Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2005

MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005 -- (Senate - June 19, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REED. I thank Senators Stevens and Inouye for including a report in Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act, S. 2012, to study council management coordination between the New England Fishery Management Council and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, MAFMC. This report speaks to an issue of great importance to Rhode Island fishermen. I would also like to thank Senator Lautenberg for working with me on developing this language.

In October 2005, I introduced the Rhode Island Fishermen's Fairness Act in order to address a serious flaw in our Nation's regional fisheries management system by adding Rhode Island to the MAFMC, which currently consists of representatives from New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina. The legislation would create two seats on the MAFMC for Rhode Island: one seat nominated by the Governor of Rhode Island and appointed by the Secretary of Commerce, and a second seat filled by Rhode Island's principal state official with marine fishery management responsibility. There is a precedent for this proposed legislation. In 1996, North Carolina's representatives in Congress succeeded in adding that State to the MAFMC through an amendment to the Sustainable Fisheries Act. Like Rhode Island, a significant proportion of North Carolina's landed fish species were managed by the MAFMC, yet the State had no vote on the council.

While I am disappointed that this reauthorization bill did not include my legislation, I believe that the report will provide useful information to the Senate that will support Rhode Island's participation as a voting member on the MAFMC based on the Magnuson-Stevens Act's National Standards and the economic value of MAFMC managed species to Rhode Island. The report will provide an opportunity for the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, in consultation with the New England Fishery Management Council, to: evaluate the role of council liaisons in the development and approval of management plans for fisheries in which Rhode Island has a demonstrated interest and significant landings; evaluate approaches developed by the councils to improve representation of non-member States in decision-making; and analyze characteristics that supported North Carolina's inclusion in the MAFMC and how those characteristics support Rhode Island's position.

The MAFMC manages the following 13 species, all of which are landed in Rhode Island: Illex squid, loligo squid, Atlantic mackerel, black sea bass, bluefish, butterfish, monkfish, scup, spiny dogfish, summer flounder, surfclam, ocean quahog, and tilefish. Rhode Island fishermen target a large proportion of species managed by MAFMC. These species make up a large proportion of landings within Rhode Island every year. Between 1995 and 2004, MAFMC species represented between 42 percent and 56 percent of all finfish landed in Rhode Island annually, for an average of 37 percent of total landings by weight. The economic value of these species to Rhode Island in 2004 totaled $72.8 million. Between 1995 and 2004, squid, Illex and loligo, was the number one marine species, based on economic value, landed in Rhode Island, with a value of $24.7 million in 2004. Because of these fisheries importance to Rhode Island, both in terms of the economic value and overall landings by weight, I believe the State deserves a vote in the management of these species on the MAFMC.

Again, I want to thank Senators STEVENS, INOUYE, and LAUTENBERG for their assistance in addressing Rhode Island's interest to become a voting member of the MAFMC. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this issue.

Mr. WARNER. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment at the desk be agreed to, the committee-reported substitute, as amended, be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov