To hearing from stake holders at additional hearings throughout the country this fall. I would like to first welcome both of our witnesses, dr. John quinn, chair of the Council Coordination committee, the ccc, and mr. Chris oliver, n. O. A. A. s assistant administrator for fisheries as the nymph administrator. And creating the ccc, the ccc convenes the Regional Fisheries Management Council to discuss areas of common industry and discussing concensus views on the msa reauthorization. Im also pleased to introduce chris oliver, first ever alaskan to permanent hold assista assistant, and working at the Fisheries Management council, last 17 as its executive director, as an alaskan, i can tell you we are thrilled to have you in this very important position. Based on his work in the gulf of mexico at the beginning of his career and extensive experience overseeing the largest and best managed fishery in the country, i have confidence under his leadership alaska and the u. S. Will be well represented and commercial and recreational fishermen. For alan skas and throughout the country, fishing is a way of life. As ive mentioned at this Committee Many times, our fisheries are by far the largest in the nation. Id like to say alaska is the superpower of seafood constituting 50, close to 60 of all domestic landing in the country and tens of thousands of jobs. In many communities, our fisheries are the backbone of their economy. Its my intention it assure that the next msa reauthorization guarantees continued strong coastal communities not only in alaska, but across the country. As Congress Considers whether msa is in need of changes, its important that we not rest on previous gains. In the last time since the msa was authorized technology has rapidly advanced yet legislation able to support that technology has not. Specifically, as relates to Data Collection, stock assessments and other analytical tools to help 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, our topics ripe for discussion and possible elements of row authorization. In addition, as we continue to responsibly manage the fishery resources across the United States we must ensure that our nation fisheries systems supports food supply, recreational opportunities and plenty of fishing and processing jobs in coastal communities. With that i want to thank our witnesses for being here and Ranking Member. Senator peters. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you to the witness for the important of reauthorizing the magnusonstevens act. The 1976 act helped reduce exploitive issues in the waters. Its preserving these incredibly important natural resources. The most recent authorizations successfully rebuilt fish populations to healthy sustainable levels of coastal communities, but we still have overfishing and evoverfished populations and we should determine what is working, what needs improvement and ways to improve fishery management is why were all here today. I regret that i cant spend as much time at this hearing this morning as id like due to a scheduling conflict, but thats why we have hearing record and i look forward to learning what our expert witnesses have to share with us. Michigan, like much of the rest of the country, is full of hunters and anglers. Every year nearly 1. 8 million anglers fish on the great lakes and there are roughly 1900 charter boats operating there. This activity is estimated to have a 7 billion impact on the surrounding economy and directly supports about 50,000 jobs. While we michiganders are typically targeting walleye, trout, perch and must muskees where we live, theres a robust communities and fisheries. Michigan, like much of the rest of the country is full of seafood lovers. We want to be assured that the fin fish and shell fish that we purchase at markets and in restaurants, much of which comes from states like alaska and florida, is import and or is imported from other countries is responsibly harvested. So how we manage our federal fisheries matters to the folks in michigan. What we do about the scourge of illegal unreported or unregulated fishing occurring in the waters of other countries, and on the high seas, also matters a great deal to us. Conserving these resources through Sustainable Management so they can continue to support the businesses and communities that rely on them matters to folks in michigan. Key to Sustainable Management is making sure were using sciencedriven process. Fisheries management is complex, and needs to account for the interactions between different species, between species and their habitat. Understanding those many interactions takes a lot of study and an awful lot of data which requires a lot of monitoring. It is important to look for ways to leverage developments in technology and science to do the critical job of managing our federal fisheries better. Only by gathering and utilizing all of the environmental information necessary can we understand the ocean, the coastal eco systems, that provide us with this important and delicious natural resource. Mr. Chairman, i also want to mention while i understand that most fresh Water Fisheries issues are not within the purview of this committee, ive introduced a bill called the Great Lakes Fishery reauthorization act of 2017, this legislation which was referred to the committee on environmental and public works will solidify the scientific basis upon which fisheries in the great lakes are augmented by data methods and new cutting edge technologies. Its my hope as part of this important msa reauthorization process we might have some cross pollization ideas for federal fisheries and salt Water Fisheries. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Peters. Now i ask senator nelson Ranking Member of the Commerce Committee if hed like to make an Opening Statement as well. 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, theres senator magnuson from washington. Theres senator stevens from alaska, and they knew that there was a problem in new england. In senator markys area because it was getting overfished. And so, they set about to do something about it and thats more than three decades ago. And we are the beneficiaries of that kind of bipartisan effort. Clearly, mr. Chairman, your state of alaska is one of the most fertile fisheries around. By the way, thats one. Reasons we have one of the most Important Reasons of why we have the u. S. Coast guard up there. It not only is given the task from the United States navy of protecting our national security, but its there to protect that big, big fishing fle fleet. And then, as its 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, but yet, they participate and understand the importance of the magnusonstevens act, and so, thank you for having this hearing and of course, my state, when it comes to downright recreational, charter boats, as well as commercial fishing, were 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 wicker, that there is a great deal that comes from the livelihoods of the people along the gulf and in the course and 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 resource and of all types and we know that we have to protect it. Interestingly, also, the gulf 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 securitys sake, likewise, reasons to protect that gulf. Ill just close by saying that one of the greatest challenges that i saw was when five Million Barrels of oil were spilled in the gulf and that immediately affected the livelihoods of a lot of people, not only in the fishing indust industry, but also it cut out an entire season of our Tourism Industry on the gulf coast because people thought the beaches were covered with oil. It is a unique environment and this committee is particularly suited to protect this kind of ocean environment. And so, i am very grateful that youre bringing up for discussion the magnusonstevens act, thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator nelson. And i want to again welcome our witnesses today, mr. Chris oliver, assistant administrator for the National Marine fishery service. Nmf. And i want to thank for the selection of chris, i dont think he could have found a more qualified capable director and dr. John quinn of the north Fisheries Management council. Youll have five minutes to deliver an oral statement, a longer written statement will be included in the record if you so desire. Mr. Oliver, the floor is yours. Is it on . Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I participated in both the 1996 and 2006 reauthorization processes in my previous role and while im wearing a different hat today in this administration has yet to take former position on specific issues, my fundamental perspectives remain built upon the success of the act as evidenced by Sustainable Management in the North Pacific fisheries and success in fisheries across the United States. I would like to describe some of the agencies successes under the act, but i want to focus on some challenges that remain. Essentially the act has been an outstanding success. The partnership with the councils, commissions and stake holders weve effectively ended overfishing in the country and are rebuilding fish stocks across the board, with a sustainable supply of seafood for the nation in the future. The magnuson act the magnusonstevens act created broad goals for management and a unique Management Structure centered around the council. I can personally attest to the value of that system which encourages a bottom up process, including fisherman, states, tribes and the federal government. Working together, fishermen and management brought back numerous resources in fisheries across our country. Im especially proud of the accomplishments in alaska and our approach has been recognized as one of the most successfully managed fisheries in the world. We have challenges remaining. Our west coast ground fish species and rebuilt several important stocks, in recent years, fishermen are leaving available harvest in the water due to outrated regulations and we have to maximize and overall with our longterm conservation goals. I think those for our commercial fisheries and recreational as well. Salt water Recreational Fishing is one. Favorite pastimes. And were proud to be partnering to host a National Summit on salt Water Fisheries in 2018. While annual catch limits are a cornerstone of successful management, we have to look at Accountability Measures, its been a major challenge for many new fisheries and thats the case for commercial as well as recreational fesh fisheries when harvest data can be can ult to report and may differ from commercial fisheries. Additional flexibility how we apply, as well as rebuilding schedules could expand our collected toolbox and our ability to address many issues which have been raised in reauthorization discussions. I can assure you, we stand ready to assist any way we can as those approaches are being considered. Americas seafood industry sets a global standard for sustainability. However, the majority of seafood we consume is imported. Theres enhanced wild stock, we believe that its agua culture, and were making that a priority in the agent with bugetary incentives. Coordination of the regulatory and permitting process is a key area where we can be more efficient. With more efficient regulation of wild stock fisheries we can position to make inroads on the seafood deficit. The current act works very well for most fisheries, however, i believe there are opportunities to provide additional flexibility to allow us to more effectively manage some of those fisheries particularly those that have different catch accounting challenges or could benefit generally from a alternative approaches. Although some of those remain in the nearterm. Overall the economy in general can be realized as fish population grow and catch limits increase in the longer term. In that sense i believe we can have it both ways. I believe that we can maximize opportuniti opportunities, take opportunities to maximize our domestic harvest potential without compromising the longterm sustainability of the resources we manage. I, and n. O. A. A. Fisheries are committed to working with congress throughout this reauthorization process to achieve just that goal and at that, concludes my opening comments, mr. Chairman. Again, i know there will be questions, ill be happy to try to answer them. Great. Thank you, director oliver. Dr. Quinn. Thank you very much, chairman sullivan, Ranking Members peters. My name is john quinn, im here to testify on above of the council coordinating committee. By way of background, the law program at Massachusetts School of law in dartmouth, which is right next door to the port of new bedford one of the leading fishing ports in the nation. Ive been involved in fishery issues the last 30 years as a lawyer, state legislature and last five years of the new england fishermans council. Commercial and recreational are key to our coastal communities and the nations economy. The councils are the cornerstone, and as a group were a strong believer in its benefits. Well highlight issues detailed in the recent statement, grouped into three, need for management flexibility, importance of our public process and a need for adequate resources. I again with management flexibility. The wide havevarieties in fisheries, we should have a flexible legal frame work that allows for a wide range of Management Solutions. To that end, requiring that a stark and Poor Condition must be rebuilt within ten years, this arbitrary timeline can cause problems. Imagine that every home owner could only choose a 10year mortgage while purchasing a home. That would work for some, but not for all. I want to make it clear, we believe that targeted changes to the law would enable the development of better rebuilding plans. Its not just the council at that reached this conclusion, this is in report by National Search council in 2014. There is also a need for flexibility at the fact cal level. Connell needs to be able to consider a wide variety of tools without burdensome requirements. They may not be the best tools to manage in all fisheries. And most have fishing permits to conduct Scientific Research that leads to Management Solutions and the new requirements for the efp process would greatly reduce the ability to approve in a timely manner. Fisheries would suffer as a report. A transparent process is critical to maintaining public trust, this need could be met in a variety of way, but specific webcasts would ignore the technical difficulties encountered when Holding Meetings in isolated fishing ports. All proposed actions are carefully examined, the analysis duplicates those in the act and applicable law. Weenl that alternative analysis should be in the frame work of the act. With 40 Years Experience the councils provide a wellknown timetested forum for fisheries issues. When others limit fishing that public process is often side stepped. If all federal fishing regulations are promulgated under section 302 of the act, with our fishery resources throughout the range. As the resources, article effectively managed fisheries, a significant investment is needed at all steps. Process. We rely heavily on data provided by nmf. And there will be increased foreign sea forward. Increased stocks assessment funding and the need to collect the data, and one of the best investments that administration can make in u. S. Fisheries. Data availability continues to be one among the greatest challenges for the management of Recreational Fisheries. And changes to the n. O. A. A. s programs have only been partially implemented and little to increase catch estimates. They do not provide the data needed for reliable monitoring. Addressing this problem will require increased sampling rates which can only occur with increased funding. We recognize that Strategic Planning is necessary, it creates Unfunded Mandates for the council. We should fulfill existing regulatory requirements before any new mandates are required. Finally, i believe its important to acknowledge the supportive relationship between the councils and National Fishery service. The regional offices and Science Center are critical to our process. Its unfortunate that mr. Oliver decided to transfer to the second best part of the partnership, but we look forward to working with him in the future. Again, thank you for the opportunity to address the committee and im happy to answer any questions. Thank you, dr. Quinn, like the rivalry between the witnesses here, thats helpful. Let me begin by just asking, and building on what senator nelson said, he made a point about the bipartisan history with regard to the origins of this act and thats certainly my goal as a chairman, to bring together members on both sides of the aisle when were looking at reauthorization of the msa. So, given that, id like to ask both of you, starting with mr. Oliver, what would you see in the msa, what would you hope to see in msa reauthorization, the issues that we think, that you think is important to address and in what areas of concensus do you think exists possibly and importantly between commercial interests, recreational interests, conservation groups . So, how are you going to answer that question . Both of you, i think thats a really key issue to get your views on that kind of high level, but important issue to begin with. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Ill take a shot at that. In my previous role, you probably 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 cant see the need for substantive changes. Im in a new role now, and as i look at the issue more broadly and ive heard from constituents around the country, ive heard the dialogs that have occurred with regard to some of the ideas that have been submitted or discussed over the past year or two, and in various reauthorization discussions, and i have come to believe that there is room in many, you know, a lot of the measures in the act were sdee designed around commercial fisheries, and i think there is possibility that additional flexabilities that are considered, whether it be with regard to annual catch limits for rebuilding plans for the Accountability Measures particularly that are used to enforce the annual catch limits, and i think this is particularly true in data in fisheries, commercial fisheries where we dont have quite the stock assessment or Data Collection, catch counting systems that im used to in my previous role, very robust and accurate. Youre saying they dont exist in different coins in different regions . I think so thats correct. And across different fisheries. I think many of our Recreational Fisheries are of a nature they dont lend themselves well to stricter Accountability Measures and i think theres probably room for us. The more tools we have in our toolbox and i think this is i wont speak for dr. Quinn, but i know speaking from my own experience, and its, again, our administration hasnt taken positions on these specific actions, so i have to be careful how i answer without and im asking your personal view then. In my personal view and my personal experience i think the more tools that we have the better job we can do, in many of these fisheries that dont have the robust stock assessment and catch counting systems, and particularly in Recreational Fisheries that have a different set of goals and objective in many cases for management so i think theres a lot of room for that kind of flexibility that i think is being considered throughout this reauthorization process. Doctor quinn, would you like to address that broad topic. I think just by the nature of the hearing, were here to reauthorize the magnuson act not repeal it so so much of the aspects are working well. Were here to tweak it. I think a couple of things just like mr. Oliver, the issue of Data Availability and stock assessments, particularly in the recreational side, is something weve got a lot of work to do. Also this level of uncertainty in the stock assessment is something, and also can be solved or at least shrunk through purpose of more data. I think that data needs are important and the uncertainty, recreational, i think the commercial and acls and ams were the commercial, not necessarily for the recreational. Let me follow up on that point. Mr. Oliver, how does nmf view recreational and commercial fishing in terms of similarities and differences from each other and again, are there flexibility positions in msa that need to address that or do we need to look at that as a possible area of reform . I think many of the challenges are similar, but there are fundamental differences. We recently had revisions to the National Standard one guidelines that have been in place only to are a few months and i think some of the councils have been able to take advantage of those revisions, the National Standard one guidelines, but i dont think they necessarily fully address some of the problems and some of the regions. And i think those exist for both commercial and Recreational Fisheries. In many cases we lack the fundamental information on stock in terms of stock assessment, whats in the water where, and the ability through realtime accounting to know what precisely is coming out of the water. And some of those are internal challenges that we need to deal with within the existing structure of the act and within the existing structure of our own regulations. He think i think some of them could benefit from the process. All right, senator markey. Thank you, mr. Chairman, very much. And dr. Quinn thank you for coming from the bay state and the new england fishery Management Council and the regional fishery Management Council coordinating committee and from your research at umass dartmouth. Youre a master of maritimes, dr. Quinn, thank you for all of your work. You know as well as anybody knows in our country, that n. O. A. A. s data shows the Climate Change will have a pro fund impact on our oceans and marine life, with many species moving north into new areas, or into deeper waters. Ocean acidfication and other species black sea bass in later numbers off the coast of massachusetts. That would be devastating to shell fisheries like we have in massachusetts, new bedford is the highest grossing port in the United States and 78 of landings are scallops. And new bedford was most at risk in the nation due to ocean ac acidfication due to Climate Change. What do Regional Councils have to those that are moving due to Climate Change. New bedford has been the highest grossing port for the last 15 years in a row. So very good news. I think, unfortunately, we do not have a switch that we can flip and lower the water temperature or decrease the association acidfication. We can get more data for trends of fish moving and Ocean Acidfication affecting the beds. A lot of councils have data on this, others dont. Increasing monitoring is important for us to plan for the Climate Change. Do you have the tools that you need in new england in order to do the monitoring adequately . I think weve got the infrastructure. I think additional monitoring comes with a financial cost to do additional monitoring outside of what were doing now, so that would certainly be a good tool for us to have to expand the monitoring of the Climate Change area. The gulf of maine where massachusetts is and where we do our fishing is the fastest warming body of water on the planet. So, this is just warming up very, very fast and cod need cold water and lobster needs cold water. As the water heats up ever more rapidly, theyre moving the lobster and cod further to the north and impacting the fishing community. Absolutely. The southern new england lobster industry is all moved north because of the warming temperatures and certainly coming up in massachusetts, fishermens nets are fishing species that arent caught up there usually. Its certainly reflecting in the landings. And Ocean Acidification has impact on shell fish. Can you look alt the impact that Ocean Acidification is having on the industry . Absolutely, we need as Much Research as possible in the Climate Change area, in the Ocean Acidification. Weve got great programs Collaborative Research and so its important that data, data, data, the more data we can get on this, more data on other aspects of this are helpful for planning purposes. Thank you. And dr. Oliver, on the question of illegal, unreported, unregulated fishing in the United States, n. O. A. A. Issued its final rule in december of 2016. Can you give us a little bit of an update as to implementation of the rule and what the pace is for its scheduled implementation in january of 2018. [inaudible] oh, and the seafood fraud issue im getting at and the heart of that and the rules youre going to put on that. The traceability. Oh, the traceability in seafood. Yes, sir, im not an expert on that, ill be honest with you, ill try to get more information where we are on that. That rule is really meant to balance the Playing Field, if you will, between imposing requirements that are already imposed on our own fishermen for exporting, to impose that same requirement on imports to simply ensure that those fisheries are adhering to a similar standard. So its really a levelling of the Playing Field as i best understand it, but i know theres been a lot of interest in that rule and the additional requirements that it puts on our producers, i know theres been a lot of interest in other aspects of that rule, such as including shrimp, for example, because so many of our imports and our trade deficits based on those imports is from imported foreign shrimp. For a variety of reasons we were not able to do that. Thats something that we are going to be pursuing in the future, but i dont have any, i guess, more to say on that. If there are more specific questions that you have id be glad to follow up with you. I think for the record, it would be very important for us to understand what n. O. A. A. Beliefs the state of play is, with regard to illegal fishing, seafood fraud, it does harm our domestic fishermen in significant ways, so to the extent for the record that you can provide that information i think to be very helpful to the councils and helpful to this committee here. Senator wicker. Let me pick up on the line of questioning that chairman sullivan was pursuing during his time and thats salt water Recreational Fishing. You mentioned on page two of your testimony that n. O. A. A. Fisheries is going to partner with Atlantic StatesMarine Fisheries to host a National Summit in march of next year on salt water Recreational Fisheries. Ive introduced a bill called the modernizing Recreational Fisheries act. Which would amend magnusonstevens. Its cosponsored by Ranking Member nelson, also by senators blount, inhoff and will you work with congress as we explore magnusonstevens authorization in away that allows to continue and fix the problems at hand especially those with Recreational Fishing and i would mention specifically the marine recreational information program, which our recreational fishermen lacks time limits and accuracy . They believe the program is not designed to monitor short seasons like red snapper and have you looked at my bill and also, have you looked at the idea of innovation such as mississippis tails and scales, electronic reporting system for red snapper landings by using smartphone snaps . Its a twopart question ill wrap into one there. Thank you, senator, mr. Sullivan, senator sullivan. Yes, i thank you for the question. We absolutely want to work within whatever construct you have to improve those types of information. I have become acutely aware in the short month that ive 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 some less than perfect satisfaction with some of our own stock assessment information, less than perfect satisfaction with our program a gentle way to say that. Yes, sir. And we, of course, have a pending baseline benchmark stock assessment for red snapper thanks to funding thats been provided. Its a couple of years before we get the results of that, but thats an important piece of information on the Data Collection side. Whats coming out of the water. I have heard from a number of constituents, from a number of people ive had discussions amongst my own staff leadership over the past two weeks, about some of the satisfaction ive heard with the program and the speed with which its progressing. That program is a work in progress and i understand some of the frustrations. Ng we have some improvements pending on it, going from the Telephone Survey to a mail survey will be an improvement. Ive also heard that its not enough, its not fast enough and were not taking great enough advantage of some of the state Data Collection programs, as the one you referenced. And a couple of thoughts on that is, i have made it a priority based on discussions over the past two weeks, to prioritize and expedite the certification, and state data programs. And a lot of those are supported through this program, but ive heard loud and clear that we need to expedite the certification of those programs and the use of the data in those programs and i personally believe when you look around at the technology that we have today and the cell phone, Smart Phone Technology that there have to be we have to find a way to utilize those technologies to get that information quickly, more quickly and more accurately, and i know that there have been concerns about using that information as the apples and oranges problem with tying it to data from the other programs in terms of stock assessments, but i think we we are going to make it a priority to do that. We also i also believe that if regardless of the implications for stock assessment, if we have a way to get better information today on what fish is coming out of the water, we darn well need to be using that, so, i absolutely agree with the provisions or the points that youre making. Ive had a chance to briefly look at the legislation youve introduced and he think its consistent with the seems to be consistent with the things we already intend to do, but certainly, any help and direction you want to provide us in that would be most welcome and well work with you, sir. Pretty good. My time is expired, ill ask you on the record about something i was going to explore in this hearing, thats aqua culture in federal waters. In 2016 there was a final rule. So far we havent had any bites on actually applications because of the expensive permitting process and other regulatory challenges. So, mr. Chairman, i think ill just ask mr. Oliver to comment on the record since were pressed for time here about why he thinks we havent had anybody apply, now that we have a program for aqua culture. Great, if you can take the question for the record for senator wicker, he appreciate that very much. Senator inhoff. Thank you, mr. Chairman, i back when i enjoyed life, i was a builder and developer that was yesterday. That was several years ago. That was today. In South Padre Island, texas and i know youre in a different area, however, youre familiar with the different regions. And did i understand in the introduction that we got from our chairman, mr. Oliver, that you were from the gulf area . Yes, mr. Chairman. I grew up in rock port, texas on the gulf coast not far from padre island. We claim him as an alaskan though. No, i claim him as a texan, how is that . No, its interesting, you are familiar with the interest that i have in that down there and its really just to clear some things up. First of all, down in texas, and theres a lot of interest, i have to say in my state of oklahoma, people thats the closest coast we go to and there are a lot of industries that are very active down there, so, were interested in the coast. Actually where they go out, the number miles you go out under state jurisdiction, it was three miles, its now nine miles, is that correct . Texas is nine miles, territorial sea. At one time, it wasnt only three miles . Not in my lifetime, sir. Okay, well, my staff is wrong on that then. My interest is, when things that are unforeseen come up, you know, how do you handle that . And do you have the jurisdiction that were talking about right now, both of you are talking about, is that primarily just federal jurisdiction that were talking about or you also oversee the state jurisdiction, in this case texas, but im sure true in other states . No, sir, we, senator, mr. Chairman, we do not manage inside state territorial waters. We only manage, for example, red snappers outside the state waters. We have to take into account what the states do in their state water seasons which is why we were originally only able to set a threeday season in federal waters for gulf red snapper in 2017. Obviously, weve implemented regulations that have changed that, relaxed at that for the reminder of the summer. But whether and what extent we can do that in the future remains to be seen. I think it depends on pending stock assessment, and theres potential legislation that you might introduce that could affect what we may do and what may be the situation in 17, but the short answer to your question is, the states essentially manages what happens within their water, whether it be three or nine miles or otherwise and we have to sort of react and make up the difference on the federal side and thats where the adjustment on federal seasons and were not enthusiastic about publishing a three day public season. We actually had a three day season for the entire year . For federal waters, that was the original season for 2017. We have since published a subsequent regulation thats extending that season for some 39 days, i believe, now. Yeah. That that is being litigated or challenged, but i dont know what the outcome of that will ultimately be. Well, it may be litigated or challenged, but theyre doing it right now. Yes, sir. And dr. Quinn, i know youre in a different region up there, but a lot of the same principles apply. When you are making the assessments that mr. Oliver talked about, you use there are a lot of sources for that. How much do you depend on in terms of recreational users and reporting data, that and how do you see that . The reason im asking this, my exposure is to the recreational people. Those are the ones that feel theyre always getting the short end of the stick and how do you view them and their input . I think the recreational fisherman is very important on the east coast in particular in new england and we just that as they gather. In our assessments, everyone regional Science Center has a way to plug in this recreational data into the stock assessments. The question is weve got to make sure that its high quality data that we plug in and where gets plugged into the stock aisesment. So our council has that with the recreational industry and well work with them closely to again additional data. How do you do this . And again, im talking about South Padre Island or the south coast of texas. Every once in a while with no warning, no predictability, we have the thing called the red tide. It dramatically changes the population and the fish and all that. How does the unknown factors, how do you address those in making the assessments that are necessary . You know, over time youd have, you know, the impact of that is not going to be able to be seen that day, the day the red tide comes in or some catastrophic situation. Its more time theory analysis and see what happens as a trend created, a decline in stock. So, at the point in time that the red tide comes in you cant really make the assessment, its more over longer term. All right, well, my time is expired, but im very interested how this works out in terms of the federal versus the state, and i appreciate your witness. Thank you, senator inhofe. Senator blumenthal. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you for having this hearing. Mr. Oliver, welcome, and i want to express my respect for your long history of involvement in in issue, both economically and in public service. Im sure youve talked to the fishing fleites fleets in new england that go out and do this hard work. Theres a proud, longstory i had history is a key element in our economy and they are angry and frustrated beyond words, at least beyond words that i could repeat in these chambers and youve heard the very earthy and direct epithets that are used to describe the system we have now and in my view, with profound justification because it has failed the fishermen a are of new england. That fleet is struggling and the effects of Climate Change has driven the fish they customarily catch north, and it has driven other fish from southern areas into our area, but the limits have not changed and so they haul a catch beyond their permissible quota of certain fish, they have to throw them back, theres a waste, billions of dollars are trashed in our oceans annually and fishermen from other Southern States come into their waters and catch their fish. Theres something profounding unfair and intolerable about the situation and in my view, it violates the present law, magnusonstevens act which says and i quote, any management plan, quote, shall not discriminate between residents of different states, end quote, and must allow quotas that are fair and equitiable, unquote. Youve said in your testimony that we need more flexibility, but the fishing fleets of new england have run out of patience and i think theres 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 think, id like to call the new england fishing industry a tale of two industries. Parts of the scallop industry is booming made new bedford many of the ports, and boats from as far south of South Carolina come and fish in new bedford. On the ground side youre correct. Its a struggling industry over time. Some of the catch limits and acls put in place were based on stock assessments that were performed with industry involved and Science Center involved. So its a very difficult challenge for the ground fish fleet, not necessarily for the scallop industry. Well, for all industries and for our fishermen, our new england fishermen, the prosperity for the South Carolina or North Carolina fishing industry, we wish them well, but theyre not doing us any good, very simply, and thats the anger and frustration that i feel on their behalf and certainly, they feel it even more directly. Ive been on the docks and in their towns and we need better answers, would you agree . I dont disagree and i think, you know, the Council Process is to collect as much data as we can get to have accurate stock assessments. I think with the state of connecticut theres been this northerly move of fishing stock, lobsters and other species have moved north. So we dont have a simple solution to that water temperature raising or the Ocean Acidification. It is due to Climate Change, i would agree, but i would respectfully say that the data is there, the facts are known, theres clearly a need to change this system. And my time is going to expire. I have a question for mr. Oliver, but i would, again, respectfully suggest that the present system is far from satisfactory. Its a downright failure and id like to talk to you further about ways we could improve it. Id be happy to, mr. Senator. Mr. Oliver, my question to you concerns the submitted by the president of the United States. Were here to discuss fisheries and their Health Including shell fish. Shell fish have a rich history in connecticut, rich in our culture and rich in our economy. And help grow and expand certain forms of agriculture, in fact, and agriculture are very, very promising for the entire country. So, the representatives administration, how can you justify proposed cut in a program youre responsible for administering . Well, senator, i dont know that im in a position to comment very extensively on the president s budget. I do know a place revised well, im on the Armed Services committee and i very much support the emphasis in baa, which ive help to improve through the Armed Service committee. It will come to the floor of the senate next month. I support it. It was passed unanimously. But this kind of slashing and trashing the programs that are central to the programs you administer to our Economic Future in our culture and agriculture, if you are not in a position to justify it, who would be. I just want to say to you, i am not being personal about it. I know your heart may be in the right place, but i want to know how you can possibly justify it. We are going to do our best to operate within the budget that we have. I know that a lot of the programs to be cut involved cooperative agreements or pass Grant Funding through the secret program, for example in grants to the coastal states. We do our best to make that up internally. Are you going to commit to me that you can make up those cuts to the program, milford lab at university of connecticut that are essential to those programs . I cant come that we are specifically going to be able to make those up from our baseline budget. I think we are facing some tough decisions, too. I said on many occasions that i feel the agency made be in a position to refocus on its core science missions. You agree with me. Of course, i really do. I want to continue the questioning with you because if you agree these programs are valid and theres no question that they are, i think your agency has a responsibility to fight for them and make sure they are fully funded. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator blumenthal paired with regard to the budget we will take a hard look at some of these programs. My own view is summer critical and im not sure they will survive, and the cuts will survive what we in congress do. Will add a lot back to the ones we think are vital. Every element of the budget is probably not at your fingertips. We recognize that peers let me ask just a few more questions. We have a distinguished panel here and i want to take advantage of the opportunity to get your thoughts and views on the record. Both of you with talk about, dr. Queenie talked about it in your testimony, and the issue of how we need to look at the process of msa authorities. For example, mr. Oliver, many in the North Pacific kinase deficiency process within the msa to reduce redundancy and programmatic burden. Do you have a personal view on that or does the agency have a personal view and related, not her clan, can you elaborate a little bit more on the ccc concern of the of meet the requirements in the analysis of the fisheries. These are related questions. You both have highlighted them and would like to get your views on them. Its an important issue. Go ahead, mr. Oliver. I will start, mr. Senator. I have a long history in my previous life dealing with the reconciliation. I participated in a working group of the ccc following the 2006 reauthorization where there was a direct provision in the act for the secretary working for the councils to reconcile and streamline. I forget the exact wording of the statute. They reconcile magnusson and meet the ni participated on a working group for a number of years to try to achieve that goal did well at this Current Administration i am now 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 direct provision. We essentially ended up in a place where we largely cemented, if you will, the existing process. I think we did not satisfy a provision i think that leaves us with the 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 for the Council Process and through the agency. Weve gotten very good with our compliance, using nepa for lawsuits. Weve gotten good at it. Ive personally always believed it was the appropriate vehicle for the processing and developing the promulgation of Fisheries Management actions. I still believe that to be the case. I think it is an area as we look at reauthorization, we should entertain the North Pacific council is looking at, as you mentioned previously. Dr. Crane, you touched on this in your written testimony. You care to elaborate a little bit more . Sure, a few things, mr. Chairman. The ccc believes nepa adds complexity to the process after the option of implementation of the process. In addition to some degree it confuses the public because you are going down to track the public funding. Different statues with two different sets of timeline and rather than encourage more participation may discourage it. We use beneath a process to put an additional alternative in place that was not considered at the council level. Often times the position is misinterpreted as being opposed to Public Participation or sharing Additional Information with the public. I can tell you nothing is further from the truth. We believe weve got a rigorous process in place. Full participation by citizens, the groups and we dont think we need to follow the nepa process as well. It is redundant and unnecessary. Again, particularly given your role on the ccc and that is kind of a broad needs Consensus Organization among all the councils, if that is one of the views in an area we think is right for consensus, it is something we should be looking at. Let me ask you more broad question for you, mr. Oliver. Given secretary ross is focused on the domestic fishing industry in fishing production from the United States, which i think is welcome, idea best thing they can promote u. S. Fisheries . You and i have talked about the export issue. We were able to get language in the trade Promotion Authority for the first time focusing on fishing and ask for it and unfair subsidies for foreign fleet. What are other things that can be done to promote a goal that i think most of us certainly agree with. I found a bit repetitive to some of my earlier comments. There is some headroom in our domestic harvest potential. I mention the west coast situation where theyre leaving fish in the water due to constraints, partly to some lingering regulatory constraints that may or may not be any longer necessary. I think there are opportunities in some of hard data fisheries when we talk again about flexibility in our annual catch limits in rebuilding schedules and Accountability Measures for data stocks. I think there are some opportunities for us to maximize that. Again, i am a Firm Believer in sciencebased overall catch limits. Its been a cornerstone in the North Pacific for 40 years. Within the overarching longterm conservation construct, there are opportunities and again in the area for marine agriculture, that is where more headroom is if you will in terms of growing our production and competing more in the world market that were currently those are great deal of potential meet agriculture area. Thank you. Senator booker. Thank you, senator. I appear not only because of the important issues, but the key components. I really appreciate that. We make thank you very much. And here for you. I have your back, sir. Thank you for being here for this important issue. Mr. Oliver, you said something that makes me want to have this be my first question. 10 of the world fish is discarded as by catch and more than 22 billion pounds of fish a year they estimate by catch. This is fish not intended to be killed as a result of our mouth is. In recent years, we discarded over 600 Million Pounds annually in sundays guard over 6060 of their catch. That is by catch. I find those numbers astonishing and unacceptable in a think we could do better then doing that kind of damage to the Wildlife Center oceans. I wonder if youll commit to focusing on the issue more so in your new role to see if theres anything we can do, bring forth ideas about strengthening existing by catch provisions. Senator, the by catch in by catch reduction has long been a focus on local of the agency. It is also a goal that is supported by the councils in the council system. Many of the councils have taken Great Strides to reduce by catch. Some of it is economic discourse, too small for whatever reason are thrown over. A lot of the by catch that occurs or regulatory discarded and there are certain regulations in place that prohibit people from retaining for selling by catch in the reason primarily is to keep them from targeting when they are not supposed to be targeting it. And then you get to the question a while, there is by catch and then there is waste. Part of the point of your question was ways. In my own experience in North Pacific fisheries several years ago we implemented a full retention, full utilization required meant for several for the premise was the keep it, you catch it, you keep it. Accounts against the quota whether you feel that way or not, but its still a waste. We didnt like the waste of all the fish. We backed up to 100 for a variety of practicality reasons. The essence of that is the reduced discards through that program by millions a year, hundreds of thousands of tons a year a discards. Other councils have done similar things. There are still regulatory discards in place that anything shouldnt be in place or need to be carefully reevaluated. You are filibustering and are about to be a time. Can we do better . And will you focus on trying to do better . Yes. Thank you. I will try and get another question in. The chairman is pretty strict time limits. In 1996, and Sustainable Fisheries act practice rebuilding requirements and they were identified as overfished. By 2006, only three have been rebuilt. The reauthorization act responded by requiring annual catch limit and by requiring the rebuilding plan to end overfishing immediately. By 2016 United States had built an additional 30 talks and we now have the lowest level in our entire history of recording the spirit in mind of success, do you agree it is a critical tool for managing fisheries and how do you respond to call for more flexibility in rebuilding timelines. Great folks in my state are calling for more flexibility. Im wondering how you balance that. Senator, it is a balancing act. As i stated previously, i am a Firm Believer in annual catch limits. Its a cornerstone of our management, but i also believe there are opportunities more we can have it both ways. There are opportunities in how we apply catch limit and Accountability Measures in rebuilding plans where we can achieve flexibility that people are seeking without rolling back Conservation Successes and without resulting in additional overfished stocks. I think we can balance that. Mr. Chairman. You can go on as long as you want. Thank you, sir. Thank you for being so generous with time. No problem, fellow senator. The larger economical challenges we have which is a critical industry for my state that provides a tremendous source of jobs, but to achieve these managers must consider the balance between ecological needs and also commercial and recreational value of fishing that includes managing forage fish that larger species depend upon to hairdryers to improve sustainability of these important fish. Nationwide we need to be doing more. Theres no federal management plans for forage species. But species. What can noaa fisheries in the council do to improve so the fishermen in coastal communities can continue to enjoy benefits of healthy fish stocks . I totally agree with you the importance of forage fish and we talk about Ecosystem Management and thats a critical aspect and i call back of my North Pacific experience. We have a number of species every two decades for those very reasons. There are probably different regions that i dont fully understand. Theyre fisheries on the stocks for good reasons, but it goes back to the balancing act. I very much appreciate and understand the importance of forage fish and i think it up to each Council Working with the agency to make sure we are protecting those to the extent we need to be doing for the larger ecological processes. We cant maintain longterm sustainability unless we have it must be managed properly and have an adequate base. They are very important. Gray. You know shark spinning was first outlawed in u. S. Waters in 2000 in the loophole was closed by the act of 2009. I recently asked your office, and the investigations noaa has opened since january 1, 2010. I was shocked to find out this and 2010, noaa has investigated 500 incidences of alleged shark spinning. As of april, seven cases were opened but not yet charged. I asked for assurances. Weve keep me informed on the progress of investigating outstanding cases and can you assure me you and your take this seriously because shark fins have no nutritional value what so ever with serious damage to that species. I hope you get assurances that the agency tasked with investigating these will continue to make progress and keep me informed of the progress. Yes and yes. I want to note for the record the grace and generosity of the residing member, senator sullivan. As always, senator booker, ive got your back. Im going to wrap at the hearing with two more questions for both of the witnesses. I want to take advantage to two hours damning witnesses here. Dr. Kwame, what are some of the problems and somebody that does follow up on senator bookers line of questioning. What are some of the problems Councils Face when managing fisheries that catchy number of different talks and what is the ccc position on the use of catching . If you want to weigh in on this question. [inaudible] i want to start with the second question first. It is certainly been very successful in some part of the country that Different Councils and others including mine have been far more controversial. The ccc division should be a tool in the toolbox for Regional Council to determine if that works best for them. The old saying one size does not at all is quite appropriate. It may work in some regions, may not work in others. It should stay in as an option, not a mandate. The first question about some of the challenges that the Councils Face managing fisheries to catchy number different stocks. Simply in new england its a very big challenge because youve got the fish swimming together in one maybe much more more valuable not just financially, and ecological, but they treat all species the same. You cannot pick winners and losers. It is important that we collect a lot of data on it. It is a choke species in particularly as we move into the Ecosystem Management will exacerbate the problem as well because we are trying to manage not just one individual species. Mr. Oliver, given the comments . Be met by comments are very similar. When you have a fishery, sometimes its problematic that sometimes its not. About the species you happen to be catching you have market and it is not a problem. The problem comes into play when you are targeting one species and catching another that may be an economic discourse species are particularly a species that perhaps a choke target species and not for management come into play. Briefly addressed your question about cat shares. Shares were a huge priority for the previous administration. This administration hasnt taken a formal position personally. My personal experience is very similar to dr. Quinns. Its an incredibly important tool used in most of our major fisheries. In alaska, for example. I think two things. Its not necessarily be appropriate tool for all fisheries. I do believe whatever legislation occurs, if this new legislation, it really needs to maintain the maximum regional flexibility we can because so many of our fisheries are so different and the way you construct these different programs is very dependent on the specific characteristics the nuances of each fishery. I would just urge that maximum flexibility and whether or not we as a Catcher Program but how we designed the catch share program. Gray. When they wrap up with one final question and then i want to compliment you on their campuses of the important data in science and will back you up with that. We need that. Its critical to wellmanaged fisheries. I know that in the experience of both of you. I think the scenario were you with the bipartisan agreement. A final question ive heard a lot about in alaska in other hearings. It is an issue in different regions of the country and its treated differently in terms of how it is funded or subsidized. As you know, fishermen for some reason have complained about the cost of onboard observers and whether emerging technologies such as electronic monitoring might be less expensive and provide comparable or even better information for fisheries managers. Do they provide counsel for flexibility to use alternative technologies such as electronic monitoring and began a question for both of you, what additional tools can congress provide to speed up their use . I think its an important question. On the fishermen advised gateway barely have room to have an additional person on board have to do that. It can be burdensome, but we want, but there might be much more efficient ways of doing that. Do you have a view on not both of you . I will lead off. Very similar answer as the authorities in the act to put electronic monitoring in place and one says does not fit all. Regions have specific industries or specific fisheries that may or may not depending upon the size and a whole host of other things. Theres a lot of programs and other electronic monitoring if we have the flexibility in the tools in the toolbox to make a decision region by region effect the best way to go. I would just echo the importance of electronic monitoring options as an option for different fisheries. Does Congress Need to do more to make that clear that as a viable option . I dont know that theres more that has to be done. We have successfully implemented electronic monitoring options in the number of fisheries. I signed a rule last week that formally brings electronic monitoring into a North Pacific program as an option to a human observer. As you point out, many of the small boat fisheries that we want information on our simply physically unable to accommodate a human observer. While cameras may not be free or even not the cause less costly as many people thought they might be, they probably still are less costly than a human observer in certain they can perform functions that we need. We have cameras in some of the large offshore fact three books as well as other Processing Plant for different reasons. The importance of being able to use them is absolutely critical. Listen. I want to thank both of the witnesses for your past six. And surveys to our country in this critical area. Certainly, there is a strong interest, a bipartisan interest to work closely with the two of you as we move forward on a tsn consensus for nsa reauthorization. This is an important start and we will keep the record of this. Hoping for two more weeks if theres additional question for members who could not make the hearing and still have questions for both of you. But back, our hearing is adjourned. Thank you again for attending. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] the u. S. Senate is about to gavel into consider Marvin Kaplan for the Relations Board with the vote to advance his nomination at 11 00 eastern. The National LaborRelations Board has five members on the currently two democrats and mr. B. The secular public and member with one vacancy that the president or would fill with someone from his party. Live coverage now the senate here on cspan2. The president pro tempore the senate will come to order. The chaplain, dr. Barry black , will lead the senate in prayer. The chaplain let us pray. Holy god, you make the clouds your chariot and walk upon the wind