59 



Fisheries Subcommittee -8- October 20, 1993 



requires a determination of the formal ICCAT expectations and practices 

 as evidenced by the actions of the ICCAT community of participating 

 nations. The language in question was not intended to infringe on the 

 Congressional imperative that U.S. fishermen be held accountable to 

 the same standards of interpretation, performance and 

 compliance with the international agreement by ail ICCAT 

 nations. 



Numerous Congressional statements are available to indicate that the 

 intent was that U.S. fishermen should not be required to share a 

 disproportionate conservation burden. Senator Kerry stated "U.S. 

 fishermen should not have to endure severe restrictions while other 

 nations continue to harvest the very same stock of fish" (136 Cong. Rec. S 

 14967). Cong. Studds stated that "these (international) agreements should 

 provide for an equitable sharing of responsibility for conservation among 

 the nations involved." (136 Cong. Rec. H. 11889). Cong. Jones stated that 

 domestic measures "should not be inequitable or unreasonable when 

 compared to those that are required of fishermen from other fishing 

 nations." (136 Cong. Rec. H. 12402). Cong. Saxton provided the compelling 

 rationale against greater unilateral restrictions when he stated that: 



"Effective management for highly migratory species must involve and coordinate ettorts 

 over the entire range of the species and include all harvesting nations. Otherwise, 

 conservation efforts of our domestic fishermen will only result in protection of the 

 species while in U.S. waters and would eliminate any incentive for other nations to 

 cooperate or adopt equal measures. Such a situation is unfair and unacceptable." (136 

 Cong. Rec. H. 11890). 



The new language in ATCA was emphatically not a rejection of past U.S. 

 management practices. To the contrary, It was a rejection of 

 unilateralism and premised on the continuation of past practices, 

 consistent with the longstanding approach of ICCAT and the desire not to 

 disadvantage U.S. harvesters vis a vis their foreign competitors. 



With ail of the above in mind and in the event that the Committee 

 entertains suggestions to change the existing language of the relevant 

 ATCA section we would propose the following revision to ATCA Section 6 

 (c) (3) to read as follows: 



"The regulations required to be promulgated under paragraph (1) of 

 this subsection may...(A)- through (E); except that no regulation 



