An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century - California Ocean ...

Figure 19.3 Migratory Fish RequireCoordination Across Multiple Jurisdictionswithin the EEZ in the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, andCaribbean regions. In the Pacific, the RFMCs orstates include highly migratory species in their managementplans.Each coastal state has authority over fisheries thatoccur only in that state’s waters, while interstate fisheriescommissions can develop management plans forfisheries that occur primarily in state waters but alsocross the boundaries of many states (Figure 19.3).Interstate Fisheries CommissionsFor most of their history, the Atlantic States and GulfStates Marine Fisheries Commissions providedforums for assembling interstate catch statistics anddesigning fishery management plans to conserve andsustain fish stocks. State compliance with these planswas voluntary. The Gulf States Commission’s plansremain voluntary, but the Atlantic Coastal FisheriesCooperative Management Act of 1994 authorized theSecretary of Commerce to close fisheries that theAtlantic States Commission determined are out ofcompliance with its management plan. The PacificStates Marine Fisheries Commission is primarily aresearch coordination agency that provides a forumfor discussing interstate fishery issues.The Great Lakes Fishery Commission, establishedby agreement between Canada and the United Statesin 1955, develops coordinated research programs andrecommends measures to maximize productivity ofGreat Lakes fisheries. The Commission coordinates the actions of state, tribal, federal, andCanadian management bodies through a joint strategic management plan, using a processof consensus decision making. It also oversees a program to eradicate or minimize sealamprey populations in the Great Lakes.Alaska Hawaii Puerto Rico■ Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission■ Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission■ Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission■ Great Lakes Fishery Commission (also includes Canada)The four interstate marine fishery commissions are critical tomanaging and conserving migratory fish that traverse thejurisdictional waters of multiple states. Pennsylvania andNew York are members of both the Atlantic States andGreat Lakes Commissions.Recommendation 19–10Congress should develop new statutory authority, similar to the Atlantic Coastal FisheriesCooperative Management Act, to support and empower the Gulf States and Pacific StatesFisheries Management Commissions. All interstate management plans should adhere to thenational standards in the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, andthe federal guidelines implementing these standards. States should participate in the developmentof the guidelines to ensure they are applicable to interstate plans.Clarifying Lead Authorities for Joint Planning PurposesDividing the natural world into neat management units is never easy, and fish populationsare no exception. Although a few fish species remain in one area for most of their lives,others are highly mobile and cross federal, state, and interstate boundaries. The lack ofeffective mechanisms for coordination and cooperation among the many fishery managemententities exacerbates the problem of managing transboundary stocks.The existing jurisdictional structure requires the development of joint plans, primarilyin the Atlantic, by two or more RFMCs, and by the states and RFMCs. In most cases, eachentity in the joint planning process has equivalent authority. This joint planning processhas generally been inefficient. Joint plans take longer to approve and amend, causingdelays in needed conservation measures. In addition, the varied jurisdictions create284 A N O CEAN B LUEPRINT FOR THE 21ST C ENTURY