance program; the Senate
passed S. 3240 on June 21, 2012.35 Section 10 of H.R. 5955 would declare algae
eligible for the agriculture biomass assistance program. H.R. 5967 would amend
the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to include algae as renewable
biomass.
• H.R. 4296, S. 496, and S.Amdt. 2199 to S. 3240 would amend the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act to repeal a program relating to inspection and
grading of catfish. Section 11018 of S. 3240 would require research and
development regarding a policy to insure producers against reduction in the
margin between the market value of catfish and selected costs incurred in the
production of catfish. On June 21, 2012, the Senate passed S. 3240, amended to
repeal the catfish inspection program (Section 12208) and require a policy on
margin coverage for catfish (Section 11019).36 Section 11021 of H.R. 6083 also
addresses margin coverage for catfish; on September 13, 2012, the House
Committee on Agriculture reported (amended) H.R. 6083 (H.Rept. 112-669).
• Section 7117 of S. 3240 and Section 7123 of H.R. 6083 would authorize
appropriations for Department of Agriculture aquaculture assistance programs
through FY2017; in addition, Section 7407 of S. 3240/H.R. 6083 would
reauthorize the National Aquaculture Act through FY2017. Title I, Subtitle E of
S. 3240/H.R. 6083 and Section 2 of H.R. 6192/H.R. 6228/H.R. 6233 would
expand and extend disaster assistance programs for farm-raised fish. On June 21,
2012, the Senate passed S. 3240 with these provisions,37 and on August 2, 2012,
the House passed H.R. 6233. On September 13, 2012, the House Committee on
Agriculture reported (amended) H.R. 6083 (H.Rept. 112-669). H.R. 4948 and
Section 9(e) of S. 2261 would amend the Federal Crop Insurance Act to modify
and extend emergency assistance for farm-raised fish.
• Section 207 of H.R. 1837 and Section 519 of S. 2365 would order that no
distinction be made under the Endangered Species Act between anadromous fish
of wild and hatchery origin in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their
35 The Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry filed a written report on S. 3240 on August 28, 2012
(S.Rept. 112-203).
36 Ibid.
37 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
22
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
tributaries. On June 2 and 13, 2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee
on Water and Power held hearings on H.R. 1837. H.R. 1837 was reported
(amended) by the House Committee on Natural Resources on February 27, 2012
(H.Rept. 112-403), and passed by the House (amended) on February 29, 2012.
• Section 105 of S. 2465 and Section 106 of H.R. 5325 would authorize the Army
Corps of Engineers to transfer to the Fish and Wildlife Service as much as
$4,300,000 for National Fish Hatcheries in FY2013 to mitigate for fisheries lost
due to Army Corps of Engineers projects. On June 6, 2012, the House passed
H.R. 5325 (amended). H.R. 5931 would authorize and require the Fish and
Wildlife Service to charge federal agencies for mitigation services provided by
National Fish Hatcheries and other related facilities.
• H.R. 1160 and S. 651 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey the
McKinney Lake National Fish Hatchery to the state of North Carolina. On May
12, 2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife,
Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 1160, and reported this bill on
July 20, 2011 (H.Rept. 112-168). The House passed H.R. 1160 (amended) on
October 24, 2011. On July 19, 2012, the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works reported H.R. 1160 (S.Rept. 112-190).
• S. 50 would direct the Departments of Commerce and of Health and Human
Services, the Federal Trade Commission, and other federal agencies to coordinate
and strengthen programs to combat seafood fraud38 and better ensure that seafood
in interstate and foreign commerce is fit for human consumption; on January 26,
2012, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported
this bill (S.Rept. 112-131).
• H.R. 2905 would temporarily waive the risk management purchase requirement
for agricultural producers adversely impacted by Hurricane Irene or Tropical
Storm Lee so that such producers would be eligible to receive assistance under
the Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honey Bees, and Farm-Raised Fish
Program.
• H.R. 574 would prohibit the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of
Commerce from authorizing commercial finfish aquaculture operations in the
EEZ unless specifically authorized by Congress. H.R. 2373 would establish a
regulatory system and research program for offshore aquaculture in the U.S.
EEZ.
• H.R. 1176 would amend the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004 to
include farmed shellfish as specialty crops. S. 1607 would add shellfish to the list
of crops eligible for the noninsured crop disaster assistance program and the
emergency assistance for livestock program of the Department of Agriculture.
• H.R. 3074 would amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to delegate to states the
authorities of the Secretary of the Interior under that act with respect to
cormorants. On March 29, 2012, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on
Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a hearing on this bill.
38 See CRS Report RL34124, Seafood Marketing: Combating Fraud and Deception, by Eugene H. Buck.
Congressional Research Service
23
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
• H.R. 1650 would amend Section 307 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Authorization Act of 1992 to establish a Chesapeake Bay coastal
living resources management and habitat program, supporting fish and shellfish
aquaculture including native oyster restoration.
• H.R. 3109 would amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to require
establishment of a Working Waterfront Grant Program to preserve, protect, and
expand coastal access for persons engaged in water-dependent commercial
activities, including aquaculture.
• H.R. 6200 would seek to address seafood fraud by requiring labels to identify
species and origin for both domestic and imported fish and would require a plan
to coordinate FDA and NMFS seafood inspection.
• Section 39 of H.R. 1026 would require the Federal Emergency Management
Agency to study the impacts of the National Flood Insurance Program on harbor
areas including aquaculture.
• Section 2(C)(1) of H.R. 1251 would direct the Secretary of Commerce and
Secretary of the Interior to establish a fish hatchery program or refuge to preserve
and restore the delta smelt.
• Section 3 of H.R. 2110 would authorize a nutrient bio-extraction pilot project for
Long Island Sound, defined so as to include the aquaculture of suspension-
feeding shellfish or algae.
• S. 256 and Section 112 of S. 1960 would amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to allow a credit against income tax for equity investments in aquaculture
small businesses.
• H.R. 5864 would modify the regulatory process for injurious wildlife to prevent
the introduction of harmful nonnative wildlife and wild animal pathogens and
parasites.
• As part of the Klamath Settlement, Section 206(f) of H.R. 3398/S. 1851 would
transfer the PacifiCorps Iron Gate Hatchery facilities to the state of California.
• H.R. 278 would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for tax-
exempt qualified small issue bonds to finance fish processing property.
• Section 306 of H.R. 4351 would authorize a grant program for promoting urban
aquaculture.
Marine Mammals
Background
In 1972, Congress enacted the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. §§1361 et
seq.), due in part to high dolphin mortality (estimated at more than 400,000 animals per year) in
the eastern tropical Pacific tuna purse-seine fishery. 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, supporters note that the MMPA has accomplished
much by way of promoting research and increased understanding of marine life as well as
Congressional Research Service
24
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
encouraging attention to incidental bycatch mortalities of marine life by commercial fishing and
other maritime industries.
The MMPA established a moratorium on the “taking” of marine mammals in U.S. waters and by
U.S. nationals on the high seas. It also established a moratorium on importing marine mammals
and marine mammal products into the United States. The MMPA 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 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 MMPA, the Secretary of Commerce, acting through NMFS, is responsible for the
conservation and management of whales, dolphins, and porpoises (cetaceans), and seals and sea
lions (pinnipeds). 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 MMPA 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 MMPA.
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 MMPA. 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 taking 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 a negligible impact on any marine
mammal species or stock, provided that monitoring requirements and other conditions are met.
The MMPA moratorium on taking does not apply to any Native American (Indian, Aleut, or
Eskimo) who resides in Alaska near the coast of the North Pacific (including the Bering Sea) or
Arctic Ocean (including the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas), if such taking is for subsistence or for
creating and selling authentic Native articles of handicrafts and clothing, and is not done
wastefully.
The MMPA also authorizes the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing
operations. The eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery initially was excluded from the incidental
take regimes. Instead, the taking of marine mammals incidental to that fishery is governed by
separate provisions of the MMPA, and was substantially amended in 1997 by the International
Dolphin Conservation Program Act.
More recently, Section 319 of P.L. 108-136 amended the MMPA in 2003 to provide a broad
exemption for “national defense” activities. This section also amended the definition of
“harassment” of marine mammals, as it applies to military readiness activities, to require greater
scientific evidence of harm, and the consideration of impacts on military readiness in the issuance
Congressional Research Service
25
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
of permits for incidental takings.39 The Navy’s use of mid-frequency sonar and its possible effects
on marine mammals has been the focus of much controversy and litigation.40
Marine Mammal Protection Act Reauthorization
The MMPA was reauthorized 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. This
reauthorization also included amendments providing for developing and implementing take-
reduction plans for stocks that have been reduced or are being maintained below their optimum
sustainable population levels due to interactions with commercial fisheries, and for studying
pinniped-fishery interactions.41
A December 2008 study by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that limitations
in information available make it difficult for NMFS to accurately determine which marine
mammal stocks meet the statutory requirements for establishing take reduction teams.42 GAO
found that NMFS did not have a human-caused mortality estimate or a maximum removal level
for 39 of 113 (35%) marine mammal stocks, making it impossible to determine their strategic
status in accordance with MMPA requirements. For the remaining 74 stocks, NMFS data have
significant limitations that call their accuracy into question. NMFS contends that funding
constraints limit their ability to gather sufficient data. In addition, NMFS has not established take
reduction teams for 14 marine mammal stocks for which NMFS data show them to be strategic
and interacting significantly with commercial fisheries.
Legislation has been introduced in the 112th Congress to address several issues related to the
MMPA. On October 17, 2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources held an oversight field
hearing in Seattle, WA, on the scientific basis for NMFS fisheries restrictions to protect Steller
sea lions.
• H.R. 990 would amend MMPA to allow the importation of polar bear trophies
taken in sport hunts in Canada. H.R. 991, Title III of H.R. 4089, S. 1066, and
Section 102 of S. 3525 would amend MMPA to allow imports of polar bear
trophies taken in sport hunts in Canada before the date the polar bear was
determined to be a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. On
May 12, 2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries,
Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 991. On December
1, 2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources reported (amended) H.R.
39 For more background, see CRS Report RS22149, Exemptions from Environmental Law for the Department of
Defense (DOD), by David M. Bearden.
40 For more background, see CRS Report RL34403, Whales and Sonar: Environmental Exemptions for the Navy’s Mid-
Frequency Active Sonar Training, by Kristina Alexander, and CRS Report RL33133, Active Military Sonar and Marine
Mammals: Events and References, by Eugene H. Buck and Kori Calvert.
41 For more background and information on the 1994 amendments, see out-of-print CRS Report 94-751 ENR, Marine
Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994, by Eugene H. Buck, available from the author at gbuck@crs.loc.gov.
42 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Improvements Are Needed in the Federal Process Used to Protect Marine
Mammals from Commercial Fishing, GAO-09-78 (December 8, 2008). Available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/
d0978.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
26
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
991 (H.Rept. 112-308). On April 13, 2012, the House Committee on Natural
Resources reported (amended) H.R. 4089 (H.Rept. 112-426, Part I); the House
passed this measure on April 17, 2012. Section 2(d)(2)(B) of S. 2062 would
amend the MMPA to delete enforcement authority under the Lacey Act for polar
bear management.
• H.R. 946 and H.R. 3069 would amend MMPA to authorize NOAA to issue one-
year permits to Washington and Oregon and four Columbia River treaty tribes for
the “lethal taking” of sea lions, seeking to reduce marine mammal predation on
endangered Columbia River salmon; on June 14, 2011, the House Natural
Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held
a hearing on H.R. 946. On December 8, 2011, the House Committee on Natural
Resources reported H.R. 3069 (H.Rept. 112-322). On June 19, 2012, the House
passed H.R. 2578 after amending this measure to include the language of H.R.
3069 as Title VII.
• Section 3(a) of H.R. 840 and Section 195(a)(2) of H.R. 4301 would allow certain
offshore drilling operations to proceed without further review under the MMPA.
Section 101 of H.R. 909/H.R. 3302 would declare the Draft Proposed Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing Program 2010-2015 to be fully
compliant with MMPA; on May 31 and June 3, 2011, the House Energy and
Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power held hearings on H.R. 909.
• Section 305(a) of S. 52 would amend the MMPA to authorize appropriations
thorough FY2013 to study of the effect of intentional encirclement (including
chase) on dolphins incidentally taken in purse seine fishing for yellowfin tuna in
the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean. On January 26, 2012, the Senate Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported this bill (S.Rept. 112-132).
• S. 1453 and H.R. 2714 would amend MMPA to allow the transport, purchase,
and sale of pelts of—and handicrafts, garments, and art produced from—South
Central and Southeast Alaska northern sea otters that are taken for subsistence
purposes. On October 25, 2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on
Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 2714.
• Section 142(6) of H.R. 4301 would direct NOAA and FWS to assign employees
to regional offices to coordinate review of federal permits for oil and gas projects
on federal lands onshore and on the OCS, with expertise in MMPA
authorizations.
• H.R. 594 would establish a jobs creation grant program to support cooperative
research to collect data to improve marine mammal stock assessments; on
December 1, 2011, the House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on
this bill.
• Section 3 of H.R. 332 would require compliance by all federal defense agencies
with certain environmental laws, including MMPA.
• S. 1402 would amend MMPA to increase the maximum penalty for violating that
act.
Congressional Research Service
27
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Additional Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Legislation has been introduced in the 112th Congress to address several other issues related to
marine mammals generally.
Habitat
S. 203 and Section 106 of H.R. 3757 would direct NOAA to research oil spill prevention and
response in the Arctic waters, including assessment of impacts on Arctic marine mammals, and
amend the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to provide specific funding for rescue, rehabilitation, and
recovery of marine species, including marine mammals. Section 224 of H.R. 501/H.R. 1870
would amend Section 20 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act relating to determining the
cumulative impacts on marine mammal species and stocks and their subsistence use. Section 4 of
S. 2147/S. 2154 would establish an Arctic Ocean Research, Monitoring, and Observation
Program to offer grants for research and monitoring of Arctic marine mammals, including their
responses to loss of sea ice habitats and reactions to disturbance. S. 1991 would establish a
National Endowment for the Oceans.
Whaling
S. 3262 and H.R. 5898 would amend the Whaling Convention Act to require the Secretary of
Commerce to authorize aboriginal subsistence whaling as permitted by the regulations of the
International Whaling Commission and to set aboriginal subsistence catch limits for bowhead
whales in the event the Commission fails to adopt such limits. H.Res. 714 would stress the
importance of continued U.S. leadership in whale conservation and restate U.S. opposition to
commercial whaling. H.R. 6145 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide
preservation and interpretation assistance for the New Bedford Whaling National Historical Park
in Massachusetts.
Sea Otters
H.R. 4043 would establish special management areas for southern sea otters to accommodate
military readiness activities, and declare that incidental take restrictions under MMPA and ESA
are not applicable in these areas during military readiness activities; on April 19, 2012, the House
Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held a
hearing on this bill; on July 17, 2012, the House Committee on Natural Resources reported
(amended) this bill (H.Rept. 112-606, Part I). On May 18, 2012, the House passed H.R. 4310
after amending this measure to include the language of H.R. 4043 in Section 316.
Polar Bears
H.R. 39 would delist the polar bear as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of
1973.
Miscellaneous Marine Mammal Issues
Section 34 of H.R. 235, Section 506(b)(21) of H.R. 408/S. 178, Section 3 of S. 475, and Section
2(a)(31) of H.R. 1891 would repeal exchange programs for Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians,
Congressional Research Service
28
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
and their historical whaling and trading partners in Massachusetts in Subpart 12 of Part D of Title
V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; on June 14, 2011, the House
Committee on Education and the Workforce reported H.R. 1891, amended (H.Rept. 112-106).
H.Res. 80 would express the sense of the House in support of the goals and ideals of National
Marine Awareness Day, celebrating the diversity of marine wildlife and the richness of marine
ecosystems.
Appropriations
Appropriations also play an important role in federal fisheries management, providing funds for
various programs and initiatives. In addition, appropriations bills have served as vehicles for
some changes in MSFCMA provisions.
National Marine Fisheries Service
For NMFS, funding for fisheries and marine mammal programs including management under the
MSFCMA is provided within NOAA’s Operations, Research, and Facilities (OR&F) Account.
(See Table 1.) NMFS employs more than 2,800 scientists, policy analysts, engineers, boat
captains, computer modelers, statisticians, enforcement officers, secretaries, fisheries managers,
economists, and various other skilled workers to implement its programs. Appropriations issues in
the 112th Congress might include not only what level of funding is adequate to implement the
programs required by law, but also what levels of funding might be provided for alleviating the
effects of disasters on fisheries and how much funding should be provided to restore salmon
habitat and promote the recovery of endangered and threatened salmon stocks.
The Administration’s FY2012 budget request was released on February 14, 2011. On March 31,
2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular
Affairs held an oversight hearing on spending for NMFS and the President’s FY2012 budget
request for this agency. On July 20, 2011, the House Committee on Appropriations reported its
FY2012 Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations bill, H.R. 2596 (H.Rept. 112-169), proposing
significantly lower funding of many NMFS programs. Under the committee’s proposal, funding
for NMFS programs would have been reduced by $267 million (-26%) from the FY2011 enacted
funding and $250 million (-25%) from the Administration’s FY2012 request. Major changes
included a reduction in funding for catch share programs of $22 million (-50%) below FY2011
funding and $32 million (59%) below the Administration’s FY2012 request. Funding for fish
stock assessments would have been increased by $10.4 million (19%) above FY2011 funding,
although it was $3.4 million (-5%) below the Administration’s FY2012 request. On September
15, 2011, the Senate Committee on Appropriations reported S. 1572 (S.Rept. 112-78), proposing
that FY2012 funding for NMFS programs be reduced by $124 million (-12%) from that proposed
by the Administration, although the Senate Committee recommendation was $126 million (17%)
larger than the House-passed measure to fund NMFS programs. On November 1, 2011, the
Senate passed H.R. 2112, amended to include the language of S. 1572 as well as direction that the
National Aquatic Animal Health Task Force establish an infectious salmon anemia research
program. On November 14, 2011, a conference committee report was filed on H.R. 2112 (H.Rept.
112-284). On November 18, 2011, President Obama signed P.L. 112-55 (H.R. 2112) into law.
Congressional Research Service
29
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Table 1. NMFS Appropriations, FY2011-FY2013
(in thousands of dollars)
FY2011
FY2012
FY2012
FY2013
FY2013
FY2013
Enacted
Request
Enacted
Request
Sen Rpt
Hse Psd
Fisheries 506,684
550,295
490,673
491,491 495,764 481,516
Protected Species
199,447
216,581
176,451
170,041 184,347 154,234
Habitat Conservation
49,812
53,600
43,187
35,987 43,678 29,388
Enforcement
105,619
106,207
107,899
110,289 110,289 110,289
Surveillance
Admin. Efficiency
(16,271)
Initiative
Undistributed
(24,000)
Reduction
Cong.-Directed
33,418
Projects
SUBTOTAL
894,980
910,412
794,210
807,808 834,078 775,427
(OR&F)
Procurement,
0
0
0
0 0 0
Acquisition,
Construction
Pacific Coastal
80,000
65,000
65,000
50,000 65,000 65,000
Salmon Recovery
Other Accounts
42,420
25,142
16,025
17,284 350 350
TOTAL 1,017,400
1,001,104
875,235
875,092 899,428 840,777
Sources: Budget Justifications, House and Senate Committee Reports, and floor debate.
The Administration’s FY2013 budget request was released on February 13, 2012.43 The
Administration is proposing that FY2013 funding for NMFS in NOAA’s OR&F account increase
about $13.6 million (+1.7%) above the FY2012 enacted funding. This is offset by a proposed
reduction of $15 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund. On April 19, 2012, the
Senate Committee on Appropriations reported S. 2323, proposing to increase NMFS funding in
NOAA’s OR&F account by $26.3 million (3.3%) more than the Administration request and $39.9
million (5.0%) more than was enacted for FY2012 (S.Rept. 112-158). On May 2, 2012, the House
Committee on Appropriations reported H.R. 5326, proposing to decrease NMFS funding in
NOAA’s OR&F account by $32.4 million (-4.0%) below the Administration request and $18.8
million (-2.4%) below the amount enacted for FY2012 (H.Rept. 112-463). On May 10, 2012, the
House passed H.R. 5326 (amended); it proposes NMFS funding for FY2013, but would prohibit
FY2013 funding for (1) a new limited access privilege program for any fishery under the
jurisdiction of Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico fishery management councils; (2) a National Ocean
Policy; (3) implementation of a proposed rule for turtle excluder devices; (4) the salary of any
officer or employee who uses the Fisheries Enforcement Asset Forfeiture Fund for any purpose
other than specifically authorized; and (5) reintroduction of California Central Valley Spring Run
Chinook salmon.
43 The Department of Commerce “Budget in Brief” is available at http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY13BIB/
fy2013bib_final.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
30
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Fish and Wildlife Service
Within the FWS budget, an account for “fisheries and aquatic resource conservation” includes
funding for the National Fish Hatchery operations, aquatic invasive species programs, and marine
mammal programs. (See Table 2.) These programs employ about 800 individuals, located at 70
National Fish Hatcheries, 65 Fish and Wildlife Conservation Offices, 1 historic National Fish
Hatchery, 9 Fish Health Centers, and 7 Fish Technology Centers.
The Administration’s FY2012 budget request was released on February 14, 2011.44 The decrease
in the FY2012 request came primarily from a decrease of $11,609,000 proposed for the National
Fish Hatchery System. On March 2, 2011, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on
Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs held an oversight hearing on Department of the
Interior spending for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the President’s FY2012 budget
request for the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Table 2. FWS Appropriations, FY2010-FY2013
(in thousands of dollars)
FY2011
FY2011
FY2012
FY2012
FY2013
FY2013
Request
Enacted
Request
Enacted
Request
Hse Rpt
Fisheries and Aquatic
142,477
138,939
136,012 135,317 131,607 127,170
Resource Conservation
Sources: Budget justifications, House and Senate Committee Reports, and floor debate.
On July 19, 2011, the House Committee on Appropriations reported its FY2012 Interior
appropriations bill, H.R. 2584 (H.Rept. 112-151), proposing significantly lower funding for many
FWS programs, including Fisheries and Aquatic Resource Conservation. Under the committee’s
proposal, funding for FWS Fisheries and Aquatic Resource Conservation programs would have
been reduced by $10.6 million (8%) from funding enacted for FY2011 and by $7.7 million (6%)
from the Administration’s FY2012 request. On December 15, 2011, a conference report was filed
on H.R. 2055, proposing FWS appropriations for FY2012 in Division E, Title I (H.Rept. 112-
331). On December 23, 2011, President Obama signed P.L. 112-74 (H.R. 2055), providing almost
$136 million for FWS fisheries and aquatic resource conservation; FY2012 funding is 2.5% less
than the FY2011 enacted amount and 0.4% less than the FY2012 Administration request.
The Administration’s FY2013 budget request was released on February 13, 2012.45 The
Administration is proposing that FY2013 funding for FWS’s Fisheries and Aquatic Resource
Conservation line item decrease by about $3.7 million (-2.7%) below the FY2012 enacted
funding. Most of this reduction would occur for National Fish Hatchery operations. On July 10,
2012, the House Committee on Appropriations reported H.R. 6091, proposing to decrease FWS
funding in their “Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Conservation” account for FY2013 by $4.4
million (-3.4%) below the Administration request and $8.1 million (-6.0%) below the amount
enacted for FY2012 (H.Rept. 112-589).
44 For more comprehensive information on FWS FY2012 appropriations, see CRS Report R41928, Fish and Wildlife
Service: FY2012 Appropriations and Policy, by M. Lynne Corn.
45 The Department of Commerce “Budget in Brief” is available at http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY13BIB/
fy2013bib_final.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
31
Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Issues in the 112th Congress
Marine Mammal Commission
The Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) is an independent agency of the executive branch,
established under Title II of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA; P.L. 92-522). The
MMC and its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals provide oversight and
recommend actions on domestic and international topics to advance policies and provisions of the
Marine Mammal Protection Act. As funding permits, the Marine Mammal Commission supports
research to further the purposes of the MMPA.
The Administration’s FY2013 request for the MMC is $3.1 million, which would represent a
1.9% increase compared to FY2012-enacted funding of $3.0 million. In S. 2323, the Senate
Committee on Appropriations recommends $3.1 million, a 1.9% increase over FY2012-enacted
funding and the same as the Administration’s FY2013 request. On May 2, 2012, the House
Committee on Appropriations reported H.R. 5326, recommending $3.0 million, the same as the
FY2012-enacted funding and 1.8% less than the Administration’s FY2013 request (H.Rept. 112-
463). On May 10, 2012, the House passed H.R. 5326 (amended).
Author Contact Information
Eugene H. Buck
Harold F. Upton
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
gbuck@crs.loc.gov, 7-7262
hupton@crs.loc.gov, 7-2264
Congressional Research Service
32