```

[Senate Hearing 115-876]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                        S. Hrg. 115-876

     FISH FIGHTS: AN EXAMINATION OF CONFLICTS OVER OCEAN RESOURCES

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

     SUBCOMMITTEE ON OCEANS, ATMOSPHERE, FISHERIES, AND COAST GUARD

                                 OF THE

                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                     ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION
                               __________

                           SEPTEMBER 18, 2018
                               __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation

                  [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                    
57-577 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2024   

       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                     ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                   JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
TED CRUZ, Texas                      AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
DEAN HELLER, Nevada                  TOM UDALL, New Mexico
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma               GARY PETERS, Michigan
MIKE LEE, Utah                       TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
CORY GARDNER, Colorado               CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  JON TESTER, Montana

                       Nick Rossi, Staff Director
                 Adrian Arnakis, Deputy Staff Director
                    Jason Van Beek, General Counsel
                 Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
              Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
                      Renae Black, Senior Counsel
                                 ------                                

            SUBCOMMITTEE ON OCEANS, ATMOSPHERE, FISHERIES, 
                            AND COAST GUARD

DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska, Chairman       TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin, Ranking
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma               BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
MIKE LEE, Utah                       EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               GARY PETERS, Michigan
CORY GARDNER, Colorado
TODD YOUNG, Indiana
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hearing held on September 18, 2018...............................     1
Statement of Senator Sullivan....................................     1
Statement of Senator Baldwin.....................................     3
Statement of Senator Nelson......................................    23
Statement of Senator Wicker......................................    27
Statement of Senator Inhofe......................................    30
Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................    31
Statement of Senator Blumenthal..................................    33

                               Witnesses

Vice Admiral Daniel B. Abel, Deputy Commandant for Operations, 
  U.S. Coast Guard...............................................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................     6
David Balton, Senior Fellow, Polar Initiative, Woodrow Wilson 
  International Center for Scholars..............................     7
    Prepared statement...........................................     9
Dr. Bama Athreya, Senior Democracy Specialist, Bureau for 
  Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, USAID........    13
    Prepared statement...........................................    15
Dr. Paul Doremus, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, 
  National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and 
  Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce........    17
    Prepared statement...........................................    19

                                Appendix

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to:
    Hon. David Balton............................................    41
    Dr. Bama Athreya.............................................    42
Response to written questions submitted to Dr. Paul Doremus by:
    Hon. Roger F. Wicker.........................................    43
    Hon. Jim Inhofe..............................................    43
    Hon. Edward Markey...........................................    44

 
     FISH FIGHTS: AN EXAMINATION OF CONFLICTS OVER OCEAN RESOURCES

                              ----------                              

                      TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2018

                               U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and 
                                   the Coast Guard,
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:33 a.m. in 
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Dan Sullivan, 
Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Sullivan [presiding], Baldwin, Nelson, 
Wicker, Inhofe, Cantwell, and Blumenthal.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DAN SULLIVAN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA

    Senator Sullivan. The Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, 
Fisheries, and the Coast Guard will now come to order.
    Today's hearing will focus on international conflict and 
criminal activity associated with global fisheries. A 
particular interest is the fight for fisheries resources, geo-
political flash points where conflict is likely to arise, and 
the role of both state and non-state actors involved in 
conflict and even criminal activity.
    Additionally, we will discuss measures being taken to 
address the growing challenges in criminal activities 
surrounding these resource conflicts and what more can be done.
    As fish stocks move with changing environmental conditions 
and expanding global populations, demand consistent and 
affordable access to protein pressure has increased on global 
fishery resources.
    For no other country is this truer than China. China's use 
of both soft power and hard power to expand its boundaries, 
secure sufficient fish stocks to feed its people, and fuel 
national economic growth is a clear step toward what some are 
referring to as hybrid warfare.
    Each year, the Chinese Government funnels billions of 
dollars in subsidies to its distant water fishing industry. 
This government aid program has enabled their fishing sector to 
grow exponentially and unsustainably. It is now the largest in 
the world with the reach to pilfer other countries' resources 
across the globe.
    As often seen throughout history, when military might is 
used to protect a nation's growing commerce, Beijing is 
deploying its military to protect its fishing fleet with 
Chinese fishing boats often benefiting from the protection of 
the Chinese Coast Guard and Navy presence in the South China 
Sea and abroad.
    Countries on the receiving end of Chinese actions are 
responding in kind. Indonesia has destroyed hundreds of fishing 
vessels in their waters illegally while Ecuador was forced to 
summon the Chinese Ambassador to condemn China's fishing in the 
Ecuadoran Exclusive Economic Zone following the seizure of 300 
tons of illegally sourced fish.
    International cooperation in this area, however, is 
possible, including with the Chinese Government. This past 
June, the U.S. Coast Guard, in close coordination with the 
State Department and the Chinese Government, intercepted a 
Chinese-flagged fishing vessel operating not far from my home 
state of Alaska.
    Our Coast Guard conducted a joint boarding of this Chinese-
flagged vessel along with a Chinese ship-rider and found almost 
10 kilometers of international illegal drift net and 80 tons of 
illegally seized salmon which were likely headed back home to 
Alaska.
    With Chinese governmental cooperation, the fishing vessel's 
voyage was terminated and the vessel and crew were returned to 
China for future enforcement action which we will be monitoring 
closely.
    Conflicts over maritime resources are not isolated to the 
Pacific. As many of you saw in the news recently, French and 
English scallop boats in the English Channel came to blows over 
the right to dredge in the near-shore waters. Valuable fish 
stocks and the right to exploit them will continue to cause 
increasing tensions around the world.
    Beyond direct conflict, global pressure on fish stocks have 
led fishermen to seek cost reductions through any means 
necessary, sometimes illegally, or to abandon fishing 
altogether and pursue other activities, sometimes illicit 
activities.
    It has been reported that some illicit harvesters seize 
their deckhands' passports and forbid them to leave the 
vessels, effectively turning them into forced labor. Others 
turn to drugs, weapons, and human smuggling. Many of the Somali 
pirates, for example, began as fishermen but once their fishery 
was depleted turned to crime.
    There's evidence that transnational criminal organizations 
are involved in all aspects of this kind of behavior, 
orchestrating illegal fishing, smuggling, and other illegal 
activity that might bring profit.
    While American fish stocks associated domestic management 
through the Magnuson-Stevens Act are viewed as the envy of the 
world in many cases, our domestic fisheries could support 
increased harvests. It's not enough for us to only be concerned 
about what happens in the American EEZ.
    Highly migratory species, coupled with changing conditions 
in the oceans, mean that we have to embrace the global nature 
of the challenge facing this critical resource.
    One of the foundational tenets of our successful domestic 
fisheries management is a reliance on sound, verifiable 
science. While the news and statistics surrounding illegal, 
unregulated, and unreported fishing is certainly dire, I want 
to make sure that the science supporting those facts is 
accurate, so appropriate action can be taken without penalizing 
illegal seafood industry.
    I look forward to hearing thoughts and solutions from our 
distinguished panel members this morning.
    With that, I want to thank all of our witnesses for being 
here today and now recognize the Ranking Member for any opening 
statements she may have.

               STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This hearing is timely and it responds to pressing 
challenges that have economic, ecological, and security 
implications.
    Our oceans and fisheries are under siege from over-fishing; 
illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing; as well as 
climate change and ocean acidification. These pressures are 
diminishing fish stocks around the world and changing where 
fish populations are found.
    Rising nationalism is another ingredient in this stew. 
Tensions are building on the high seas and in territorial 
waters. Experts are warning that we're entering an era of 
natural resource conflict where wars will be fought over fish.
    The United States is a major player in the world fishery 
industry. We harvest five million metric tons of fish each 
year, more than any other country in the world, besides China 
and Indonesia. The U.S. fishing industry is valued at $250 
billion annually and it supports 1.3 million jobs.
    After key commercial species, like cod, flounder, and 
haddock, in New England collapsed in the 1980s and 1990s from 
over-fishing, we got to work; and through comprehensive Federal 
fisheries legislation, we have become a global leader in 
fisheries management.
    The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
Act of 1976, as improved by major amendments in 1996 and 2006, 
has helped 44 once-depleted fish species recover since 2000. It 
also put over-fishing in U.S. waters at an all-time low.
    As a significant fishing power, a key influencer in global 
fishing industry, and a major market for imported seafood 
products, we have a responsibility to help sustainably manage 
global fisheries; not only to feed Americans and ensure our 
fisheries are economically viable, but also to help maintain 
global stability and peace with other coastal countries.
    Climate change and ocean acidification are exacerbating 
fishery conflicts. The oceans have already absorbed about 93 
percent of the heat created from human-influenced climate 
change. As a result, our oceans are warming and sea levels are 
rising.
    In addition to heat, the ocean is also a sponge for carbon 
dioxide, and has absorbed about a quarter of manmade carbon 
dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels. Ocean 
acidification is occurring as a result. Research shows that 
warming temperatures are driving commercial fish species away 
from the tropics and toward the poles. Sea level rise threatens 
the boundaries of our exclusive economic zones and ocean 
acidification impacts fish behavior and the basis of the food 
web upon which fish populations depend.
    The U.S. has the second largest exclusive economic zone in 
the world, ranging from parts of the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf 
of Mexico to areas in three oceans: the Atlantic, the Pacific, 
and the Arctic.
    Our EEZ is in a vulnerable condition as climate change, 
ocean acidification, and illegal fishing threatens our 
fisheries resources.
    The U.S. and the world need to work toward a comprehensive 
government approach to improving global fisheries management 
based on sound science.
    A recent study published in the premier journal Science 
represents models demonstrating that improved fisheries 
management can actually help offset the negative effects of 
climate change on fisheries. We also need to help other 
countries develop capabilities to effectively police EEZs.
    I commend the Senate's bipartisan efforts to address IUU 
fishing and I also want to thank the U.S. Coast Guard and Navy 
for fearlessly defending our ports and high seas' interests.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening this prescient 
hearing.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Senator Baldwin, and as you 
mentioned, these are issues that I think most of us would agree 
are very bipartisan from the Senate's and the Congress's 
perspective and it's timely right now.
    So I do want to welcome our distinguished panel of 
witnesses. I'll go through the list here.
    Vice Admiral Daniel Abel is the Deputy Commandant for 
Operations, United States Coast Guard; Dr. Paul Doremus is the 
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations at NMFS in the 
National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration; Ambassador David 
Balton is a Distinguished Retired Career Foreign Service 
Officer who has worked his whole lifetime, professional 
lifetime on these issues, a good friend of Alaska's, as well, 
and he is now the Senior Fellow for the Polar Initiative at the 
Wilson Center; and Dr. Bama Athreya, who is a Labor and 
Employment Rights Specialist at the United States Agency for 
International Development.
    I want to thank all of you again for being here today. You 
will have 5 minutes to deliver an oral statement and a longer 
written statement will be included in the record for each of 
you.
    We'll begin with Vice Admiral Abel.

STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL DANIEL B. ABEL, DEPUTY COMMANDANT FOR 
                  OPERATIONS, U.S. COAST GUARD

    Vice Admiral Abel. Good morning, Chairman Sullivan, Ranking 
Member Baldwin, and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee.
    I thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf 
of U.S. Coast Guard enforcement efforts to deter IUU within 
areas of U.S. jurisdiction, on the high seas, and in 
cooperation with our partner nations.
    I ask that my written record be entered.
    Senator Sullivan. Without objection.
    Vice Admiral Abel. Your Coast Guard continues to be ready, 
relevant, and responsive to strongly support the 
Administration, this Committee, and Congress, and you have our 
thanks.
    The Coast Guard embraces its role as the lead Federal 
agency for at-sea enforcement, protecting living marine 
resources within our exclusive economic zone, and on the high 
seas.
    Coast Guard's at-sea enforcement activities complement and 
support broader U.S. efforts to combat IUU. U.S. fish stocks 
are some of the most well managed fisheries in the world. Thus, 
our resources present an attractive target to foreign fleets 
engaged in IUU fishing.
    The Coast Guard monitors and patrols our EEZ to ensure U.S. 
fishers have access to their livelihood, can support their 
families, as well as to deter foreign fishers from exploiting 
U.S. sovereignty.
    Additionally, Coast Guard patrols and monitors key areas of 
the high seas to protect U.S. interests in valuable migratory 
fish stocks, as these stocks, such as tuna and salmon, are 
managed under regional fishery management organizations or 
RFMOs in which the U.S. participates. The work of these RFMOs 
helps to close the gaps in governance structures that could be 
exploited by IUUs.
    Given the vast expanse of our EEZ and the high seas, one of 
our greatest challenges is to place the right asset at the 
right location at the right time to deter illicit activity.
    The Coast Guard leverages its broad legal authorities as 
well as our linkages to the intelligence community to support 
these critical patrol efforts. By incorporating intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance and, most importantly, highly 
trained Coast Guard women and men, our service optimizes 
limited resources to confront the greatest threats.
    Success against IUU relies on the Coast Guard's 
collaboration with inter-governmental partners, particularly 
Department of State, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric 
Administration, and, additionally, external partners and other 
nations and non-governmental organizations, all critical to 
deterring IUU fishing.
    I'd like to highlight a few recent successes and best 
practices.
    Mr. Chairman, as you mentioned, in June of this year, as 
part of our annual Operation North Pacific Guard, which draws 
support from an odd collection of shipmates that include the 
United States, Canada, China, Japan, Republic of Korea, and 
Russia, with this mix, the Coast Guard interdicted the foreign 
fishing vessel Run Da that was decimating fish stocks with 
highly illegal high seas drift nets, killing 80 tons of salmon.
    The U.S. Coast Guard cooperated closely with Chinese 
officials, including a ship-rider carried on the Coast Guard 
cutter, to stop the vessel's illegal activity, turn the vessel 
over, the crew and the catch, for Chinese prosecution, which 
currently pends.
    In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, the Coast Guard 
patrols the high seas, the EEZ, and partner nation EEZs under 
unique bilateral agreements.
    Conducting boarding at seas while vessels are actively 
fishing is critical in ensuring all aspects of the harvest are 
legal and conform to international laws.
    For this purpose, the U.S. Navy, when able, provides ship 
capability and capacity to the Coast Guard and partner nation 
boarding teams under the Oceana Maritime Security Initiative, 
or OMSI, in the Pacific. These efforts provide the enforcement 
mechanism for 10 bilateral ship-rider agreements to support 
these Pacific Island nations.
    Off the West Coast of Africa, Coast Guard law enforcement 
detachments deploy aboard U.S. ships to monitor partner nation 
assets as part of the Africa Maritime Law Enforcement 
Partnership or AMLEP run under the U.S. DOD, U.S. Africa 
Command.
    Finally, the Coast Guard's recapitalization efforts are 
making a significant enhancement. Our new Fast Response cutters 
have provided great assets against IUU fishing, especially on 
the Mexico-U.S. border.
    FRCs are much more capable than the aging 110s that they 
replaced, and we're anticipating the soon-to-be built offshore 
patrol cutters will provide even greater capability to reach 
the far reaches of our EEZs.
    The Coast Guard understands the gravity of this threat, and 
I look forward to your questions.
    Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Vice Admiral Abel follows:]

 Prepared Statement of Vice Admiral Daniel B. Abel, Deputy Commandant 
                    for Operations, U.S. Coast Guard
    Good afternoon Chairman Sullivan, Ranking Member Baldwin, and 
distinguished members of the Subcommittee. It is a pleasure to appear 
before you today to discuss the Coast Guard's role, authorities, 
capabilities, capacities, and recent experiences to deter, prevent, and 
enforce rules against Illegal, Unregulated, and Unreported (IUU) 
fishing within areas of U.S. jurisdiction, on the high seas, and in 
cooperation with partner nations.
    Safeguarding living marine resources is vital to U.S. economic 
interests, and is an enduring Coast Guard mission. Beginning with 19th 
Century protection of the Bering Sea fur seal herds, and continuing 
through the post-World War II expansion of global fishing fleets, the 
Coast Guard has embraced and met its role as the principal Federal at-
sea law enforcement agency for the protection of U.S. living marine 
resources. Today, the Coast Guard maintains a law enforcement presence 
within our Nation's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ); the largest in the 
world. Protection of the fisheries inside our EEZ is essential to the 
long-term health of vital fish stocks, being both an environmental and 
an economic concern. This is not just about holding the U.S. fishing 
industry accountable to U.S. laws; we provide a critical deterrent from 
foreign poachers targeting U.S. fish stocks.
    However, IUU fishing activity is not just a national issue. The 
efficiency of contemporary fishing vessels has made strong management 
and enforcement of fisheries even more important. Fishing activity that 
does not respect rules adopted at either the national or international 
level threatens the sustainability of worldwide fish stocks and marine 
ecosystems, and adversely affects coastal communities by distorting the 
market and jeopardizing the economic survival of those whose 
livelihoods depend upon local fisheries. Actors engaged in IUU fishing 
often exploit the gaps between governance structures and operate in 
areas where there is little or no effective enforcement presence.
    Coast Guard efforts to deter and combat IUU fishing bridge the 
Service's maritime security and stewardship goals. We partner with the 
Department of State (DoS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration (NOAA), remote island nations in the Western Pacific 
Ocean, North Pacific Partners, and nations along the Atlantic Coast of 
Africa to combat IUU fishing across the world's oceans.
    These goals are driven by national policy, laws (such as the 
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act), and 
international ocean governance structures (such as U.S. membership 
within international Regional Fishery Management Organizations 
(RFMOs)). RFMOs have proven to be effective, critical tools in managing 
fisheries resources beyond areas of national jurisdiction. For example, 
the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), one of 
the first RFMOs in the world to employ a fully-developed boarding and 
inspection protocol for high seas enforcement based on the United 
Nations (UN) Fish Stocks Agreement, has produced a level of governance 
and cooperation for long-term resource management that was previously 
not feasible. The Coast Guard is proud to have been involved in the 
development and negotiation of the protocol, and as a leader in its 
continuing implementation. Enforcement at the outer reaches of the U.S. 
EEZ, and within high seas areas managed by RFMOs, is a mission largely 
conducted by Coast Guard offshore assets. The Coast Guard's aviation 
and offshore recapitalization program ensures that the service will 
continue to have the capability and capacity necessary to conduct these 
critical missions which require significant demands of time and 
distance, and are often impacted by challenging weather conditions. 
Since 2008 in the area managed under WCPFC, the Coast Guard has 
conducted more than 230 high seas boardings and inspections, issuing 
violations to 66 vessels. To date, in Fiscal Year 2018 alone, the Coast 
Guard conducted more than 39 boardings, documenting violations on 25 
vessels.
    Likewise, Coast Guard cutter patrols in support of the UN General 
Assembly resolution 46/215, which bans the use of large-scale high seas 
drift nets, also provides IUU fishing deterrence. This summer a Coast 
Guard cutter, while deployed in support of the annual Operation North 
Pacific Guard, and operating with support from assets and personnel 
from multiple partner nations, including China, Japan, Canada, Republic 
of Korea, and Russia, intercepted the Chinese fishing vessel RUN DA, 
which was carrying more than 80 tons of illegal catch resulting from 
high seas drift net fishing. Notably, the Coast Guard cooperated 
closely with Chinese officials to turn over the vessel, crew, and catch 
for case adjudication. The Coast Guard looks forward to continuing to 
lead the global fight against IUU fishing through its participation in 
a multitude of RFMOs.
    Estimates of IUU activity vary, but at least one study found, based 
on regional surveys, global IUU catch may be valued in the tens of 
billions of dollars each year. These figures demonstrate the lucrative 
nature of this activity, and the attraction for transnational criminal 
organizations, menacing non-state actors, and foreign players to be 
linked to IUU activity and gray zone operations that may increase 
regional instability and maritime disorder. The Coast Guard is uniquely 
positioned to combat these destabilizing forces and uphold the rule of 
law through our role as a member of the intelligence community, our 
specialized capabilities, robust bilateral maritime agreements, and our 
law enforcement authorities. The myriad tools available through our 
intragovernmental partners position the United States as a global 
leader who can strengthen the international fisheries enforcement 
regime, and stop maritime threats to our national interest.
    The more we strengthen the sovereignty of other nations, the 
greater their ability to resist foreign activity that negatively 
targets their economic resources.
    In conclusion, the Coast Guard is an active and effective leader in 
the global effort to combat IUU fishing, and will continue to work 
closely with the DoS, NOAA, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), 
industry, and international partners, to achieve national and 
international objectives for managing sustainable fisheries worldwide, 
and for reducing the IUU fishing threat.
    The world's oceans contain shared resources, and therefore require 
an internationally cooperative approach toward their conservation and 
management. In the face of increasing challenges to global food 
security and the growing demand for marine resources, the U.S. Coast 
Guard stands ready to confront IUU fishing to ensure the long-term 
strategic and economic viability of fish stocks that are fished by U.S. 
fishers. In doing so, we can increase Maritime Domain Awareness on the 
high seas, and more effectively respond to a range of transnational 
threats; upholding global order in the maritime domain and asserting 
American influence through presence.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. I would 
be happy to answer any questions you may have.

    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Admiral, and I can assure you 
this Committee is fully supportive of the Coast Guard's 
recapitalization efforts. We're trying hard to get the Coast 
Guard bill passed here soon. So I appreciate that testimony.
    Ambassador Balton.

        STATEMENT OF DAVID BALTON, SENIOR FELLOW, POLAR 
  INITIATIVE, WOODROW WILSON INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR SCHOLARS

    Ambassador Balton. Mr. Chairman, Members of the 
Subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to testify today. 
I also ask my written statement appear in the record.
    Senator Sullivan. Without objection.
    Ambassador Balton. While the focus of this hearing is on 
ocean fisheries, let's take a quick look at the bigger picture. 
The world's ocean is not in good shape. It faces three serious 
and inter-related challenges: unsustainable fisheries, marine 
pollution, and the series of effects caused by climate change-
related challenges, such as ocean acidification.
    But this hearing and other events around the world are 
raising awareness of these problems and this attention has led 
to some serious commitments and some concrete actions that are 
aimed at remedying the ocean's ills but we need to do much 
more.
    With respect to ocean fisheries, we must take three steps 
to achieve long-term sustainability. We must end over-fishing, 
we must continue to combat IUU fishing, and we must do more to 
prevent damage caused to marine eco-systems by certain types of 
fishing practices.
    Over-fishing remains a real concern. The percentage of the 
fish stocks harvested at unsustainable rates has increased 
steadily in decades, recent decades, and today represents 
roughly a third of such stocks. If this trend continues, 
serious consequences for food security and the marine 
environment will follow.
    There's better news concerning efforts to stop destructive 
fishing practices. The U.S. and other nations have in fact 
restricted the use of several types of fishing gear and certain 
fishing practices, thereby reducing excessive bycatch and 
limiting damage to sensitive marine ecosystems but again we 
need to do more.
    With respect to IUU fishing, which is more closely aligned 
with the main focus of this hearing, we have had some 
accomplishments to date. We are not starting from scratch. I 
just want to lay out a few of the things that have happened in 
recent years.
    The Port State Measures Agreement has entered into force, 
now has 55 parties, including the United States. Many regional 
fishery management organizations have taken aggressive action 
against IUU fishing, including putting IUU vessels on 
blacklists and denying them fishing opportunities.
    Some new RFMOs have come into existence, including in the 
North and South Pacific, bringing effective management to 
certain previously unregulated fisheries.
    The U.S. and the Russian Federation, at a time of real 
friction in that relation, managed to negotiate and sign a 
bilateral agreement to combat IU fishing just a few years ago.
    In just a few weeks, the United States, eight other 
nations, and the European Union will sign a new agreement to 
prevent unregulated fisheries in the high seas portion of the 
Central Arctic Ocean, and both the United States and the EU 
have taken steps to prevent the sale and importation of 
illegally caught fish in their respective markets. I wish I 
could say all these things have solved the problem. They do 
represent important steps, but we need to do some more things 
and here are five things I recommend.
    First, we must promote widespread adherence to and 
implementation of the Port State Measures Agreement. This is a 
terrific tool. We need to use it fully and in particular we 
need to provide developing countries with the resources they 
need to implement it properly.
    Two, we should expand fish traceability programs. In an 
ideal world, the consumer buying a fish in a restaurant or in a 
market would know where that fish was caught, who caught it, 
whether it was caught legally, whether it's the fish it says it 
claims to be. We are not at that stage yet but we're heading 
down that road and I would encourage us to do more.
    We must get other states to end subsidies that contribute 
to over-fishing and IUU fishing. You know, we have gotten 
commitments to do that many times on paper. Now we must insist 
that these commitments be fulfilled. Most recently, there was a 
firm commitment to end such subsidies by 2020. Let us secure 
that.
    Fourth, we should keep building a data base, known as the 
Global Record of Fishing Vessels, Refrigerated Transport 
Vessels, and Supply Vessels. This is a data base created by the 
U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. It is already a good 
tool. It has uses in combating IUU fishing. We need to work 
with others to make it truly comprehensive.
    And, finally, we must accede to the U.N. Convention on the 
Law of the Sea. There are a lot of reasons to do this, but one 
reason is that it will lend greater credence to our efforts to 
urge others in the fight against IUU fishing.
    I wish to commend the sponsors of the bill that would 
create the Maritime Security and Fisheries Enforcement Act. If 
I can be of assistance to the Subcommittee as the bill receives 
further attention, I'd be pleased to do so.
    Thank you for this opportunity to testify.
    [The prepared statement of Ambassador Balton follows:]

 Prepared Statement of David Balton, Senior Fellow, Polar Initiative, 
            Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
    Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I would like to thank 
you for this opportunity to testify in today's hearing focusing on 
ocean fisheries. My name is David Balton and I am currently a Senior 
Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, working 
primarily on issues relating to the two Polar Regions, the Arctic and 
Antarctica.
    As you know, Congress created the Wilson Center fifty years ago as 
the official memorial to President Wilson. We serve as the Nation's key 
non-partisan policy forum, fostering independent research and open 
dialogue to help guide the policy community.
    Before I joined the Wilson Center this year, I worked for 32 years 
at the U.S. Department of State, the last fifteen years serving as 
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oceans and Fisheries. In that capacity, 
I participated in numerous efforts to advance our Nation's interests 
relating to the oceans, including the effort to secure sustainable 
ocean fisheries. My testimony today draws largely on my experiences in 
that regard.
State of the World's Fisheries
    While the focus of this hearing is on ocean fisheries, and the 
problem of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing in 
particular, I believe that it would be useful to take a quick look at 
the broader picture. The world's ocean as a whole is not in good shape. 
As highlighted by the series of Our Ocean Conferences launched by the 
United States several years ago, we face three serious and interrelated 
challenges in respect of the ocean:

   unsustainable fisheries;

   marine pollution; and

   a range of adverse effects caused by climate change and 
        related phenomena, such as ocean acidification.

    The good news is that, through hearings such as this one and 
countless other events in the United States and around the world, the 
ocean and its problems are receiving significant attention. This 
attention has produced some high-profile commitments, and some concrete 
actions, aimed at remedying the ocean's ills--by nations, international 
organizations, the private sector, philanthropies, scientific bodies 
and civil society. Much more needs to be done, however.
    With respect to ocean fisheries, we must successfully address three 
main issues if we are to achieve long-term sustainability: (1) we must 
end overfishing, which is driven in large part by excess fishing 
capacity; (2) we much continue to combat IUU fishing; and (3) we must 
prevent damage caused to marine ecosystems by certain types of fishing 
practices. Since the focus of this hearing is on IUU fishing, most of 
what follows addresses item (2). But first, a few words about items (1) 
and (3).
Overfishing
    The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 
produces a biennial publication known as the State of World Fisheries 
and Aquaculture (``SOFIA''), which most experts generally regard as the 
best source of overall statistics in this field. The 2018 SOFIA reveals 
that, while the total amount of fish captured in the ocean has remained 
relatively stable over the past few decades, there are some alarming 
trends in these capture fisheries:

        The state of marine fishery resources, based on FAO's 
        monitoring of assessed marine fish stocks, has continued to 
        decline. The fraction of marine fish stocks fished within 
        biologically sustainable levels has exhibited a decreasing 
        trend, from 90.0 percent in 1974 to 66.9 percent in 2015. In 
        contrast, the percentage of stocks fished at biologically 
        unsustainable levels increased from 10 percent in 1974 to 33.1 
        percent in 2015, with the largest increases in the late 1970s 
        and 1980s. In 2015, maximally sustainably fished stocks 
        (formerly termed fully fished stocks) accounted for 59.9 
        percent and underfished stocks for 7.0 percent of the total 
        assessed stocks.

    In other words, overfishing remains a real concern. The percentage 
of fish stocks harvested at unsustainable rates has increased steadily 
in past decades and today represents roughly a third of such stocks. If 
this trend continues--and unless further action is taken to reduce 
overfishing and excess fishing capacity, we should expect it to 
continue--serious consequences for food security and the marine 
environment will follow.
Destructive Fishing Practices
    Over the past 25 years, the United States and other nations have 
restricted the use of several types of fishing gear and certain fishing 
practices with the potential to cause significant harm to the marine 
environment. That harm may include, among other things:

   excessive bycatch, particularly of juvenile fish and species 
        at risk such as seabirds, sea turtles, marine mammals; and

   damage to sensitive areas such as seamounts, hydrothermal 
        vents and other vulnerable marine ecosystems.

    The United States can point to some real successes in this 
endeavor. For example:

   we championed an initiative to prohibit the use of large-
        scale driftnets on the high seas;

   we led the effort to reduce the mortality of dolphins in the 
        purse seine tuna fisheries of the Eastern Pacific Ocean;

   we prompted other nations to use turtle excluder devices, 
        thus reducing sea turtle mortality in their shrimp trawl 
        fisheries;

   we pushed the United Nations and regional fisheries 
        management organizations (RFMOs) to limit bottom trawling 
        operations in areas known to have vulnerable marine ecosystems; 
        and

   we have secured bans on shark-finning and pursued 
        sustainable shark fisheries.

    Again, more needs to be done in this space, particularly to reduce 
the mortality of endangered species in certain fisheries.
IUU Fishing
    Even in cases where governments, individually or collectively, have 
set responsible limits on the harvest of marine fish and have enacted 
or adopted other necessary management measures, some fishers violate 
those rules. The term ``IUU fishing'' has come to represent a wide 
range of activities that undermine sustainable fisheries.
    I have seen any number of estimates of the amount of IUU fishing 
taking place and of the value of illegally harvested fish. My own view 
is that those estimates are probably not reliable, simply due to the 
difficulty of obtaining hard data on this topic. Nor can we know for 
certain whether the overall amount of IUU fishing is increasing or 
decreasing. What I do feel safe in saying is that IUU fishing remains a 
serious threat to fisheries worldwide.
    Over the past two decades, nations have taken many steps--at the 
global, regional, and national levels--to combat IUU fishing. To 
highlight just a few:

   As part of Agenda 2030, the United Nations adopted 
        Sustainable Development Goal 14, which includes the following 
        target:

        By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, 
        illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive 
        fishing practices and implement science-based management plans, 
        in order to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, 
        at least to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield 
        as determined by their biological characteristics.

   The Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA), negotiated under 
        the auspices of the FAO, has entered into force and now has 55 
        parties, including the United States. Meetings of the parties 
        to the PSMA have started to take place, with the aim of 
        ensuring effective implementation of its provisions. One key to 
        this effort will be to provide developing countries with the 
        training, expertise and resources they need to prevent 
        illegally caught fish from being landed, transshipped, packaged 
        or processed in their ports. I am aware that the United States 
        is actively engaged in such capacity building efforts, 
        providing both financial and technical support.

   Another critical step will be to facilitate the exchange of 
        information about IUU fishing activities--among States, RFMOs, 
        and others--that the Agreement envisions.

   Many RFMOs have taken aggressive action to address IUU 
        fishing, such as the creation of ``black lists'' of IUU vessels 
        that are denied fishing opportunities, stronger requirements on 
        the monitoring, control and surveillance of vessels, 
        institution of trade-tracking and catch-documentation schemes, 
        etc.

   A number of new RFMOs have come into existence in the past 
        decade or so, including in the North Pacific and South Pacific, 
        with the aim of bringing effective management to certain 
        previously unregulated fisheries.

   In 2015, the United States and the Russian Federation signed 
        a bilateral agreement to combat IUU fishing. Despite serious 
        friction in the U.S.-Russian relationship on other matters, 
        this agreement is allowing the agencies of both governments to 
        cooperate more effectively in dealing with IUU fishing, 
        particularly in the Bering Sea and North Pacific regions.

   In early October, the United States, eight other States and 
        the European Union will sign the Agreement to Prevent 
        Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean.

   Over the past few years, both the United States and the 
        European Union have instituted a variety of controls to prevent 
        the importation and sale of illegally harvested fish in their 
        respective markets.

    I wish I could say that these actions, and others like them, have 
solved the problem of IUU fishing. Although they constitute significant 
and commendable efforts--and reflect a remarkable degree of political 
will of many nations to address this problem--we need to do more.
Next Steps in Combatting IUU Fishing
1. Promote widespread adherence to, and full implementation of, the 
        PSMA.
    The entry into force of the Port State Measures Agreement in 2016 
represented a true milestone in the fight against IUU fishing. It gave 
the international community, at the global level, its first legally 
binding tool with which to prevent illegally harvested fish from 
entering the stream of commerce. Now we must ensure widespread 
adherence to, and full implementation of, this key treaty. That the 
United States is a party to the PSMA gives us the legitimacy our Nation 
needs to work with others in doing just that.
    At this stage, I recommend a focus on three things simultaneously. 
The United States should:

   Encourage more States to join the PSMA, particularly 
        developing States whose ports are used often by vessels for 
        landing, transshipping, packaging and processing fish. Some 
        significant States that currently remain outside the PSMA are 
        China, Brazil and Mexico.

   Contribute further expertise and resources to developing 
        States, directly and/or through the FAO, both to help those 
        States that are already parties to the PSMA implement its 
        requirements and to encourage other developing States to join 
        and implement the PSMA.

   Support FAO in creating a global mechanism to facilitate the 
        exchange and publication of information relating to the PSMA, 
        which will, among other things, help States determine whether 
        particular vessels seeking entry into their ports have engaged 
        in or supported IUU fishing.
2. Expand fish ``traceability'' programs.
    In an ideal world, a consumer seeking to buy a fish in a market or 
to order a fish in a restaurant would have access to the information 
necessary to know where the fish was caught, who caught the fish, that 
the fish was caught in accordance with applicable rules and that the 
fish is actually the species that the seller claims it to be. Although 
we are still many years away from living in such a world, we have begun 
to take steps to improve the ``traceability'' of fish products from the 
moment of harvest to final sale.
    We should continue down this road. To do so effectively, the United 
States Government will need to collaborate not only with other 
governments and international organizations, but also with many 
partners in the seafood industry and civil society. I note that quite a 
few industry and other non-governmental groups in the United States are 
already working actively in this regard. It also appears that many U.S. 
consumers are willing to adjust their purchasing behavior in favor of 
buying fish that they know have been caught legally and sustainably.
3. End subsidies that contribute to IUU fishing.
    For years, the United States and other like-minded nations have 
sought to create a strong set of international rules to end harmful 
subsidies to the fisheries sector, subsidies that exacerbate 
overfishing and contribute to IUU fishing. We have repeatedly secured 
commitments on paper to do just that, including in Agenda 2030. And 
yet, final agreement on these ``disciplines'' on fisheries subsidies 
has eluded our grasp. We should demand that all States fulfill the 
pledge they made in Sustainable Development Goal 14 to end such 
subsidies by 2020.
4. Build the Global Record of Fishing Vessels, Refrigerated Transport 
        Vessels and Supply Vessels.
    This database, constructed by FAO with the support of many States 
and other entities, contains accessible information about vessels 
engaged in fishing and related activities. That information includes 
registration, vessel characteristics and ownership, previous vessel 
names, previous owners and operators, authorizations to engage in 
fishing and related activities, history of compliance, etc. Clearly, 
the availability of such information will aid in the fight against IUU 
fishing. For example, States will be able to use the Global Record in 
helping to determine whether to allow a vessel seeking access to its 
ports to do so.
    FAO released the Global Record earlier this year. It is accessible 
at: http://www.fao.org/global-record/information-system/en/. The 
database currently includes information on more than 8,400 vessels, 
uploaded by 49 States, including the United States. But it is still a 
work in progress. The United States will need to work with others to 
continue building the Global Record, and to keep all of its information 
up-to-date, with the goal of making it truly comprehensive.
5. Accede to the Law of the Sea Convention.
    The United States has been a prominent player in the worldwide 
effort to combat IUU fishing despite the fact that we have not adhered 
to the basic international instrument on ocean governance, the 1982 
Convention on the Law of the Sea. It is not at all clear, however, that 
we will be able to maintain a leadership role as a non-party to this 
treaty.
    The most compelling reasons for the United States to join the 
Convention concern the benefits that that the United States would reap 
regarding enhancement of our national security interests, recognition 
of the outer limits of our continental shelf, and the ability to 
sponsor U.S. companies to engage in deep seabed mining.
    But joining the Convention would also lend greater legitimacy to 
our efforts to urge others in the fight against IUU fishing. Today, 
other nations reluctant to join the PSMA can point to our non-adherence 
to the LOS Convention and say that we are being hypocritical. China, 
for example, makes this point when our government raises concerns about 
Chinese behavior, including allegations of IUU fishing by Chinese 
vessels, in the South China Sea.
Preliminary Comments on the Maritime SAFE Act
    In late August, a bill was introduced in the Senate called the 
Maritime Security and Fisheries Enforcement Act, or Maritime SAFE Act. 
I commend the sponsors of this bill for their willingness to take on 
these issues, and am particularly pleased at the bipartisan nature of 
this proposed legislation.
    The basic purposes of the bill are fully consistent with the needs 
I perceive to take further action against IUU fishing. I support the 
intention to improve global data sharing, to promote international 
collaboration, to foster implementation of the PSMA, and to strengthen 
internal coordination on fisheries enforcement here in the United 
States.
    The bill may well undergo change as it moves through the 
legislative process. If I can be of assistance to this Subcommittee or 
to others in the Senate or in the House during this process, I would be 
pleased to do so.
    At this early stage, I might simply note that the bill places 
perhaps too heavy an emphasis on what the United States can do on its 
own. While there clearly are things that our government should do 
unilaterally to advance our efforts, real success will lie in working 
with other nations, particularly developing States that lack the 
capacity to fight IUU fishing effectively. We will also need to work 
with those outside of government, including the fishing industry, 
scientific organizations, environmental NGOs and others.
Conclusion
    Thank you once again for this opportunity to testify. I would be 
pleased to answer any questions.

    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Ambassador, and just one of 
the issues I wanted to highlight, you mentioned the subsidies 
and the Trade Promotion Act that passed the Congress a couple 
years ago. There's a whole new section on trade agreement. Now 
the U.S. Trade Representative has to go after the illegal trade 
subsidies of our trade partners. So we're making progress 
there.
    Ambassador Balton. Thank you.
    Senator Sullivan. Dr. Athreya.

  STATEMENT OF DR. BAMA ATHREYA, SENIOR DEMOCRACY SPECIALIST, 
              BUREAU FOR DEMOCRACY, CONFLICT, AND 
                 HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE, USAID

    Dr. Athreya. Chairman Sullivan, Ranking Member Baldwin, and 
Members of the Subcommittee, thank you so much for the 
opportunity for USAID to speak today, and we would also ask 
that our written testimony be submitted for the record.
    Senator Sullivan. Without objection.
    Dr. Athreya. We are particularly pleased to be able to 
speak to you about a very important topic: the criminal conduct 
and, in particular, the widespread human trafficking that is 
connected with the over-exploitation of fisheries.
    Under our Administrator, Ambassador Greene's leadership, 
USAID has reaffirmed its commitment to ending human trafficking 
in all forms and in all industries around the world. Our 
experience shows that IUU fishing and human trafficking have 
common drivers. We believe that we need to address the 
environmental and human rights challenges together in order to 
have a stronger and more transformational impact on both the 
environmental degradation and the human rights violations 
associated with IUU fishing.
    So let me start by just talking for a minute about why this 
is a development priority for USAID. Seafood is the world's 
most widely traded food commodity, supporting a $500 billion 
global economy. Fisheries and aquaculture assure the 
livelihoods of 10 to 12 percent of the world's population. More 
than 90 percent of those are people working in small-scale 
operations in developing countries.
    Fisheries make a significant contribution to food security 
around the world and again particularly in the developing 
world. Fish provide more than 3.1 billion people with almost 20 
percent of their animal protein.
    This is an important underpinning industry for global 
development, but these gains cannot continue unless we address 
the over-exploitation and associated criminal activities.
    At USAID, ending human trafficking is a priority. 
Trafficking in persons corrupts global commerce and it 
threatens global security. Empowering people and communities at 
risk of human trafficking helps our development objectives by 
disrupting the cycles that keep people in poverty around the 
world.
    Equally important, we do see well-managed wild fisheries as 
a development pathway that can support self-reliance; food 
security; decent work; economic growth; and women's 
empowerment; and, as noted by a recent National Intelligence 
Council report, ensuring the economic and food security of 
vulnerable populations strengthens our own national security.
    How widespread is the problem of trafficking in the fishing 
sector? We and other donors are investing in more and better 
research about the extent of the problem. One recent study, a 
prevalence study, done in Southeast Asia by the International 
Justice Mission, identified up to 80 percent of the migrant 
workers in Southeast Asia that were interviewed for the study 
had experienced trafficking at some point in their 
participation in fishing or as crew on fishing vessels--80 
percent. So in that region, at least, trafficking seems to be 
the norm and not the exception. Clearly, we have to tackle this 
issue.
    USAID has actively focused on the issue of human 
trafficking in fisheries since 2014 when we raised this problem 
within the U.S. Government interagency discussions about IUU 
fishing. We have seen how over-exploitation and illegal 
exploitation of fishery resources is a driver for labor abuse 
in fisheries and vice-versa. Scarce fish mean fisheries are 
less profitable, trips are longer and more dangerous, and 
fishers are more isolated. These conditions create a pull for 
labor abuses because ship owners and captains are looking for 
fishing crews to work under more and more isolated and 
dangerous conditions.
    At the same time, boats crewed by fishers working under 
these exploitive conditions continue to drive over-fishing and 
are associated with other illegal behaviors.
    For the past few years, USAID has addressed these 
challenges through our programming and also by acting as a 
convener within the U.S. Government as well as the broader 
donor community. We have regularly led meetings on this subject 
with U.S. Government colleagues from State Department, Commerce 
Department, Labor Department, Department of Homeland Security, 
and the U.S. Trade Representative, to ensure that we coordinate 
our work and identify trends and opportunities to disrupt 
cycles of human trafficking. We've also facilitated the same 
types of conversations within the broader donor community, 
private foundations, bilateral donors, et cetera, both in 
Washington, D.C., and particularly in Southeast Asia.
    We have described some of our key investments in our 
written submission. I just want to make a few broad points 
about our portfolio here. One major theme in our programs is 
bringing stake-holders together. For example, in our recently 
launched Seafood Alliance for Legality and Traceability, we are 
directly investing in collaboration. The initiative itself is a 
partnership with the Packard Foundation, Moore Foundation, and 
Walton Family Foundation, and it is a global alliance for 
knowledge exchange and action to promote legal and sustainable 
fisheries through improved transparency in seafood supply 
chains. We believe transparency and traceability will directly 
benefit workers themselves--workers on boats--by making 
invisible people visible.
    Technology for the detection of crimes at sea is another 
consistent theme in our programming. Through USAID's Supply 
Unchained Initiative, we have solicited innovative approaches 
to addressing labor exploitation on boats by using technology 
to connect directly with workers and allowing for the real-time 
reporting of problems and abuses. This is also linked with our 
approach to sustainability in the seafood sector. We've 
integrated labor concerns, for instance, into our Oceans and 
Fisheries Partnership, which is promoting electronic catch 
documentation to improve fisheries management for 
sustainability and biodiversity to improve biodiversity. But 
the electronic catch documentation traceability systems being 
developed can be dual purpose. They can also help provide 
visibility in terms of the workers on the boats.
    In closing, we'd like to highlight once again the 
importance of the whole-of-government approach to this issue. 
No single organization can solve these complex and inter-
related challenges and we have benefited enormously from the 
insights we've received from NOAA, State Department, Labor 
Department, Justice Department, and so many other colleagues.
    In turn, we hope USAID's programs support our colleagues' 
priorities on law enforcement, trade, and regulatory fronts. We 
believe solutions are possible if we all work together.
    Thank you once again for your time and I look forward to 
your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Athreya follows:]

 Prepared Statement of Dr. Bama Athreya, Senior Democracy Specialist, 
   Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, USAID
    Chairman Sullivan, Ranking member Baldwin, Members of the 
subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to speak to you today about an 
important issue that touches upon our work: the criminal conduct 
arising from overfishing that has led to severe human rights 
violations, in particular widespread human trafficking. We appreciate 
the importance of working across the U.S. government to end the 
exploitation of resources and people.
    USAID is committed to combating human trafficking in all forms and 
industries around the world. A prevalence study conducted by a USAID 
partner in Thailand, Issara Institute, revealed that in the research 
area, nearly 80 percent of the fishing vessel workers may have been 
trafficked. Our experience shows that Illegal, Unregulated, and 
Unreported (IUU) fishing and human trafficking have common drivers and 
USAID understands that addressing environmental and human rights 
challenges together creates stronger and more transformational impact 
on both sectors.
    At USAID, ending human trafficking is a priority. Trafficking in 
persons corrupts global commerce and threatens global security. 
Empowering people and communities at risk of exploitation disrupts 
cycles of poverty. We also see well-managed wild fisheries as a 
development pathway that can support self-reliance, food security, 
decent work, economic growth, and women's empowerment. I'd like to 
highlight some of our findings and programs.
    People are surprised by the scale of the seafood sector globally. 
Seafood is the world's most widely traded food commodity, supporting a 
$500 billion global economy. They are a significant source of foreign 
currency earnings for many developing countries, providing net export 
revenues of US$ 42 billion in 2014, higher than other major 
agricultural commodities--including meat, tobacco, rice and sugar--
combined. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that 
fisheries and aquaculture assure the livelihoods of 10-12 percent of 
the world's population with more than 90 percent of those employed by 
capture fisheries working in small-scale operations in developing 
countries. A recent study suggests that 50 percent of seafood workers 
are women, often engaged in post-harvest processing.
    Finally, fisheries make a significant contribution to food and 
nutrition security, particularly in developing countries. Fish provide 
more than 3.1 billion people with almost 20 percent of their animal 
protein. But maintaining and enhancing these benefits requires us to 
unwind the unvirtuous spiral we've described by creating the reverse 
situation where sustainable fisheries support decent work.
    USAID has actively focused on the issue of human trafficking in 
fisheries since 2014, when we raised this problem within U.S. 
Government interagency discussions about IUU fishing. We have seen how 
overexploitation and illegal exploitation of fishery resources is one 
of the drivers for labor abuse in fisheries. Scarce fish means 
fisheries are less profitable, trips are longer and more dangerous, and 
fishers are more isolated. These conditions create a ``pull'' for labor 
abuses as ship owners and captains look for fishing crew to work under 
poor conditions. At the same time, boats crewed by fishers working 
under these exploitive conditions continue to drive over-fishing and 
are also associated with illegal fishing behaviors.
    For the past few years, USAID has been an influential convener 
within the government as well as the broader donor community. We have 
regularly convened U.S. Government colleagues from State, Commerce, 
Labor, Homeland Security, and the U.S. Trade Representative to 
coordinate our work and identify trends and opportunities; and we've 
facilitated a number of events with the broader donor community in both 
Washington, D.C. and in Southeast Asia. As a result, USAID investments 
have been consistently aligned with broader U.S. government priorities 
in this area, and with the programmatic investments of other funding 
agencies and private donors.
    In developing our programs we coordinate closely with other U.S. 
agencies that also address this issue, including State/JTIP and 
Department of Labor's Bureau of International Labor Affairs. We also 
coordinate with other donor agencies.
    Indeed one of our main projects, the Seafood Alliance for Legality 
and Traceability (SALT) is an example of how we are directly investing 
in collaboration. The SALT initiative is a partnership with the Packard 
Foundation, Moore Foundation and Walton Family Foundation to form a 
global alliance for knowledge exchange and action to promote legal and 
sustainable fisheries through improved transparency in seafood supply 
chains. SALT brings together the seafood industry, governments, civil 
society groups, academics and other stakeholders to accelerate learning 
and support collaboration on innovative solutions for legal and 
sustainable seafood, with a particular focus on traceability-the 
ability to track the movement of seafood through supply chains. The 
program has held three global workshops since its launch in October 
2017, each of which have included human rights activists and experts 
working to end human trafficking in this sector. Going forward, 
specific activities will be driven by the collective recommendations 
from these workshops. We believe new transparency and traceability 
solutions will directly benefit workers on boats, as participants 
stated in our most recent workshop in Bangkok, by ``making the 
invisibles visible.''
    Technology for the detection of crimes at sea is a consistent 
refrain in our programming. We have investments in tech-enabled 
detection programs to address labor exploitation and to improve 
fisheries management to achieve ecological sustainability and conserve 
marine biodiversity. Our key programs in these areas are focused on 
Southeast Asia, which produces 50 percent of the world's seafood and is 
recognized as a hotspot for human trafficking in fisheries.
    I'd like to describe two relevant projects using technology to 
detect human trafficking at sea. Golden Dreams, implemented by 
Thailand-based Issara Institute and also supported by the Walmart 
Foundation, uses social media to connect migrant workers at risk with 
each other through a Burmese-language smartphone app, to revolutionize 
safe migration, jobseeker empowerment, ethical sourcing due diligence, 
and anti-human trafficking. The app serves as a platform for learning 
and exchanging information, reviews, ratings, comments, and advice 
about employers, recruiters, and service providers, in both home and 
destination countries.
    The IM@Sea project, implemented by the International Labor Rights 
Forum (ILRF) in partnership with Iridium Go! explores how satellite-
based vessel-tracking technology can advance U.S. efforts to identify 
and counter human trafficking in the global fishing industry. With 
narrowband satellite devices, video cameras, data collection tools, and 
a risk assessment system, ILRF and IM@SEA partners tested a 
sophisticated, cost-effective way to generate labor and environmental 
risk profiles on two fishing vessels with a small trial set of crew. 
This project recognized that trust is as important as technology, and 
built a protocol, including binding agreements with vessel owners, that 
can be replicated to foster more ethical practices on fishing vessels.
    On the sustainability side, the Oceans and Fisheries Partnership is 
a collaboration between USAID and the Southeast Asian Fisheries 
Development Center (SEAFDEC) that works to strengthen regional 
cooperation to IUU fishing, promote sustainable fisheries and conserve 
marine biodiversity in the Asia-Pacific region through the development 
of transparent and financially sustainable Catch Documentation and 
Traceability (CDT) systems to help ensure that fisheries resources are 
legally caught and properly labeled. The program has documented labor 
conditions at both its main project sites, and is exploring ways to 
integrate labor practices into its approach.
    I'd like to share one final example of our integrated approach to 
this issue: USAID in Ghana is addressing the challenge of child labor 
in fishing, particularly on Lake Volta, through its existing Feed the 
Future program implemented by the University of Rhode Island Coastal 
Resources Center. A community-based approach targeting parents and 
guardians who are in poverty and lack knowledge of the negative impacts 
of child labor is complemented with livelihoods support, resulting in 
children spending more time in school than fishing. The project 
partners have also drafted an anti-trafficking policy document for the 
Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development (MOFAD) and the 
Fisheries Commission, in collaboration with Ministry of Gender, Child 
and Social Protection, to be incorporated into ministries' policies.
    In closing we would like to highlight once again the importance of 
a whole-of-government approach to this issue. No single organization 
can solve these complex and interrelated challenges. For the past few 
years, USAID has been acting as a convener of regular discussions among 
our U.S. government colleagues, other donors, and other stakeholders to 
ensure that our investments to address human trafficking in the global 
fishing sector effectively leverage, and wherever possible partner 
with, other allies working on these issues. Our programs have benefited 
enormously from the insights we have received from NOAA, State 
Department, Labor Department, Justice, Department of Homeland Security 
and so many other colleagues. In turn we hope that our programs are now 
better aligned with our colleagues' priorities on the law enforcement, 
trade and regulatory fronts. We believe solutions are possible if we 
all work together. Thank you again for your time, and I look forward to 
your questions.

    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Dr. Athreya.
    Dr. Doremus.

        STATEMENT OF DR. PAUL DOREMUS, DEPUTY ASSISTANT

         ADMINISTRATOR FOR OPERATIONS, NATIONAL MARINE

      FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC 
          ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

    Dr. Doremus. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the 
Subcommittee. Pleased to have the opportunity to testify before 
you today and likewise ask that my written testimony be 
accepted into the record.
    Senator Sullivan. Without objection.
    Dr. Doremus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The United States is a global leader in sustainable seafood 
and is committed to preventing illegally harvested or 
fraudulently marketed fish from entering the global stream of 
commerce.
    Fourteen Federal agencies have a role in implementing U.S. 
actions to combat IUU fishing and seafood fraud domestically as 
well as internationally. Interagency coordination of these 
efforts has been managed through a Working Group on IUU Fishing 
and Seafood Fraud, co-chaired by NOAA and the State Department.
    The working group coordinates actions to combat IUU 
fishing, strengthen enforcement cooperation, enhance 
partnerships, and implement a risk-based traceability program 
for seafood entering into U.S. commerce.
    The National Security Council identified combating IUU 
fishing as one of this Administration's environmental 
priorities and, in fulfillment of this priority, NOAA engages 
in international cooperation and assistance with a particular 
emphasis on providing training and strengthening efforts to 
combat IUU fishing in foreign countries. These activities 
promote maritime security through increased monitoring, 
control, and surveillance. NOAA, in partnership with USAID, the 
State Department, U.S. Naval Forces Africa, and the U.N. Food 
and Agricultural Organization, has been engaged in the capacity 
of building initiatives around the world.
    In June 2016, the Agreement on Port State Measures entered 
force. The U.S. supports successful international 
implementation of the Port State Measures Agreement because 
assisting nations with implementation ultimately will reduce 
the level of IUU fish products being landed and exported around 
the world. To this end, the Office of Law Enforcement in the 
National Marine Fisheries Service developed and has been 
delivering an international training program for providing 
technical assistance to global partners.
    NOAA also works to combat IUU fishing pursuant to domestic 
authorities. The Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and 
Management Reauthorization Act of 2006 requires NOAA to 
identify countries whose vessels engage in IUU fishing in a 
biennial report to Congress. Once NOAA identifies such a 
nation, we consult with them to encourage appropriate 
corrective actions which, if not taken, can lead to a negative 
certification and prohibitions from importing certain fisheries 
products into the United States.
    Finally, the U.S. also is a leader within the Regional 
Fisheries Management Organizations on monitoring, control, and 
surveillance efforts needed to combat IUU fishing. Through 
these organizations, we're working closely with countries 
around the world to develop strong enforcement tools and 
management measures.
    For NOAA, one of the most significant recent program 
developments is the Seafood Import Monitoring Program. This 
program establishes for imports of certain seafood products the 
reporting and recordkeeping requirements needed to prevent IUU 
fish, fish products, and misrepresented seafood from entering 
U.S. commerce. Through these requirements, the Seafood Import 
Monitoring Program provides additional protections for our 
national economy, global food security, and sustainability of 
our shared ocean resources.
    It helps level the playing field for fishermen and seafood 
producers around the world who play by the rules. This is a 
risk-based traceability program requiring the importer of 
record to report data and retain records that allow for 
tracking of products from the point of harvest to the point of 
entry into U.S. commerce.
    By direction of the 2018 Appropriations Act, shrimp and 
abalone must now comply with the Seafood Import Monitoring 
Program's requirements by December 31 of this year. We will 
require foreign shrimp and abalone seafood products to be 
accompanied by harvest and landing data, and chain of custody 
records when entering the United States.
    NOAA also is establishing an analogous domestic program for 
reporting on shrimp and abalone aquaculture to include those 
species in SIMP. In addition, NOAA's implemented a number of 
international catch documentation and trade programs designed 
to prevent illegal trade in seafood products.
    On the enforcement front, both NOAA and the Department of 
Commerce are strongly committed to preventing IUU fish and fish 
products as well as fraudulently labeled seafood from entering 
the United States. We have begun to explore ways to improve 
enforcement. Opportunities include administrative subpoena 
authority, which would increase NOAA's ability to get 
information it needs to support investigations involving 
importation of IUU fish products, including documents related 
to the storage, processing, packaging, and transport of fish. 
In addition, the ability to share information, including with 
other international organizations, is an important element in 
combating IUU fishing.
    Finally, to effectively address trafficking in IUU fish and 
fish products, NOAA needs clear prohibitions on the submission 
of false information related to shipments of fish.
    To conclude, combating IUU fishing is a priority for this 
Administration. NOAA is undertaking a variety of strong actions 
and initiatives to help level the playing field for U.S. 
industry, ensure public confidence in U.S. seafood, and promote 
maritime security.
    I look forward to working with members of the Subcommittee 
and your staff on actions needed to counter IUU fishing.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I'll be happy to 
answer any questions.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Doremus follows:]

Prepared Statement of Dr. Paul Doremus, Deputy Assistant Administrator 
for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and 
        Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce
Introduction
    Good morning, Chairman Sullivan, Ranking Member Baldwin, and 
Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Paul Doremus and I am the 
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations within the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Marine 
Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the Department of Commerce. Today, I will 
describe the agency's work to combat illegal, unreported, and 
unregulated (IUU) fishing and seafood fraud as well as the nexus 
between our work and maritime security. The United States is a global 
leader in sustainable seafood and is committed to preventing illegally 
harvested or fraudulently marketed fish from entering the global stream 
of commerce.
    As a result of sound science, strong management programs, and 
enforcement controls, the United States has successfully reduced 
domestic overfishing to its lowest level in decades and rebuilt a 
record number of historically depleted domestic stocks. IUU fishing and 
seafood fraud undermine these efforts. Entities that engage in IUU 
fishing circumvent conservation and management measures and avoid the 
operational costs associated with sustainable fishing practices. IUU 
fishing also undermines the reputation of legitimate fishing and 
seafood operations and the consumer confidence on which they rely. 
Because the United States imports more than 90 percent of its seafood, 
NMFS works to ensure that this high demand for imported seafood does 
not create incentives for illegal fishing activity. Some countries are 
overwhelmed by the increasing demand for their fisheries products, 
while many lack the necessary management and/or enforcement capacity to 
sustainably manage their marine resources. Furthermore, the way other 
countries manage our shared marine resources can directly affect the 
status of fish stocks of importance to the United States. Thus, the 
United States has a critical role in promoting the consumption of 
sustainable and legally caught seafood.
IUU Fishing and Seafood Fraud--Definitions and Clarifications
    IUU fishing encompasses a wide range of activities. In general, 
illegal fishing refers to fishing activities conducted in contravention 
of applicable laws and regulations, including those adopted at the 
regional and international level. Unreported fishing refers to fishing 
activities that are not reported or are misreported to relevant 
authorities in contravention of national laws and regulations, or 
reporting procedures of a relevant regional fisheries management 
organization (RFMO). Unregulated fishing occurs in areas, or for fish 
stocks, for which there are no applicable conservation or management 
measures and where such fishing activities are conducted in a manner 
inconsistent with State responsibilities for the conservation of living 
marine resources under international law. Fishing activities are also 
unregulated when occurring in the management area of a RFMO by vessels 
without nationality, or by those flying a flag of a State or fishing 
entity that is not party to the RFMO in a manner that is inconsistent 
with the conservation measures of that RFMO.
    In general terms, seafood fraud is ``the act of defrauding buyers 
of seafood for economic gain.'' Seafood fraud occurs in a variety of 
different ways--from intentional mislabeling and species substitution, 
to falsifying trade documentation, to short-weighting product (charging 
consumers more for less product). Regardless of the manner in which the 
fraud occurs, seafood fraud is illegal, undermines confidence in the 
marketplace, and can have serious negative consequences for fisheries 
resources, fishermen, the seafood industry and consumers. IUU fishing 
and seafood fraud can overlap when the origin or species of a seafood 
product is fraudulently labeled in an effort to conceal IUU fishing 
activity, such as hiding that it is a protected species or that it was 
harvested illegally from a protected area.
Current Scope of Our Work
    Fourteen Federal agencies have a role in implementing U.S. actions 
to combat IUU fishing and seafood fraud, both domestically and 
internationally. Interagency coordination on these efforts has been 
managed through an interagency working group on IUU Fishing and Seafood 
Fraud, co-chaired by NOAA and the State Department. The working group 
coordinates the implementation of a suite of actions to improve 
international tools to combat IUU fishing, strengthen enforcement 
cooperation both domestically and internationally, enhance partnerships 
with industry and other stakeholders, and implement a risk-based 
traceability program for seafood entering U.S. commerce.
    The National Security Council identified combating IUU fishing as 
one of this Administration's international environmental priorities, 
under the Combating Conservation Crimes initiative. The initiative 
calls for NOAA to promote adoption and implementation of global and 
regional counter-IUU fishing measures, support the provision of 
technical assistance to developing States, strengthen interagency 
collaboration to combat IUU fishing, implement the Seafood Import 
Monitoring Program, and accelerate the development and use of 
innovative technologies to detect and deter IUU fishing.
    In fulfillment of this Administration's initiative to combat IUU 
fishing, NOAA engages in international cooperation and assistance, with 
particular emphasis on providing training to strengthen efforts to 
combat IUU fishing and trafficking of IUU fish products. These 
activities promote and enhance maritime security through increased 
monitoring, control, and surveillance of fishing activities. NOAA, in 
partnerships with the U.S. Agency for International Development 
(USAID), State Department Bureau of International Narcotics and Law 
Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Naval Forces Africa, and the Food and 
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, has been engaged in 
capacity building initiatives around the globe, including Africa, 
Southeast Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. Since 2008, the U.S. 
Coast Guard and NOAA, in partnership with the State Department and 
USAID have conducted numerous workshops across Southeast Asia on 
combating IUU fishing and implementing fisheries law enforcement best 
practices. Since 2013, NOAA has also collaborated in efforts to train 
African fisheries management and enforcement officials, as well as 
prosecutors. The purpose of these workshops is not only to strengthen 
fisheries enforcement and prosecution, but to promote interagency 
cooperation and regional coordination.
    In June 2016, the Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, 
Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (PSMA) 
entered force. The United States supports successful international 
implementation of the PSMA because assisting nations with the 
implementation of the PSMA will, ideally, reduce the level of IUU fish 
products being landed and exported from nations around the world. Thus, 
the NOAA Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) developed an international 
training program for providing technical assistance to its global 
partners. OLE's Port State Measures Inspector Training Program 
curriculum focuses on the operational aspects of implementing the PSMA 
with emphasis on roles and responsibilities of PSMA inspectors, methods 
to detect IUU fishing activity and the ability to conduct thorough 
fisheries inspections of foreign-flagged fishing and fishing-support 
vessels that enter global ports. Likewise, by working to increase 
awareness and competence of global law enforcement partners to combat 
IUU fishing and crimes related to IUU fishing (such as human 
trafficking, documentation fraud, and trafficking in protected fish and 
wildlife), NOAA seeks to prevent illegal fishing and related activities 
at the source before the fish and seafood resulting from these 
activities enter global commerce.
    NOAA also works to combat IUU fishing pursuant to its domestic 
authorities. The MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
Reauthorization Act of 2006 (MSA), which amended the High Seas Driftnet 
Fishing Moratorium Protection Act, requires NOAA to identify countries 
in a biennial report to Congress whose fishing vessels engage in IUU 
fishing activities. Once NOAA identifies such a nation, we consult with 
them to encourage appropriate corrective action. If the Nation does not 
take appropriate action, it receives a negative certification, and the 
Nation may be prohibited from importing certain fisheries products into 
the United States. Since the Act's reauthorization, NOAA has consulted 
with France, Italy, Libya, Panama, People's Republic of China, Tunisia, 
Colombia, Ecuador, Portugal, Venezuela, Ghana, Republic of Korea, 
Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, and the Russian Federation to resolve IUU 
fisheries issues as required by the Act. In accordance with the Act, 
every two years NOAA reports to Congress the details of these 
consultations and other efforts to improve international fisheries 
governance.
    Finally, the United States is also a leader within RFMOs on 
regional issues related to monitoring, control, and surveillance and 
efforts to combat IUU fishing, working closely with countries around 
the world to develop strong enforcement tools and effective 
conservation and management measures. NOAA provides policy guidance and 
technical expertise in the development of these tools and measures. 
NOAA also supports groups working to counter IUU fishing under the 
framework of existing RFMOs and regional fishery management 
arrangements, such as the International Commission for the Conservation 
of Atlantic Tunas and the Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission. 
To help advance these efforts, support has been provided for the 
development of traceability tools and technologies to improve 
monitoring, control, and surveillance in hot spot regions. To 
illustrate, grants have been awarded to partners with the aim of 
improving traceability tools, developing technologies such as mobile 
software applications to bridge information gaps, and conducting 
studies to improve knowledge of the international trade and commerce of 
protected species.
Addressing Seafood Fraud
    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the competent authority 
to address seafood fraud practices through improper labeling and other 
statements or claims on the label that may mislead the customer once 
the product enters into U.S. commerce. NOAA's Seafood Inspection 
Program assists the FDA in administering its authorities under a 
Memorandum of Understanding with that agency. For example, when seafood 
products are presented for inspection, identification of mislabeling 
(to include low net weights, species identification, product integrity 
and country of origin) is included in the scope of the inspection, when 
practical. Violations are either corrected through the Seafood 
Inspection Program's work or referred to the FDA or applicable state 
authorities for review and final disposition.
Seafood Import Monitoring Program
    The Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) establishes, for 
imports of certain seafood products, the reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements needed to prevent IUU fish and fish products or 
misrepresented seafood from entering U.S. commerce. Thus, the SIMP 
provides additional protections for our national economy, global food 
security and the sustainability of our shared ocean resources. It helps 
to level the playing field for fishermen and seafood producers around 
the world who play by the rules. This is a risk-based traceability 
program--requiring the importer of record to report key data and to 
retain records that allow for tracking of the product from the point of 
harvest to the point of entry into U.S. commerce. These requirements, 
which apply to imports of 13 species and species groups identified as 
particularly vulnerable to IUU fishing or seafood fraud, went into 
effect January 1, 2018. Compliance for shrimp and abalone was stayed, 
however, until a comparable traceability program for domestic 
aquaculture could be established. Per direction of the 2018 
Appropriations Act, shrimp and abalone must comply with SIMP's 
requirements by December 31, 2018. We will require foreign shrimp and 
abalone seafood products to be accompanied by harvest and landing data 
and chain of custody records when entering the United States. NOAA is 
establishing an analogous domestic program for reporting on shrimp and 
abalone aquaculture to include these species in SIMP. NOAA also 
anticipates finalizing a Commerce Trusted Trader Program in the coming 
months, which will offer streamlined reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements for U.S. importers who elect to implement robust internal 
traceability and auditing measures that meet the counter-IUU fishing 
and seafood fraud objectives of the SIMP. In addition to the SIMP, NOAA 
has implemented a number of international catch documentation and trade 
tracking programs designed to prevent illegal trade of seafood products 
moving in trade. These include programs for tunas, swordfish, and 
Patagonian toothfish.
Enforcement Authorities
    Both the Department of Commerce and NOAA are strongly committed to 
preventing IUU fish and fish products as well as fraudulently labeled 
seafood from entering the United States. Most prohibitions and 
enforcement tools currently available to NOAA are focused on harvesting 
violations within federally-managed fisheries.
    NOAA has begun exploring ways to improve enforcement. This analysis 
includes the areas described below:

  1)  Administrative Subpoena Authority--Administrative subpoena 
        authority would increase NOAA's ability to get the information 
        it needs to support investigations involving the importation of 
        IUU fish or fish products including documents related to the 
        storage, processing, packaging and transportation of fish. 
        While many other agencies have Administrative Subpoena 
        authority to assist in the investigation of suspected 
        violations related to the safety and accurate labeling of a 
        multitude of food items, no such equivalent authority exists 
        for NOAA to do the same for most fish and fish products.

  2)  Data Sharing--The ability to share information (including with 
        other governments and international organizations) is a 
        critical element in combating IUU fishing.

  3)  Additional Prohibitions--To effectively address trafficking in 
        IUU fish and fish products, NOAA needs clear prohibitions on 
        the submission of false information related to shipments of 
        fish (e.g., harvesting vessel, ocean area of catch, species).
Threat detection and evidence gathering
    A number of entities, including non-governmental organizations, 
have been promoting the use of technology, including satellites and 
vessel transponders required for maritime safety (i.e., automatic 
identification system (AIS)), to identify areas of the ocean where 
suspected IUU activity is taking place. Some of NOAA's polar orbiting 
satellites have a Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) 
capable of detecting the lights on the high seas which can be 
associated with fishing vessels. Using these data, a number of private-
sector services now offer the ability to see where vessels are and 
believe this information could be helpful in ending IUU fishing.
    Maritime domain awareness (MDA), which is the effective 
understanding of everything associated with the marine environment that 
can impact security, safety, the economy or the environment, has long 
been of keen interest to the United States. While NOAA has a 
significant interest in MDA, other agencies, like the U.S. Navy, share 
that interest and have a number of systems that provide MDA. NOAA has 
worked directly with many of these agencies to focus these tools in the 
effort to identify and take action on IUU fishing.
    However, knowing where fishing vessels are operating is really less 
than half of the problem. Additional information and evidence of 
illegal activity is required to bring an enforcement action which can 
be challenging to collect.
Conclusion
    Combating IUU fishing is a priority for this Administration. As 
demonstrated in my testimony, NOAA is undertaking a variety of strong 
actions and initiatives to combat these activities to help level the 
playing field for U.S. industry, ensure public confidence in U.S. 
seafood, and promote maritime security globally.
    I look forward to working with Members of the Subcommittee and your 
staff on the proposed legislation and actions needed to counter IUU 
fishing and enhance maritime security.
    This concludes my testimony. Thank you again for the opportunity to 
testify before your Subcommittee today. I would be happy to answer any 
questions you may have.

    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Dr. Doremus.
    And we are joined by the Ranking Member of the Full 
Commerce Committee, Senator Nelson, who I know being the 
Senator from Florida, has a lot of interest in these issues. So 
I'm going to offer the opportunity for Senator Nelson to make a 
brief opening statement.

                STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

    Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the Ranking 
Member, thank you.
    Indeed, this is a subject matter that is of considerable 
interest to the entire committee and certainly to my state and 
what I want to do is underscore a number of things that you all 
have already said.
    Climate change and global mismanagement of fish stocks are 
driving our oceans to conditions that we've never seen before. 
Internationally, each coastal fishing nation is responsible for 
managing the fish stocks that fall within their domestic 
waters.
    This Committee has passed legislation that has allowed the 
U.S. to be a leader in fishery conservation and management and 
we stand as that leader for the rest of the world and that was 
through the Magnuson-Stevens Act and subsequent Acts. We made 
improvements that have resulted in an unprecedented era of 
rebuilding over-fished stocks in the U.S.
    It has been especially important in the waters around 
Florida, which is the source of millions of dollars of shrimp, 
snapper, grouper, spiny lobster, and stone crab that are 
enjoyed by so many American restaurants and households around 
the country.
    The entire state, from the bait shop to the boatyard, from 
the airport to the seaport, relies on the waters off our coast.
    Another piece of legislation we've worked on in this 
committee, the Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management 
Act, otherwise known as the Modern Fish Act, seeks to improve 
the Nation's fishery conservation and management laws to expand 
fishing opportunities for saltwater anglers while making sure 
we conserve the fishery resources for the future. This 
legislation received bipartisan approval in this committee 
earlier in the year and we're hopeful that the Senate is going 
to act on it soon.
    This Committee has worked in a bipartisan way, but at the 
same time, many coastal nations do not manage their fish stocks 
sustainably. They don't enforce conservation measures 
effectively or coordinate management of shared stocks with 
other fishing nations. You all have testified to this fact and 
because other nations are not doing their part. These gaps are 
allowing for the illegal, unreported, and the unregulated 
fishing that is occurring.
    And this global problem appears to be increasing as some 
bad actors attempt to avoid the stricter fishing rules created 
to address the declining fish stocks and so the U.S. must 
continue to lead the way, so that our commercial and 
recreational anglers can continue to operate and benefit.
    While our fishermen are playing by the rules, more must be 
done to address illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing 
that threatens so much of the world fish population. So thank 
you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
    Now I'm going to begin the questioning, and I want to ask 
Admiral Abel.
    Sir, I want to get a little bit more in detail on that 
interdiction of the Chinese fishing vessel Run Da. Now as I 
mentioned in my opening statement, the Chinese are perhaps the 
largest state sponsor of illegal over-fishing, something that 
Ranking Member Nelson just touched on.
    How does that square with their perceived cooperation in 
apprehending this fishing vessel? So my point is, they were 
clearly cooperating on this one, but as a state they're 
probably one of the big bad actors and problem governments on 
these topics.
    So you and perhaps Ambassador Balton, in your previous 
job--I know you worked a lot--can you give an example of how 
this cooperation occurred? Are you confident the Chinese will 
take appropriate punitive actions against the master of this 
vessel or do you think this was more of a show versus trying to 
hide what they're doing more dramatically as a government?
    Vice Admiral Abel. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the 
question.
    It's an interesting collection of folks that work for the 
Northern Central Pacific. I mentioned our Pacific Guard and the 
fact it brings together Canadians that are flying out of Japan, 
Chinese ship-riders, Russian cooperation, as well as the South 
Koreans, all working together.
    Your comment about the approach we take with the Chinese, 
we certainly cooperate when we can and certainly on this case 
we did.
    When I served up with you up in the 17th District, we also 
did a similar case of IUU fishing that was a Chinese vessel and 
there's one before that. So the last three we have had Chinese.
    While Run Da has not been--they haven't adjudicated yet and 
they haven't taken final action, the Chinese will destroy the 
vessel. They will scrap the vessel is the ultimate of what they 
do with that. So they appear to take it seriously and their 
cooperation is critical as far as getting onboard the vessel, 
inspecting the vessel as a Chinese-flagged vessel, to then take 
action.
    So it's an interesting conundrum where we compete and we 
collaborate at the same time.
    Senator Sullivan. At the same time from a government 
perspective, they're very problematic in a lot of these areas?
    Vice Admiral Abel. Yes, sir, and they consume about a third 
of the world's fish. So certainly as their middle class rises 
and the protein need goes up, there's going to be more of a 
demand in China for fish.
    Senator Sullivan. Ambassador Balton, do you have any 
comments from your previous job?
    Ambassador Balton. Thank you, Senator.
    In my experience, cooperation with China on fisheries 
issues has improved gradually over time but it's not been 
linear. We are getting better data from China. There has been 
some more transparency. China's government has been devoting 
more resources to management and enforcement of their fishing 
vessels. All that's on the positive side. I would say they've 
also been participating more in international efforts.
    But, for example, in the South China Sea, a recent 
arbitrable decision found that there was widespread IUU fishing 
by Chinese vessels in that sea supported by the Chinese 
Government.
    Senator Sullivan. And Chinese Coast Guard and Naval Fleets 
to protect the IUU fishing?
    Ambassador Balton. So the arbitrable award found. Yes, sir. 
So it's----
    Senator Sullivan. That's a real problem, right?
    Ambassador Balton. Well, it's certainly a problem for the 
countries in that region, yes. The U.S. doesn't have particular 
fishing interests there, but it is evidence that we have a long 
way to go with China, yes.
    Senator Sullivan. Great. Dr. Doremus, I wanted to ask. I 
know NOAA focuses on a lot of these issues. Are you doing work 
at NOAA, or is USAID doing work, to better support our partners 
around the world by enhancing their maritime domain awareness 
capability and capacity? I'll put that out to either NOAA or 
USAID witnesses.
    Dr. Doremus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and perhaps we both 
could comment. From our vantage point, our authority centers 
most squarely on efforts to tackle IUU fishing. There's clearly 
a nexus between IUU activities and maritime domain awareness. 
There's an extensive effort within the Federal Government and 
outside the Federal Government to improve various types of 
detection technologies, including use of remote-sensing 
capabilities and other, more recent, augmentations of those 
capabilities with software to interpolate fishing behavior and 
the like. So we have very extensive mechanisms for sharing 
information across our Federal agency partners that relate to 
maritime domain awareness, particularly, but not only with the 
Coast Guard and the U.S. Navy.
    Senator Sullivan. Dr. Athreya.
    Dr. Athreya. Yes, I mean, I'll just mention sort of one 
example. Yes, we are working to strengthen the capacities, 
particularly in the Asian Region, on maritime domain awareness, 
but more particularly on solutions that involve transparency 
and traceability, and working with the RFMOs.
    So our Oceans and Fisheries Partnership is a collaboration 
with the Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center, SEAFDC, 
and it working to strengthen regional cooperation to combat IUU 
fishing through the development of electronic catch 
documentation and traceability systems that can be implemented 
throughout the region.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you.
    Senator Baldwin.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
    Admiral Abel, on July 1 of this year, the Chinese Coast 
Guard moved from being under the State Oceanic Administration 
to being under the command of its military governing Central 
Military Commission.
    Last month, your Commandant discussed China's investment in 
and use of its Coast Guard really as a de facto enforcement arm 
in the South China Sea. Admiral Schultz also noted that the 
U.S. Coast Guard is in discussion with the Indo-Pacific Command 
and that, if asked for assistance, that the U.S. Coast Guard 
could have a presence in that part of the world next calendar 
year.
    Admiral, is the Coast Guard capable of establishing a 
presence in the South China Sea, and, if so, what do you see as 
the Coast Guard's role and how would this impact the operations 
that the Coast Guard is already doing?
    Vice Admiral Abel. Ranking Member, thank you for the 
question.
    As far as the request from the Department of Defense to 
support INDOPACOM, we're working with them right now as far as 
requirements for a potential Coast Guard cutter to deploy over 
there.
    I would say, though, that the Coast Guard already has a 
fairly large presence on that side of the Pacific in a number 
of ways. The Oceana Maritime Security Initiative or OMSI is a 
way that we actually ride Navy ships with our law enforcement 
authorities to board on behalf of the United States. We also 
have a number of bilateral agreements where we take ship-riders 
from other Coast Guards and other Navies to help them enforce 
the fragile fishing stocks that they have that make it 
difficult out there. We also help man up every quarter as a 
regional command center that helps those islands deal with the 
threat to their fishing.
    I would also say two different ways we're also doing 
something different out there. One would be our Fast Response 
cutters are showing up in Alaska. They're proving themselves to 
be very, very robust cutters that are going to extend our reach 
and our sustainment and our seakeeping to extend that, and, 
interestingly enough, our Buoy Tender Sequoia just finished a 
three-week patrol, did 30 international boardings and found on 
10 of those that the vessel monitoring system that's required 
was not properly functioning.
    So we're helping these nations patrol their own waters so 
that the Rule of Law for individual EEZs is consistent from 
nation to nation to nation.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
    Ambassador Balton, global population is expected to exceed 
9.7 billion by 2050, with the largest growth coming in Asia and 
Africa.
    Fish consumption has also increased from an average of 9.9 
kilograms, 21.8 pounds, per person in the 1960s to over 20 
kilograms, or about 44 pounds per person, in 2015. Worldwide 
depletion of fish stocks could cause nutritional deficiencies 
in countries that depend upon food from the oceans as a crucial 
protein source.
    So I'm wondering, have you looked into this aspect of the 
issue and, if so, how can we prevent a potential food shortage 
and potential international conflicts that would result from 
food shortage?
    Ambassador Balton. Senator, I think you're right to be 
worried about these trends, and I don't know that there is a 
good answer to your question.
    I think the best that we can do is to put more of the fish 
stocks we have on a sustainably fished basis. As has come out 
in the hearing so far, we, the United States, have done 
reasonably well at that over the last quarter century or so, 
and it is a mixed bag internationally.
    It's not all doom and gloom, but the tools for sustainable 
fisheries are now becoming more available, even to developing 
countries. We do need to help them become better managers of 
their fishery resources and we need to reduce the other 
stressors on the oceans that are also competing in a sense with 
human needs for these fish stocks.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
    Senator Sullivan. Senator Wicker.

              STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER F. WICKER, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI

    Senator Wicker. Thank you.
    Dr. Doremus, on Page 2 of your testimony, you mention the 
Interagency Working Group on IUU Fishing and Seafood Fraud, 
chaired by NOAA and the State Department.
    Let me ask if we need to expand on that? Senator Coons and 
I have a bill called The Maritime SAFE Act, which would add to 
that a whole-of-government approach and it would direct that 
the intelligence community be included in this working group, 
as appointed by the Director of National Intelligence.
    Are we on to something here? Would it help to be more all-
inclusive and take a whole-of-government approach and, 
specifically, would it help us to add the intelligence 
community in this effort?
    Dr. Doremus. Thank you, Senator Wicker, very much, 
appreciate your support of these efforts.
    The Administration is currently reviewing the SAFE Act. I 
can't comment specifically on that now, but more generally to 
the interagency collaboration that you noted at the outset of 
your question, we do have very effective across-agency 
collaboration.
    I think it has been broadly recognized among the panelists 
here that that's a central component of being able to continue 
our steady progress against IUU fishing and I do think that 
that approach--which you're characterizing as a whole-of-
government approach--is an essential ingredient of our ability, 
long term, to be able to set and best use the institutional 
capabilities that we have among the Federal Government 
agencies, as well as with the Regional Fisheries Management 
Organizations and our other government partners around the 
globe in tackling this problem.
    Senator Wicker. Right now, does the intelligence community 
act as a part of your working group?
    Dr. Doremus. At this point in time, I think we always have 
opportunities for improving sharing of information. We do share 
information through a number of existing channels that do 
involve intelligence agencies.
    Senator Wicker. OK. Well, let me shift then to an issue 
with Mexico. Mexican crew boats called lanchez engage in 
frequent illegal fishing in U.S. Federal waters, including in 
the Gulf. They typically run drugs up from Mexico into Texas 
and then fish their drift nets on boat rides back to Mexico and 
the proceeds, I understand, help finance ongoing cartel 
operations.
    It's troubling to me, based on information I have, that 
five times the amount of red snapper are caught in this way--
five times more--than my Mississippi legal fishermen are 
allowed to catch.
    How is our cooperation going with the Mexican Government 
and how can we improve our efforts to combat illegal fishing, 
particularly by Mexican lanchez?
    Dr. Doremus. Thank you, Senator. This has been recognized 
as a significant problem for some time, and we've been working 
very closely both with the U.S. Coast Guard in gathering 
information about violations, providing that information to the 
Government of Mexico, and then also working very closely with 
the Government of Mexico in providing that information and 
understanding how they are deploying it through their legal 
authorities to prosecute violators of our laws.
    Things are progressing well. We are not in the place we 
were a number of years ago. I think the signs of progress are 
very promising. We have shared information and the Mexican 
Government has shared information with us, charging documents, 
court proceedings, and documentation of the sanctions that 
they've levied. So we believe we're moving in a very positive 
direction on this problem. It will require sustained effort by 
all of us.
    Senator Wicker. OK. Vice Admiral Abel, who owned this Run 
Da ship? Was it privately owned by a Chinese company?
    Vice Admiral Abel. Chinese vessel, sir, returned to the 
Chinese, and, Senator, your question about intelligence, the 
Coast Guard has a foot in both camps and certainly we're 
members of the intelligence community. So in our enforcement 
activities, we also work with intelligence so that we can levy 
all of the exquisite capabilities that the United States has on 
intelligence, large oceans, many targets, sea change, 
temperatures, and salinities to try to forecast where the 
illegal activity could be and then the intelligence means to 
track those. So already we're the interlocutor between the 
Coast Guard and fishing enforcement and intelligence.
    Senator Wicker. OK. But I was asking about this Chinese 
ship. Is it privately owned, and to follow up on the Chairman's 
point, why would they help with one privately owned ship and 
not with others? Do you think they're favorites of the regime? 
What would the difference be there?
    Vice Admiral Abel. Sir, I'm not sure I have the answer on 
that one, but I will certainly follow up as far as the actual 
ownership of the vessel. It was Chinese-flagged, though.
    Senator Wicker. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Sullivan. But we don't know if that was state-owned 
or privately-owned?
    Vice Admiral Abel. I'll take that one for the record, sir.
    Senator Sullivan. Senator Nelson.
    Senator Nelson. To follow that up, the Chinese have twice 
as many vessels to support their fishing fleet. Coast Guard 
Captain Jay Caputo has written that the Coast Guard has little 
capacity to work with other countries, citing the struggles to 
meet U.S. fisheries enforcement obligations and he notes that 
about the Chinese fleet.
    Do you agree, Admiral, with that assessment?
    Vice Admiral Abel. Senator, I guess I would describe that 
we have many layers of fishery enforcement. The first, of 
course, is within our own EEZ, which is enforcing domestic 
fisheries in our own fleet, making sure it's a level playing 
field, you know, that folks can get back from supporting their 
families in a safe manner. We do that. We dedicate a 100,000 
hours of boat, cutter, and aircraft hours every year. Last 
year, it was up 10 percent, making sure we enforce that. We 
also look at incursions.
    Senator Nelson. And you do that very well.
    Vice Admiral Abel. Yes, sir. So that's one demand on your 
Coast Guard.
    Certainly we do the high seas enforcement, as well, which 
does include the Chinese threat; and then we work with other 
nations in their EEZs, like we mentioned, off of Africa or the 
Pacific Islands.
    So if we had more Coast Guard, could we do more patrolling? 
Absolutely. We're optimistic that the increased range, reach, 
and endurance of the Fast Response cutters, as well as the 
offshore patrol cutters, will give us more capability per hull 
so we can get after this threat.
    Senator Nelson. So, Ambassador Balton and Dr. Doremus, 
climate change and sea level rise are already changing 
ecosystems and that forces fish populations to move. Some 
islands in the Pacific may even be close to underwater in 
another 30 years.
    What is it going to mean for sustaining the fish 
populations and being able to get to them?
    Ambassador Balton. Senator, it's going to be bad news. As I 
think Senator Sullivan mentioned already, there's evidence that 
the warming sea surface temperatures are pushing at least some 
fish stocks from tropical areas toward the poles. We've seen 
fish showing up in waters off Alaska that are not typically 
there and stocks even pushing up into the Arctic Ocean for the 
first time as the Arctic Ocean melts.
    The sea surface temperature warming is not the only 
stressor connected to climate change. There's also 
acidification, coral degradation, other types of marine 
pollution. So the oceans are facing a variety of challenges and 
they need all of which need to be addressed if we're going to 
achieve sustainability.
    Senator Nelson. Doctor?
    Dr. Doremus. Senator, thank you for your question. We can 
devote considerable scientific effort to understanding 
ecosystem dynamics, how these ecosystems are changing, how 
changes in ocean conditions are affecting the distribution of a 
variety of living marine resources. These are very complex 
dynamics.
    They're very hard to predict; but we are dedicated to 
understanding and trying to respond through science-based 
advice to our management system through the Regional Fisheries 
Management Councils as aggressively as possible to changing 
conditions, population size, and distribution and what that 
means for management decisions and the use of those resources.
    Long term, in terms of global fishing supplies, the comment 
has been--the observation has been made during our proceedings 
that there are extraordinary pressures for increased seafood 
consumption, demographically driven pressures, and one of the 
additional things that we think should be considered, the 
ability that exists now, and possibly in greater measure, to 
take advantage of the cultivation of fish through aquaculture 
techniques to be able to meet some of those supply needs in the 
future. It can be done sustainably. That might help with the 
problem, but long term, yes, sir, there are many changes that 
we need to respond to that are making the whole equation a lot 
more complicated.
    Senator Sullivan. Senator Inhofe.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. JIM INHOFE, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA

    Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I often say, Dr. Doremus, back when I enjoyed life I was a 
builder and developer in an area around South Padre Island, 
Texas. That's a long ways from Oklahoma, but nonetheless I 
spent a lot of time down there. So I've watched over the years.
    What I want to do is get you to expand a little bit more on 
Senator Wicker's questioning. I've seen times when the red 
snapper population was great and would go up and down and now 
you folks got in there and I think have been doing a very good 
job recently. Recently I was down there, that was when they 
actually lifted the restrictions they had on fishing for red 
snapper in that area and it's had just a great--really a great 
improvement.
    One of the problems, though, was with the Mexicans that 
were coming up and were mass fishing in different ways that 
were really very harmful. In fact, a lot of them, they were 
actually just killing a lot of the red snapper because they'd 
use the nets. They'd disappear. That was really a serious 
problem. So I assume at one point you put some restrictions on 
Mexican fishing in those waters and then lifted those 
restrictions later, or have they been lifted? Explain the 
process. What do you go through when you make a determination 
that you need to do something to enhance the fish population, 
using red snapper as an example? What indications are there 
when you restrict some of the fishing? What's the process? What 
do you go through?
    Dr. Doremus. Thank you, Senator. I think the overarching 
basis for all of our management decisions and our collaboration 
with the states on red snapper is based on our assessments of 
the population size and distribution of red snapper and how 
that would affect our ability to set different guidelines for 
the allowable catch through different segments of the red 
snapper industry.
    The presence of illegal fishing by launch activity from 
Mexico complicates the matter considerably. It undermines the 
conservation-based measures that are taken through the Gulf 
Management Council primarily for red snapper and corresponding 
state efforts.
    So we collaborate very closely with Coast Guard on 
identifying and trying to enforce proscribed fishing activities 
by those that are not licensed and authorized to fish in or 
fish outside of our regulatory system.
    We provide that information to the Government of Mexico and 
we work very closely with them to understand how they respond 
through their domestic laws to----
    Senator Inhofe. Do you get cooperation from the Mexican 
Government?
    Dr. Doremus. Yes, we have, sir, and that is improving on a 
regular basis, and we feel it is moving in a positive 
direction, continued sharing of information, continued 
verification of practices that the Mexican Government is 
embarking on will be key to our future success.
    Senator Inhofe. Well, anyway, whatever you have been doing 
is really recent and I wonder if you made any changes at that 
time. My concern is that we know firsthand about the problems 
of the Mexicans coming in and not complying with our rules, 
which I think our domestics pretty much do. Admiral Abel, 
you've got a big operation down there in that South Padre 
Island. I've been very familiar with it for many years. What's 
the process that would involve you to start looking to try to 
find illegal methods of catching fish by Mexican nationals?
    Vice Admiral Abel. Senator, I appreciate the question. This 
year, we've seen some record-breaking incursions. We're up to 
50 already, which exceeds last year. So we've seen a lot more.
    We've stepped up aviation patrols, which then helps the 
Fast Response cutters get there on scene. Typically, what 
happens is the vessel is taken to Station South Padre Island. 
The crew is taken off and handed over to the CBP. They're 
interviewed for any information that we can get from the crew.
    The way the catch is stored on vessel means it cannot be 
consumed. That is actually destroyed at sea. We wait 45 days 
for the Mexican Government to ask for their vessel back, 20 
years they've never asked for one back, and then the vessel is 
destroyed. So that is the process we go through but we're 
seeing increasing levels. But I do know, and I think in 2015 
and 2017, Mexico was labeled an IUU country through sanctions.
    Senator Inhofe. What does that mean, IUU?
    Vice Admiral Abel. I'd defer to the doctor as far as what 
that means internationally, but we've documented enough of 
these cases that it put them on this list.
    Senator Inhofe. Well, it does seem to be working, and I'm 
familiar--I've actually talked to some of the people in your 
shop down there, and I'm interested in how they coordinate with 
NOAA and I think you're doing a good job.
    The other thing I didn't have time to ask, I will just ask 
something for the record, because I'm concerned about the rider 
agreements. I don't quite understand how that works, 
particularly the agreement we have with China, which there has 
been concern voiced already, but the Chairman and I were in 
South China Sea. We were watching what's going on with the 
development of the Seven Islands and the fact that when you 
know what's going on there, you can't come to any conclusion 
other than they're preparing for World War III and so any time 
we have something like this agreement, it's kind of scary to 
me.
    So I'd like to have you maybe for the record get something 
back to me on what we can do to avoid problems with countries 
like China when they're given that opportunity to be in 
agreement with us.
    Good. Thank you.
    Senator Sullivan. Senator Cantwell.

               STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON

    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for 
holding this important hearing. I've followed the comments of 
our witnesses, but I want to go back to the issue as it relates 
to fisheries enforcement and the need in determining cutters 
and where they go.
    This is such a vital aspect of what we're doing in the 
Pacific Northwest and I know you still have decisions to make.
    Is the Pacific Northwest mission important in those 
considerations and in determining where the rest of the cutters 
will go?
    Vice Admiral Abel. Senator, absolutely. As you know, the 
offshore patrol cutters, the first four we have decided are 
going to the West Coast, two will go up to Kodiak, Alaska, two 
will be down at our base in San Pedro LALB, and we're looking 
at where the next will come.
    We have a five-part test where we decide where cutters 
should go. The first is logistics. The engineers would love to 
have all the ships together because then you get common 
maintenance, spare parts, logistics, shore facilities, and the 
operators.
    The second part, of course, would like the opposite. They 
want to disburse. They want to put them where the mission is, 
minimize transit time, and make sure you're where the work is.
    Next is port. Will the port support it? Does it require 
dredging, peer interface? People is the next one, spouse 
employment, schools, available housing, costs of living, and 
the last part is the environmental impact to make sure we're 
good there. So that five-part test, we're just beginning to 
embark on hulls five and six as far as where they will be based 
on the West Coast, Senator.
    Senator Cantwell. Thank you. But fisheries enforcement is 
not being met and obviously we want to make sure that that is 
considered. That's part of this hearing, is how are we going to 
make enforcement work better and having the resources to do so. 
It's great that witnesses have been able to articulate about 
what you can do with Fast Response and we agree and I'd also be 
remiss if I didn't mention obviously expanding the Arctic 
mission writ large with icebreakers. We want to make sure that 
the Coast Guard continues to expand in the Pacific Northwest 
and the Arctic.
    We think this is a very, very important issue. I don't know 
if you have any thoughts on that.
    Vice Admiral Abel. Ma'am, the presence in the Arctic is 
critical and where we stand right now is very fragile. We have 
one and a half icebreakers and I hate saying the Healy is a 
half but it's a medium icebreaker. She doesn't give us assured 
access year-round to where we need to be.
    The Coast Guard is committed to six icebreakers. At least 
three of those must be large icebreakers and we need one right 
now, and we certainly look forward to getting the funding that 
we're seeking and awarding that contract and getting that ship 
online by 2023 and giving some relief to the Polar Star that 
has served the watch well. She's going to go through a service 
life extension program in between her annual requirements, 
which puts us at risk, but our nation has to invest in this 
national asset, this polar security cutter.
    Senator Cantwell. Thank you. I couldn't agree more. I want 
to ask about stock assessments, too, and, Admiral Balton, I 
would ask our Deputy Assistant at NOAA, I know sometimes 
they're caught in what they can and can't say.
    Do we need more money for stock assessments and helping us 
manage fisheries? To you, Admiral Balton?
    Ambassador Balton. I may not the best person to answer 
that. My sense is that relative to most other countries, we do 
a very good job assessing stocks in U.S. waters. We probably 
have some of the best science on which to base fisheries 
management measures here in the U.S.
    It's true nationwide but I would say particularly in the 
Pacific Northwest and off Alaska, I think some of the very best 
fisheries management in the world takes place around there. 
Would the scientists and the fisheries managers in the U.S. do 
an even better job with even more money to do better 
assessments? The answer is yes, probably that's true. Is that 
the best use of some added dollars if your concern is a 
worldwide one? Probably not.
    Senator Cantwell. I heard what you said earlier about the 
worldwide issue, and I'm a huge supporter of what you said. I 
think this protein problem is real and one of the easiest 
layups would be to get the U.S. more involved in helping with 
better fisheries management around the globe.
    In fact, I was able to convince the Chilean Government to 
come to the University of Washington and hear about the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act and understand exactly why we're so 
successful in the Northwest in fisheries management. So I agree 
wholeheartedly.
    Now we probably have a pretty robust debate here in 
Congress about what the United States' role should be in doing 
that. You know, I wish someone would help us. I actually think 
it is meaningful for a lot of political reasons, as well as for 
stability within regions, but there's nothing that says we 
can't upgrade Magnuson-Stevens to even more scientific 
information about stock assessments here in the United States.
    So I guess I would like to have both of those goals met 
because I think that the challenge that you all have 
articulated as it relates to our oceans, very important that we 
come up with more science and data to help drive us.
    So thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
    Senator Blumenthal.

             STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

    Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for 
being here today.
    Mr. Doremus, you're in charge of enforcement of the 
Fisheries Management System, correct?
    Dr. Doremus. Yes, sir.
    Senator Blumenthal. I know you have a connection to 
Connecticut.
    Dr. Doremus. I do, indeed.
    Senator Blumenthal. So we appreciate your public service 
and your allegiance to Connecticut and----
    Senator Sullivan. I'm not sure he stated any allegiance to 
Connecticut, just for the record, but if you want to question 
him on that, you can do that.
    Senator Blumenthal.--he doesn't have to state it. I can see 
it in his face.
    Senator Sullivan. There you go.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Blumenthal. But in all seriousness, as you may 
know, the fishing industry in Connecticut is still vibrant and 
active but increasingly threatened by a system that appears to 
most of our fishermen as a cruel and irrational, sometimes 
ridiculous, joke in their view and there's a lot of evidence to 
support it.
    Quotas on their fishing are enforced. They are compelled to 
throw back perfectly good fish that they catch as a result of 
quotas that are based on totally obsolete, out-of-touch limits. 
They are out-of-touch and obsolete because the fish stocks have 
moved with water temperatures changing. The changes in water 
temperatures are due to climate change, a factor out of their 
control, and so they have to obey quotas and limits set by a 
system that's enforced against them when abroad the fishing 
industries of other countries are permitted to catch basically 
whatever they want, even though there may be rules, there may 
not be.
    The fishing fleets of other countries essentially are free 
to operate with impunity and are lawless. So we are decimating 
our fishing industry with a system that seems obsolete in its 
limits and constraints, although we share the view that over-
fishing is a bad thing, and yet they are competing with fishing 
fleets abroad that seem to be immune from any real enforcement 
or penalties. That's their view of the world and, frankly, it's 
my view of the world right now.
    So what do we do about that kind of system?
    Dr. Doremus. Thank you, Senator. This is a very complex 
issue. I think at root in terms of the issues that you're 
observing in the Northeast, there are fundamental challenges to 
responding quickly to the science and the changing distribution 
of stocks.
    Our Fishery Management Councils and our Science Centers and 
our entire science enterprise is working very aggressively to 
improve our ability. I think in the end of the day, maintaining 
the rigor and our science-based management decisionmaking 
process is the best way to address that.
    Senator Blumenthal. But when you say--and I apologize for 
interrupting, but as you know, our time here is limited. When 
you say changing quickly, the question is whether there are 
changes at all. It's not quickly. It seems like it's stuck in 
some kind of bureaucratic morass, and I recognize there are 
fishery councils.
    Isn't there a fundamental problem with this system under 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act?
    Dr. Doremus. In terms of the rapid changes I was referring 
to, environmental changes that are, I think, putting a lot of 
pressure on the system, I think structurally it is a sound 
system.
    I speak regularly with our Fisheries Management Councils, 
with our science community. They understand the challenge of 
responding quickly. We are seeing unprecedented changes in the 
populations that we monitor, their size, their distribution, 
and, yes, sir, we need to get better at the management side 
responding to those changes. It is a very large problem and 
it's particularly evident in the Northeast.
    On the international front, I think the range of activities 
and focus areas that have been identified through this hearing, 
working with other nations to build their ability to detect, 
enforce, and prosecute illegal fishing is the long-term order 
of the day. We will continue to work on that through our 
capacity-building efforts, through our work in international 
fisheries management organizations of various types, and with 
our other agency partners who share responsibility for a rules-
based system on an international scale.
    I do think, as Ambassador Balton recognized, U.S. generally 
does set the standard for science-based management. Yes, we can 
improve it, and I think we can do more to help the rest of the 
world kind of achieve a similarly high bar for sustainable 
management, particularly as there are such great pressures 
environmentally and demographically on wild fish resources.
    Senator Blumenthal. Well, thank you. I appreciate that the 
system is complex, but it's really hammering our fishing 
industry in the Northeast--it's Connecticut, it's 
Massachusetts, because it's completely stuck. It's not 
responding to the scientific changes that are occurring.
    You've said they are occurring rapidly. I would agree with 
you, but the system isn't responding rapidly and that is having 
a real-life impact on people's livelihoods and on the health 
and welfare and economies of Northeastern states, like 
Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
    And as this Committee works the reauthorization of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act, trying to address some of your concerns, 
which you've raised consistently on this committee, we 
certainly want to try and work with you on that.
    Just a couple additional questions and points. You know, 
you may have noticed a lot of members on this Committee 
actually have an overlap with the Armed Services Committee; 
several of them, including the Chairman of the Armed Services 
Committee, Senator Inhofe, and Senator Wicker chairs the 
Subcommittee on the Navy and the Marines. I chair the 
Subcommittee on Readiness, and just a couple points, Admiral, 
in particular.
    You know, the NDAA the President signed this past year, 
does call for the authorization of six additional icebreakers, 
and I think that's exactly what the Coast Guard wants. So 
that's in the NDAA. It's in the law now. We, of course, have to 
fund it.
    Second, your point on perhaps a permanent deployment of a 
cutter to the South China Sea, I think it would be important to 
brief this Committee and the Armed Services Committee. It's an 
important area, no doubt, but as you know, we also believe 
there's a lot of demand for the Coast Guard assets in our own 
waters and I for one would question the wisdom of a permanent 
deployment of a Coast Guard vessel to the South China Sea when 
the Navy, in my view, can be doing the job out there but maybe 
you and the Commandant can brief this committee and the Armed 
Services Committee on that, if you're looking to do that.
    Again, I think I certainly would have some questions about 
that, but let me get back to just a couple final questions. We 
have a vote here in a couple minutes, so we're going to have 
wrap up.
    But, Ambassador Balton and really for all the witnesses 
here, you're hearing a bipartisan skepticism from a number of 
members and I think frustration with regard to this dichotomy 
that although our system isn't perfect, we're certainly trying 
to do a rules-based system within our EEZ.
    We do it pretty darn well, although there are challenges. 
We do it according to science and data, and then we have other 
countries, China, Mexico, you heard a lot about today, outside 
the EEZ that are just rampaging globally, and even trying to 
get within our zone.
    So it's frustrating because we think we're doing the right 
thing and others are not abiding by the rules and we don't have 
enough enforcement assets.
    What are some of the international accords and agreements 
that the United States is a party to or leads in that help us 
with this challenge, which is the challenge of other countries? 
Obviously you can have an EEZ that's well managed and 
sustainable but, you know, the fish don't pay attention to the 
200-mile zone. They're all over the ocean.
    Are there gaps in the international agreement regime that 
can help us or if countries who are international partners just 
don't want to play and kind of do a double-faced/two-faced 
approach to this, is that just going to be a continuing source 
of frustration? What are your thoughts on that? I'll open that 
up to any of the witnesses.
    Ambassador Balton. Thank you, Senator. I guess I'd start by 
saying the situation may not be quite as bad as you outline. 
There are a lot of other countries who do a good job in 
fisheries management and have proven to be good partners with 
the United States.
    Senator Sullivan. Yes, and I think that's a good point, and 
I appreciate you highlighting that.
    Ambassador Balton. The other thing I would say is that 
things have actually gotten better at the international level 
over the course of my time doing this, basically the last 
quarter century. We now have a better international system, a 
series of international agreements that are linked, 
international organizations that are working together more 
effectively on this. I'm not saying the system is perfect. I'm 
not saying it's even necessarily good, but it's certainly 
better than it used to be, and it does give us a series of 
tools to use.
    One that I highlighted in my testimony I'd like to come 
back to since you asked is this thing called the Port State 
Measures Agreement. Every fish caught at sea must be landed 
somewhere to enter the stream of commerce and this agreement 
requires parties to prohibit the landing or trans-shipment in 
their ports of illegally caught fish.
    If properly implemented, this would go a long way toward 
helping at least with the IUU problem. There's a lot more I 
could point to but those are things that come to the top of my 
mind.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you. Anyone else just on that? 
Doctor?
    Dr. Doremus. Senator, I would be happy to comment a little 
bit, and I do fully agree with the observations made by 
Ambassador Balton.
    I would add to that a key element of this is our ability to 
work with other countries in building their capacity to detect, 
enforce, and prosecute illegal fishing behavior within their 
own EEZs. That's where a considerable amount of IUU fishing 
takes place, through that, plus the strengthening of the Port 
States Measures Agreement, on an international basis.
    We'll do a much better job than we are and it's 
progressively improving, I think, over time.
    Senator Sullivan. So you think it might be more of an issue 
of lack of capacity as opposed to lack of good intentions?
    Dr. Doremus. I think that that's the considerable part of 
the problem, yes.
    Senator Sullivan. OK. Good. Admiral, any thoughts on this?
    Vice Admiral Abel. As far as helping other nations enforce 
their own EEZ, is that your question, Senator?
    Senator Sullivan. It's just whether we have gaps on the 
international regime that addresses a frustration that we have, 
which is: we seem to be playing by the rules but not all other 
countries do.
    Vice Admiral Abel. I think helping other nations with their 
capability and capacity to enforce their own EEZs is critical 
to this and let me just clarify, sir. The ask from INDOPACOM is 
for the Coast Guard to do some work for them. There has been no 
decision to have a permanent presence in the South China Sea. I 
look forward to briefing you on the Coast Guard work and the 
DoD work that we'll be doing for INDOPACOM.
    Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you. Dr. Athreya, any 
thoughts on this last question from me?
    Dr. Athreya. Thank you, Senator, and just coming back to 
the human trafficking front, one of the things we observe is 
that it is in fact not just lack of capacity but also lack of 
political will on the part of governments to enforce actions to 
address criminalities, including human trafficking, and so from 
our perspective, we are interested in the challenge of the 
jurisdictional issues and there's a big gap there in terms of 
when you identify victims, whose responsibility is it to follow 
up on the crimes.
    The other big problem, which we are supporting and other 
U.S. agencies are supporting some work to address, is the 
financial enablers, right. We don't--jurisdiction is one thing 
when you're talking about the vessel itself. Who are the other 
enablers in terms of the financial intermediaries, the shell 
companies that sometimes own the vessels?
    So, you know, we think there's actually a big gap and 
actually our colleagues at State Department's Office to Combat 
and Monitor Trafficking in Persons are doing some excellent 
work to support initiatives to do more research on the legal 
gaps.
    Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you for your work in all 
these areas. It's really important.
    Senator Baldwin.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
    You actually just touched on my question in terms of the 
human rights enforcement and labor trafficking enforcement. So 
I'm going to try to combine two questions into one.
    My last question was about future demand for fish with a 
growing population as well as a population that is consuming 
more of their protein with fish and seafood.
    Dr. Athreya, your explanation of how the environmental 
impacts that are challenging our fisheries and the human rights 
work, together--in terms of longer trips at sea and increased 
isolation was very descriptive and very helpful for me to 
figure out.
    I would think those two factors would really collide to 
make these problems worse in the coming years and decades.
    So I kind of wanted to ask this to the entire panel. 
Depleted fisheries or unsustainable level of fishing in an area 
can result in these fishermen and industries putting fishing 
industry resources, such as vessels and certainly ports to 
other uses, including illegal ones and including forced labor.
    I want to figure out how you work together and cooperate to 
more effectively prevent participation in these criminal 
activities to compensate for the lower fish yields and how do 
you perceive your organization's role in mitigating these 
threats? Let's start with you, Admiral Abel.
    Vice Admiral Abel. Thanks, Senator. Certainly complex 
question. Some of the ideas that you have in the SAFE Act as 
far as better collaboration of the whole of government, some of 
the things that are already going on, I think it's 
institutionalizing that and making that formal is certainly a 
good thing, but as you mentioned, this is a national problem 
and international problem.
    We have to work within non-governmental agencies, science, 
because it's a world challenge that we have to deal with here, 
and I think by national agreements, working with other nations 
to enforce their EEZs, and the fact that we get to a point 
where nation states respect nation states and sovereignties are 
protected. I'm also concerned, as far as the national security 
issue of a $20 billion illegal enterprise that those funds 
certainly are going to activities that could threaten our 
nation, as well.
    So sovereignty issues are a concern. You mentioned protein, 
security, food security is a concern particularly these fragile 
nations that we need to work with and the last one is the ill-
gotten gains from $20 billion of this illegal activity. I think 
all three of those are national security issues and we need to 
view it as such.
    Ambassador Balton. Not much to add, Senator. You are right 
and as others have testified, there is a link between vessels 
engaged in illegal fishing on the one hand and other types of 
wrong-doing at sea, migrant trafficking, human trafficking, 
drug trafficking, piracy. I think the whole of government 
approach that is embedded in the Maritime SAFE Act is a good 
concept to pursue.
    Dr. Athreya. Thank you so much, Senator, for the question, 
and our approach to ending this sort of vicious cycle of ships 
going out further, fish being more expensive to catch, and 
therefore you've got to cut costs somewhere and you do it by 
essentially using slave labor.
    I mean, the answer to that is to create a virtual spiral in 
our view and so USAID as a development agency, what we're 
trying to do is to really say, and I think many of your 
colleagues on the panel today have raised this as have my 
fellow panelists, we have good examples of effective fisheries 
management.
    How do we take those examples and build the capacity of 
governments that have an interest in sustainable fisheries 
management and how do we then make that a source of decent 
employment, decent work for folks, so that kind of interrupts 
the vicious cycle of continued depletion of resources, 
continued exploitation of people by providing viable, 
sustainable alternatives in the long run?
    A couple of other things I'll say. It really is very 
important to us because, you know, USAID has a particular role 
again in sustaining these positive solutions to problems--very 
important to us to be working with our colleagues across 
government on law enforcement efforts because we also need to 
build the capacity to again disrupt criminal behavior and that 
is something that we can best do by working with our partners 
in other agencies to see what we can do.
    What our partners around the world can often do is bring 
the human intelligence. We work with grassroots community-based 
organizations. We work with RFMOs. They may see the problems 
happening and not know how to bring them to the attention of 
law enforcement officials to address. So that's another piece 
that we continue to contribute over time, and thank you very 
much for the question.
    Dr. Doremus. Thank you, Senator. I can only accent the 
observations already made about tackling the broad problem of 
illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing. I think we have a 
lot of the mechanisms and it's this continued commitment to 
collaboration across Federal agencies and steady and continued 
work with other countries to reduce that type of behavior.
    You prefaced your question with a very compelling and 
comprehensive observation that seafood supply is not meeting 
demand and on a global basis, while output from wild captured 
fisheries has been flat for over 20 years now and the increase 
in demand has been met through farmed products, largely 
produced in other countries. We have a robust domestic 
aquaculture industry; largely shellfish, very little fin fish. 
So I do think to address that very, very large question of 
supply that you raise, it is a food security question long term 
on a global basis.
    We need to get more in the game of sustainable aquaculture 
production, both domestically as well as through international 
bodies and the private sector where they're setting very high 
standards and enforcing standards for sustainable production of 
farmed fish, very much the same as we do in the wild capture 
world, with our commitment to science-based sustainable 
fisheries management.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you. And just on that last point, 
we want to make sure that that approach is also sustainable and 
non-harmful to the wild stocks, which are so important in my 
state.
    Dr. Doremus. Absolutely, Senator. We need to be very 
cognizant of that.
    Senator Sullivan. Well, listen, this was a really 
informative hearing. I want to thank all four of our witnesses.
    The record will remain open for two weeks. During this 
time, Senators may submit questions for the record. Upon 
receipt, the witnesses are respectfully requested to submit 
their written answers, we had some requests already from some 
of the members, to the Committee as soon as they are able.
    I want to thank the witnesses again for appearing on this 
very important topic. We've got a lot of work to do but I 
think, as most people recognize, there's a strong bipartisan 
interest in getting some solutions to these complex problems.
    This hearing is now adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:09 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X

   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to 
                           Hon. David Balton
    Question 1. The East Asia and Pacific region is rife with IUU 
fishing and associated challenges. According to the Global Slavery 
Index, ten countries in the Indo-Pacific, including China, have either 
a ``high-'' or ``medium-risk'' of using modern slavery in their fishing 
industry--more than any other region. Additionally, a recent Human 
Rights Watch report noted that Thailand's high-seas fishing fleet is 
widely reported to use forced labor and engage in labor abuses 
including beatings and even murder.
    In the South China Sea, IUU fishing continues to be a significant 
problem, exacerbating existing and sometimes-violent sovereignty 
disputes. Geopolitical instability, along with growing human 
populations and declining fish populations, are likely to make the 
situation even worse.
    How have you seen IUU fishing exacerbate regional instability in 
this region and around the world? Can you provide some examples?
    Answer. I believe that IUU fishing is primarily an economic and 
environmental problem. I am nevertheless aware that some of the same 
vessels that engage in IUU fishing activities also use forced labor and 
engage in other crimes. The nexus between IUU fishing and these other 
illicit activities provides yet another reason to tackle the problem.
    IUU fishing can also contribute to regional instability. In the 
South China Sea, instability arises mostly from conflicting claims of 
several nations to sovereignty over various islands and other land 
features, which in turn creates conflicting claims to sovereignty, 
sovereign rights and jurisdiction with respect to the waters 
surrounding these islands and other land features. IUU fishing can 
thrive in such situations, where nations dispute each other's authority 
to adopt and enforce fishing rules. Where IUU becomes rampant, fish 
stocks are at much greater risk of depletion, causing economic hardship 
and environmental damage, and further exacerbating regional tensions.

    Question 2. Given your experience with international negotiation on 
these matters, how do you think that the U.S. can best work with other 
nations to help address IUU fishing and reduce this threat to regional 
stability?
    Answer. Over the past 20 years, the United States and other nations 
have developed a variety of tools with which to combat IUU fishing. For 
example, following the adoption of the 2001 International Plan of 
Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate IUU Fishing, the Food and 
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) issued Technical 
Guidelines designed to assist States, individually and collectively, in 
this effort. (See FAO Fisheries Department, FAO Technical Guidelines 
for Responsible Fisheries, No. 9 (2002)).
    More recently, the Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA), a treaty 
that entered into force in 2016, has given nations a potentially 
powerful instrument in this regard. As I outlined in my written 
testimony, I recommend that the United States should at this stage:

   Encourage more States to join the PSMA, particularly 
        developing States whose ports are used often by vessels for 
        landing, transshipping, packaging and processing fish. Some 
        significant States that currently remain outside the PSMA are 
        China, Brazil and Mexico.

   Contribute further expertise and resources to developing 
        States, directly and/or through the FAO, both to help those 
        States that are already parties to the PSMA implement its 
        requirements and to encourage other developing States to join 
        and implement the PSMA.

   Support FAO in creating a global mechanism to facilitate the 
        exchange and publication of information relating to the PSMA, 
        which will, among other things, help States determine whether 
        particular vessels seeking entry into their ports have engaged 
        in or supported IUU fishing.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to 
                            Dr. Bama Athreya
    Question. The East Asia and Pacific region is rife with IUU fishing 
and associated challenges. According to the Global Slavery Index, 10 
countries in the Indo-Pacific, including China, have either a ``high-'' 
or ``medium-risk'' of using modern slavery in their fishing industry--
more than any other region. Additionally, a recent Human Rights Watch 
report noted that Thailand's high-seas fishing fleet is widely reported 
to use forced labor and engage in labor abuses including beatings and 
even murder. Can you describe how IUU fishing and forced labor are 
intertwined? By addressing one, will we help to address the other?
    Answer. Globally, the marine capture fishery is estimated to 
legally employ over 30 million fishers, who work aboard 4 million 
fishing vessels; if IUU-caught products are equivalent to approximately 
20 percent of the legal catch, this suggests that the crews involved in 
IUU fishing likely number in the thousands or more. IUU fishing vessels 
are inherently operating for financial gain, and seek to avoid costs 
associated with license fees, ship maintenance, and minimum standards 
of crew treatment, safety and sanitary conditions. Further, recent 
research highlights that crew on IUU fishing vessels work under 
conditions that are consistent with the ILO definition of forced labor, 
and are subject to egregious human rights abuses, including excessive 
working hours (e.g., 18-20 hours/day), physical abuse, lack of food and 
water, coerced indebtedness, abandonment in remote locations, and in 
some instances, murder.
    The self-perpetuating cycles among fisheries declines, increases in 
forced labor, and broader community conflicts have been documented in 
academic research. The interconnected relationships between human 
rights abuses, illegal fishing, and degradation of marine resources 
highlight the benefits of an integrated approach in responding to these 
issues.
    Currently, weak fisheries management has resulted in stock 
depletions and sector instability. In some cases, this has led small-
scale fishers to join the crew of larger vessels, leaving them more 
vulnerable to trafficking. In other cases, depletion has pushed fishing 
vessels farther offshore, increasing fisher isolation and vulnerability 
to labor exploitation and abuse.
    Forced labor contributes to over-fishing and creates economic 
disadvantages for companies and fishing families that play by the 
rules. When we take actions to reduce forced labor in fisheries, it 
will help strengthen fisheries management and contribute to improved 
food security, stronger livelihoods and biodiversity conservation.
    We are better able to identify both illegal labor and harvesting 
practices when seafood supply chains are transparent. Weak rule of law 
and opaque supply chains open the door to forced labor and illegal 
harvesting practices in fisheries. Increased transparency in the supply 
chain helps us design more efficient interventions to reduce human 
rights abuses, conserve fisheries and identify and target criminal 
networks.
    Traceability systems are a common approach used to ensure the 
legality of natural resource products, such as fish and timber, and the 
labor conditions under which various commodities are produced (e.g., 
agriculture and clothing). Demand for fisheries catch documentation and 
traceability by governments and industry is growing, and we are 
currently building partnerships to support and promote integrated 
traceability systems that could have significant impacts on issues of 
both human rights and the sustainability of fisheries. Our Oceans and 
Fisheries Partnership and Seafood Alliance for Legality and 
Traceability, which we described during the hearing, are examples of 
how USAID is investing in better transparency and traceability in this 
sector.
    We know that strong fisheries management helps sustain fisheries 
resources and provide decent livelihoods for fishers. For example, 
working with fishers to replace destructive gears and adopt more 
ecologically sound approaches, the ECOFISH project in the Philippines 
resulted in a 24 percent increase in fish biomass over an area larger 
than the size of Connecticut compared to unmanaged areas. We also 
helped establish registration and licensing schemes in the municipal 
fisheries sector in the Philippines to act as a key deterrent to IUU 
fishing--1.6 million municipal fishers have registered.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger F. Wicker to 
                            Dr. Paul Doremus
    Question 1. How does NOAA and the Coast Guard enforce the use of 
Automated Information Systems (AIS) on fishing vessels, and what are 
the current gaps in vessel tracking (ex: vessels going dark)?
    Answer. Vessels, including fishing vessels, 65 feet or more in 
length operating within U.S. waters are subject to AIS carriage 
requirements under regulations promulgated and enforced by the U.S. 
Coast Guard.
    AIS comes with some inherent gaps with regard to vessel tracking 
for law enforcement purposes. AIS was developed in response to the 
Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 as an anti-collision and 
Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) tool. Thus, AIS was originally designed 
for ship-to-ship communication and not designed for vessel tracking. 
Thus, there are concerns that using AIS to track fishing vessels will 
result in IUU fishing operators powering off their units, 
misrepresenting their reported locations, or falsifying their reporting 
vessel identification information, potentially jeopardizing the 
system's purpose and primary function as a safety-at-sea measure. 
Furthermore, each nation sets its own AIS requirements for vessels in 
the Nation's exclusive economic zone, complicating efforts to use AIS 
for vessel tracking.

    Question 2. What can be done to improve the tracking of vessels for 
purposes of monitoring IUU fishing?
    Answer. Requiring vessel identification information to be pre-
programmed into an AIS unit by the manufacturer, while eliminating the 
option for the operator to adjust the identification field once it has 
been assigned, would reduce the ability for vessels to falsely report 
their information.
    Intergovernmental organizations, such as regional fisheries 
management organizations, have made progress in implementing measures 
that encourage, and in some cases require, vessels to obtain an 
International Maritime Organization (IMO) number, a number that is 
designed to remain with a vessel from its time of launch until its 
scrapping. While some IUU fishing operators have been known to falsify 
these numbers, IMO numbers are considered the most consistent, 
tangible, and uniformly applied vessel identifier. Therefore, attempts 
at subterfuge could be less effective in an international environment 
if IMO number requirements were expanded to include most commercial 
fishing and fishing-support vessels. The launching of the United 
Nations Food and Agricultural Organization's Global Record of Fishing 
Vessels, Refrigerated Transport Vessels and Supply Vessels, and the 
development of several regional counter-IUU fishing networks, where 
national vessel registry information and alerts of known and suspected 
IUU fishing activity are shared, have also enhanced the availability of 
vessel information globally and increased transparency on vessel 
activities.

    Question 3. Are there other forms of technology available that 
would be better suited for vessel tracking that are not being used or 
are underutilized, and if so, why?
    Answer. NOAA is working with other Federal partners to evaluate the 
effectiveness of other satellite-based technologies for use in the 
detection of IUU fishing activity. While some of these technologies can 
provide ``indicative'' information that fishing activity may be 
occurring, they generally cannot provide stand-alone evidence of IUU 
fishing.
    NOAA is also exploring the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) 
as a means to enhance patrol efforts in specific areas for maritime 
domain awareness and enforcement. NOAA is currently working with other 
agencies to assess what increases in visibility already-deployed UAV 
assets can provide as well as the costs and time commitment needed to 
deploy them.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. James Inhofe to 
                            Dr. Paul Doremus
    Background: The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 
has worked extensively with the recreational fishing community to 
rebuild the red snapper population in the Gulf of Mexico. Studies have 
shown stock has tripled over the last 10 years--as of May of 2018 the 
red snapper was removed from the overfished status list.
    I am proud to see the work that NOAA has done, but the United 
States is not the only country on the Gulf Coast. My understanding is 
that in the 2015 and 2017 Biennial Report to Congress for IUU fishing 
Mexico was decertified for illegal fishing and restricted from using 
U.S. ports, but now Mexico has been recertified.
    Question 1. Can you explain the current efforts that NOAA is using 
to prosecute illegal fishing activities and the process NOAA used to 
recertify Mexico for fishing in the Gulf of Mexico?
    Answer. Mexico was identified for IUU fishing in the 2015 Report to 
Congress and negatively certified for failure to adequately address the 
issue (and re-identified for more recent cases) in the 2017 Report to 
Congress. For reasons described below, Mexico was positively certified 
in April 2018.
    Once a nation is identified under the High Seas Driftnet Fishing 
Moratorium Protection Act, the United States enters into a two-year 
consultation process to encourage that nation to take appropriate 
corrective measures to address the IUU fishing issue for which it was 
identified. To warrant a positive certification, a nation must provide 
documentary evidence that demonstrates the corrective action taken by 
the Nation. For IUU fishing violations that include foreign fishing in 
U.S. waters (such as the case with Mexico) or fishing in violation of 
international measures (such as violations of regional fishery 
management organization conservation and management measures), the 
United States seeks documentary evidence that falls into two broad 
categories: enforcement action or adoption or revision of laws to 
enable effective action to combat IUU fishing in the future. 
Specifically, evidence could include:

   Charging documents showing the fines levied for the 
        violations;

   Documentation showing the requirement for revocation of 
        fishing licenses and/or forfeiture of catch and gear;

   Court proceedings identifying individuals and/or entities 
        charged, infractions, and rulings; or

   New implementing authorities, shown through documentation of 
        laws and regulations, designed to combat IUU fishing and 
        addressing the issue for which the Nation was identified, 
        including measures which provide nations with greater 
        regulatory authority over their fishing fleets.

    In response to its 2015 identification and subsequent negative 
certification, Mexico provided a description of measures taken, and 
provided the following information regarding each of the identified 
cases targeted for prosecution and imposition of sanctions:

   Charging documents including: names, copies of individual's 
        national identification cards, case numbers, mugshots, and 
        photographs of individuals signing consent notifications;

   Court proceedings identifying individuals and/or entities 
        charged, infractions, and rulings;

   Implementing authorities; and

   Documents detailing the sanctions levied upon each party 
        charged.

    Upon reviewing these corrective measures, NOAA issued a positive 
certification in relation to Mexico's 2015 identification. We are 
currently reviewing Mexico's response to the 2017 identification and 
will issue a certification (positive or negative) in our 2019 Report to 
Congress.

    Question 2. What indicators/metrics did NOAA use to determine if 
there is actual compliance from Mexico? Is there measurable data to 
show they are in compliance?
    Answer. Please see the previous answer.

    Question 3. Following improved cooperation from Mexico on 
prosecution and resulting recertification, has NOAA observed a 
significant difference in illegal fishing by Mexican launch as in the 
Gulf of Mexico?
    Answer. While Mexico has taken corrective action on the identified 
incursions into U.S. waters, incursions are still taking place. It may 
take more time for the full-expected deterrent effect of the increased 
corrective actions taken by Mexico to be realized. NOAA will continue 
to closely monitor such incursions into U.S. waters to determine the 
effectiveness of the corrective actions taken by Mexico.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to 
                            Dr. Paul Doremus
    Question 1. On January 1, 2018, the Seafood Import Monitoring 
Program (SIMP) went live for 11 priority species. The program 
establishes a risk-based traceability system for seafood imports in 
order to help prevent seafood products from illegal, unreported, and 
unregulated (IUU) fisheries from entering the United States. Can you 
please provide an update regarding the implementation of SIMP for these 
first eleven priority species? Have any seafood products been traced 
back to IUU fisheries, and if so, what actions have been taken?
    Answer. NOAA worked extensively with the seafood industry over a 
year-long implementation period, to support an orderly implementation 
of the current regulation for the eleven high-priority species. Earlier 
this year, the Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) was 
successfully implemented with no significant disruption to imports of 
legally harvested seafood.

    Question 2. So far, NOAA has not identified any seafood products as 
having originated from IUU fishing activities through SIMP. However, 
violations of SIMP requirements, and of requirements under other NOAA 
import programs, have been identified and investigations are ongoing in 
these cases. Do you think that SIMP is helping to combat IUU fishing on 
a global scale? If so, how?
    Answer. A key objective of SIMP is to prevent the United States 
from serving as a market for IUU-caught seafood, and NOAA believes that 
SIMP has prompted industry, as well as the countries from which the 
United States imports seafood, to improve documentation of harvest, 
transshipment, processing and trade. In our view, these improvements 
are helping to disincentivize and deter IUU fishing and seafood fraud 
by increasing the possibility that IUU-caught seafood will be detected. 
SIMP ensures that U.S. seafood importers take responsibility for the 
legal catch and truthful representation of their imports. In addition, 
traceability information collected at the time of entry into U.S. 
commerce under SIMP has improved sharing and analysis of data among 
those relevant regulatory and enforcement authorities for imported 
seafood with access to SIMP data--marking a significant step forward 
for combating IUU fishing.
    The scope and counter-IUU fishing benefits of SIMP will 
significantly expand in 2019 with the inclusion of shrimp and abalone 
imports, as the United States imports more shrimp than any other 
seafood species. On March 23, 2018, President Trump signed into law the 
2018 Appropriations Act, which directed the Secretary of Commerce to 
lift the stay of effectiveness of the SIMP regulation for shrimp and 
abalone within thirty days and to establish a compliance date for 
shrimp and abalone of no later than December 31, 2018.

    Question 3. President Obama's Task Force on Combating IUU Fishing 
and Seafood Fraud called for improved interagency coordination for 
monitoring and enforcement against IUU activities, and to develop 
collaborative partnerships as part of a global effort against IUU 
fishing.Can you describe the importance of a whole-of-government 
approach for addressing IUU fishing?
    Answer. As a general principle, addressing IUU fishing requires 
scientific, regulatory, and enforcement expertise, as well as expertise 
from other agencies that necessitates a whole-of-government approach. 
Ideally, this starts with scientific efforts to assess stocks and 
understand their habitat and life history. Regulatory agencies can then 
use this information to determine the appropriate actions needed to 
achieve a maximum sustained yield. The resulting regulations are only 
effective if there is a monitoring and enforcement regime in place and 
backed by a strong legal framework.
    In the U.S., at least fourteen Federal agencies implement U.S. 
actions to combat IUU fishing and seafood fraud, both domestically and 
internationally. Interagency coordination on these efforts have been 
managed through an interagency working group on IUU Fishing and Seafood 
Fraud, co-chaired by NOAA and State Department. The current whole-of-
government approach enhances inter-agency cooperation, reduces 
duplication and conflict in U.S. government approaches to IUU fishing 
and expands our influence on these issues by coordination in the 
application of available resources.

    Question 4. Do you think NOAA's level of coordination with other 
Federal agencies is presently sufficient to effectively combat IUU 
fishing? If not, could you provide a specific example of an additional 
means of interagency coordination that would be beneficial?
    Answer. Combating IUU fishing, both within the United States and 
abroad, is one of NOAA's core missions that is achieved through strong 
Federal partnerships and interagency collaboration. Through 
coordination with the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection, U.S. Agency for International Development, and U.S. 
Department of State, among others, NOAA is proactively engaging to 
detect and prevent IUU fishing and will continue to leverage our 
partnerships to maximize our ability to maintain a level playing field 
for law abiding fisheries. One area for potential growth may be in 
further identifying opportunities and implementing mechanisms to share 
data relevant to combating IUU fishing and seafood fraud with 
interagency partners.

                                  [all]
```