Todays hearing is the first in a series. The laws impact on managing our nations fisheries. Its successes, date, and possible improvements. The committee has announced a field hearing in alaska this month. Morek forward to hearing this fall. I would like to welcome our witnesses. Ccc, and chrise administrator. The last authorization was 11 years ago and created the ccc. It convenes the leadership of the Management Council to discuss common interests. I am pleased to have dr. Quinn to discuss consensus views of the council on the reauthorization. I am also pleased to introduce chris oliver, the first alaskan to permanently hold the position for assistant administrator of fisheries before becoming director. He spent 27 years working at the North Pacific fisheries Management Council, the last 16 as its executive director. As an alaskan, we are thrilled to have you in this important decision. They son his work on the gulf of mexico and experience overseeing the largest best managed fishery in the country, i have confidence under his leadership alaska and americas interest will be well represented in the concerns and perspectives of commercial charter recreational fishermen alike will be valued. For so many of alaskans and their families and so many throughout the country, fishing is a way of life. As i mentioned, our fisheries are by far the largest in the nation. I would like to say alaska is the superpower of seafood, constituting almost 60 of all domestic landings in the country and the of thousands of jobs. In many communities, they are the backbone of the economy. It is my intention to ensure that the next reauthorization guarantees strong coastal communities and alaskan throughout the country. As Congress Considers whether the msa is in need of changes, it is important we not rest on previous gains. The msaast time since was authorized, technology has advanced, yet legislation has not, specifically Data Collection, stock assessments, and other analytical tools to improve the accuracy of fish stock information, better understanding the health of the stocks and how technology can assist in that regard, as well as reducing administrative burdens on our fishing industry are topics right for discussion and possible owns a reauthorization. To thetion as we respond management of fishery resources, we must ensure our nations Fisheries ManagementSystems Support a stable food supply, recreational opportunities, and plentiful fishing and processing jobs that provide for vibrant coastal communities. With that, i want to thank our witnesses for being here and recognize the raking member Ranking Member. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thanks to our witnesses for being here to discuss the important issue of reauthorizing the msa. The original 1976 act reduce exploitive fishing by foreign fleets in u. S. Waters and protected our countries important fishery resources. Have come tome, we understand the importance of sustainably managing fisheries and preserving the incredibly important natural resources. The most recent authorizations have rebuilt fish populations to healthy, sustainable levels to the benefit of coastal communities. Overfishing and overfished populations and we should seek out ways to improve the Management Systems we create. The need to determine what is working, what needs improvement, and ways to improve fishery management is why we are all here today. I regret i cant spend as much as at this hearing this morning as i would like due to a scheduling conflict. That is why we have a hearing record, and i look forward to learning what our expert witnesses share with us. Michigan like the rest of the country is full of hunters and anglers. Every year, 1. 8 million anglersish on the great lakes, and there are 1900 charter boats operating there. Tos activity is estimated have a 7 billion impact on surrounding economy and directly supports 50,000 jobs. While we in michigan are targeting particular fish where we live, many travel to states like florida and alaska to enjoy saltwater fishing opportunities. Michigan also has a robust marine Product Manufacturing industry that depends on vibrant coastal communities and wellmanaged federal fisheries. Finally, michigan like the rest of the country is full of seafood lovers. That theo be assured shellfish we purchase at markets and in restaurants, much of which comes from states like alaska and florida, or is imported from other countries, is responsibly harvested. Our federalnage fisheries matters to the folks in michigan. Legale do about the unreported or unregulated fishing in the waters of other countries and on the high seas also matters a great deal to us. Resources these through Sustainable Management so they can continue to support the businesses and communities that rely on them matters to folks in michigan. The key to Sustainable Management is making sure we are using a sciencedriven process. Fisheries management is complex and needs to account for interactions between different species, between species, and their habitat. Understanding those interactions takes a lot of study and data, which requires a lot of monitoring. Look for wayst to to leverage developments in technology and science to do the critical job of managing our federal fisheries better. Utilizingthering and all of the environmental information necessary can we understand the ocean, the coastal ecosystems, that provide us with is important and natural resource. Chairman, while i understand most freshwater fishery issues are not within the purview of this committee, i have the great a bill call lakes Fishery Research authorization act of 2017. This legislation referred to the committee on environment and public works will solidify the scientific basis upon which fisheries in the great lakes are managed by augmenting current datagathering methods and utilizing new cutting edge technologies. It is my hope that as part of this important msa reauthorization process that we might have some cross polymerization of ideas and approaches to conservation and management between Great Lakes Fisheries and federal saltwater fisheries. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator peters i asked the Ranking Member senator nelson of the Commerce Committee if you would like to make an Opening Statement as well. Mr. Chairman. Just a couple of comments. One of the great things about this committee is the broad jurisdiction that it has. In areas that are so important to the country as a whole. You think about this, the 1970s, there is senator , theren from washington is senator stevens from alaska, and they knew that there was a problem in new england. Overfished, and so they set about to do something about it, and that is more than three decades ago. We are the beneficiaries of the kind of bipartisan effort. Chairman, your state of alaska is one of the most fertile fisheries around. By the way, that is one of the reasons we have one of the most reasons of why we have the u. S. Coast guard up there. Is given the task from the United States navy of protecting our National Security , but it is there to protect that big, big fishing fleet. As it is interesting that the members of the committee, we have a number of members that represent landlocked states. They dont have a direct outlet to the ocean. Yes, you are the great lakes. [laughter] yet, they participate and understand the importance of the Magnuson Stevens act. So thank you for having this hearing. Of course, my state when it recreationalright charter boats as well as commercial fishing, we are known as the capital of the fishing world, and i can speak that sounds more impressive than the superpower of seafood. [laughter] and i can speak for senator great that there is a deal that, from the livelihoods of the people along the gulf, and in the case of the atlantic when senator markey comes back, all up and down the atlantic, that comes from the commercial fishing. The gulf is such an important all types, and we know we have to protect it. Gulfestingly also, the happens to be off of florida, the largest testing and Training Range for the United States military in the world. And so, we have for our national likewise reasons to protect that gulf. I will close by saying that one of the greatest challenges that i saw was when 5 million barrels. F oil were spilled in the gulf that immediately affected the livelihoods of a lot of people, not only in the fishing out any, but also it cut entire season of our Tourism Industry on the gulf coast because people thought that the beaches were covered with oil. Environment, and this committee is particularly suited to protect this kind of ocean environment, and so i am very grateful that you are bringing up for discussion the Magnuson Stevens act. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator nelson. I want to welcome chris oliver. Express myommend and appreciation to secretary ross for the selection of chris. I dont think he could have found a more qualified, capable director. Dr. John quinn, the chair of the Council Coordination committee in northeast fisheries Management Council. You will each have five minutes to deliver a statement. The longer written statement will be included in the record if you so desire. Mr. Oliver, the floor is yours. Oliver is it on . Ive participated in the 1996 and 2006 reauthorization processes in my previous role. While i am wearing a different hat and an administration that has yet to take positions on specific arees, my perspectives built on the success of the Sustainable Management of our fisheries and fisheries across United States. I would like to describe the agencys successes, but i want to focus on challenges that remain. The act has been an outstanding theess in partnership with councils, commissions and other stakeholders, we have ended overfishing in this country and are rebuilding fish stocks across the board, injuring a sustainable supply of seafood for the nation in the future. The magnuson act created broad goals for u. S. Fishery management and the unique Management Structure centered around Regional Councils. I can attest to the value of that system which encourages a process in which fishermen, stakeholders, tribes, and the federal government. Haveng together, they brought back numerous resources in fisheries across our country. I am proud of the accomplishments in alaska where our approach has led them to be widely recognized as one of the most successfully manage fisheries in the world, yet we have challenges remaining. Our west coast groundfish species have rebuilt stocks in arent years, fishermen facing outdated regulations and constraints. We have to find ways to maximize the allowable harvest in all of our fisheries, but do so within our overall longterm conservation goals. Is a case for some of our commercial fisheries and Recreational Fisheries as well. So water Recreational Fishing is among the nations favorite pastimes and a contributor to the economy at all levels. We are pleased to announce we are partnering with the Atlantic Fisheries commission to host a National Summit on saltwater Recreational Fisheries in march 2018. While annual catch limits are a cornerstone of Sustainable Management, we have to recognize managing associated Accountability Measures has been a change for many fisheries. That is the case for commercial and Recreational Fisheries, particularly where harvest data can be difficult to collect and timely reports and are management goals may differ. Additional flexibility and how we apply those Accountability Measures an annual catch limits and rebuilding schedules could expand our collective toolbox and our ability to address many of the issues which have been raised in reauthorization discussions. I can assure you we stand ready to assist in any way we can as those approaches are being considered. Americas seafood industry since a global standard for sustainability, however the majority of the seafood we consume is imported. While there are opportunities to enhance stock and harvest, we believe significant headroom lies in aquaculture production, and we are making Marine Aquaculture Development of priority within the agency through operational and budgetary incentives. Coordination of the regulatory and permitting process is a key area where we can be more effective. With these initiatives and more efficient regulation of our stock, fisheries can position the nation to make inroads on the seafood deficit. The current act works very well for most fisheries. Believe there are opportunities to provide additional flexibility to allow us to more effectively manage some of those fisheries, particularly those that have different challenges or benefit generally from alternative management approaches, although challenges remain. In the near term, overall, the the resources, industries, an economy can be realized as fish populations grow and catch limits increase in the longer term. In that sense, i believe we can have it both ways. I believe we can maximize both come and take opportunities to maximize our domestic harvest potential without compromising the longterm sustainability of the resources we manage. To working with congress throughout this reauthorization process to achieve just that goal. Concludes my opening comments, mr. Chairman, and again, i know there will be questions and will be happy to answer them. Thank you, dr. Oliver. Dr. Quinn. Thank you very my name is john quinn. Im here to testify on behalf of the council and coordinating committee. Public interest programs at the university of massachusetts goal of law is right nextdoor to the port of new bedford, one of the leading fisher ports in the nation. I have been involved in fishery issues for the last 30 years as a lawyer, state legislator, and for the last five years, as a member of the fisheries Management Council. Commercial, recreational, and subsistence fisheries are key contributors to our coastal communities in the nations economy. The council is a cornerstone of the regional system created by the act, and as a group we are strong believers in its benefits. Today will highlight the issues that detail in my statement on three themes come the need for management flexibility, the importance of our public process , and a need for adequate resources. Then he begin with management flexibility. The wide variety of fisheries means that no single solution to management challenges will work in all cases. Createategy should be to a flexible Legal Framework that allows for a wide range of management solutions. This is particular true when it comes to promoting Sustainable Fisheries. To that end, the act requires that a stock must be rebuilt within 10 years. This arbitrary timeline can cause problems. Imagine that every homeowner could only choose a 10year mortgage when purchasing a home. That would work for some, but not for all. I want to make it clear that we do not seek a laminating rebuilding read armen scum the believe targeted changes to the law would enable the development of better rebuilding plans. It is not just the council that has reached this conclusion. Ae issue is highlighted in report by the National Research council in 2014. There is also a need for flexibility at the tactical level. Townsends need to be of the consider a wide variety of management tools without her in some requirements. A. C. L. May not be the best tool to manage fisheries. Most recent these exempted fishing permits to conduct Scientific Research that leads to management solutions. Emt process for the would greatly reduce the ability to get those approved in a timely manner. Fishermen in their communities would suffer as a result. Process,e public clearly a transparent process is critical to maintaining public trust. This need can be met in a variety of ways, but specific requirements lead to additional expenses and ignore the technical difficulties encountered when Holding Meetings in isolated fishing ports. All proposed actions are carefully examine before implementation. Those in theicates act and other applicable laws. We believe alternative analysis should be done within the framework of the act. Experience, the council providing well known, timetested form for resolving fisheries issues. When other statutes are used to develop regulations that limit fishing, that public process often sidesteps. Are promulgated under section 302 of the act to ensure rational management of our fishery resources throughout the range. As to resources, in order to effectively manage fisheries, significant investment is needed at all steps of the process. We rely heavily on data analysis. Reducing stock assessment funds will reduce harvest by u. S. Fishermen, increase imports of foreign seafood. Increasing stock assessment funding, including that needed to collect necessary data, is one of the best investments the administration can make in u. S. Fisheries. Data availability continues to be among the greatest challenges to the management of Recreational Fisheries. s program have catchittle to increase estimates. It does not provide data needed for reliable monitoring for a. C. L. And a. M. Addressing this problem will increase rates, which can only increase funding. We recognize Strategic Planning is necessary, the concern that it creates Unfunded Mandates for the councils. We should fulfill the existing regulatory and management hermans before any new mandates are required. Finally, i believe it is important to acknowledgeds is important to acknowledge the supportive relationship between the councils and National Marine fisheries service. The Regional Office sinners are critical to our process. It is unfortunate that mr. Oliver decided to transfer to the secondbest part of the forwardhip, but we look to working with him in the future. Again, thank you for the opportunity to address the committee and im happy answer any russians. Thank you, dr. Quinn. I like a little rivalry between witnesses here. That is helpful. , senator nelson pointn important about the bipartisan history with regards to the words of this act, and that is my goal as chairman to bring together members on both sides of the aisle when we are looking at reauthorization of the msa. To askhat, i would like both of you and starting with seeoliver, what would you hope to see in the msa reauthorizations . Thinksues you think you are important to address, and what areas of consensus do you think exist possibly and importantly between commercial interests, recreational interests, conservation interests . However you want to answer that question to both of you, that is a key issue and i would like to , a your views on that highlevel issue to begin with. Shotliver i will take a at that. In my previous row, you have heard me testify on behalf of the North Pacific council when i was in that role that the current act is working very well and we did not see the need for changes. I am in a new role now, and as i look at the issue more broadly and i have heard from constituents around the country, i have heard the dialogues that have occurred with regard to some of the ideas that have been submitted or discussed over the past year or two in various reauthorization discussions, and i have come to believe that a lot of the in measures in the acta designed around commercial fisheries, and i think there is a possibility additional flexibilities being considered, whether with ,egard to annual catch limits rebuilding plans, Accountability Measures particularly used to enforce annual catch limits, i think this is particularly true in commercial fisheries, where we dont have quite the stock assessment or Data Collection, catch Accounting Systems that i am used to in my previous role, very robust and very accurate. You are saying those done exist evenly throughout the Different Councils and regions . Mr. Oliver i think that is correct, and across different fisheries. Many Recreational Fisheries are of a nature that they dont lend themselves well to some of those stricter Accountability Measures, and i think there is probably room the more tools we have in our toolbox, and i want speak for dr. Quinn, but i know speaking from my own experience, and again, our administration has not taken positions on the specific actions, so i have to be careful how i answer. I can ask you your personal view. Mr. Oliver my personal view and experience, i think the more tools we have, the better job we can do in many fisheries that , int have robust systems particularly Recreational Fisheries that have a different set of goals objectives for management, so i think there is a lot of room for that kind of flexibility that i think is being considered through this reauthorization process. Dr. Quinn, would you like to address the broad topic . Dr. Quinn this fight the nature of the hearing, we are here to reauthorize msa, not repeal it many aspects are working well. I think a couple of things like mr. Oliver, the issue of data and stockty assessments, particularly the recreational side, is something we have a lot of work to do. Also this level of uncertainty in the stock assessment can also be solved, or at least shrunk, through the purpose of getting more data, so data needs an important and certainty. Recreational, commercial a. C. L. s and a. M. s work for the commercial, not in a surrey recreational. Let me follow up on that point. Theoliver, how does Organization View commercial and Recreational Fisheries in terms of their differences . Are there flexibility provisions in the msa that can address that . Or do we need to look at that as an area of possible reform . I think many of the challenges are similar, but there are some fundamental differences. Issued guidelines in place only for a couple of months, and some of the councils have been able to take advantage of those revisions to the National Standard guidelines come of it i dont think they necessarily fully address some of the problems in some of the regions, and i think those exist for both commercial and for Recreational Fisheries. Lack theases, we fundamental information on stock , in terms of stock assessment, what is in the water and where and the ability through realtime accounting to know what is coming out of the water, and some of those are internal challenges we need to deal with within the existing structure of the act and within the existing structure of our own regulations. I think some of them could benefit from additional flexibility that might be provided through the reauthorization process. Thank you. Senator markey. Thank you, mr. Chairman. For comingthank you down from the bay state. We appreciate all your work chairing the new england fishery Management Council and the regional fishery Management Council coordinating committee, and from your research at dartmouth. You are a master of maritime. Thank you for all your work. Know as well as anybody else datar country that noahs shows Climate Change will have an impact on our oceans and marine life with many species moving north into new areas or deeper waters. It impedes the development of shellfish, lots of populations speciesorth, while some like black sea bass are appearing in greater numbers off the coast of massachusetts. It would be devastating to shell fisheries like we have in and bedford is the highest grossing port in the United States. Landings,e percent of in fact a noah report determined bedford was most at risk in the nation due to Ocean Acidification from Climate Change. Quinn, do, dr. Regional councils have to ensure we can respond to fish stocks that are moving or changing due to Climate Change . I first want to add that new bedford has been the highest grossing port for the last 15 years in a row. Very good news. I think unfortunately we do not have a switch that we can flip and lower the water temperature or decrease the Ocean Acidification. What we can do is collect more data to try and identify trends as you say of fish moving or Ocean Acidification impacting shellfish beds. I think some councils have a lot of data on this. I think others dont, so increasing monitoring is important for us to plan to the future of Climate Change. Where we do our fishing is the fastest body of warming water on the planet. Warming up very fast. Cod need cold water. Lobster need cold water. This water just heats up ever more rapidly, moving the lobstermen further to the north and impacting the fishing community. The southern new england lobster industry has all moved north because of the warming temperatures, and certainly coming up in massachusetts, fishermans nets are fishing species that are not caught up here usually. Acidification does have a profound impact, especially on shellfish. Can you talk about your feeling of the need for more basic research . Absolutely. Possible in the Climate Change area, weve got some great programs of collaborative research, where industry is involved. Important, data, data, data. Other aspects are very helpful for planning purposes. Dr. Oliver, on the question of illegal, unreported, unregulated fishing in the United States, noaa issued its final rule in december of 2016. Can you give us a little bit of an update as to the implementation of the rule and what the pace is for the schedule of implementation in january of 2018. January of 2018 . I apologize if i misunderstand your question. [no audio] specifically on the the seafood fraud question is what im trying to get out. The traceability. The traceability. Yes, sir. Im not an expert on that. I can try to get you more information on where we are without, but that rule was meant to balance the playing field, if you will, between the imposing without, but that rule wasrequin for exporting. En same requirement on imports to ensure that those fisheries are at hearing to a similar standard, so it is leveling the playing field. Theres been a lot of interest in the that same requirement on imports to ensure that rule t rule. I know there has been interest in other aspects of that rule, including shrimp, for example. So many of our imports and the trade deficit based on our imported shrimp. For whatever reasons, we were not able to do that. That is something we will be pursuing in the future. I dont have any more to say on that. If there are more specific questions you have, i would be glad to follow up. For the record, it would be important for us to understand believes the state of play is in regards to fishing. It does harm our domestic fisherman in an extensive way. If you can provide that information, it would be helpful to the council and the committee, as well. Senator wicker . Let me pick up on the line of questioning that chairman sullivan was pursuing during his time. That salt water recreation fishing, you mentioned on page is goingnoaa fisheries to partner with our fisheries to host a National Summit in march of next year on salt water recreation. I have introduced a bill called the modernization recreational Fisheries Management act, which things for saltwater Recreational Fishing. It is cosponsored by Ranking Member nelson, senators blunt, in half, schatz, and klobuchar of this committee. Will you work with congress as the reauthorization in a way that allows success to continue, while also adapting to fix the problems at hand, especially those with Recreational Fishing. I would mention specifically the marine recreational information program, which recreational fishermen believe time limits and accuracy, they believe the program is not designed to monitor short seasons like red snapper. Bill, andooked at my have you looked at the idea of innovation such as mississippis tails and scales electronic reporting system by using s martphones . It is sort of a twopart question. Thank you, senator. Yes. Thank you for the question. Work toutely want to improve those types of information. I have become acutely aware in the short month that i have been here of some of the issues surrounding not just red snapper , but certainly, a lot of focus on red snapper particularly with regard to some of our lessthanperfect satisfaction with some of our stock assessment information, lessthanperfect satisfaction with our program. He, of course, have pending a baseline stock assessment for the red snapper thanks to funding that has been provided. That is going to be an important piece of information. I have heard from a number of constituents. Ive had discussions amongst my own staff over the past two weeks about some dissatisfaction i have heard with the speed with which it is progressing. That program is a work in progress, and i understand some of the frustrations. We have some improvements going from the telephone survey. I have also heard that its not enough, not fast enough, and we are not taking great enough advantage of some of the state Data Collection programs, like the one you referenced. Icouple thoughts on that have made it a priority based on discussions over the past two weeks to prioritize and expedite the certification of those programs. We are using data for many of those programs, and a lot of those are supported, but i have heard loud and clear that we need to expedite the certification of those programs and the use of data in those programs. I believe we need to look around at the technology we have today, smartphone technology. We have to find a way to utilize those technologies to get the information more quickly and more accurately. I know there will be concerns about using that information. Its the apples and oranges problem with tying it to data from the other programs in terms of stock assessments, but i think we are going to make it a priority to do that. Ill so believe that regardless of the implications for stock assessment, if we have a way to get better information today on what fishes are coming out of the water, we need to be using that. I absolutely agree with the provisions, the points that you are making. Ive had a chance to briefly look at the legislation you have introduced, and i think it is consistent seems to be consistent with what we intend to do. Certainly any help and direction you want to provide would be most welcome. My time has expired, so i will ask you on the record about something i was going to explore in this hearing that is aquaculture in federal waters. In 2016, there was a final rule. So far, we havent had any bites because of the expense of permitting process and other regulatory challenges. I think i will ask mr. Oliver to comment on the record, since we about whyd for time, he thinks we havent had anybody apply now that we have a program for aquaculture. If you can take that question for the record for senator wicker, we would appreciate that very much. . Enator inhofe chairman. Ou, mr. Back when i enjoyed life, i was a builder and developer. That was several years ago. Area. However, you are familiar with the different regions. Did i understand in the introduction we got from our chairman, mr. Oliver, that you are from the gulf area . Yes, mr. Chairman. I grew up in rock work, texas. I claim him as a texan. How about that . [laughter] its interesting. You are familiar with the interest i have, and it is to clear some things up. There are a lot of industries. We are interested in the coast. You go out, a number of miles you go out, under state jurisdiction, three miles, and its now nine miles is that correct . Texas is nine miles of the territorial three miles, and its now nine miles is that correct . Texas is nine miles of the territorial sea. At one time was it only three miles . Not my lifetime. Ok. My staff is wrong on that. The jurisdiction we are talking about right now, is that primarily a federal jurisdiction, or are you also overseeing the state jurisdiction, in this case texas, but im sure it would be true in other states . Mr. Chairman, we do not manage inside state territorial waters. We only manage, for example, red snapper outside the state waters. We have to take into account what the states do in their state water seasons in order to which is why we were originally only able to set a threeday season for red snapper in 2017. Obviously, we have implemented regulations that have changed and to whatether extent we can do that in the future remains to be seen. It depends on pending stock assessments. Theres pending litigation. Theres potential legislation you might introduce that could affect what we may do. The shorter answer to your question is, the state would manage what happens within the waters, whether it be three or nine miles, and we have to react and make up the difference on the federal side. That is where that adjustment comes in. Are notusly enthusiastic about publishing a threeday federal sees, but that is where the math left us. We actually did have a threeday season for the entire year . For federal waters, that was the original season for 2017. We have since published a subsequent regulation that extends that season for 39 days. That is being litigated or challenged. I dont know what the outcome of that will be. It may be litigated, but they are doing it right now. Yes, sir. Dr. Quinn, i know you are in a different region. A lot of the same principles apply. When you are making the assessments that mr. Oliver talked about, there are a lot of sources for that. How much do you depend on in terms of recreational users reporting data, and how do you see that. How do you see that . The reason i ask this is because my exposure is to the recreational people. They are the people who feel like they are getting the short end of the stick. I want to see how you view the input. I think recreational fishermen are very important on the east coast in particular. We use data they gather in our assessments. Every Regional Science Center has a way to plug in this recreational data. We are going to make sure that it is highquality data that we plugged in, and our counsel has a great relationship with our recreational industry and will work with them to get additional data. This. Do you do every once in a while, theres no warning, no pretty ability. We have something called the red tide. The red tide comes in and dramatically changes the population. Factors,ose unknown how do you address those in making the assessments that are necessary . Overtime, the impact of that is not going to be able to be seen that day. Created,s a trend theres going to be a decline in stocks. At the time the red tide comes in, you cant really make the assessment. My time is expired, but im very interested in how this of theut in terms federal versus state, and i appreciate that. Thank you, senator inhofe. Senator blumenthal . Thank you for having this hearing. Welcome. I want to express my respect for your long history of being involved in this issue, both academically and in public service. Talked to behave fishing fleets in new england, the men who go out on the water and do this incredibly hard work , the fleets of connecticut and massachusetts and new england have a proud storied history, and they are angry and frustrated beyond words, at least beyond words i can repeat in these chambers. Earthye heard the very epithets that are used to describe the system we have now, and in my view, with profound justification. We have failed the fishermen of new england. That fishing fleet is struggling. The effects of Climate Change have forced the fish north, and its driven other fish from southern areas into our area, but the catch limits have not changed. What they see is that they have all attached to beyond their permissible quota of certain fish. They have to throw them back. Theyve wasted billions of dollars on trash in our oceans annually, and meanwhile, fishermen from Southern States come in to waters and catch their fish. There is something profoundly unfair and on top intolerable about the situation. To me, it violates the present says, any Management Plan shall not discriminate between residents of different states and must allow quotas that are fair and equitable. You said in your testimony that we need more flexibility, but the fishing fleets of new england have run out of patience. I think there is a need for sweeping, radical, immediate change to accommodate the dwindling and dying industry that is essential to our economy. Would you agree . I would agree in part. I like to call the new fishing industry the tale of two industries. Parts of it are booming. From ases, many boats far south as North Carolina, and fish. On this side, you are correct. Its been a tough industry overtime. Some of the catch limits we put in place were based on stock assessments that were performed with the Science Center involved. Its a difficult challenge for the groundfish fleet. For all industries and our fishermen, the prosperity for the South Carolina or North Carolina fishing industry, we wish them well, but they are not doing us any good, very simply. That is the anger and frustration that i feel on their certainly, they feel it even more directly in their towns. We better have answers for them. Agree . Ou i dont disagree, and ive the Council Process is to collect as much data as we can get to have accurate stock assessments. With your state of connecticut, there has been this northerly move of fish in stock, lobsters, and other species. We dont have a simple solution on Ocean Acidification. It is due to Climate Change. I agree. I would respectfully suggest that the data is there. The facts are known. There is clearly a need to change the system, and my time is going to expire. I have a question for mr. Oliver. Again, i would respectfully present systeme is far from satisfactory. It is a failure. I would look to talk to you about ways we can improve it. Present i would be happy, se. Concernsstion to you the budget submitted by the president of the United States. We are here to discuss fisheries and their health, including shellfish. History inave a rich connecticut, rich in our culture , rich in our economy, and im working hard to preserve and sustain opportunities in our fishing economy. That is why i am so concerned about president trumps proposed budget, among other reasons. Funding forslashes programs like sea grant and funding for the milford lab in. Ilford, connecticut at the university of connecticut, they are doing Pathbreaking Research in areas that concern our fishing industry to help grow and expand ,ertain forms of agriculture and in effect, aquaculture. Its very important for the entire country. As a representative of the administration, how can you propose these cuts in noaa programs you are responsible for administrating . Senator, i dont know that i am in a position to comment extensively on the president s budget. I do know theres a revised emphasis on the department of defense and National Security. Im on the Armed Services committee, and i support that emphasis. It is incorporated in the nda, which i helped to approve through the Armed Services committee. It will come to the floor of the senate next month. It was passed unanimously. Of trashing of central to there programs you administer, that to our Economic Future in aquaculture and agriculture i consider it a mockery of the mission of your agency. If you are not in a position to justify it, who would be echoed i want to say, im not being personal about it. You are here as a representative of the administration. I want to know how you can justify it. We are going to do our best to operate within the budget that we have. A lot of the programs slated to our Grant Funding are funding, grants to the coastal states. We are going to do our best to make that up internally. Are you going to commit to me that you can make up those cuts to the Sea Grant Program and the milford lab and university of connecticut that are essential to those programs . I cant commit that we are specifically going to be able to make those up from our baseline budget. We are facing some tough decisions, too. I have said that i feel this agency may be in a position to refocus on some of its core missions. You would agree that those are valid and important programs . Of course, sir. I do. My time has expired. I want to continue this with you. G if you agree these programs are valid, and there can be no question that they are, i think your agency has a responsibility to fight for them and make sure they are fully funded. With regard to the budget, i think we will be taking a hard look at some of these programs. My own view is, some of them are critical, and im not sure the cuts will survive what we in congress do. I know mr. Oliver, you are only four weeks on the job, so i know that every element of the budget is probably not at your fingertips. Im going to ask just a few more questions. Panel, a distinguished and i want to take advantage of the opportunity to get your views on the record. Both of you have talked about, and dr. Quinn, you talked about it in your testimony the issue of, how do we need to look at the process as it intersects with msa authorities . For example, mr. Oliver, many in the North Pacific have expressed support for the efficiency. Rocess to reduce redundancy do you have a personal view on ,hat, and related, dr. Quinn can you elaborate a little bit more on the ccc concern over the application of the requirements to the analysis of the fishery Management Act . These are related questions. You both have highlighted them, and i would like to get your views. Its an important issue. I will start. Mr. Chairman, senator, i have a long history in my previous life dealing with the reconciliation. I participated in a working cc following the 2006 reauthorization where there was a directive provision for t he secretary working through with the councils to reconcile and streamline. I forget the exact wording of the statute. Basically, it was to intersect both, and i participated on a working group for a number of years to try to achieve that goal. While this Current Administration that i am representing does not have a position on this, i can tell you from my experience in that process that we did not, in my opinion, address the provision. We essentially ended up in a cemented,e we largely if you will, the existing process. I dont think we i think we did not satisfy the provisions in that directive, and i think that leaves us with a potential opportunity to look at that again. I will say on the other hand, however, that over the intervening years, we have gotten very good through the Council Process and through the agency and National Fisheries service, weve got really good with our compliance, using it as a vehicle for our fishery Management Actions. We are not losing lawsuits anymore. Weve gotten good at it. Ive believe that the Magnuson Stevens act was the appropriate vehicle for the processing and promulgation of fishery Management Actions. I still believe that to be the case. Area, as wet is an look at reauthorization, we should entertain ideas in a way that the North Pacific fisheries Management Council is looking at, as you mentioned, previously dr. Quinn, you touched on this in your written testimony. Do you care to elaborate more . I will add a few things. The ccc believes that it adds additional complexity to the process. It lengthens the process. In addition, to some degree, it confuses the public. Youve got two different statutes with two different sets of timelines, and rather than encourage more participation, it may discourage it. That was not considered at the council level. Oftentimes, the position is misinterpreted. I can tell you nothing could be further from the truth. Full participation by citizens, groups. We dont think we need that process. We think it is redundant and unnecessary. Given your role on the ccc and that that is a broadbased consensus organization, if that is one of the views and an area that we think is ripe for consensus, i think it is something we should be looking at. Let me ask a more broad question for you, mr. Oliver. Onen secretary rosss focus guarding the domestic fishing industry, fishing production from the United States, which all of us welcome, how do you best think we can promote u. S. Fisheries he . You and i have talked about the export issue. We were able to get trade. Romotion authority what are other things that we can be doing to promote a goal that most of us agree with. This may sound a little bit with some of my earlier comments. Is some room and our domestic harvest potential. There are some lingering regulatory constraints that may or may not be any longer necessary. Opportunitiesare with some of our schedules. I think there are some opportunities for us to maximize that. I am a Firm Believer in sciencebased catch limits. It has been a cornerstone in the North Pacific for the past few that, thereithin are opportunities. In the area of marine i think that is where more headroom is in terms of growing our production. Gentle men, thank you very much for being here for this important issue. Gentlemen, thank you for being here for this important issue. I want this to be my first question. About 10 of the worlds fish catch is discarded as by catch. More than 22 billion pounds of fish a year is what they estimate that is, by catch. This is fish that are not intended to be caught but end up being killed as a result of our methods. In recent years in the United States, we have discarded over 600 Million Pounds of fish annually, and some fisheries discard over 60 of their catch. I find those numbers astonishing. The by catch reduction has long been a focus of the agency. Its also a goal that is supported by the council and the council system. Many of the councils have taken Great Strides to reduce by catch. Some of the by catch his economically discarded. A lot of the by catch that his with regulatory discards. There are regulations in place that prohibit people from selling by catch, and the reason is to keep them from targeting it when they are not supposed to be targeting it. Of, you get to the question theres by catch and then there is waste. Part of the point of your question was waste. We implemented what was originally called a full retention, full legalization of ourment for several fisheries. If you catch it, you keep it, and it counts against the quota. Against the quota whether you keep it or not, but it is still waste. 100 for aff the variety of practical reasons, but the essence of that is, we reduced the discards through that program by millions of pounds per year, hundreds of thousands of tons per year, and i think other counsels have done similar things. There are still regulatory discards in place that i think shouldnt be in place or need to be carefully reevaluated. You are filibustering me. I am almost out of time. Can we do better . Will you focus on trying to do better . Yes. Thank you very much, sir. Im going to try to get another question in. The chairman is pretty tough with time limits. In 1996, the Sustainable Fisheries act established rebuilding requirements, and shortly thereafter, 92 fish stocks were identified as overfished. By 2006, only three had been rebuilt. Two thousand six magnus stephenson reauthorization act responded by requiring annual catch limits and by requiring rebuilding plans ot end overfishing immediately. 2006 magnus stephenson reauthorization act responded by requiring annual catch limits by requiring rebuilding plans to and overfishing immediately. Do you it is a critical tool for managing fisheries , and how do you respond to calls for more flexibility on catch limits and rebuilding timelines . I hear that call from really great folks in my state calling for more flexibility. Im wondering how you would balance that. Senator, i think it is a balancing act. As i stated previously, i am a Firm Believer in annual catch limits. It has been a cornerstone of our successful management. I also believe there are opportunities i think there are opportunities for additional flexibility in how we apply annual catch limits to subsequent Accountability Measures, and in those rebuilding plans where we can achieve some flexibility that people are seeking without rolling back our Conservation Successes and without resulting in additional overfished stocks. I think we can balance that. Mr. Chairman senator, you can go on as long as you want. Thank you very much, sir. Thank you very much for being generous in time for your fellow senator. Last question, its just another of my concerns about the larger ecological challenges we have, as we go forward trying to sustain what is a critical thattry for my state, provides a tremendous sense of Economic Development and jobs. To achieve these sustainable fishery Management Actions, managers must consider the balance between ecological needs and also the commercial and recreational value of fishing. That includes managing foraged fish that larger species depend upon. New jersey and the midatlantic region have made considerable strides to improve the sustainability of these fish, but nationwide, i feel we need to be doing more. In many instances, there were no federal Management Plans for foraged species. What can noaa fisheries and the councils due to improve management so that coastal communities can continue to benefits of healthy foraged fish stocks . I totally agree with you on the importance of forage fish in the Overall Economic picture. That is a critical aspect of that. I keep falling back on my North Pacific experience, but we have banned fishing for a number of forage fish species nearly two decades ago for those reasons. I think there are probably Different Reasons i probably dont understand. I think it goes back to that and i very much appreciate and understand your sir, on the importance of foraged fish. I think it is up to the Council Working with the agency to make sure we are protecting those to the extent we need to be for the larger ecological processes. We cant maintain longterm of our target fisheries unless they have unless we manage them properly themselves and unless they have an adequate forage base. Just another commitment i would love to get from you you know that sharkthinning was first outlawed in 2000. A loophole in that law was closed by the shark conservation act of 2009. I recently asked your office how many investigations noaa has open since january 1, 2010. I would shocked to find out that since 2010, noaa has investigated over 500 incidents sharkfinning. As of april, there were seven cases that were open but not charged. Keep meion is, will you informed on the progress of investigating these cases, and can you assure me that you and your agencies will take this seriously . To me, it is a horrific act. Shark fins have no nutritional value whatsoever, and they do serious damage to that species. I just hope to get from you the assurances that the agency tasked with investigating these will continue to make progress, and maybe you can keep me informed of that progress. Yes and yes. Thank you very much, sir. I just want to note for the record the grace and generosity of the presiding member, senator sullivan. As always, senator booker, ive got your back. Im going to wrap up the hearing with two more questions for both of the witnesses. I want to take advantage of having two outstanding witnesses here. Dr. Quinn, what are some of the to followup on senator bookers line of questioning, what are some of the problems that Councils Face when dealing with fisheries that catch a number of different stocks, and what is the cccs position on the use of catchshares . If you want to weigh in, we would welcome that, as well. Why dont i start with the second question . I think the catchshares have been successful in some parts of the country. Cccs position is that it should be a tool in the toolbox for Regional Councils to determine if that works best for them. Theres the old saying, one size does not fit all. This is quite appropriate with the catchshares. As anuld stay in, but option, not a mandate. And that first question about that thehe challenges councils have faced with fisheries catching a number of different stocks . In new england, its a very big challenge. Youve got fish swimming together. Its important that we collect data on it. This term that mr. Oliver said, it is a choke species, and particularly as we move into the ecosystembased fisheries space, it is going to exacerbate the problem. Mr. Oliver, do you have any comments . I think my comments are fairly similar to dr. Quinns. When you have a mixed stock fishery, sometimes, it is problematic. Sometimes, its not. Often, its not a problem. The problem comes into play when you are targeting one species and catching another that may be seen as an economic discards species or when you are catching a species that is either a by catch or a choke target species. That is where the difficulties in management come into play. To briefly address your question about catchshares, we know catchshares were a priority for the previous administration. This administration has not taken a formal position on catchshares. My personal experience is similar to dr. Quinns. Its an incredibly important tool. It is used in most of our major fisheries. I do believe that whatever , if there isccurs new legislation, i think it really needs to maintain the maximum reason regional flexibility that it can. The way you construct of these dependentprograms is on the specific correct or a six characteristics of the industry. Flexibility maximum in whether or not we use a catchshare program. Let me wrap up with one final question. I want to compliment you on not only the emphasis on the importance of data and science, but we are going to back you up with that. I know that has been the experience of both of you. I think thats an area where we have seen bipartisan agreement. I have question certainly heard a lot about this in alaska and other hearings. I know its been an issue in different regions of the country, and it is treated differently in terms of how it is funded or subsidized. As you know, fishermen in some regions have complained about the costs of onboard observers and have questioned whether Technology Like electronic monitoring might be less expensive and provide comparable forven better information fisheries managers. Does the msa provide councils with the flexibility to use alternative technologies such as electronic monitoring, and again, a question for both of you what additional tools can congress provide to speed up their use . I think it is an important question. In my state, theres barely room for an additional person on board. Burdensome. We want the correct data. There might be much more efficient ways of doing this. Do you have a view on this, both of you . I will lead off. A very similar answer as the catchshares. Putes been an act to electronic monitoring in place. Again, one size does not fit all. Regions have specific fisheries where they may or may not, depending on the size of the boat. There are a lot of pilot programs and work being done on electronic monitoring. I think we should have the flexibility to have it as one of the tools in the toolbox to make a decision region by region. I would just echoed the importance of ] echo the importance of electronic monitoring as an option. Does Congress Need to do more to make that clear that that is a viable option . I dont know that there is more that has to be done. I know we have successfully implemented electronic monitoring options for a number of our fisheries. Role at week that formally brings electronic monitoring into our north as anc Monitoring Program observer. A human as you point out, many small boat fisheries we want information on, they are simply unable to accommodate a human observer. Orle cameras may not be free as costly as many people thought they might be, they are still less costly than a human observer and can perform functions that we need. We have cameras in some of the large offshore factory boats, as well, inside the processing plant, but the importance of being able to use them particularly on the smaller boat is critical. Listen, i want to thank both for your pastes experience and service to our country and to this critical area. Certainly, there is a strong interest, bipartisan interest to work closely with the to review as we move forward on ideas with the two of you as we move forward on ideas and the reauthorization. This is an important start, and we will keep the record of this hearing open for two more weeks. If there are additional questions from members who could not make the hearing, and still have questions for both of you. With that, are hearing is adjourned. Thank you for attending. Cspans washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up wednesday, a discussion on efforts to stabilize various for Double HealthCare Insurance markets with aei Health Care Scholar joseph antos and sabrina corlette