|Congressional Research Service Reports
Redistributed as a Service of the NLE*
IB10010: Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal Legislation in the 106th Congress
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
September 20, 2000
Fish and marine mammals are important resources in the open ocean
and nearshore coastal areas. A diverse body of laws and regulations
guides the management of these resources by a multitude of federal
Commercial and sport fishing are jointly managed by the federal government and
individual states. States manage fishery resources in inshore waters where 30% to 40% of
the annual U.S. commercial harvest is taken. Beyond state jurisdiction and out to 200
miles, the federal government manages fisheries under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) through the actions of
eight regional fishery management councils. Beyond 200 miles, the United States
participates in a multitude of international agreements relating to specific areas or
Legislation related to commercial and sport fisheries considered by the 105th
Congress and enacted addressed numerous concerns, including regulation of large fishing
vessels, management of the Atlantic striped bass fishery, protection of coral reef
ecosystems, research and control of harmful blooms, and reauthorization of Wallop-Breaux
sport fish restoration funding.
Aquaculture -- the farming of fish, shellfish, and other aquatic animals and plants in
a controlled environment -- is expanding rapidly, both in the United States and abroad. In
the United States, important species cultured include catfish, salmon, crawfish,
shellfish, and trout.
Legislation related to aquaculture considered in the 105th Congress focused
on reauthorizing the National Aquaculture Act (NAA) and promoting private aquaculture
development. A simple reauthorization of the NAA was enacted.
Marine mammals are provided extensive protection under the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) of 1972, as amended. This Act authorizes restricted use ("take") of
marine mammals and addresses specific situations of concern, such as dolphin mortality
primarily associated with the eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery.
Legislation considered in the 105th Congress and enacted related to marine
mammals included proposals to balance dolphin protection in the eastern tropical Pacific
with tuna harvesting, modify regulations applicable to importing polar bear trophies from
Canada (where limited hunting is legal), and provide an exemption from MMPA constraints
for disentangling marine mammals from fishing gear or debris.
Authorization of appropriations for major legislation in this issue area -- the MSFCMA
and the MMPA -- expired at the end of FY1999. Thus, reauthorization and possible amendment
of these laws may be considered in the 106th Congress. In the first session of
the 106th Congress, oversight hearings were held on implementation of various
programs under these major authorities.
(Note that this issue brief references a number of useful Internet sites; these sites
are hot-linked in the online version of this product.)
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
On September 18, 2000, the House passed H.R. 2798, the
Pacific Salmon Recovery Act, by voice vote. On September 12, 2000,
the House passed H.R. 4840, the
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Act, by voice vote. On September 5,
2000, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations reported a recommended
resolution of advice and consent to the ratification of the 1996
Inter-American Convention for the Protection and Conservation
of Sea Turtles (Exec. Rept. 106-18). On August 7, 2000,
President Clinton signed P.L. 106-256
(S. 2327), establishing
a Commission on Ocean Policy. (Members and staff may obtain
daily or weekly summary updates via e-mail providing
current information on marine and freshwater fisheries, aquaculture,
and marine mammal issues by contacting email@example.com and requesting to be added
to the summary distribution list.)
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Commercial and Sport Fisheries: Background
Historically, coastal states managed marine sport and commercial
fisheries in nearshore waters, where most seafood was caught.
However, as fishing techniques improved, fishermen ventured farther
offshore. Before the 1950s, the federal government assumed limited
responsibility for marine fisheries, responding primarily to international
fishery concerns and treaties (by enacting implementing legislation
for treaties; e.g., the Northern Pacific Halibut Act
in 1937) as well as to interstate fishery conflicts (by consenting
to interstate fishery compacts; e.g., the Pacific Marine
Fisheries Compact in 1947). In the late 1940s and early 1950s,
several Latin American nations proclaimed marine jurisdictions
extending 200 miles offshore. This action was denounced by those
within the United States and other distant-water fishing nations
who sought to preserve access for far-ranging fishing vessels.
Beginning in the 1950s (Atlantic) and 1960s (Pacific), increasing
numbers of foreign fishing vessels steamed into U.S. offshore
waters to catch the predominantly unexploited seafood resources.
Since the United States then claimed only a 3-mile jurisdiction
(in 1964, P.L. 88-308 prohibited fishing by foreign-flag vessels
within 3 miles of the coast; in 1966, P.L. 89-658 proclaimed an
expanded 12-mile exclusive U.S. fishery jurisdiction), foreign
vessels could fish many of the same stocks caught by U.S. fishermen.
U.S. fishermen deplored this "foreign encroachment"
and alleged that overfishing was causing stress on, or outright
depletion of, fish stocks. The unsuccessful Law of the Sea Treaty
negotiations in the 1970s provided impetus for unilateral U.S.
The enactment of the Fishery Conservation and Management Act (FCMA) in 1976 (later
renamed the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act after the late Senator Warren
G. Magnuson, and more recently the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (MSFCMA) http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/
after Senator Ted Stevens) ushered in a new era of federal marine fishery management. The
FCMA was signed into law on April 13, 1976, after several years of debate. On March 1,
1977, marine fishery resources within 200 miles of all U.S. coasts, but outside state
jurisdiction, came under federal jurisdiction, and an entirely new multifaceted regional
management system began allocating fishing rights, with priority given to domestic
enterprise. Primary federal management authority was vested in the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the Department of
Commerce. The 200-mile fishery conservation zone was superseded by an Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ), proclaimed by President Reagan on March 10, 1983 (Presidential Proclamation
Eight Regional Fishery Management Councils were created by the FCMA http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/councils/. Councils
members are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce from lists of candidates knowledgeable
of fishery resources, provided by coastal state Governors. The Councils prepare fishery
management plans (FMPs) for those fisheries that they determine require active federal
management. After public hearings, revised FMPs are submitted to the Secretary of Commerce
for approval. Approved plans are implemented through regulations published in the Federal
Register. Together these Councils have implemented 39 FMPs for various fish and
shellfish resources, with 7 additional plans in various stages of development. Some plans
are created for an individual or a few closely related species (e.g., FMPs for
red drum by the South Atlantic Council, for northern anchovy by the Pacific Council, and
for shrimp by the Gulf of Mexico Council). Others are developed for larger species
assemblages inhabiting similar habitats (e.g., FMPs for Gulf of Alaska groundfish
by the North Pacific Council and for reef fish by the Gulf of Mexico Council). Many of the
implemented plans have been amended (one more than 30 times), and three have been
developed and implemented jointly by two or more Councils. The MSFCMA was last
reauthorized in 1996 by P.L. 104-297,
the Sustainable Fisheries Act http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/sfaguide/.
The current authorization expired in FY1999.
Under initial FCMA authority, a substantial portion of the fish catch from federal
offshore waters was allocated to foreign fishing fleets. However, the 1980 American
Fisheries Promotion Act (Title II of P.L. 96-561) and
other FCMA amendments orchestrated a decrease in foreign catch allocations as domestic
fishing and processing industries expanded. Foreign catch from the U.S. EEZ declined from
about 3.8 billion pounds in 1977, to zero in 1992 and subsequent years. Commensurate with
the decline of foreign catch, domestic offshore catch increased dramatically, from about
1.6 billion pounds (1977) to more than 6.3 billion pounds (1993). Total (U.S. and foreign)
offshore fishery landings from the U.S. EEZ increased about 24% between 1977 and 1986-1988
to a peak of 6.65 billion pounds, but declined slightly to stabilize over the next decade.
Today, individual states manage marine fisheries in inshore and coastal waters
(generally within 3 miles of the coast). Interstate coordination occurs through three
regional (Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific) interstate marine fishery commissions, created by
congressionally approved compacts. Beyond state waters, out to 200 miles, the federal
government manages fish and shellfish resources for which FMPs have been developed under
the MSFCMA. Individual states manage fishermen operating state-registered vessels under
state regulations consistent with any existing federal FMP when fishing in inshore state
waters and, in the absence of a federal FMP, wherever they fish.
In 1998, U.S. commercial fishermen landed about 7.2 billion pounds of edible fish and
worth about $3 billion at the dock. Imports supplied another 3.6 billion pounds, worth
almost $8.2 billion. After converting processed imports to comparable landed weight, 47.4%
of the U.S. supply of edible fish and shellfish came from imports in 1998. U.S. consumers
spent more than $49 billion on edible seafood in 1998, with more than $32 billion of that
amount spent in restaurants. Marine recreational anglers caught an estimated 312 million
fish in 1998 http://www.st.nmfs.gov/recreational/database/queries/index.html,
of which the retained catch was about 195 million pounds. In 1996, a nationwide survey
that recreational anglers spent almost $38 billion each year pursuing their sport.
1. Magnuson Act Reauthorization
Background. The MSFCMA was reauthorized in 1996
by P.L. 104-297,
the Sustainable Fisheries Act http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/;
the current authorization for appropriations expires on September
30, 1999. These 1996 amendments established fish conservation
initiatives directing NMFS and regional councils to protect essential
fish habitat, minimize incidental fish bycatch, and restore overfished
stocks. In addition, a host of modifications to regional council
management procedures and federal management policy were enacted.
NMFS contends that implementation of the 1996 amendments has met
many of the Act's objectives http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases99/jan99/noaa99-4.html;
fishing industry and environmental groups have criticized NMFS
and regional council implementation efforts. While environmental
groups have expressed concerns that NMFS and regional councils
have not been as responsive as needed on conservation measures,
fishing industry representatives are concerned that too stringent
an application of conservation measures may cripple commercial
fishing and bankrupt many fishermen. A key issue in any reauthorization
debate in the 106th Congress may be seeking a comfortable
balance between conserving fish and maintaining a viable commercial
Congressional Action. At issue for the 106th Congress will
be the terms and conditions of any provisions designed to reauthorize and amend the MSFCMA
to address the concerns of various interest groups. On April 29, the House Resources
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held an oversight hearing on
the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the economic impact of NMFS regulations. H.R. 1653 proposes to
approve a governing international fishery agreement between the United States and the
Russian Federation; this measure was reported by the House Committee on Resources on June
22, 1999 (H.Rept.
106-195). H.R. 1643
proposes to establish a moratorium on operating large fishing vessels in the north
Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries; no action has been taken on this measure.
However, 3025 of P.L. 106-31 (H.R. 1141) makes
permanent the moratorium (included in P.L. 105-277)
on operating large fishing vessels in the north Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries
until fishery management council action was taken. H.R. 2181 would
authorize the Secretary of Commerce to acquire and equip fishery survey vessels; the House
Committee on Resources reported this measure on July 22, 1999 (H.Rept. 106-251).
would express the sense of Congress regarding shark finning in Pacific waters. The House
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on H.Con.Res. 189 on
October 21, 1999; this measure was reported (amended) on November 1, 1999 (H.Rept. 106-428),
and it was agreed to by the House on November 1, 1999. In addition, H.R. 3078 would direct
NMFS to study the effects of shark finning in the Pacific, while H.R. 3535 would prohibit
shark finning. On June 6, 2000, the House Committee on Resources reported H.R. 3535 amended (H.Rept. 106-650);
later in the day, this bill passed the House by a vote of 390-1. S. 2831 was introduced in
the Senate to address shark finning concerns. H.R. 3059 proposes to
establish a moratorium on all bottom trawling until NMFS completes a study of impacts of
this fishing method and fishery management plans have been modified to address these
impacts; no action has been taken on this measure. H.R. 3331, H.R. 3390, H.R. 4612, H.R. 4773, and S. 1911 would authorize a
vessel buyout program for the swordfish pelagic longline fishery. The Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported S. 1911 (amended) on July
12, 2000 (S.Rept.
106-339); no action has been taken on the other bills. H.R. 3516 would prohibit
pelagic longline fishing in federal waters along the Atlantic coast; the House Resources
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 3331, H.R. 3390, and H.R. 3516 on February 8,
On July 15, 1999, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife,
and Oceans held an oversight hearing on National Marine Fisheries Service's regulations
implementing the Fishery Management Plan for Highly Migratory Species of Atlantic Tunas,
Swordfish and Sharks, specifically as it affects yellowfin tuna. On July 22, 1999, the
House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held an
oversight hearing on the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The
Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Oceans and Fisheries held a hearing on implementation of
1996 amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and
various reauthorization issues on July 29, 1999, as well as field hearings on this
reauthorization in Portland, Maine (September 25, 1999), New Orleans, Louisiana (December
14, 1999), Anchorage, Alaska (January 18, 2000), Seattle, Washington (January 19, 2000),
and Boston, Massachusetts (April 10, 2000). On March 21, 2000, the first MSFCMA
reauthorization bill (H.R.
4046) in the 106th Congress was introduced, followed in the Senate by S. 2832 and S. 2973. For additional
information on reauthorization issues in the 106th Congress, see CRS Report
RL30215 , The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act:
Reauthorization Issues for the 106th Congress.
2. Pacific Salmon
Background. Five species of salmon spawn in
Pacific coastal rivers and lakes, after which juveniles migrate
to North Pacific ocean waters where they mature. Since these fish
may cross several state and national boundaries during their lifespan,
management is complicated http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/salmon/salmon.html.
Threats to salmon include hydropower dams blocking rivers and
creating reservoirs, sport and commercial harvest, habitat modification
by competing resource industries and human development, and hatcheries
seeking to supplement natural production but sometimes unintentionally
causing genetic or developmental concerns. In response to declining
salmon populations in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California,
discrete population units have been listed as endangered or threatened
species under the Endangered Species Act. For background on this
issue, see CRS Report 91-267 ENR, Pacific Salmon and Steelhead:
Potential Impacts of Endangered Species Act Listings, CRS
Report 98-666 ENR, Pacific Salmon and Anadromous Trout: Management Under
the Endangered Species Act, and CRS Issue Brief IB10009,
Endangered Species: Continuing Controversy.
To address some of these concerns, the United States and Canada negotiated a bilateral
agreement on Pacific salmon in 1985. However, by the mid-1990s controversy stalled
renegotiations to adjust cooperative management of these fish, and U.S.-Canada relations http://radio.cbc.ca/news/fish/ became more
antagonistic, including the blockade of an Alaska state ferry by British Columbia
fishermen in Prince Rupert, BC, in July 1997. This deadlock was resolved in June 1999 when
a new accord was concluded. (For additional information on the Pacific Salmon Treaty and
new agreement, see CRS Report RL30234 , The Pacific Salmon Treaty: The 1999 Agreement
in Historical Perspective.)
Congressional Action. Section 582(a) of P.L. 106-53
(Water Resources Development Act of 1999) amends 511 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986 to direct the Army Corps of Engineers to establish a research and development
program for Columbia and Snake Rivers salmon survival, with $10 million in funding
authorized. In addition, 582(b) directs the Corps to accelerate development
"fish-friendly" turbines with $35 million authorized for this purpose.
Furthermore, 582(c) directs the Corps to carry out a program to reduce populations of
fish-eating birds nesting on dredge spoil islands in the Columbia River, with $1 million
authorized for this purpose. Section 515 authorizes the Corps of Engineers to provide
technical planning and design assistance to non-federal parties and/or conduct studies to
design and evaluate fish screens, fish passages devices, and other measures to decrease
the inadvertent entry of fish into irrigation systems. P.L. 106-53 was
signed into law on August 17, 1999. S. 1723 would authorize
the Bureau of Reclamation to undertake projects to address salmon concerns with irrigation
system water diversions; the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's Subcommittee
on Water and Power held a hearing on S. 1723 on October 20,
1999, and the full Committee approved this measure on February 10, 2000. S. 294 and H.R. 1444 propose to
direct the Army Corps of Engineers to develop and implement a comprehensive program for
fish screens and fish passage devices. The House Resources Committee reported H.R. 1444 (amended) on
November 5, 1999 (H.Rept. 106-454,
Part I), and the House suspended the rules, passing this measure on November 9, 1999. The
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources reported H.R. 1444 (amended to
incorporate S. 1723) on
March 9, 2000 (S.Rept.
106-239), and the Senate passed the amended H.R. 1444 on April 13,
2000. No action has been taken on S. 294.
On April 6, 1999, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources' Subcommittee on Water and
Power held an oversight field hearing in Hood River, Oregon, on the process for
determining the future of the four lower Snake River dams. On April 7, 1999, the Senate
Committee on Appropriations' Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies and the House
Committee on Appropriations' Subcommittee on Interior held a joint field hearing in
Seattle, WA, on funding for salmon recovery programs. H.Con.Res. 63
expresses the sense of Congress opposing removal of dams on the Columbia and Snake Rivers
for fish restoration; the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation,
Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on this measure on May 27, 1999; on July 21, 1999, the
House Committee on Resources ordered H.Con.Res. 63
reported. On June 9, 1999, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources' Subcommittee on Water
and Power held an oversight hearing on the process to determine the future of the four
lower Snake River dams and conduct oversight on the Northwest Power Planning Council's
Framework Process. H.R.
1314 and S. 715
propose to protect chinook salmon spawning habitat in the Hanford Reach of the Columbia
River by designating this area as a Wild and Scenic River; no action has been taken on
these measures. H.R. 1759
would create a Hanford Reach National Salmon Preserve and Recreational Area. H.R. 1652 proposes to
establish a Yukon River Salmon Advisory Panel; the House Committee on Resources reported
this measure on June 25, 1999 (H.Rept. 106-201).
S. 1100 would amend the
Endangered Species Act to require the designation of critical habitat for endangered and
threatened species as part of recovery plan development. The Senate Environment and Public
Works Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Drinking Water held a hearing on this
measure on May 27, 1999, and reported it, amended, on July 28, 1999 (S.Rept. 106-126).
S. 1167 would amend the
Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act to expand the scope of the
Independent Scientific Review Panel; a hearing was held on this measure by the Senate
Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power on October 20, 1999. This
measure was reported (amended) by the full Committee on March 9, 2000 (S.Rept. 106-235),
and passed by the Senate on April 13, 2000. On June 23, 1999, the Senate Environment and
Public Works' Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Drinking Water held a hearing on
the plans and procedures of 9 federal agencies in their coordinated effort to promote
salmon recovery. H.R.
2875 proposes to amend the Klamath River Basin Fishery Resources Restoration Act to
provide for tribal representation on the Klamath Fishery Management Council and clarify
allocation of annual tribal catch; no action has been taken on this measure. H.R. 2664 and S. 1525 propose to provide
compensation to the Spokane Tribe in settlement of claims related to Grand Coulee Dam; no
action has been taken on these measures. H.R. 2798 would
authorize the Secretary of Commerce to provide financial assistance to Alaska, Washington,
Oregon, and California for salmon habitat restoration projects. The House Resources
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 2798 on May 18,
2000, and this measure was reported (amended) September 6, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-806).
The House passed H.R.
2798 by voice vote on September 18, 2000. On October 28, 1999, the House Resources
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held an oversight hearing on
the Pacific Salmon Treaty. S.
would authorize $125 million for the Corps of Engineers to coordinate and fund local
efforts to restore salmon habitat in Puget Sound; no action has been taken on this
measure. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power held
oversight hearings to examine federal actions affecting hydropower operations on the
Columbia River system in Washington (April 12, 2000) and in Cascade Locks, Oregon (April
3. Coral Reef Ecosystems
Background. Coral reef ecosystems are viewed
as fragile, unique, and in need of additional protection http://www.coralreef.noaa.gov/. Although
most coral reef ecosystems are outside U.S. jurisdiction, many
seek to encourage protection of these resources and U.S. coral
reefs in Florida, Hawaii, and various island possessions. For
more information, see CRS Report 91-671 ENR, Corals and Coral
Congressional Action. S. 725, the Coral Reef
Conservation Act of 1999, would establish a Coral Reef Conservation Program including NOAA
grants authorized at $3.8 million annually for FY2000-FY2002 . The Senate Commerce
Subcommittee on Oceans and Fisheries held a hearing on S. 725 on June 30, 1999. H.R. 673 and S. 2711, the Florida Keys
Water Quality Improvements Act of 1999, would authorize the Environmental Protection
Agency to make grants to the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority to improve water quality in
the marine ecosystem of the Florida Keys. The House Transportation and Infrastructure
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment held a hearing on H.R. 673 on July 13,
1999, and the bill was reported (amended) on May 2, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-592).
On May 4, 2000, H.R. 673
was passed by the House on vote of 411-7. S. 1253, the Coral Reef
Protection Act of 1999, would authorize $100 million in financial assistance over 5 years
for coral reef conservation projects; the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Oceans and
Fisheries held a hearing on this measure on June 30, 1999. Subtitle B of S. 1420, the Coastal
Stewardship Act, incorporates the coral protection language of S. 1253. No action has
been taken on S. 1420. H.R. 2903, the Coral
Reef Conservation and Restoration Act of 1999, would authorize a grant program to fund
coral reef conservation projects and authorize appropriations to fund this program; the
House Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on this
measure on October 21, 1999. H.R. 3919 proposes
coordination of and assistance for coral reef conservation; this measure was reported
(amended) by the House Resources Committee on July 19, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-762).
S. 1888 proposes
additional support for coral reef protection in lands administered by agencies within the
Department of the Interior; no action has been taken on this measure.
National Marine Fisheries Service. The Administration's
FY2001 budget request for NMFS included $455.4 million in direct
program obligations (FY2000 was $416.5 million); $21.9 million
for procurement, acquisition, and construction; and $179.7 million
in other fisheries-related accounts (including $160 million for
Pacific salmon). NMFS identified an additional $119.5 million
in increases for items supporting the management of living marine
resources and their habitats elsewhere within the NOAA budget,
including $102 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery/Treaty
Fund (see below). Within the NMFS program, the Administration
requests significant increases for Endangered Species Act recovery
plans (+$12.3 million), New England fisheries management (+$6.1
million), fish statistics (+$5.9 million), and coral reefs (+$5
million). NMFS also projects $20 million in transfers from the
Department of Agriculture for Norton Sound (Alaska) fisheries
failure ($5 million) and cooperative research and management in
New England ($15 million). In addition, the Administration pledges
to work with Congress to transfer NMFS's Seafood Inspection Program
to the Food and Drug Administration. NMFS also proposed collecting
$20 million in new fees under the authority of the MSFCMA in FY2001
and transferring $68 million from the Saltonstall-Kennedy account
for NMFS activities.
Pacific Salmon. The Administration's FY2001 budget requests an additional $102
million for salmon recovery and Pacific Salmon Treaty obligations. A total of $60 million
would implement the June 1999 agreement to the Pacific Salmon Treaty, providing $20
million each to the two Restoration and Enhancement Funds and $20 million to Washington
State to complete a salmon license buyback program. The other $42 million in increases
would be part of the Lands Legacy Initiative, to increase state capabilities to assist in
conservation of Pacific salmon (the FY2001 proposal would increase this $58 million
program (FY2000) to a total of $100 million).
Fish and Wildlife Service. The Administration's FY2001 budget request
includes increases for subsistence fisheries on federal lands in Alaska ($11.1 million),
Klamath and Trinity watersheds ($2.8 million), watershed restoration and fish passage
through Partners for Fish and Wildlife ($500,000), the California Bay-Delta project
($500,000), and consultation on Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relicensing decisions
($100,000). Projected decreases include salmon and steelhead recovery in Washington State
(-$3.8 million), salmon and bull trout habitat conservation projects in Washington State
(-$2.1 million), fish health research and surveys (-$1 million), and Alabama sturgeon
($0.4 million). Payments to states under the Wallop-Breaux Sport Fish Restoration Program
are estimated at about $292 million for FY2001 (was slightly more than $305 million in
FY2000 Supplemental. H.R. 3908, as reported (H.Rept. 106-521),
would provide $17.4 million for fishermen harmed by Hurricanes Floyd, Dennis, Georges, and
Mitch and relief for the Long Island Sound lobster fishery disaster. The House passed this
measure on March 30, 2000. No funds were provided for the West Coast groundfish fishery.
No further action was taken on this measure. Subsequently, Title II, Chapter 2 of P.L. 106-246
appropriated disaster assistance and other funding for several fisheries: 1) Hurricane
Floyd and other recent hurricanes ($10.8 million), fishery disasters in the Long Island
Sound lobster fishery ($7.3 million for compensation and assistance, $6.6 million for
research), and the west coast groundfish fishery ($5 million); 2) Pribilof Island and East
Aleutian area of the Bering Sea crab fishery ($7 million disaster assistance; $3 million
for Bering Sea ecosystem research, with $1 million for research to restore the crab
fishery); 3) northeast multispecies fishery capacity reduction program ($10 million); and
4) Hawaiian longline fishery ($2 million for studies of longline interactions with sea
turtles, $5 million for observer coverage).
5. Other Miscellaneous Issues
a. Managing fishing in Glacier Bay National
Park. S. 501 and H.R. 947 would
authorize specific and limited commercial and subsistence fishing
within Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska. Although P.L.
105-277, the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 1999, included a compromise on commercial
fishing in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska, disagreements over
this approach led to 106th Congress efforts to repeal
the earlier action. On April 15, 1999, the Senate Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources held a hearing on S.
501; this measure was reported, amended, on July 29, 1999
106-128), and passed (amended) by the Senate on November 19,
1999. The compromise directs the National Park Service to allow
commercial fishing in the outer waters of the park and requires
the Park Service to study fisheries throughout the park, including
the effect of commercial fishing on park resources. No action
has yet been taken on H.R. 947. Language
was inserted in H.R.
1141 and S.
544, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bills, to compensate
Dungeness crab fishermen for loss of fishing privileges (Section
2319) as well as prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from expending
funds to implement closures or restrictions on subsistence or
commercial fishing in Glacier Bay National Park until questions
concerning the state of Alaska's legal claim to submerged lands
ownership and jurisdiction has been resolved (Section 2328). The
compensation provision was added by Senate floor amendment to
S. 544 on March
18, 1999, and the amended S.
544 passed the Senate on March 23, 1999. Subsequently, the
Senate amended H.R. 1141 to
substitute the language of S.
544, and adding the expenditure prohibition by floor amendment
on March 24, 1999. The Senate passed the amended H.R.
1141 on March 25, 1999 . The conference report (H.Rept.
106-143) filed on May 14, 1999, provided for compensation
of Dungeness crab fishermen in 501, but excluded the Secretarial
prohibition on implementing fishery closures and restrictions.
This measure was signed as P.L. 106-31
on May 21, 1999. In addition, 2303 (Title II, chapter 2) of P.L. 106-246
provides compensation for elements of the Dungeness crab fishery
harmed by Glacier Bay National Park fishing restrictions.
b. Dedicated funding for fishery restoration. S. 446 and H.R. 798 were introduced
to establish a program, using the Land and Water Conservation Fund, to provide substantial
regular funding for a variety of interests, including fishery restoration. In these
measures, Title VI would establish an Ocean Fish and Wildlife Conservation Fund through
which the Department of Commerce would have $300 million annually to allocate in grants to
states as well as public and private persons for conservation, restoration, and management
of ocean fish and wildlife. Title VII would amend the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act
of 1980 to provide $350 million annually to states for the conservation of native fish,
wildlife, and plants. Title VIII would establish an Endangered and Threatened Species
Recovery Fund through which NMFS and FWS would implement a $100 million private landowners
incentive program for recovery of endangered and threatened species and their habitats. H.R. 701, H.R. 3245, H.R. 4377, S. 25, S. 2123, and S. 2181 take slightly
different approaches on the same issues. After a series of hearings, the House Committee
on Resources reported H.R.
701 on February 16, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-499,
Part I). On May 11, 2000, the House passed H.R. 701 by a vote of
315-102. No action has been taken on any of the other measures. For additional information
on these bills, see CRS Report RL30133, Resource Protection and Recreation: A
Comparison of Bills to Increase Funding.
c. Tax provisions. H.R. 2488, the Taxpayer
Refund Act of 1999, as passed (amended) by the Senate on July 30, 1999, contained two
provisions relevant to commercial fishing, while this measure as passed earlier by the
House contained a provision relevant to sport anglers. In the Senate version (retained
from language previously in S.
1429), 604 reinstates income averaging provisions for commercial fishermen; and
605 would allow commercial fishermen to establish a tax-deferred Farm, Fishing, and
Range Risk Management Account to shelter a portion of fishery income. In the House version
of H.R. 2488, 1323
proposed to repeal the excise tax on fishing tackle boxes. A conference report (H.Rept. 106-289)
was filed on August 4, 1999, and was adopted by both the House and Senate on August 5,
1999; the conference agreement includes all three new provisions. However, President
Clinton vetoed H.R. 2488
on September 23, 1999. S.
2203 would provide income averaging for fishermen and allow fishermen to establish
risk management accounts; no action has been taken on this measure. S. 1411 would amend the
Internal Revenue Code to extend the credit for producing electricity from fish oil; no
action has been taken on this measure. S. 2605 would provide
income averaging for fishermen and a $1,500 business credit for purchasing safety
equipment; no action has been taken on this measure.
d. Estuarine habitat. S. 835 and H.R. 1775 would
encourage restoration of estuarine habitat through coordination of federal and non-federal
programs. The Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works held a hearing on S. 835 on July 22, 1999,
and reported this measure on October. 14, 1999 (S.Rept. 106-189).
The Senate passed S. 835,
amended, on March 30, 2000. Hearings were held on H.R. 1775 by the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment (July
13, 1999) and by the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and
Oceans (September 23, 1999). H.R. 1775 was reported
(amended) by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on April 4, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-561,
Part 1) and by the Committee on Resources on June 9, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-561,
Part 2). H.R. 2536
proposes to reduce the risk of oil pollution and improve navigation safety in San
Francisco Bay. No action has been taken on this measure.
e. Chesapeake Bay restoration. H.R. 3039 and S. 492, the Chesapeake Bay
Restoration Act of 1999, propose to amend the Clean Water Act to continue the Chesapeake
Bay Program, providing technical assistance and technical assistance grants to promote
restoration of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. The Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works held a hearing on S. 492 on July 22, 1999,
and reported this measure on October 13, 1999 (S.Rept. 106-181).
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and
Environment held a hearing, prior to referral, on this issue on July 13, 1999. H.R. 3039 was reported
on March 29, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-550),
and passed the House (amended) on April 12, 2000, by a vote of 418-7.
f. Ocean Policy and Restoration. S. 959, H.R. 2425, S. 2327, and H.R. 4410 propose to
establish a National Ocean Council and/or a Commission on Ocean Policy to comprehensively
review U.S. ocean policy. S.
2327 was reported by the Senate Commerce Committee on May 23, 2000 (S.Rept. 106-301).
This measure was passed (amended) by the Senate on June 26, 2000, and passed by the House
on July 25, 2000. President Clinton signed this measure into law as P.L. 106-256 on
August 7, 2000. H.Res.
415 and H.Res. 440
express the sense of the House that there should be a National Ocean Day to recognize the
significant role the oceans. H.Res. 415 was reported
(amended) by the House Resources Committee on July 10, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-716),
and was passed by the House on a vote of 387-28 on July 11, 2000. S. 2223 would establish a
fund for the restoration of ocean and coastal resources. No action has been taken on this
g. Fishermen and bankruptcy. S. 684, the Fishermen's
Bankruptcy Protection Act, proposes to permit family fishermen to reorganize under Chapter
12 of the Bankruptcy Code in a similar fashion as provided already to farmers. Language of
S. 684 was inserted in S. 625, the Bankruptcy
Reform Act of 1999, on November 9, 1999. On February 2, 2000, the Senate incorporated S. 625 into H.R. 833 as an amendment,
and H.R. 833 was
passed by the Senate. The family fishermen provisions are in 1006 and 1426.
h. Foreign seizure of U.S. fishing vessels. H.R. 1651 proposes to
amend the Fishermen's Protective Act of 1967 to extend the period during which
reimbursement may be made to U.S. fishing vessel owners for costs incurred when their
vessel is seized and detained by a foreign nation. This measure was reported by the House
Committee on Resources on June 23, 1999 (H.Rept. 106-197)
and was passed in the House by voice vote on September 13, 1999. On May 23, 2000, the
measure was reported, amended, by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
106-302). H.R. 1651
passed the Senate, amended, on June 26, 2000.
i. Pfiesteria. S. 493, the Toxic
Microorganism Abatement Pilot Project Act, would require the Army Corps of Engineers to
evaluate, develop, and implement pilot projects in Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina
to address problems with harmful toxic organisms in coastal waters and wetlands. No action
has been taken on this measure. H.R. 684 proposes to
amend the Clean Water Act to control water pollution from concentrated animal feeding
operations. No action has been taken on H.R. 684.
j. Colorado River endangered fish. H.R. 2348, S. 1544, and S. 2239 propose
authorizing the Bureau of Reclamation to provide cost sharing for endangered fish recovery
programs for the Upper Colorado and San Juan River Basins. The Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on S. 2239 on April 25, 2000.
On June 7, 2000, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee ordered S. 2239 reported
(amended). The House Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on H.R. 2348 on October 21,
1999; this measure was reported (amended) by the House Resources Committee on July 25,
106-791), and passed by the House later that day.
k. Commercial fishing vessel safety. H.R. 820 would authorize
$5.5 million for the U.S. Coast Guard's commercial fishing vessel safety program. This
measure was reported, amended, on March 11, 1999, by the Committee on Transportation (H.Rept. 106-51),
and passed (amended) by the House on March 17, 1999. In the Senate, S. 1089 would rename and
reauthorize the Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel Safety Advisory Committee through
FY2005. This measure was reported May 23, 2000 (S.Rept. 106-300)
and, on July 27, 2000, the language of S. 1089 was inserted into H.R. 820 and H.R. 820, as amended, was
passed by the Senate, in lieu of S. 1089.
l. Sea lamprey control in the Great Lakes. Section 506 of P.L. 106-53
amends 1135(c) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 to clarify that use of the
authority under this subsection for control of sea lamprey at any Great Lakes basin
location is appropriate. P.L. 106-53 was
signed into law on August 17, 1999.
m. Georges Bank oil exploration. S.Res. 167 proposes
commendation of the Georges Bank Review Panel for recommending extension of the moratorium
on oil and gas exploration on Georges Bank and of the Government of Canada for extending
the moratorium. No action has been taken on this measure.
n. Sport fish restoration. H.R. 3671 and S. 2609 would amend the
Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act to address concerns about administration of
these accounts. H.R. 3671
was reported (amended) on March 30, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-554),
and passed by the House on April 5, 2000, by a vote of 423-2.
o. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. H.R. 4010 and S. 1653 propose to amend
and reauthorize the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Establishment Act. S. 1653 was reported by
the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works on March 6, 2000 (S.Rept. 106-230)
and passed by the Senate on March 9, 2000.
p. FERC licensing changes. H.R. 2335 proposes to
modify the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's hydroelectric relicensing process,
possibly affecting prescriptions for fishways issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Hearings were held on H.R. 2335 by the House
Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power on March 30, 2000.
q. Federal government structure. H.R. 2452 proposes to
eliminate the Department of Commerce and establish an independent National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration. No action has been taken on this measure.
r. Missouri River fish habitat. S. 1279 proposes to grant
the Army Corps of Engineers additional authority to protect, enhance, and restore fish
habitat on the Missouri River. No action has been taken on this measure.
s. Invasive Species. H.R. 4191 would require
regulations to enforce ballast water transfer procedures to protect the Great Lakes from
invasive species; no action has been taken on this measure.
t. Habitat and Water Quality. H.R. 4278 and S. 2441 would establish a
voluntary community incentive-based program to improve fish habitat and water quality; no
action has been taken on either measure.
u. Double-crested cormorants. H.R. 3118 would direct
the Secretary of the Interior to issue regulations authorizing states to establish hunting
seasons for double-crested cormorants; no action has been taken on this measure.
v. Sport fishing licenses. H.R. 3810 would permit
persons 62 and older to fish navigable waters without a license; no action has been taken
on this measure.
w. Striped bass. H.R. 934 would prohibit
the commercial harvest of Atlantic striped bass; no action has been taken on this bill. H.R. 4408 would
reauthorize the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act; this measure was reported by the
House Resources Committee on June 26, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-698),
and passed the House later that day by a vote of 393-12.
x. Crop insurance. Sec. 132 of P.L. 106-224
incorporated a Senate amendment to the Federal Crop Insurance Act to create a pilot
program to insure wild salmon fishermen for harvest failure risks beginning in FY2002 and
limited to no more than $1 million.
y. Atlantic cooperative fisheries. H.R. 4840 would
reauthorize and amend the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act. This
measure was reported (amended) by the House Resources Committee on September 6, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-804),
and passed by voice vote in the House on September 12, 2000.
z. North Pacific Marine Research Institute. Section 2204 of Title II,
Chapter 2, P.L.
106-246 establishes a North Pacific Marine Research Institute to be administered at
the Alaska SeaLife Center, Seward, Alaska.
aa. Capital Construction Fund. S. 2960 would
provide for qualified withdrawals from the Capital Construction
Fund for fishermen leaving the industry and rollover of funds
to individual retirement plans. No action has been taken on this
Aquaculture: Background and Issues
Aquaculture is broadly defined as the farming or husbandry of
fish, shellfish, and other aquatic animals and plants, usually
in a controlled or selected environment. The diversity of aquaculture
is typified by such activities as: fish farming, usually applied
to freshwater commercial aquaculture operations (catfish and trout
farms are examples http://www.usda.gov/nass/pubs/stathigh/1998/lv-aq.htm);
shellfish and seaweed culture; net-pen culture, used by the salmon
industry wherein fish remain captive throughout their lives in
marine pens built from nets; and ocean ranching, used by the Pacific
Coast salmon industry which cultures juveniles, releases them
to mature in the open ocean, and catches them when they return
as adults to spawn. Fish hatcheries are government and commercial
aquaculture facilities that raise fish for recreational and commercial
stocking as well as for mitigation of aquatic resource and habitat
damage [ http://aquanic.org/].
The United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization has characterized aquaculture as
one of the world's fastest growing food production activities. World aquaculture
more than doubled in 10 years, from about 10 million metric tons in 1984 to a record 25.5
million metric tons in 1994, with a value of approximately $40 billion. U.S. aquaculture,
until recently and with a few exceptions, has been considered a minor industry. By 1994,
the U.S. aquaculture industry produced about 0.3 million metric tons http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/erssor/livestock/ldp-aqs/1998/aquaculture_outlook_03.05.98
with a farm gate value of $751 million. For more information, see CRS Report 97-436 ENR, Aquaculture
and the Federal Role.
1. Miscellaneous Issues
a. Stuttgart Research Center. S. 1340 and H.R. 2972 propose
to rename the Stuttgart National Aquaculture Research Center as
the Harry K. Dupree Stuttgart National Aquaculture Research Center.
Language to accomplish this renaming was incorporated in 754
of P.L. 106-78
(FY2000 agriculture appropriations).
b. Grants for Coordinated State Regulation of Aquaculture. H.R. 1110 and H.R. 2669 propose to
amend the Coastal Zone Management Act to allow Coastal Zone Enhancement Grants to fund the
development of a coordinated process among State agencies to regulate and issue permits
for aquaculture facilities. Prior to introduction, hearings were held by the House
Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans on February 25,
1999. H.R. 2669 was
reported by the Committee on Resources on November 18, 1999 (H.Rept. 106-485).
c. Fort Peck Lake Hatchery. S. 2027 would authorize
the Army Corps of Engineers to design and construct a warm water fish hatchery at Fort
Peck Lake, MT; no action has been taken on this measure.
d. Stormwater exemption. H.R. 3625 and
S. 2139 would
exempt aquaculture facilities from permit requirements under the
Clean Water Act's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System;
no action has been taken on these measures.
Marine Mammals: Background and Issues
Due in part to the high level of dolphin mortality (estimated
at more than 400,000 animals per year) in the eastern tropical
Pacific tuna purse-seine fishery, Congress enacted the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) in 1972. The Act established a moratorium
on the "taking" of marine mammals in U.S. waters and
by U.S. nationals on the high seas. The Act also established a
moratorium on importing marine mammals and marine mammal products
into the United States. This Act protected marine mammals from
"clubbing, mutilation, poisoning, capture in nets, and other
human actions that lead to extinction." It also expressly
authorized the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of the
Interior to issue permits for the "taking" of marine
mammals for certain purposes, such as scientific research and
Under the Act, the Secretary of Commerce, acting through NMFS, is responsible for the
conservation and management of whales, dolphins, porpoises, seals, and sea lions]. The
Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), is
responsible for walruses http://species.fws.gov/bio_walr.html,
sea and marine otters, polar bears http://species.fws.gov/bio_pola.html,
and dugongs. This division of authority derives from agency responsibilities as they
existed when the MMPA was enacted. Title II of the Act established an independent Marine
Mammal Commission (MMC) and its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals to
oversee and recommend actions necessary to meet the requirements of the Act.
Prior to passage of the MMPA, states were responsible for marine mammals on lands and
in waters under their jurisdiction. The MMPA shifted marine mammal management authority to
the federal government. It provides, however, that management authority, on a
species-by-species basis, could be returned to states that adopt conservation and
management programs consistent with the purposes and policies of the Act. It also provides
that the moratorium on taking can be waived for specific purposes, if the taking will not
disadvantage the affected species or population. It provides that 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. It allows U.S.
citizens to apply for and obtain authorization for the take of small numbers of mammals
incidental to activities other than commercial fishing (e.g., offshore oil and
gas exploration and development) if the taking would have no more than a negligible impact
on any marine mammal species or stock, provided that monitoring requirements and other
conditions are met.
The Act's moratorium on taking does not apply to any Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo who
resides in Alaska and who dwells on the coast of the North Pacific or Arctic Ocean if such
taking is for subsistence purposes or for creating and selling authentic Native articles
of handicrafts and clothing, and is not done wastefully.
The Act also authorizes the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing
operations. In 1988, most U.S. commercial fish harvesters were exempted from otherwise
applicable rulemaking and permit requirements for a 5-year period, pending development of
an improved system to govern the incidental taking of marine mammals in the course of
commercial fishing operations. This exemption expired at the end of FY1993, and was
extended several times until new provisions were enacted by P.L. 103-238,
which reauthorized the MMPA through FY1999. The eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery was
excluded from the incidental take regimes enacted in 1988 and 1994. Instead, the taking of
marine mammals incidental to that fishery is governed by separate provisions of the Act,
as substantially amended by P.L. 105-42, the
International Dolphin Conservation Program Act.
1. Marine Mammal Protection Act Reauthorization
Background. The MMPA was reauthorized in 1994
by P.L. 103-238,
the Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994, with the
current authorization for appropriations expiring on September
30, 1999. The 1994 amendments indefinitely authorized the taking
of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing operations
and provided for assessment of marine mammal stocks in U.S. waters,
for the development and implementation of take reduction plans
for stocks that may be reduced or are being maintained below their
optimum sustainable population levels due to interactions with
commercial fisheries, and for studies of pinniped-fishery interactions
For more on the 1994 amendments, see CRS Report 94-751 ENR, Marine
Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994.
Congressional Action. At issue for the 106th Congress will
be the terms and conditions of any provisions designed to reauthorize and amend the MMPA
to address the concerns of various interest groups. H.R. 1934 and S. 1216 propose to amend
the MMPA to establish a Marine Mammal Rescue Grant Program; the House Resources
Subcommittee on Fisheries conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 1934 on June 10,
1999, and this measure was reported, amended, on July 20, 1999 (H.Rept. 106-242).
The House passed H.R.
1934 by voice vote on September 27, 1999. No action has been taken on S. 1216. The House
Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a general
oversight hearing on the Marine Mammal Protection Act on June 29, 1999. For additional
information on potential reauthorization issues in the 106th Congress, see CRS
Report RL30120 , Marine Mammal Protection Act: Reauthorization Issues for the 106th
2. Miscellaneous Issues
a. Tax deduction for subsistence whaling.
Both H.R. 813 and
S. 713 propose
to amend the Internal Revenue Code to allow a charitable contribution
deduction for certain expenses incurred by whaling captains in
support of Native Alaskan subsistence whaling. On July 21, 1999,
the language of S.
713 was added as 806 of S.
1429, the Taxpayer Refund Act, being marked up by the Senate
Committee on Finance. This measure was reported on July 26, 1999
106-120), and passed by the Senate, amended, on July 30, 1999.
Subsequently, the text S. 1429 was inserted
into H.R. 2488, the
Taxpayer Refund Act of 1999, which was passed in lieu of S. 1429. A conference
106-289) was filed on August 4, 1999, and was adopted by both
the House and Senate on August 5, 1999; the conference agreement
included the subsistence whaling provision. However, President
Clinton vetoed H.R. 2488 on
September 23, 1999.
b. Cook Inlet beluga whale protection. Section 2314 of H.R. 1141 proposes to
revoke the Marine Mammal Protection Act exemption permitting subsistence hunting of Cook
Inlet beluga whale through the end of FY2000 unless a cooperative agreement is negotiated
between NMFS and the Cook Inlet Marine Mammal Council. This provision was added by Senate
floor amendment to S. 544
on March 18, 1999, and the amended S. 544 passed the Senate on
March 23, 1999. The Senate amended H.R. 1141 to substitute
the language of S. 544,
and passed the amended H.R.
1141 on March 25, 1999. The conference report (H.Rept. 106-143)
filed May 14, 1999, included this provision as 3022, and this measure was signed as P.L. 106-31 on
May 21, 1999.
c. Pribilof Islands transition. H.R. 3417 proposes to
complete the withdrawal of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration from civil
administration of the Pribilof Islands, Alaska; this measure was reported (amended) by the
House Resources Committee on April 11, 2000 (H.Rept. 106-569),
and passed by the House on June 26, 2000, by a vote of 400-3.
Related public laws and bills are discussed in the text of this
document under "Background and Analysis."
(H.R. 1141); P.L. 106-53 (S. 507); P.L. 106-60 (H.R. 2605); P.L. 106-78 (H.R. 1906); P.L. 106-113 (H.R. 3194); P.L. 106-224 (H.R. 2559); P.L. 106-246 (H.R. 4425); and P.L. 106-256 (S. 2327).
189 (Cunningham); H.Res.
415 (Mink); H.Res.
440 (Mink); H.R. 673
(Deutsch); H.R. 684
(George Miller); H.R. 701
(Young of Alaska); H.R.
798 (George Miller); H.R.
820 (Shuster); H.R.
833 (Gekas); H.R. 934
(Pallone); H.R. 947
(Young of Alaska); H.R.
1110 (Saxton); H.R.
1314 (Dicks); H.R.
1444 (DeFazio); H.R.
1480 (Shuster); H.R.
1643 (Saxton); H.R.
1651 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 1652 (Young of
Alaska); H.R. 1653
(Young of Alaska); H.R.
1759 (Hastings); H.R.
1775 (Gilchrest); H.R.
2181 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 2335 (Towns); H.R. 2348 (Hansen); H.R. 2425 (Farr); H.R. 2452 (Royce); H.R. 2466 (Regula); H.R. 2488 (Archer); H.R. 2536 (George
Miller); H.R. 2664
(Nethercutt); H.R. 2669
(Saxton); H.R. 2670
(Rogers of Kentucky); H.R.
2798 (Thompson); H.R.
2875 (Herger); H.R.
2903 (Saxton); H.R.
3039 (Bateman); H.R.
3059 (Hefley); H.R.
3078 (Faleomavaega); H.R.
3118 (McHugh); H.R.
3245 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 3331 (Saxton); H.R. 3390 (Goss); H.R. 3516 (Sanford); H.R. 3535 (Cunningham); H.R. 3671 (Young of
Alaska); H.R. 3810
(Ney); H.R. 3882
(Inslee); H.R. 3908
(Young of Florida); H.R.
3919 (Saxton); H.R.
4010 (Faleomavaega); H.R.
4046 (Gilchrest); H.R.
4191 (Hoekstra); H.R.
4278 (Tanner); H.R.
4377 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 4408 (Saxton); H.R. 4410 (Saxton); H.R. 4612 (Saxton); H.R. 4773 (Saxton); H.R. 4840 (Saxton); S.Res. 167 (Collins); S. 25 (Landrieu); S. 294 (Wyden); S. 446 (Boxer); S. 492 (Sarbanes); S. 493 (Sarbanes): S. 501 (Murkowski); S. 525 (Grassley): S. 544 (Stevens); S. 684 (Collins); S. 715 (Murray); S. 725 (Snowe); S. 835 (Chafee); S. 959 (Hollings); S. 1089 (Snowe); S. 1100 (Chafee); S. 1167 (Gorton); S. 1186 (Domenici); S. 1217 (Gregg); S. 1253 (Inouye); S. 1279 (Kerrey); S. 1292 (Gorton); S. 1411 (Stevens); S. 1420 (Kerry); S. 1429 (Roth); S. 1525 (Murray); S. 1544 (Allard); S. 1653 (Chafee); S. 1723 (Wyden); S. 1888 (Akaka); S. 1911 (Breaux); S. 2123 (Landrieu); S. 2181 (Bingaman); S. 2203 (Murkowski); S. 2223 (Kerry); S. 2228 (Murray); S. 2239 (Allard); S. 2441 (Bond); S. 2605 (Collins); S. 2609 (Craig); S. 2711 (Graham); S. 2831 (Kerry); S. 2832 (Snowe); S. 2960 (Wyden); and S. 2973 (Kerry).
H.R. 2972 (Berry);
H.R. 3625 (Dickey); S. 1233 (Cochran); S. 1340 (Lincoln); S. 2027 (Burns); and S. 2139 (Hutchinson).
(H.R. 1141) and P.L. 106-113 (H.R. 3194).
H.R. 813 (Young of
Alaska); H.R. 1934
(Saxton); H.R. 2488
(Archer); H.R. 3417
(Young of Alaska): S. 544
(Stevens); S. 713
(Murkowski); S. 1216
(Torricelli); and S. 1429
These CRS reports were produced by the Congressional Research Service, a branch of the Library of Congress providing nonpartisan research reports to members of the House and Senate. The National Council for Science and the Environment (NCSE) has made these reports available to the public at large, but the Congressional Research Service is not affiliated with the NCSE or the National Library for the Environment (NLE). This web site is not endorsed by or associated with the Congressional Research Service. The material contained in the CRS reports does not necessarily express the views of NCSE, its supporters, or sponsors. The information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. NCSE disclaims all warranties, either express or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall NCSE be liable for any damages.