Statement of Administration Policy: S. 39 - Sustainable Fisheries Act

(Senate)
(Stevens (R) Alaska and 7 cosponsors)

The Administration strongly supports the reauthorization of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act in a manner that ensures the continued use and health of the Nation's commercial and recreational marine fishery resources. The Administration supports Senate passage of S. 39, as modified by the draft manager's amendment, but recommends that the concerns outlined below be addressed satisfactorily.

The Administration supports the provisions in S. 39 aimed at: protecting fish habitat through the identification of essential habitat and improved consultations with other agencies; requiring the regional Fishery Management Councils (FMCs) to take action to end overfishing within one year of being notified by the Secretary that overfishing is occurring; rebuilding overfished stocks to their maximum sustainable yield; and reducing the bycatch of nontarget species to the extent practicable.

The Administration is pleased with recent progress made in addressing many of its concerns and, with the adoption of the draft manager's amendment, S. 39 represents an important step forward in protecting the Nation's fishery resources and ensuring their sustainable use. The Administration, however, remains opposed to several provisions of S. 39 as modified by the draft manager's amendment.

The Administration opposes the moratorium on the approval of new individual harvest share programs. The FMCs should be allowed to select, develop, and recommend implementation of the management measures that will be most effective for a specific fishery. Further, the provision in section 207(b), which requires two referenda of affected fishermen concerning harvesting of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico should be deleted. This provision would undermine the FMC system, setting an undesirable precedent, by allowing affected fishermen to vote on conservation measures for a species.

Section 108 of the bill does not provide adequate protections against conflicts of interest on the part of members of the FMCs. S. 39 would allow an FMC member to vote in many situations where the member could derive a significant financial gain from the matter. Concerns raised by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics in a letter to the Senate Commerce Committee of May 28, 1996, have been heightened by the draft manager's amendment.

The prohibition on the Secretary of Commerce's ability to repeal a fishery management plan without approval by a vote of three-quarters of the members of the appropriate FMC raises serious concerns under the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. The Administration urges deletion of the prohibition.

The provision in section 106(b), which would require the Secretary of State to enter into negotiations, under certain circumstances, to secure international agreements to reduce bycatch should be changed to an authorization for such activity. The requirement raises serious constitutional concerns because it interferes with the President's authority to conduct the Nation's foreign affairs.

The Administration opposes section 106(f), which would require the prohibition of certain imports from any country that did not agree to establish standards and measures for reducing bycatch. U.S. trading partners may argue that the provision is inconsistent with international trade obligations, and it would undermine the ability of the United States to make multilateral progress in addressing the problem of bycatch.

Finally, the bill should conform with the requirements of the Budget Enforcement Act; and the bill includes numerous provisions imposing unnecessary requirements on the Secretary and the FMCs. While several requirements were deleted or delayed by the draft manager's amendment, additional requirements should be removed. For example, an advisory panel for each highly migratory species is unnecessary when one panel could cover all such species.