60 



and Wildlife Service provides broader, more Inclusive support for state coastal 

 fishery programs than does the National Marine Fisheries Service. 



In recognition of this, it seems only logical and fair to us that the Fish and 

 Wildlife Service share decision making responsibility fully with the National 

 Marine Fisheries Service. The bill goes a long way in this direction; but on the 

 question of deciding whether to impose a moratorium the bill w^ould only provide a 

 consultative role for the Secretary of the Interior. Given the essential partnership 

 nature of this program, this limitation is unwarranted and could easily be 

 counterproductive. Coastal fishery resources need more involvement and cooperation 

 from all agencies involved, not less. The bill should give all partners in this process 

 a strong incentive to cooperate, rather than only partially include any of them. 



Mr. Chairman, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission believes that 

 much progress has been made in developing federal legislation to implement its 

 policy favoring increased efforts to improve interstate cooperation in the 

 implementation of needed conservation and management for coastal fishery 

 resources. The bill before the Committee is certainly on the right track, although it 

 still needs revisions, sonie of which I have discussed today. We at the Commission 

 look forward to continiiing to work with the Committee to develop appropriate and 

 effective legislation. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to be here today. I would be 

 pleased to try to respond to any questions the Committee may have. 



