December 18, 1973
Page 42100
DECLARING THE LOBSTER A CREATURE OF THE CONTINENTAL SHELF
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the Senate is considering today H.R. 8529, a bill to implement the shrimp fishing agreement with Brazil. The measure includes a proposal to extend U.S. protection to a valued resource – the lobster – by designating the lobster a creature of the Continental Shelf.
I would like to commend the Senator from Washington (Mr. MAGNUSON) and the Commerce Committee for linking these two important measures needed to conserve and strengthen the U.S. fishing industry. I would also like to extend my special thanks to the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PASTORE) for sponsoring this provision in committee at the request of Senator WEICKER and myself.
Homarus americanus, the North American lobster, is the most prized of the several species of lobster, and it enjoys a well-deserved reputation throughout the world as a delicious foodstuff.
Those of my colleagues who have had the pleasure of visiting my home State of Maine will have certainly listed a lobster dinner as among the State's most memorable attractions.
Lobstering is a $36 million industry for the 11 coastal States from Maine to North Carolina where men make their living fishing for the lobster. The lobster is more than an important economic factor in these States. It is an American resource of significant esthetic appeal. It is as American as apple pie.
The dramatic increase in foreign fishing off our shores in recent years, however, threatens to deplete this resource.
The bill before us today, by including a provision to make the lobster U.S. property to the edge of the Continental Shelf, is the best short-term method of preserving our stocks of lobster. It will serve as a short-term protection pending a comprehensive agreement on fisheries resources through multilateral negotiations at the Law of the Sea Conference next year, and through other negotiations.
The effect of this provision would be to forbid foreign fishing of this resource without the specific permission of the United States and under such conditions as the United States may impose. This method of protecting Continental Shelf fisheries has been agreed to by many coastal nations since it was developed in Geneva in 1958. Such protection is now extended to king crab and several other species of crab, corals, sponges, and mollusks.
Far from precluding international agreements, by demonstrating the depth of our concern about the lobster, this step will actually enhance negotiations and give foreign nations an additional incentive for reaching agreement.
American fishermen have enjoyed rich catches of lobster since the earliest days of our country. But in recent years, there have been several alarming signs that this resource is in serious danger.
Ten years ago, 23 million pounds of lobster were landed in Maine. By 1970 and 1971, the total had declined to 18 million pounds, and last year the catch totaled less than 16 million pounds.
This decline is cause enough for concern. It becomes even more alarming when we note that the number of licensed lobstermen increased by nearly 1,500 from 1962 to 1972 and the number of lobster traps jumped from 767,000 to 1,247,000. Many lobstermen have doubled or tripled the number of traps they must set to make a living.
The dwindling supply of lobsters near the shore has in turn caused a rapid increase in the lobster fishing effort offshore. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimates that there has been a five-fold increase in the number of American vessels fishing for lobster offshore in the past 3 years. And there has been a significant increase in the foreign trawling effort in the same period. As an NOAA analysis put it:
Given the fishing power now present in the northwestern Atlantic, awaiting positive indications of serious decline [offshore] will make it too late to introduce conservation measures that can avoid disaster for the American lobster. Thus, if the American lobster is to continue as a biologically viable self-perpetuating stock, it is essential that more extensive management practices based on present knowledge be implemented immediately to protect the resource throughout its geographical range.
Lobstermen in growing numbers are reaching a consensus that prompt action must be taken to control and limit the American lobstering effort if Homarus americanus is to be more than a delicacy for the rich. But they expect positive Government action to control both the intentional fishing and unintentional catch of lobster by foreign fleets. As these independent men see it, they will resist management efforts which could lessen their catch as long as foreign fishing fleets continue to take lobster with abandon. While there are apparently no comprehensive estimates of the extent of foreign lobstering, it has been estimated that the foreign catch is between 16 and 22 million pounds of lobster per year. Coupled with the American catch, this fishing effort is clearly threatening the ability of our lobster stocks to sustain the species.
NOAA, which realizes the problem, nevertheless has declined to declare the lobster a creature of the shelf by administrative action. NOAA argues that there is conflicting evidence that the lobster meets the strictest definition of a shelf species, and that an American declaration in this area could prompt other governments to make similar declarations which would be detrimental to other segments of the American fishing industry. NOAA argues further than bilateral agreements are the best way to reduce the foreign lobstering effort in the short term. These arguments have several defects, as recent experience demonstrates. First, the definition of a "shelf creature" clearly could include lobsters. The negotiators of the Shelf Convention of 1958 did not intend to exclude lobsters, which are ecologically dependent on the ocean floor, from the creature of the shelf definition. In fact, they specifically rejected proposed language which would have excluded crustacea from this protection. In the American Journal of International Law, Mr. Richard Young cited these criteria as the bases for including sedentary species in the shelf regime: they are tied closely to particular areas; they are capable of exhaustion; and they respond well to good husbandry. The North American lobster meets all these criteria.
Second, international negotiations have so far not brought results. The effectiveness of an agreement with the Japanese to avoid incidental lobster catches is brought into question by the recent increase in Japanese fishing activity in some of the most prolific lobster areas off our coast. Recent negotiations with the Russians have been inconclusive.
And in fact, passage of this measure would enable the United States to negotiate from a position of strength in efforts to reach international agreements on the lobster catch. This proposal can be seen as an effort to protect our resource until international agreements are reached. Otherwise, we may no longer have a significant lobster resource to protect.
This proposal has the support of State officials from all 11 coastal States with a lobster industry. It has the formal support of all six New England Governors. It has the strong support of our colleagues in the House, and it deserves our support as well.
Mr. President, let me in closing urge our representatives in the conference with the House on this bill to expend every effort to insure its inclusion in the final legislation. Just as the Brazilian shrimp agreement is vital to the continued health of our shrimp industry, so is designation of the lobster a creature of the Continental Shelf vital to the good health and good husbandry of our limited lobster resource.
The administration has been inclined against the lobster proposal. By linking the two proposals, Congress will demonstrate its commitment to all segments of the fishing industry, and will reject the favoritism implied by approval of the shrimp agreement alone.
The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a third time.
The bill was read the third time, and passed.
The title was amended so as to read:
An act to implement the shrimp fishing agreement with Brazil, and for other purposes.