[House Report 107-91]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 107-91
======================================================================
EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY OF STATES OF WASHINGTON, OREGON, AND CALIFORNIA
TO MANAGE DUNGENESS CRAB FISHERY
_______
June 6, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hansen, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1661]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 1661) to extend indefinitely the authority of the States
of Washington, Oregon, and California to manage a Dungeness
crab fishery until the effective date of a fishery management
plan for the fishery under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management 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. 1661 is to extend indefinitely the
authority of the States of Washington, Oregon, and California
to manage the Dungeness crab fishery until the effective date
of a fishery management plan for the fishery under the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
Background and Need for Legislation
The Pacific Ocean fishery for Dungeness crab (Cancer
magister) is prosecuted in the State waters of California,
Oregon, and Washington and in the 200-mile Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ) adjacent to those States. In the Sustainable
Fisheries Act of 1996, Congress authorized interim management
authority to the States of Washington, Oregon, and California
for the Dungeness crab fishery in the EEZ adjacent to their
State. This authority was given to the States in the absence of
any federal fishery management plan. When, and if, the Pacific
Fishery Management Council implemented a fishery management
plan, the interim authority to the States was negated.
In 1997, the Pacific Fishery Management Council unanimously
requested in a letter that Congress permanently extend this
management authority to the States. ``The Council supports an
agreement reached by industry representatives, tribal
representatives, and the state fishery management agencies that
the Council not proceed with development of a fishery
management plan for Dungeness crab. * * * That agreement
recommends Congressional action that extends and expands the
current interim authority.'' In the 105th Congress, Public Law
105-384 reauthorized the States management authority over
Dungeness crab through September 30, 2001.
Congressmen George Miller (D-CA) and Greg Walden (R-OR)
introduced H.R. 1661 to extend indefinitely State management of
the Dungeness crab fishery. However, H.R. 1661 does not change
the existing provision in Law that allows the Pacific Fishery
Management Council, which has management authority over this
fishery, to develop a federal fishery management plan and
regain its management authority from the States.
The States have been managing the fishery cooperatively and
successfully since the interim authority was given in 1996. The
1999-2000 season landings of Dungeness crab were 8.775 million
pounds with a revenue of $17.7 million for California; 15.6
million pounds with a revenue of $31.7 million for Oregon; and
17.0 million pounds with a revenue of $34.8 million for
Washington. Ex-vessel prices in Washington were $1.35 per pound
and in Oregon averaged $1.78 per pound.
Committee Action
H.R. 1661 was introduced on May 1, 2001, by Congressman
George Miller (D-CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on
Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans. On May 16, 2001,
the Full Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans was
discharged from further consideration of the bill by unanimous
consent. There were no amendments offered to the bill, 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. General Performance Goals and Objectives.--This bill
does not authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not
apply.
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 1, 2001.
Hon. James V. Hansen,
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. 1661, a bill to
extend indefinitely the authority of the states of Washington,
Oregon, and California to manage a Dungeness crab fishery until
the effective date of a fishery management plan for the fishery
under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
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 Lauren Marks (for the private-
sector impact).
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 1661--A bill to extend indefinitely the authority of the states of
Washington, Oregon, and California to manage a Dungeness crab
fishery until the effective date of a fishery management plan
for the fishery under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act
H.R. 1661 would allow Washington, Oregon, and California to
continue to manage commercial fishing for Dungeness crabs in
federal waters adjacent to their states until the Pacific
Fishery Management Council develops a formal fishery management
plan for the area. Under existing law, the states' authority to
manage their Dungeness crab fisheries will expire on September
30, 2001.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1661 would have no
significant effect on the federal budget. The three states
would continue to manage their Dungeness crab fisheries largely
at state expense. H.R. 1661 would not affect direct spending or
receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
The bill contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no
costs on state, local, or tribal governments. Any costs to
states to continue regulating their fisheries would be incurred
voluntarily.
H.R. 1661 would reauthorize an existing mandate on owners
of vessels that fish for Dungeness crabs in federal waters
adjacent to the states of California, Oregon, and Washington.
Based on information provided by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, CBO estimates that the direct costs
of extending the existing mandate would fall well below the
annual threshold established by UMRA ($113 million in 2001,
adjusted annually for inflation).
The staff contacts for this estimate are Deborah Reis (for
federal costs) and Lauren Marks (for the private-sector
impact). The estimate was 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 and
existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 203 OF THE ACT OF NOVEMBER 13, 1998
AN ACT To approve a governing international fishery agreement between
the United States and the Republic of Poland, and for other purposes.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 203. AUTHORITY OF STATES OF WASHINGTON, OREGON, AND CALIFORNIA TO
MANAGE DUNGENESS CRAB FISHERY.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(i) Sunset.--This section shall have no force or effect on
and after September 30, 2001.]