**Transition Document on Issues Pertaining to the**

**National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration**

**Prepared by the**

**Marine Fisheries Advisory Committee**

**Ver. 1 June 23, 2008**

The Marine Fisheries Advisory Committee (MAFAC) is established to advise
the Secretary of Commerce on matters relating to conservation and
management of living marine resources under the jurisdiction of the
department. MAFAC is composed of a diverse group of stakeholders
appointed by the Secretary. MAFAC submits the following advice on
priority issues to the new administration.

**1. NOAA Management and Structure**

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is widely
recognized as a world-class science agency. With respect to conservation
and management of living marine resources, NOAA has instituted a
progressive ecosystem-based approach to management. This document
highlights two high priority issue areas---managing marine areas and
climate change/ocean acidification---where the incoming administration
should focus resources and further emphasize, and where necessary
improve, intra-agency cooperation.

**NOAA Organic Act**

*Recommendation:* The incoming administration should place a high
priority on urging Congress should pass an organic act that codifies the
existence of NOAA within the Department of Commerce. NOAA was created in
1970 through a reorganization plan submitted to Congress by the
president, creating the nation's primary ocean agency. Legislation can
strengthen the agency and help ensure that its structure is consistent
with three primary functions: management, assessment and prediction, and
research and education. A stronger, science-based and service-oriented
ocean agency can work to achieve better management of oceans and coasts
through an ecosystem-based approach.

**Climate Change/Ocean Acidification**

*Recommendation:* NOAA line offices should continue to emphasize, and
where necessary improve, the sharing of information on the effects of
climate change on living marine resources in order for the agency to
meet its goal of ecosystem-based management of living marine resources
through a precautionary approach to optimizing utilization of fishery
resources.

*Background:* An important aspect of climate change research is better
understanding the impacts of such change on the oceans and living marine
resources, including the impact of increasing acidification levels in
the oceans. NOAA reports that the oceans have absorbed half of the
carbon dioxide released from the burning of fossil fuels, which in turn
has led to a 30% increase in ocean acidity levels since the start of the
industrial age. Obviously, such a dramatic change in the ocean
environment affects living marine resources.

In the past decade, NMFS and the regional fishery management councils
have moved beyond single-species management to embrace a more holistic,
ecosystem-based approach to management. While under-funded for the task,
NOAA is expanding its understanding of food webs, monitoring ocean
currents and temperatures, and undertaking numerous other initiatives
that can assist fishery managers in better assessing fish stock trends.
It is imperative that NOAA consider NMFS and the regional fishery
management councils as important partners in developing scientific
approaches that will optimize management of living marine resources.

**Managing Marine Areas**

*Recommendation:* The incoming Under Secretary should address
stakeholder concerns, particularly those of commercial and sport fishing
interests, that the proliferation of entities within NOAA involved in
marine managed areas will not unduly burden or disenfranchise user
groups. NOAA's current policy in managing marine areas is to be
science-based, to focus on place-based governance, and to ensure
significant public participation in any regulatory process. This
framework should continue to guide agency actions. The Under Secretary
should make clear that National Marine Fisheries Service's (NMFS')
primacy in setting fishing regulations will stand, and that other
offices or agencies involved in any manner in marine area management
will coordinate fully with NMFS. NOAA should argue against establishing
any new marine managed areas through monument designations under the
Antiquities Act since such actions do not foster a science-based
approach nor provide for public participation in the decision making
process.

*Background:* The Commerce Inspector General's 2008 semi-annual report
to Congress highlights tensions among NOAA agencies in the management of
marine areas, specifically actions affecting commercial and sport
fishing access to certain marine areas. NMFS and the National Ocean
Service (NOS), which administers the Marine Protected Areas (MPA) Center
and the National Marine Sanctuary Program, are the principal players.
NMFS and the eight regional fishery management councils established by
the Magnuson-Stevens Act have primary responsibility for conserving
fishery resources and protecting fish habitat and living marine
resources, and the agency has instituted hundreds of management measures
restricting some or all fishing in certain areas to achieve specific
conservation goals.

With the exception of the Northwest Hawaiian Islands National Monument,
which President Bush created under the Antiquities Act, the thirteen
marine sanctuaries created under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act are
dwarfed in number and size by the marine area management actions
developed through the regional fishery management council process. NOS's
MPA Center, which was created through a Clinton administration executive
order (E.O. 13158), is charged with developing a national system of MPA.
The MPA Center will finalize its framework for a national network in the
fall 2008. While the MPA Center has no legal authority to create
additional MPAs, it is tasked with identifying enhanced or new MPAs that
may be needed. The incoming Under Secretary should ensure that existing
programs and new initiatives do not alienate NOAA's key constituencies
or undermine the role and responsibilities of NMFS and the regional
fishery councils.

2.  **Major Issues**

In December 2007, MAFAC completed a report on the desired future state
of U.S. marine fisheries at the request of the Assistant Administrator
of NOAA Fisheries. The report identified key policy issues to be
addressed and tasks necessary to implement such policies to achieve
conservation and management objectives. This report highlights several
of the recommendations from the report entitled, *"Vision 2020: The
Future of US Marine Fisheries."*

> **Limited Access Privilege Programs**

*Recommendation*: NOAA Fisheries should complete its review of existing
fishery management plans to determine which management systems would
most benefit from transitioning to a Limited Access Privilege Program
(LAPP). NOAA Fisheries, working with regional fishery management
councils and affected stakeholders, should set specific goals for
instituting LAPPs for identified candidate fisheries.

*Background:* LAPPs are a promising tool for a market-based approach to
better achieving conservation goals as well as providing economic
stability for fishery participants and coastal communities. (Social
benefits have been more mixed but underline the importance of engaging a
full range of stakeholders in the design process.) To help assure
successful implementation of new LAPPs, NOAA Fisheries should invest in
approaches to better monitor catch and bycatch on an individual vessel
basis, emphasizing technological applications and utilization of private
sector providers. NOAA Fisheries' should establish a budget priority for
upfront investments in LAP programs until the full benefits of LAPPs can
be realized through implementation of such programs and cost recovery is
feasible.

The incoming administration will likely be undertaking Secretarial
review of new LAPP programs from at least four different regional
fishery management councils before 2010 as well. This work should
provide momentum for moving forward across all regions and in additional
fisheries to develop LAPPs. In many cases, fisheries may be in a
depleted and/or overcapitalized state when LAPPs are implemented. There
may be a transition period before the improved economic performance
afforded by the LAP program can be realized and cost recovery can be
obtained. In addition, requiring cost recovery should be accompanied by
a commitment to utilize the most cost effective methods for
administration and monitoring of the program, including use of third
party providers and electronic monitoring technology.

> **Marine Aquaculture Development**

*Recommendation:* To keep pace with the nation's food supply needs and
to reduce our seafood trade deficit, national investment in the
development of sustainable aquaculture systems is needed. Regional
investments in technical support, capital equipment and other
infrastructure would pay economic dividends. MAFAC urges the new
administration to continue critical efforts to develop a single,
multi-agency regulatory and permitting process for developing
environmentally sound marine aquaculture in the EEZ. NOAA's ten year
plan for aquaculture for marine aquaculture development should be
implemented without delay and legislation passed that would codify a
statutory framework for marine aquaculture in the U.S. 200 mile zone.
Also, the National Aquaculture Act should be amended to designate NOAA
as the lead federal agency for implementing a national policy on
environmentally and economically sustainable offshore marine
aquaculture.

NOAA Fisheries should work with commercial fishermen, seafood
processors, trade associations and state and local governments to
identify ways to integrate wild stock production with aquaculture
production to maximize the value of domestic seafood production and
related industries. Efforts should be made to ensure that aquaculture
complements rather than competes with wild fish products in the
marketplace.

*Background:* In 2004, responding to the expanding U.S. consumer demand
for seafood and a corresponding increasing seafood trade deficit, the
U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy recommended that NOAA develop a
comprehensive marine aquaculture program. NOAA responded with a 10 year
Marine Aquaculture Plan. (A very brief status report is needed on where
implementation stands on the 10 year plan.)

The [National Offshore Aquaculture Act of
2007](http://aquaculture.noaa.gov/us/2007.html) was introduced at the
request of the administration. If enacted, the bill would create a
regulatory framework for safe, sustainable aquaculture operations in
U.S. federal waters, three to 200 miles off the coast and expand a
research program for all of marine aquaculture, not just offshore.
Provisions of the Act are consistent with recommendations of MAFAC,
including mandates to:

-   Develop and codify a statutory framework for marine aquaculture in
    the U.S. EEZ.

-   Perfect, as needed, the statutory framework for marine and offshore
    aquaculture in domestic waters.

-   Develop economic policies that encourage environmentally sound and
    prosperous aquaculture in the U.S. EEZ.., for example by making the
    resources of the Fisheries Finance Program and the Capital
    Construction Fund accounts available to aquaculture businesses.

**International Fishery Management**

*Recommendation:* MAFAC recommends that the incoming administration
continue to support and develop strategies for advancing U.S. positions
advocating responsible management of fish stocks in international waters
and for advocating for equitable treatment of U.S. fishers in the
allocation of fish stocks harvested beyond nations' 200 mile zones. A
number of U.S. fisheries depend on highly migratory fish stocks whose
sustainability depends on responsible and effective international
management. Central to the effort of protecting U.S. fishing interests
and promoting responsible international management of living marine
resources is continued assistance to Regional Fishery Management
Organizations (RFMOs). RFMOs are becoming increasingly effective tools
to promote sustainable stocks using available political, economic and
other strategic tools to ensure other countries follow the scientific
recommendations of RFMO staff.

*Background:* Many commercial stocks, such as tuna, are highly migratory
species that spend most of their life in the open ocean. They are
harvested by U.S. commercial and recreational fishermen and by foreign
fishing fleets. Most of these stocks are managed cooperatively by RFMOs,
whose performance records in managing stocks under their jurisdiction
remain uneven. If not managed sustainably, U.S. fishers and seafood
consumers are disadvantaged. Therefore, total harvest reductions are
necessary to effectively improve the health of these stocks. To date,
the U.S. has often acted unilaterally to restrict harvests by U.S.
fishers without reciprocal efforts by foreign fleets. The U.S.
government should advocate equally forcefully for sound conservation and
the economic interests of U.S. fishers.

**3. Budget Issues**

*Recommendation:* NOAA and the incoming administration should develop an
FY 2010 budget proposal that increases funding levels for living marine
resource management. NOAA should work with its state agency partners and
constituents on funding priorities. Currently, NOAA is not adequately
funded to conduct its responsibilities under the law to maintain
healthy, vibrant and productive coastal ecosystems and the fisheries
they support. Administration budget requests have not been robust enough
generally to support conservation and management priorities, leaving
Congress to sort out priorities.

-   Increased funding of scientific data collection, analyses and
    reporting should be a budget priority. Enhanced scientific data,
    coupled with coordination of regulatory activities and enforcement
    with state partners, will maximize return on investment.

-   Stock Assessments...?

-   Protected Species...?

-   Habitat conservation is another priority funding area. Healthy
    habitat is critical to species assemblages in freshwater, estuarine,
    near shore marine and open ocean areas. The recently completed
    National Fish Habitat Action Plan includes long term commitments
    made on federal, state, local and private levels to achieve
    unprecedented coordinated action for habitat protection and
    enhancement. Despite the involvement of NOAA Fisheries in the
    development of this plan, and clear role of the agency in its
    implementation, there is no provision for funding in NOAA's budget
    planning documents.

-   Efforts to bolster programs related to assessment and management of
    activities of recreational anglers should receive continued
    attention.

*Background:* Management of the nation's living marine resources is a
shared responsibility among NOAA Fisheries, regional fisheries
management councils, interstate marine fisheries commissions and
individual states. There is increasing recognition of the need for
strong strategic relationships among fishery management authorities and
agencies and organizations with responsibility for conservation and
enhancement of marine, estuarine and inland aquatic habitat. Annual
budget preparation must recognize these shared roles and
responsibilities and seek to maximize strategic prioritization and
coordination. A cooperative conservation effort with a sharing of costs
to conduct marine fisheries research is the most efficient and effective
means to assure sustainability while imparting local stewardship.

**4. Legislative Opportunities**

*Recommendation*: In addition to legislation referenced earlier on a
NOAA Organic Act and National Offshore Aquaculture Act, NOAA should
promote legislation reauthorizing the Coastal Zone Management Act,
strengthening seafood safety and inspection programs, and coordinating
management of offshore energy resources.

**Coastal Zone Management Act Reauthorization**

The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) created a national partnership
among state and federal coastal zone managers to address shared
objectives. Over three decades, the CZMA has led to reduced impacts from
coastal development, provided important support for coastal zone
planning, and helped resolve significant conflicts over competing
coastal zone uses. However, new and complex environmental, social,
technological and governance challenges face the coastal states, local
governments, and federal agencies in protecting coastal areas. States
are crucial partners in meeting these challenges; thus, a re-invigorated
national coastal management initiative would provide enhanced federal
leadership and build upon approved programs of states, territories and
commonwealths.

Additionally, many other partners, including coastal fishery management
authorities have important roles, responsibilities and expertise in
various aspects of coastal zone management. More effective and
consistent coordination with these partners would be of great benefit to
the nation's coastal zone management efforts.

CZMA reauthorization should move forward to achieve the following goals:

-   Reaffirm a national commitment to coastal management to protect,
    develop, restore, and enhance resources of the nation's coastal
    zone.

-   Prepare for impacts of climate change on the nation's coasts.

-   Ensure that local, state, regional, and federal coastal programs are
    coordinated and integrated at all appropriate scales.

-   Set the stage for multi-year state strategic coastal zone plans to
    meet national priorities while allowing for individual state needs.

-   Provide for federal investment in state programs to promote coastal
    stewardship responsibilities.

-   Monitor effectiveness of federally-supported state coastal zone
    management through performance measures and periodic evaluation.

-   Engage and encourage local communities in the coastal stewardship
    enterprise. Create incentives for local governments, through land
    use regulations and infrastructure investments, to institute
    policies that minimize the impacts of development on coastal
    resources.

-   Clarify the roles for state and federal fisheries management
    authorities in coastal zone management actions that affect fishery
    resource management.

**Seafood Safety Act**

Congress should enact legislation to ensure coordination of NOAA and FDA
seafood safety programs to ensure safe domestic and imported seafood
products in the marketplace. Additional funding for NOAA's seafood
safety program should be an agency budget priority.

**Offshore Energy Management Act**

Currently offshore energy sources such as oil and gas are being
explored. Renewable energy sources should also be considered as part of
a coordinated offshore management regime. There is a need for a uniform
permitting process across all appropriate federal agencies and a
regulatory framework for non-traditional energy projects including, but
limited to, renewable energy projects such as wind, wave and solar
energy. Congress should enact legislation to streamline the licensing of
renewable energy facilities in U.S. waters, relying on an open,
transparent process that accounts for state, local, and public concerns.