98020: Fishery, Aquaculture, and Marine Mammal
Legislation in the 105th Congress II

Eugene H. Buck
Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division

October 28, 1998

CONTENTS FOR THIS SECTION

6. Ocean Policy
7. Striped Bass
8. Appropriations
9. Other Miscellaneous Issues

Aquaculture: Background and Issues

1. Aquaculture Policy
2. Other Miscellaneous Issues

Marine Mammals: Background and Issues

1. Eastern Pacific Tuna Fishery and Dolphin Protection
2. Importing Polar Bear Trophies from Canada
3. Good Samaritan Exemption
4. U.S. Whaling Policy

LEGISLATION

6. Ocean Policy

Background. As use of the ocean and nearshore coastal waters has increased, concern has grown that such use may approach or exceed sustainable limits if care is not taken. Managers cite increasing reports of harmful coastal blooms, a large hypoxic (i.e., low oxygen) zone appearing annually off the mouth of the Mississippi River, strandings and deaths of marine mammals, and other occurrences as signs that sustainable limits of use may be approaching. The United Nations General Assembly designated 1998 as the "Year of the Ocean" to emphasize the economic and physical importance of the world's oceans http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/oceans/yoto/.

Congressional Action. H.Con.Res. 131, expressing the sense of Congress regarding 1998 as the International Year of the Ocean, was passed by the House on November 13, 1997, and by the Senate on June 10, 1998. On March 12, 1998, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation approved a substitute amendment for H.Con.Res. 131. S. 1213, establishing a National Ocean Council and a Commission on Ocean Policy, passed the Senate on November 13, 1997. The House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on March 19, 1998, on S. 1213 and on House legislation to establish a Commission on Ocean Policy -- H.R. 2547 (Oceans Act of 1997) and H.R. 3445 (Oceans Act of 1998). On July 29, 1998, the House Resources Committee ordered H.R. 3445 reported as amended. The amended H.R. 3445 passed the House by voice vote on September 15, 1998. (For more information on this issue and these bills, see CRS Report 98-640 ENR, Oceans Act in the 105^th Congress: Bills Relating to a U.S. Oceans Policy.)

7. Striped Bass

Background. The recovery of Atlantic striped bass since the early 1980s has been a remarkable success for fishery management http://www.wh.whoi.edu/library/sos94/spsyn/af/sbass.html.

Congressional Action. H.R. 1658, reauthorizing and amending the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act, was signed into law as P.L. 105-146, by President Clinton on December 16, 1997. No action has been taken on H.R. 393, proposing to prohibit the commercial harvesting of Atlantic striped bass.

8. Appropriations

National Marine Fisheries Service. The total FY1999 budget request for NMFS was about $351.4 million, an increase of about $5.1 million (1.5%) from the FY1998 funding enacted. The conference agreement on FY1999 funding provided almost $370.6 million, an increase of about $24.3 million (7.0%). Increases for individual subcategories were $11.3 million for "Information Collection and Analysis" (includes increases of $7.4 million for "resource information," $1.8 million for "Pacific Salmon Treaty Program," and $3 million in new funding for "GULF FIN Data Collection Effort"), $12.7 million for "Conservation, Management, and Operations" (includes increases of $2.6 million for "Fisheries Management Programs," $1.5 million for "Columbia River Hatcheries," $1.1 million for "Regional Councils," $2.8 million for "Endangered Species Act Recovery Plan," and $2.6 million in new funding for "Observers/Training"), and $0.3 million for "State and Industry Assistance Programs" (includes an increase of $1 million for "Interstate Fish Commissions" and a decrease of $0.7 million for "Product Quality and Safety/Seafood Inspection").

Fish and Wildlife Service. Increased funding for FY1999 specifically provided for in the conference report on H.R. 4328 (P.L. 105-277) includes $20 million for salmon and steelhead recovery in Washington state to be administered by the Office of the Governor's Salmon Recovery Office, $0.8 million for fish passage facilities, $0.6 million for a prototype machine to mark hatchery-reared salmon by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, $0.4 million for Alabama sturgeon, $0.3 million for Washington salmon enhancement, and $0.2 million for the national fish health survey.

Army Corps of Engineers. P.L. 105-245 provided $60 million for the Corps of Engineers Columbia/Snake River salmon recovery efforts in FY1999, a significant reduction from the $95 million provided in FY1998. However, P.L. 105-277 provided a supplemental appropriation of an additional $35 million for the Corps of Engineers Columbia/Snake River salmon recovery efforts to maintain level funding for this program in FY1999.

Other Funding in P.L. 105-277. Other FY1999 funds provided in P.L. 105-277 include 1) $3.5 million for a Commission on Ocean Policy, should such be authorized; 2) $5 million in emergency disaster assistance for New England groundfish fisheries; 3) $1 million for the cost of a direct loan in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands crab fisheries for a fishing capacity reduction program; 4) $0.72 million for Pfiesteria (Agricultural Research Service); 5) $0.4 million for alternative salmon products in Alaska (Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service); 6) almost $4.2 million for the Saltonstall-Kennedy grant program; 7) $1 million to support coral reef studies in the Pacific and Southeast and almost $2.93 million for Pfisteria and other harmful algal bloom research and monitoring (NOAA's Ocean Assessment Program) as well as an additional $5.2 million for research on pfisteria, hypoxia, and other harmful algal blooms (NOAA's Ocean and Coastal Research and the Coastal Ocean Program); 9) $1 million for the Gulf of Mexico Oyster Disease Initiative (National Sea Grant Program); 10) $1 million for New England fishermen's health care (NOAA); 11) an additional $1 million for the Bureau of Land Management's fisheries program; 12) $0.5 million for fish passage research by the U.S. Geological Survey; 13) $5 million for the Glacier Bay National Park fishery buyout (Department of the Interior); 14) funding to implement the American Fisheries Act (Division C, Title II), including $0.75 million direct loan costs under section 207(a), $20 million for direct payments under section 207(d), $0.25 million for direct loan costs under section 211(e), and $8 million administrative implementation expenses. While the conference agreement did not approve the Department of Commerce's full proposed collection of $19.8 million in new fisheries fees, the NOAA budget did include $4 million in a new offsetting collection of "fish fees/IFQ CDQ."

9. Other Miscellaneous Issues

a. Feasibility study of a national recreational fishing license. H.R. 2653 would authorize a study to determine the feasibility of a national sport fishing license. No action has been taken on this measure.

b. Managing fishing in Glacier Bay National Park . S. 1064 would authorize specific and limited commercial and subsistence fishing within Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska. On October 21, 1998, President Clinton signed P.L. 105-277, the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, including a compromise on commercial fishing in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska (related to S. 1064). These provisions modify language proposed by the Senate regarding commercial and subsistence fishing in Glacier Bay National Park. The National Park Service is directed to extend the comment period on the pending regulations (62 Federal Register 18547, April 16, 1997) until January 15, 1999, modify the draft regulations to conform to the fiscal year 1999 Interior Appropriations Bill language, and publish the changes in the final regulations.

c. Exempting fishing industry persons from certain antitrust laws (allowing collective agreements between fishermen and processors). S. 533 would allow fishermen to form associations to work with similar associations of processors to establish first-wholesale purchase prices -- the prices paid to the processors for fish products, and ex-vessel prices paid to the fishermen. No action has been taken on this measure.

d. Implementing recommendations in the Great Lakes Fishery Restoration Study. Two bills, H.R. 1481/S. 659, authorize the implementation, by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, of study recommendations prepared in compliance with the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act of 1990. President Clinton signed H.R. 1481 into law as P.L. 105-265 on October 19, 1998.

e. Atlantic tuna. Senate Amendment No. 921 to S. 1023, FY1998 Treasury Department and general government appropriations, sought to improve compliance with the International Convention on the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas by enforcing more stringent import measures on Atlantic bluefin tuna. Although the Senate adopted this language and it was eventually inserted in H.R. 2378 as passed by the Senate, this provision was removed in Conference. H.R. 3460 would extend the authorization of appropriations for the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of 1975 through FY2001. H.R. 3460 was passed by the House on August 3, 1998.

f. Dungeness crab management. S. 1726/H.R. 3498 would authorize the states of Washington, Oregon, and California to regulate the Dungeness crab fishery in the Exclusive Economic Zone offshore of their states. The House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 3498 on May 7, 1998; and reported (amended) by the full committee on August 4, 1998 (H.Rept. 105-674). No action has been taken on S. 1726.

g. Governing International Fishery Agreements. H.R. 2393 would approve an extension of a governing international fishery agreement (GIFA) with the People's Republic of China. H.R. 3460 would approve the extension of a GIFA with the Republic of Latvia. H.R. 3461 would approve the extension of a GIFA with Poland. H.R. 3460 (Latvia) was passed by the House on August 3, 1998, and H.R. 3461 was passed by the House, amended, on October 12, 1998, but no action was taken on H.R. 2393.

h. Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act reauthorization. H.R. 3460 would extend the authorization of appropriations for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act of 1995 through FY2001. H.R. 3460 was passed by the House on August 3, 1998.

i. Disapproval of bycatch reduction device regulations. H.R. 3735 would disapprove NMFS regulations requiring the Gulf of Mexico shrimp fishery to use bycatch reduction devices (BRDs) in their trawl nets to reduce the incidental bycatch of juvenile red snapper.

j. IRS treatment of state commercial fishery limited entry permits. On May 7, 1998, H.R. 2676, the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, was amended in the Senate to incorporate a provision making it more difficult for the Internal Revenue Service to seize state commercial fishery limited entry permits for nonpayment of taxes. This measure was signed into law as P.L. 105-206 on July 22, 1998, with this fishery permit language included in §3445(c).

k. Upper Colorado and San Juan River Basin fisheries. H.R. 3669 would authorize funding for the implementation of the endangered fish recovery implementation programs in the Upper Colorado and San Juan River Basins. No action has been taken on this bill.

l. Gulf of Mexico red snapper quotas. S. 2417 and H.R. 4423 would amend the MSFCMA to provide that the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery be managed so as to provide larger catch quotas. No action has been taken on either of these bills.

m. Longline Fishing Restrictions. H.R. 4500 would restrict the U.S. Atlantic swordfish pelagic longline fishery. The House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans has scheduled a hearing on this bill for September 24, 1998.

Aquaculture: Background and Issues

Aquaculture is broadly defined as the farming or husbandry of fish, shellfish, and other aquatic animals and plants, usually in a controlled or selected environment. The diversity of aquaculture is typified by such activities as: fish farming, usually applied to freshwater commercial aquaculture operations (catfish and trout farms are examples http://www.usda.gov/nass/pubs/stathigh/1998/lv-aq.htm); shellfish and seaweed culture; net-pen culture, used by the salmon industry wherein fish remain captive throughout their lives in marine pens built from nets; and ocean ranching, used by the Pacific Coast salmon industry which cultures juveniles, releases them to mature in the open ocean, and catches them when they return as adults to spawn. Fish hatcheries are government and commercial aquaculture facilities that raise fish for recreational and commercial stocking as well as for mitigation of aquatic resource and habitat damage. http://ag.ansc.purdue.edu/aquanic/

The United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization has characterized aquaculture as one of the world's fastest growing food production activities. World aquaculture production http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/FISHERY/publ/circular/c886.1/c886-1.htm more than doubled in 10 years, from about 10 million metric tons in 1984 to a record 25.5 million metric tons in 1994, with a value of approximately $40 billion. U.S. aquaculture, until recently and with a few exceptions, has been considered a minor industry. By 1994, the U.S. aquaculture industry produced about 0.3 million metric tons http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/erssor/livestock/ldp-aqs/1998/aquaculture_outlook_03.05.98 with a farm gate value of $751 million. For more information, see CRS Report 97-436 ENR, Aquaculture and the Federal Role.

1. Aquaculture Policy

Background. Debate in Congress has often focused on the questions of what might be an appropriate national policy to guide the safe and effective development of the commercial aquaculture industry and what might be the appropriate level of federal support for this industry under such a policy. The Department of Agriculture has assumed leadership of freshwater aquaculture research and development. http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/afsaqua.htm

Congressional Action. S. 1080 and language in S. 1150 seek to amend the National Aquaculture Act of 1980 to: (1) redefine "aquaculture"; (2) define "private aquaculture"; (3) authorize (rather than require) the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a National Aquaculture Information Center within the Department; (4) authorize appropriations through FY2002; and (5) provide additional encouragement for U.S. aquaculture development. An extensive program modification was introduced as S. 1080 (National Aquaculture Development, Research, and Promotion Act). However, on October 29, 1997, the Senate passed S. 1150 (including Section 230 on National Aquaculture Policy, Planning, and Development) providing a more streamlined approach, shifting almost all jurisdiction over aquaculture to the Department of Agriculture and minimizing the cooperative roles of the Departments of the Interior and of Commerce. In addition, the proposed treatment of aquacultural species as "livestock" would remove these species from the jurisdiction of general fish and wildlife laws and regulations, such as the Lacey Act. On February 24, 1998 and pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 365, the House amended S. 1150 to incorporate the provisions of H.R. 2534. In the House-amended S. 1150, Section 317 would reauthorize the National Aquaculture Act of 1980 through FY2002, while Section 341 would repeal Section 1476 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3323), that authorized grants for research on intensive water recirculating aquaculture systems at Illinois State University and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University and appropriations for these grants. On April 22, 1998, the conference reported language reauthorizing the National Aquaculture Act through FY2002, but declined to include any other aquaculture provisions (H.Rept. 105-492). This measure was signed as P.L. 105-185 on June 23, 1998, with the aquaculture reauthorization in §301(i).

2. Other Miscellaneous Issues

a. Marion NFH Conveyance. H.R. 608/S. 1883 would convey the Marion National Fish Hatchery and the Claude Harris National Aquacultural Research Center to the State of Alabama. While no action has been taken on H.R. 608, S. 1883 was reported ( amended) by the Committee on Environment and Public Works on July 24, 1998 (S.Rept. 105-263) and passed by the Senate, as amended, on July 31, 1998. After referral to the House Committee on Resources, this measure was called up and passed the House by voice vote on September 9, 1998. President Clinton signed this measure into law as P.L. 105-239 on September 23, 1998.

Marine Mammals: Background and Issues

Due in part to the high level of dolphin mortality (estimated at more than 400,000 animals per year) in the eastern tropical Pacific tuna purse-seine fishery, Congress enacted the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) in 1972. The Act established a moratorium on the "taking" of marine mammals in U.S. waters and by U.S. nationals on the high seas. The Act also established a moratorium on the importation of marine mammals and marine mammal products into the United States. This new Act protected marine mammals from "clubbing, mutilation, poisoning, capture in nets, and other human actions that lead to extinction." It also expressly authorized the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior to issue permits for the "taking" of marine mammals for certain purposes, such as scientific research and public display. http://www.nmfs.gov/tmcintyr/mmpatext/mmpacont.html

Under the Act, the Secretary of Commerce, acting through NMFS http://www.nmfs.gov/tmcintyr/mmpahome.html, is responsible for conservation and management of whales, dolphins, porpoises, seals, and sea lions http://www.nmfs.gov/tmcintyr/spec_idx.html. The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), is responsible for walruses http://www.fws.gov/r9extaff/biologues/bio_walr.html, sea and marine otters, polar bears http://www.fws.gov/r9extaff/biologues/bio_pola.html, manatees http://www.fws.gov/r9extaff/biologues/bio_mana.html, and dugongs. This division of authority derives from agency responsibilities as they existed when the MMPA was enacted. Title II of the Act established an independent Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) and its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals to oversee and recommend actions necessary to meet the requirements of the Act.

Prior to passage of the MMPA, states were responsible for marine mammals on lands and in waters under their jurisdiction. The MMPA shifted marine mammal management authority to the federal government. It provides, however, that management authority, on a species-by-species basis, could be returned to a state that adopts conservation and management programs consistent with the purposes and policies of the Act. It also provides that the moratorium on taking can be waived for specific purposes, if the taking will not disadvantage the affected species or population. It provides that permits may be issued to take or import any marine mammal species, including depleted species, for scientific research or to enhance the survival or recovery of the species or stock. It allows U.S. citizens to apply for and obtain authorization for the take of small numbers of mammals incidental to activities other than commercial fishing (e.g., offshore oil and gas exploration and development) if the taking would have no more than a negligible impact on any marine mammal species or stock, provided that monitoring requirements and other conditions are met.

The Act's moratorium on taking does not apply to any Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo who resides in Alaska and who dwells on the coast of the North Pacific or Arctic Ocean if such taking is for subsistence purposes or for creating and selling authentic Native articles of handicrafts and clothing, and is not done wastefully.

The Act also authorizes the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing operations. In 1988, most U.S. commercial fish harvesters were exempted from otherwise applicable rulemaking and permit requirements for a five-year period, pending development of an improved system to govern the incidental taking of marine mammals in the course of commercial fishing operations. This exemption expired at the end of FY1993, and new provisions were enacted by P.L. 103-238, which reauthorized the MMPA through FY1999. These new provisions indefinitely authorized the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing operations and provided for the preparation of assessments for all marine mammal stocks in waters under U.S. jurisdiction, for the development and implementation of take reduction plans for stocks that may be reduced or are being maintained below their optimum sustainable population levels due to interactions with commercial fisheries http://www.nmfs.gov/tmcintyr/mammals/mmap.html, and for studies of pinniped-fishery interactions http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/pubs/tm/tm28/areas.htm. The eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery was excluded from the incidental take regimes enacted in 1988 and 1994. Instead, the taking of marine mammals incidental to that fishery is governed by separate provisions of the Act. For more information, see CRS Report 94-751 ENR, Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994.

1. Eastern Pacific Tuna Fishery and Dolphin Protection

Background. From its inception in 1972, one of the goals of the MMPA was to reduce the incidental mortality of dolphins in the eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery to insignificant levels approaching a zero rate. In the early 1990s, U.S. tuna processors announced that they would no longer purchase tuna caught in association with dolphins, and Congress passed the Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act to set standards for labeling tuna as "dolphin-safe." A short time later, the International Dolphin Conservation Act of 1992 prohibited the sale, purchase, transport, or shipment in the United States of any tuna not dolphin-safe.

During the mid-1990s, dolphin mortality in the tuna fishery declined to historically low levels. This, in large part, resulted from the 1992 La Jolla Agreement, which established annual dolphin mortality limits, implemented through vessel-specific quotas. Dissatisfied that they remained subject to U.S. tuna embargoes under the MMPA despite their success in reducing dolphin mortality, tuna fishing nations and the United States, in October 1994, signed the Declaration of Panama. The Declaration called for strengthening and formalizing the International Dolphin Conservation Program established under the La Jolla Agreement, contingent on changes to U.S. law.

Congressional Action. Legislation in the 104^th and 105^th Congresses (H.R. 408, H.R. 1259, and S. 39 in the 105^th Congress) sought to amend the MMPA as called for under the Declaration of Panama. http://environment.miningco.com/library/weekly/bltuna.htm On August 15, 1997, President Clinton signed H.R. 408, the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act, as P.L. 105-42. This Act eliminates tuna import sanctions for nations in compliance with the International Dolphin Conservation Program and provides that the definition of "dolphin-safe" tuna be altered to include tuna caught by encircling dolphins as long as observers document that no dolphins were killed or seriously injured, unless a 3-year study to be undertaken by NMFS finds that chase and encirclement of dolphins with purse seine nets is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock. Most recently, nations fishing for tuna in the eastern tropical Pacific reached an agreement on a new treaty to formalize the La Jolla Agreement and the Panama Declaration and implement amendments to the MMPA enacted in 1997 in P.L. 105-42.

2. Importing Polar Bear Trophies from Canada

Background. The 1994 amendments to the MMPA provided for the import of polar bear trophies from Canada subject to certain findings by the FWS. Controversy concerning implementation of this provision developed after the FWS published regulations (62 Federal Register 7302-7331, February 18, 1997) finding that the statutory criteria had been met for only 5 of 12 Canadian management units. Although the law allowed for imports of polar bear trophies taken before enactment of the 1994 amendments, the regulations interpreted the statute as requiring a current affirmative finding for the subpopulation before a trophy could be imported. http://www.fws.gov/r9dia/public/polarbr.html

Congressional Action. H.J.Res. 59 was introduced to disapprove FWS regulations on importing polar bear trophies from Canada. After a House Committee on Resources hearing was held on this measure on April 30, 1997, language was incorporated into several measures to ease the criteria that needed to be met before polar bear trophies taken in Canada prior to the 1994 MMPA amendments (prior to April 30, 1994) could be imported into the United States. This provision was enacted as Section 5004 of P.L. 105-18, signed by President Clinton on June 12, 1997. The FWS announced that it will propose revisions to the February 1997 regulations to clarify that those regulations apply only to polar bear trophies taken on or after April 30, 1994.

3. Good Samaritan Exemption

Background. Responding to concern that the disentanglement of a marine mammal from fishing gear could violate the "taking" prohibition of the MMPA, a noncontroversial amendment to the MMPA was offered to provide a "good samaritan" exemption to allow individuals to free marine mammals entangled in fishing gear http://nmml.afsc.noaa.gov/gallery/pinnipeds/pinniped_gallery1.htm or debris http://seawifs.gsfc.nasa.gov/OCEAN_PLANET/HTML/peril_marine_debris.html.

Congressional Action. Initially introduced as S.Amdt. 80 to S. 672 (FY1997 supplemental appropriations), language amending the MMPA to accomplish this intent was adopted as Section 2003 of P.L. 105-18, signed by President Clinton on June 12, 1997.

4. U.S. Whaling Policy

Background. For more than 10 years, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/iwcoffice/iwc.htm#Home has maintained a moratorium on commercial whaling. However, Japan kills several hundred minke whales annually in the Southern (Antarctic) and northwest Pacific Oceans for scientific research, and Norway has resumed a commercial harvest of several hundred minke whales annually in the central and northeast Atlantic. The IWC has struggled for years over completion of a revised management scheme which could permit sustainable harvest of whales from selected stocks. For more information, see CRS Report 97-55 F, Norwegian Commercial Whaling: Issues for Congress.

Congressional Action. On May 8, 1998, the Senate adopted S.Res. 226, concerning U.S. policy at the 50^th Annual Meeting of the International Whaling Commission, May 16-20, 1998, in Muscat, Oman. In the House, H.Res. 425 received no action. S. 2172 would authorize the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to establish a whale conservation fund. On October 21, 1998, President Clinton signed P.L. 105-277, the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, including provisions of the National Whale Conservation Fund Act (S. 2172). This measure: 1) includes findings that funding available for whale conservation is insufficient and that there is a need to facilitate the use of non-Federal funds for this purpose; 2) amends the National Fish and Wildlife Establishment Act to provide authority to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to establish a `national whale conservation fund' and receive funds for deposit; 3) establishes priorities for the use of the fund; and 4) requires the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to consult with NOAA and the Marine Mammal Commission.

5. Other Miscellaneous Issues

a. Tax deduction for subsistence whaling. Both H.R. 1267 and S. 379 propose to amend the Internal Revenue Code to allow a charitable contribution deduction for certain expenses incurred by whaling captains in support of Native Alaskan subsistence whaling. Although this provision was added in the Senate to H.R. 2014, the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1997, it was deleted in conference (p. 498 of H.Rept. 105-220).

b. Marine Mammal Rescue Grant Program. S. 2199 proposes to amend the MMPA to establish a Marine Mammal Rescue Grant Program. No action was taken on S. 2199.

LEGISLATION

Listed public laws and bills are discussed in the text of this document under "Background and Analysis."

Fisheries

P.L. 105-119 (H.R. 2267); P.L. 105-146 (H.R. 1658); P.L. 105-160 (S. 927); P.L. 105-178 (H.R. 2400); P.L. 105-206 (H.R. 2676); P.L. 105-265; and P.L. 105-277(H.R. 4328).

H.Con.Res. 8 (Saxton);H.Con.Res. 124 (Young of Alaska); H.Con.Res. 131 (Saxton); H.Res. 87 (Miller of California); H.Res. 470 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 393 (Pallone): H.R. 1088 (Metcalf); H.R. 1575 (Saxton); H.R. 1855 (Saxton): H.R. 2233 (Saxton); H.R. 2393 (Saxton);H.R. 2547 (Farr); H.R. 2565 (Jones); H.R. 2973 (Tanner); H.R. 3445 (Saxton); H.R. 3460 (Saxton); H.R. 3461 (Saxton); H.R. 3498 (Miller of California); H.R. 3669 (McInnis); H.R. 3735 (Paul); H.R. 3973 (Riggs); H.R. 3989 (Solomon); H.R. 4079 (Doolittle); H.R. 4180 (Saxton); H.R. 4235 (John); H.R. 4294 (White); H.R. 4335 (Young of Alaska); H.R. 4423 (Paul); H.R. 4500 (Saxton); S.Res. 109 (Murkowski); S. 533 (Murkowski); S. 1035 (Reed): S. 1192 (Snowe); S. 1213 (Hollings); S. 1219 (Faircloth); S. 1480 (Snowe); S. 1726 (Murray); S. 1904 (Gorton); S. 2111 (Smith of Oregon); S. 2218 (Sarbanes); and S. 2417 (Sessions).

Aquaculture

P.L. 105-185 (S. 1150) and P.L. 105-239 (S. 1883).

H.R. 2534 (Combest); and S. 1080 (Akaka).

Marine Mammals

P.L. 105-18 (H.R. 1871); P.L. 105-42 (H.R. 408); and P.L 105-277 (H.R. 4328).

H.Res. 425 (Metcalf); H.R. 1267 (Young of Alaska); S.Res. 226 (Snowe); S. 379 (Murkowski); and S. 2199 (Torricelli).