[House Report 106-698]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-698
======================================================================
REAUTHORIZATION OF ATLANTIC STRIPED BASS CONSERVATION ACT
_______
June 26, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 4408]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 4408) to reauthorize the Atlantic Striped Bass
Conservation Act, having considered the same, report favorably
thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of H.R. 4408 is to reauthorize the Atlantic
Striped Bass Conservation Act.
Background and Need for Legislation
Atlantic striped bass
Atlantic striped bass (Morone saxatilis) are an important
commercial and recreational fish found along the U.S. East
Coast from the St. Lawrence River in Canada to the St. John's
River in Florida. Striped bass can live up to 30 years and are
anadromous, meaning that they spend the majority of their adult
lives in salt water but return to freshwater rivers to spawn.
Mature females (age 4 and older) produce large quantities of
eggs, which are fertilized by mature males (age 2 and older) as
they are released. The fertilized eggs drift downstream while
developing, eventually hatching into larvae. After arriving in
nursery areas located in coastal sounds and estuaries, the
larvae mature into juvenile fish. The juveniles remain in the
estuary from two to four years, and then migrate into the
Atlantic Ocean. In the ocean, many populations of adult striped
bass migrate seasonally, wintering off the coast of the
Carolinas and ranging as far north as Maine in the summers.
These fish usually remain in nearshore State waters (less than
three miles offshore). With warming water temperature in the
spring, striped bass return to the riverine spawning areas to
continue their life cycle. Unlike Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus
spp.), Atlantic striped bass may spawn year after year. The
Chesapeake Bay produces the vast majority of coastal migratory
striped bass, but smaller spawning populations exist in the
Delaware and Hudson Rivers.
Economic value of the fishery
Striped bass are an important economic resource to the
States in the region. According to a 1999 report to Congress,
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) estimate that despite a
declining share of the harvest, the commercial striped bass
fishery ranks 25th for landings and 17th for ex-vessel revenues
among Atlantic finfish species. Among States allowing a
commercial harvest in 1998, fishermen harvested 1.2 million
fish, weighing 6.5 million pounds. These landings represent an
increase of 165,000 fish and 567,000 pounds since 1997. Among
States allowing a commercial fishery, those with the largest
proportion of the harvest were Virginia and Maryland. New
Jersey, Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Delaware do not
have a commercial fishery.
Recreational fishermen consider striped bass to be one of
the premier saltwater game fish along the East Coast. These
anglers support a coast-wide industry of charter boats, bait
and tackle shops, and related businesses. The 1996 Survey of
Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, conducted
by the FWS, estimated that 886,000 anglers spent 10.7 million
days fishing for striped bass in saltwater during 1996. Average
expenditures for all Atlantic Coast saltwater trips were about
$800 per angler in 1996, for a total estimated annual
expenditure in this fishery of $762 million. Recreational
landings in 1998 total 1.4 million fish, weighing an estimated
12.9 million pounds. These landings represent a decrease of
155,000 fish and 3.1 million pounds since 1997.
Fluctuating populations
Striped bass populations, along with other important
species such as bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix), fluctuate from
year to year. When Europeans first colonized America, striped
bass were so common that it was said that one could walk across
the Delaware River on the backs of the stripers. Since that
time, the striped bass population has fluctuated radically
between abundance and scarcity. In the early 1970s striped bass
were abundant and supported a large commercial fishery. By the
late 1970s, heavy fishing pressure combined with habitat
degradation and other poorly understood factors caused the
population to crash. Commercial landings plummeted from 14.7
million pounds in 1973 to 2.9 million pounds in 1984. During
this time, the species disappeared as a game fish. Currently,
the population of Atlantic striped bass has recovered to near
all-time record abundances with a total harvest of 19 million
pounds in 1998, but the causes of the huge population
fluctuations over the last century remain poorly understood.
Scientists and fishery managers believe that populations of
striped bass and other important East Coast species, including
bluefish, are linked. Many of these other species are managed
under the 1990 Atlantic Coastal Fishery Cooperative Management
Act which was modeled after the Atlantic Striped Bass
Conservation Act (ASBCA, 16 U.S.C. 1851 note). Because bluefish
and striped bass compete for similar prey species, abundant
striped bass populations may result in a decline in the number
of bluefish. The reverse is expected to hold for abundant
bluefish populations. Thus, fishery managers recognize the
importance of multi-species management techniques for striped
bass, bluefish and associated forage fish species.
The recovery of the striped bass fishery since the crash of
the late 1970s is an example of successful State and federal
cooperation and angler support over the last two decades, but
maintaining healthy striped bass stocks will require continued
coordination and careful management. In its 1999 report to
Congress, the Atlantic States Marine Fishery Commission (ASMFC)
stated that total landings of Atlantic striped bass have
increased since the early 1990s, peaking at nearly 22 million
pounds in 1997 before dropping to about 19 million pounds in
1998. The ASMFC report highlights concerns resulting from 1998
fishery-independent indices. While juvenile indices were about
average for the time series, indices of adult abundance showed
a stable or decreasing population, and preliminary 1999
estimates of spawning biomass were among the lowest this
decade. The report also states that striped bass were fished
above the target level in 1998 and 1999. Of particular concern
was the finding that fishing mortality for older (age 8 and
above) fish exceeded the definition of overfishing in 1998.
These age 8 and older fish represent the most important age
class for recreational fishermen, and provide a large
percentage of the spawning biomass. Regulations for the 2000
season include harvest reductions to meet the target fishing
mortality rate and to increase the number of large fish in the
population. The Committee is concerned with the negative trends
in juvenile production, particularly in the Chesapeake Bay, as
well as removal of too many large fish from the population, and
urges the ASMFC and the States to take the necessary steps to
ensure that the population is protected.
Legal regime for management
Because of the migratory patterns of the fish, the
management of striped bass is subject to the regulation of many
States. The Atlantic States Marine Fishery Commission (ASMFC)
is an interstate commission that was established by interstate
compact in 1942 to coordinate the management efforts of the
States on the Atlantic Coast for a variety of
interjurisdictional fisheries, including striped bass. The
Commission consists of representatives from Maine, New
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York,
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. In addition, the
District of Columbia and the Potomac River Fisheries Commission
(PRFC) have an interest in striped bass management. Atlantic
striped bass management is based on the Atlantic Striped Bass
Fishery Management Plan (FMP) of the ASMFC. The FMP was first
adopted in 1981, and has undergone five amendments and various
addendums through 1999. The interstate plans developed by ASMFC
establish guidelines for State regulations to reduce harvest
pressure in coastal waters. Under the FMP, 14 coastal
jurisdictions (12 States, D.C. and PRFC) have principal
management responsibility for striped bass and these
jurisdictions adopt regulations consistent with the FMP.
Although they are not given seats on the Commission, the
District of Columbia and the PRFC are required to comply with
the FMP and the provisions of the Atlantic Striped Bass
Conservation Act, and may participate on the ASMFC's striped
bass Management Board and technical committees.
In 1979, Congress first authorized the Emergency Striped
Bass Study as part of the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act
(Public Law 96-118) to address the problem of declining striped
bass stocks. The study was carried out jointly by FWS and
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and investigated
climate change, predation, competition among species and
fishing mortality in the search for the cause of the decline.
The primary conclusion of the study was that, regardless of the
cause, major reductions in fishing mortality were required if
the species were to recover. In response, the ASMFC prepared
the first coast-wide management plan for Atlantic striped bass
in 1981. To ensure that the States would comply with the plan,
Congress passed the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act of
1984 (ASBCA). This Act created a federal mechanism for
enforcing the interstate fishery management plan. Under the
ASBCA, the ASMFC is required to notify the Secretaries of the
Interior and Commerce if a State is not complying with the FMP.
After receiving notice that a State is not in compliance with
the plan, the Secretaries can jointly declare a moratorium on
fishing for Atlantic striped bass within the coastal waters of
that State. This strict enforcement policy is unique to the
ASMFC and has not been extended to the other interstate fishery
commissions approved by Congress.
Amendments to the ASBCA in 1988 authorized the Secretary of
Commerce, acting through NMFS, to regulate Atlantic striped
bass within federal waters of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ)
from 3 to 200 miles offshore. Using this authority, the
Secretary is required to develop offshore regulations that are
consistent with the national standards set forth in the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16
U.S.C. 1851 et seq.) and are compatible with the ASMFC striped
bass FMP. In 1990, NMFS declared a moratorium on fishing for
striped bass in federal waters to ensure the effectiveness of
strict catch limits in State waters. This moratorium remains in
effect today. The 1988 amendments also included provisions
authorizing NMFS and FWS to carry out annual studies and
population assessments of striped bass populations. The ASBCA
and associated striped bass studies have been reauthorized a
number of times. Congress last reauthorized the ASBCA in 1997
with the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act Amendments of
1997 (Public Law 105-146). This Act provided a substantial
overhaul of the statute by revising, reorganizing and
integrating various statutory provisions related to striped
bass. The amendment combined the studies and research
authorizations from the existing ASBCA and the Anadromous Fish
Conservation Act, and provisions of the 1988 reauthorization
governing the federal management of striped bass in the EEZ. In
addition, the 1997 amendments required biennial reports from
ASMFC to Congress concerning the status of striped bass stocks,
mandated public participation in the preparation of management
plans, and provided funding for continuing research efforts
related to striped bass and related species.
The 1997 amendments to the ASBCA authorized important
ongoing research and studies on striped bass. Section 6 of the
ASBCA directs the Secretaries to conduct continuing studies of
striped bass, including annual stock assessments,
investigations into population fluctuations of striped bass
populations, investigations into the effects of water quality,
land use and other environmental factors on recruitment,
spawning, mortality and abundance of striped bass. Section 6
also directs the Secretaries to conduct investigations of the
interactions of striped bass and other fish such as bluefish,
and the effects of interspecies predation and competition on
the recruitment, spawning, mortality and abundance of striped
bass. The Committee feels that these striped bass predator/prey
and interspecific competition studies have not received
adequate attention to characterize the impacts of interspecific
competition on striped bass. The Committee encourages the
Secretaries to focus additional resources into these areas.
The Atlantic Coastal Fishery Cooperative Management Act of
1990 (Public Law 103-206) gave the Secretary of Commerce the
authority to impose moratoria in State waters for other
Atlantic fisheries managed under ASMFC-approved fishery
management plans. In general, the ability of the federal
government to impose a moratoria has been effective in
encouraging State compliance with fishery management plans.
Since 1984, the Secretaries have only imposed one brief
moratorium for striped bass.
Authorization of appropriations for the ASBCA expired on
September 30, 1999. H.R. 4408 is a simple reauthorization of
the ASBCA. The legislation authorizes a total of $3.75 million
over three years to carry out the ASBCA, which includes an
additional $200,000 a year for fiscal years 2001 through 2003
for ongoing striped bass research. The Committee intends that
the additional dollars be used for peer-reviewed research under
Section 6 of the Act to study the interactions between striped
bass, bluefish and their prey species. This research should be
funded in addition to continued work on stock assessments,
investigations into the cause of striped bass population
fluctuations, and the effects of interspecies predation and
competition on the recruitment, spawning potential, mortality,
and abundance of Atlantic striped bass. The Committee would
like to see the Administration and the ASMFC place greater
emphasis on improving harvest reporting and statistics programs
to ensure that current allocations and commercial and
recreational fishery harvest levels do not endanger the long-
term health of striped bass populations.
Committee Action
H.R. 4408 was introduced on May 9, 2000, by Congressman Jim
Saxton (R-NJ). The bill was referred to the Committee on
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on
Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans. On April 28, 2000,
the Subcommittee held a hearing in Toms River, New Jersey, on
striped bass. On May 18, 2000, the Subcommittee met to mark up
the bill. The bill was ordered favorably reported without
amendment to the Full Committee by voice vote. On June 7, 2000,
the Full Resources Committee met to consider the bill. No
amendments were offered and the bill was ordered favorably
reported to the House of Representatives by voice vote.
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations
are reflected in the body of this report.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United
States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.
Compliance With House Rule XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the
rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B)
of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2)
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in
revenues or tax expenditures.
3. Government Reform Oversight Findings. Under clause
3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the Committee has received no report of
oversight findings and recommendations from the Committee on
Government Reform on this bill.
4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause
3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate
for this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, June 21, 2000.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4408, a bill to
reauthorize the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Deborah
Reis (for federal costs), and Marjorie Miller (for the state
and local impact).
Sincerely,
Steven M. Lieberman
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 4408--A bill to reauthorize the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation
Act
Summary: H.R. 4408 would authorize the appropriation of
$1.25 million annually through 2003 for the management and
conservation of striped bass. This program is carried out by
the Departments of Commerce and the Interior, which would be
authorized to receive $1 million and $0.25 million,
respectively.
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing H.R. 4408 would cost $1 million in
2001 and $3.75 million over the 2001-2003 period. The bill
would not affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-
as-you-go procedures would not apply.
The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments. Enacting this legislation would benefit the states
that are eligible for financial assistance under the Atlantic
Striped Bass Conservation Act.
Estimated Cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 4408 is shown in the following table.
For this estimate, CBO assumes that the amounts authorized by
H.R. 4408 will be appropriated for each fiscal year and that
outlays will follow historical spending patterns for the
authorized programs. The costs of this legislation fall within
budget function 300 (natural resources and environment).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------------
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Spending Under Current Law:
Budget Authority \1\.............................. 1 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................. 1 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Changes:
Authorization Level............................... 0 1 1 1 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................. 0 1 1 1 0 0
Spending Under H.R. 4408:
Authorization Level \1\........................... 1 1 1 1 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................. 1 1 1 1 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2000 level is the amount appropriated for that year for the management and conservation of striped bass.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments:
H.R. 4408 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in
UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments. Enacting this legislation would benefit the states
that are eligible for financial assistance under the Atlantic
Striped Bass Conservation Act.
Estimated impact on the private sector: The bill would
impose no new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Deborah Reis. Impact
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller.
Impact on the Private Sector: Natalie Tawil.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Compliance With Public Law 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
Preemption of State, Local or Tribal Law
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 7 OF THE ATLANTIC STRIPED BASS CONSERVATION ACT
SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS; COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.
[(a) Authorization.--For each of fiscal years 1998, 1999,
and 2000, there are authorized to be appropriated to carry out
this Act--
[(1) $800,000 to the Secretary of Commerce; and
[(2) $250,000 to the Secretary of the Interior.]
(a) Authorization.--For each of fiscal years 2001, 2002,
and 2003, there are authorized to be appropriated to carry out
this Act--
(1) $1,000,000 to the Secretary of Commerce; and
(2) $250,000,000 to the Secretary of the Interior.
* * * * * * *