H.R. 81 (111th): International Fisheries Agreement Clarification Act

Introduced:
Jan 06, 2009 (111th Congress, 2009–2010)
Sponsor:
Del. Madeleine Bordallo [D-GU0]
Status:
Signed by the President
Slip Law:
This bill became Pub.L. 111-348.

The bill’s title was written by the bill’s sponsor. H.R. stands for House of Representatives bill.

GovTrack’s Bill Summary

We don’t have a summary available yet.

Library of Congress Summary

The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.


1/4/2011--Public Law. (This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on December 20, 2010. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Title I - Shark Conservation Act of 2010
Shark Conservation Act of 2010 -
Section 102 -
Amends the High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act to direct the Secretary of Commerce to urge international fishery management organizations to which the United States is a member to adopt shark conservation measures, including measures to prohibit removal any of the fins of a shark (including the tail) and discarding the shark carcass at sea.
Requires the Secretary to seek to enter into international shark conservation agreements, including measures prohibiting fin removal and carcass disposal, that are comparable to those of the United States, taking into account different conditions.
Directs the Secretary to include shark conservation measures when defining fishing activities that violate international fishery conservation and management agreements.
Requires the Secretary to list a nation in the biennial report on international compliance if the nation's fishing vessels are or have been engaged in fishing activities that target or incidentally catch sharks in waters beyond their jurisdiction, and such nation has not adopted a regulatory program providing for shark conservation, including the fin removal and carcass disposal prohibitions.
Requires such listing within one year after the enactment of this Act.
Section 103 -
Amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to revise provisions prohibiting the removal of shark fins to make it a prohibited act to:
(1) remove any shark fin (including the tail) at sea;
(2) have a fin aboard a fishing vessel unless the fin is naturally attached to the carcass;
(3) transfer a fin from one vessel to another or receive a fin unless it is naturally attached; or
(4) land a fin that is not naturally attached to a carcass or land a carcass without fins naturally attached.
Revises the current rebuttable presumption provision concerning shark fins on fishing vessels to create a rebuttable presumption that, if any shark fin (including the tail) is aboard a non-fishing vessel without being naturally attached, the fin was transferred from a fishing vessel in violation.
Section 104 -
Decreases authorizations under the Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act of 1986 for FY2011-FY2012.
Title II - International Fisheries Agreement
International Fisheries Agreement Clarification Act -
Section 202 -
Allows the Secretary and the New England Fishery Management Council, for purposes of rebuilding portions of fish stocks covered by the United States-Canada Transboundary Resource Sharing Understanding, to:
(1) take into account such Understanding and decisions made under such Understanding when specifying a time period for rebuilding a fishery that is overfished; and
(2) consider decisions under such Understanding as management measures under an international agreement in which the United States participates when determining whether a rebuilding may exceed 10 years.
Permits the Secretary and the Council to establish catch levels for portions of fish stocks within their respective geographic areas that exceed catch levels otherwise required under the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan if:
(1) overfishing is ended immediately;
(2) the fishing mortality level ensures rebuilding within such a rebuilding time period; and
(3) such catch levels are consistent with the Understanding.
Title III - Miscellaneous
Section 301 -
Prohibits from being considered federal employees except for certain specified injury compensation or tort claims liability:
(1) Commissioners of the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, other than officers or employees of the U.S. government;
(2) certain advisory committee members; and
(3) other specified appointees under the Pacific Whiting Act of 2006.
(Current law considers such individuals to be federal employees for:
(1) certain injury compensation purposes;
(2) ethics, conflicts-of-interest, and corruption requirements; and
(3) criminal or civil statutes or regulations governing conduct of federal employees in that capacity.)
Section 302 -
Decreases the number of scientific experts on the joint technical committee under the Pacific Whiting Act of 2006 to 2 (currently at least 6 but not more than 12).
Section 303 -
Authorizes the Secretary to promulgate regulations that allow for the replacement or rebuilding of a vessel qualified under specified provisions of the Department of Commerce and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005.

House Republican Conference Summary

The summary below was written by the House Republican Conference, which is the caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives.


This summary can be found at http://www.gop.gov/bill/111/1/hr81.

Background

Under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, NOAA works to rebuild overfished shark stocks.  To this end, the U.S. recently enacted a ban on shark finning that prohibits any person under U.S. jurisdiction from engaging in shark finning and possessing shark fins harvested on board a U.S. fishing vessel without the corresponding carcasses.  According to NOAA, the U.S. has participated in shark management meetings with Japan, Spain, Taiwan, the European Union, Canada, China, and Mexico.  While shark conservation efforts have been conducted in the past, NOAA contends that some vessels have engaged in the process of removing shark fins at sea and releasing the shark's carcass, thus avoiding restrictions on shark harvesting while still retrieving the valuable fin.  H.R. 81 would tighten laws regarding shark conservation by requiring NOAA to publicly identify any nation whose fishing vessels are actively engaged in fishing activities that target sharks and prohibiting the removal of shark fins at sea. 

The House considered identical legislation (H.R. 5741) in the 110th Congress.  The bill passed the House by unanimous consent on July 30, 2007.  According to a CBO score for H.R. 5741, the bill would impose a private sector mandate by requiring shark fins on fishing vessels to be naturally attached to shark carcasses.  CBO estimated that the mandate would fall below the $139 million threshold established by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) for private sector mandates.  In addition, CBO estimated that H.R. 5741 would cost $1 million annually for NOAA to expand their existing fishing reports.

 

Summary

H.R. 81 would require the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to identify nations whose fishing vessels have engaged in activities that directly target or accidentally catch sharks.  NOAA would be required to maintain a public list of each nation that had targeted sharks during fishing activities.  The list would also be required to include information regarding any regulatory measures being taken by each nation to conserve sharks. 

In addition, the bill would prohibit fisherman from removing any shark fins at sea, having a fin aboard a fishing vessel that is not attached to the carcass, or transferring a fin from one vessel to another unless it is naturally attached to a shark.

 

Cost

A CBO score for H.R. 81 was not available at press time.  However, a CBO score for H.R. 5741 (an identical bill considered in the 110th Congress) estimated that H.R. 5741 would cost $1 million annually for NOAA to expand their existing fishing reports

House Democratic Caucus Summary

The House Democratic Caucus does not provide summaries of bills.

So, yes, we display the House Republican Conference’s summaries when available even if we do not have a Democratic summary available. That’s because we feel it is better to give you as much information as possible, even if we cannot provide every viewpoint.

We’ll be looking for a source of summaries from the other side in the meanwhile.

The bill contains the following citations to other parts of U.S. law:

Slip Laws

Slip laws refer to enacted bills and joint resolutions in their original form as enacted by Congress, that is, before other laws amend them. Slip laws are cited as “Public Law XXX-YYY”, where XXX is the number of the Congress in which the bill or resolution was introduced.

United States Code

The United States Code is the compilation of permanent laws enacted by Congress. Temporary and other non-permanent laws do not appear in the United States Code. (About half of the United States Code is the law itself, called positive law. The other half is merely a compilation of the laws but has no legal significance.)

Statutes at Large

The United States Statutes at Large is the compilation of all laws enacted by Congress.

  • 188 Stat. 886-891

Other Citations

  • 5 U.S.C. Chapter 81
  • 28 U.S.C. Chapter 171