Encouraging the elimination of harmful fishing subsidies that contribute to overcapacity in commercial fishing fleets worldwide and that lead to the overfishing of global fish stocks.

Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 94 expresses our support for ending the fishing subsidies given to foreign fishermen. I appreciate the chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, Nick Rahall, and the Ranking Republican, Don Young, for their assistance in moving this legislation.

Foreign governments' subsidies to fishermen are common in many countries around the world. Too little of these subsidies go toward beneficial purposes, such as improving fisheries management and science. Instead, they typically are used to offset fishing costs, for example, by providing support for fuel consumption and vessel construction.

The subsidies artificially decrease the cost of fishing for foreign fishermen, making fishing a profitable trade when it would not be otherwise. The subsidies increase the rate of overfishing worldwide. Current estimates reveal that the sheer number of vessels actively fishing around the world today is up to 250 percent greater than is sustainable, according to the World Wildlife Fund.

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has found that 75 percent of the world's fisheries are fully exploited, over exploited, depleted, or recovering from depletion. There is clearly no need to expand the world's fishing fleets beyond their current capacity. Quite the contrary. By eliminating the subsidies that lead to fleet expansion, we can reduce some of this pressure.

The United States--like other countries--reserves to American fishermen and women the exclusive right to fish within 200 nautical mile of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Hundreds of foreign vessels each year, however, are intercepted while fishing illegally in U.S. waters. This rise in illegal fishing, most certainly contributed to by the overcapacity in the world's fleets, is placing additional pressure on our already exploited resources, damaging our marine ecosystems, and taking away potential revenue from our domestic fishing industry. In 2006 alone, the United States Coast Guard intercepted 164 vessels fishing in our EEZ.

In my home district of Guam the problem of illegal fishing is significant. The Western Central Pacific area is considered one of the Coast Guard's three highest threat areas for illegal foreign fishing. In 2006, the Coast Guard recorded 11 incidents of illegal foreign fishing in the Western Central Pacific area. Since 2000, the Coast Guard has intercepted an average of 34 vessels per year. And this only represents the vessels that are being caught.

The countries whose vessels are the most likely to be found illegally fishing in the U.S. EEZ are also countries that provide large capacity- increasing subsidies to their fishing fleets. Because enforcement is so difficult, it is even more important that we attack the issue at its root by encouraging worldwide capacity reduction and by discouraging other countries from making it economically feasible for their vessels to travel into our waters to fish.

While we have no direct control over the actions of foreign governments, the Doha Round of the current World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations have placed the United States in a unique position to influence the future use of harmful fisheries subsidies by other countries. Through these negotiations the United States has an opportunity to exercise its leadership internationally in encouraging the elimination of subsidies that increase fishing capacity and that promote overfishing. By passing this concurrent resolution, Congress can demonstrate to the world its support for our government as they move forward with these negotiations.

I strongly urge my colleagues to take a strong stance against harmful foreign fishing subsidies by supporting this House Concurrent Resolution 94.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 94. I want to thank Chairwoman Bordallo and Chairman Rahall for their efforts on this resolution.

I know the issue of harmful foreign fishing subsidies is one of the key concerns of the West Virginia fishing fleet and I congratulate Mr. Rahall on his interest in this resolution.

All kidding aside, this issue is a global concern. Harmful foreign fishing subsidies that threaten the sustainability of legitimate fisheries and threaten the economic viability and international competitiveness of the U.S. fishing industry must be identified and eliminated.

Some foreign fishing fleets have been heavily subsidized by their governments and this has led to over exploitation of some important fish species.

Harmful subsidies not only put legitimately prosecuted fisheries in jeopardy of overfishing, but also put U.S. fishermen at an economic disadvantage in the global fish market.

However, we need to be careful when discussing subsidies because some subsidies are actually beneficial. Government programs which help fishermen reduce unnecessary bycatch, which aid efforts to develop ``clean'' fishing gear, which aid governments in monitoring or enforcing the fisheries, or which

make the fishery safer for fishermen are all legitimate and beneficial governmental programs.

Harmful subsidies that increase the size and harvesting capabilities of fishing fleets beyond the capacity needed to sustainably harvest the quotas in a fishery can be harmful environmentally and economically.

While I support the main concept of this resolution--to place the House of Representatives on the record opposing harmful fishing subsidies by foreign governments--one statistic used in this resolution is misleading even though it is often quoted. The resolution uses the statistic that ``75 percent of the world's fish populations are currently fully exploited, over exploited, significantly depleted or recovering from overexploitation.'' Full exploitation of fisheries is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, the full utilization of our Nation's fisheries is a key purpose of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Admitedly, fully exploited fisheries need to be carefully managed, monitored, and enforced to keep them from becoming over exploited.

If you remove ``fully exploited'' from this statistic, the figure drops to approximately 25 percent. This figure, while much less dramatic, is still a concern that we need to address. Foreign subsidies that contribute to this figure need to be addressed.

The United States has already taken a leading role in addressing IUU fisheries and in addressing harmful foreign subsidies. I support these efforts and urge support of efforts to continue to reduce harmful foreign fishing subsidies.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 94, encouraging the elimination of harmful fishing subsidies that contribute to overcapacity in commercial fishing fleets worldwide and that lead to the over-fishing of global fish stocks.

I commend my esteemed colleague from Guam, the Chairwoman of the Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans for submitting this concurrent resolution. She understands the severe impact that over-fishing has on our world's oceans and this resolution is an important step in gaining the cooperation of other nations in managing our shared ocean resources responsibly.

According to a 2006 scientific study, there may be no more commercial fish stocks left in the sea by 2050. As the report states, since 1950 29% of the world's commercial fish species have already collapsed. If we do not change our course and stop over-fishing, our children could be the first generation to face entirely empty oceans.

One major contributor to this precipitous decline in global fish stocks is the huge overcapacity of our global fishing fleets. By some accounts, the current fishing fleet capacity is 250% of what is needed to catch the maximum sustainable yield from the oceans. In many instances, this overcapacity is fueled by harmful subsidies provided by a limited number of foreign governments to their fishing fleets, leading to over-fishing, and ecologically unsound bottom-trawling in international waters.

Through our nation's laws, such as the Magnuson-Stevens Act, we have established a strong federal policy supporting sustainable fishing practices here in the United States. In order to successfully manage the world's limited ocean resources, however, we need to promote the elimination of these fishing subsidies with the cooperation of our neighbors in the world community. This Resolution is an important first step in developing a global plan to manage our oceans responsibly. Again, I thank my friend from Guam and I urge my colleagues to support H. Con. Res. 94, encouraging the elimination of these harmful fishing subsidies.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 94) encouraging the elimination of harmful fishing subsidies that contribute to overcapacity in commercial fishing fleets worldwide and that lead to the overfishing of global fish stocks, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I commend the chairwoman of the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans, Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo, for introducing House Concurrent Resolution 94. This resolution will encourage the United States to support the elimination of foreign fishing subsidies that lead to overcapacity and overfishing in global fisheries.

House Concurrent Resolution 94, as amended, resolves that the United States will continue to support efforts to eliminate harmful subsidies issued by foreign governments to their fishing fleets. These subsidies reduce the cost of fishing to foreign fishermen, making fishing a profitable enterprise where it otherwise would not be, and leading to overcapitalization, overfishing and illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. The end result is that foreign fishing subsidies hurt American fishermen who have to compete against subsidized foreign fishing.

We support this noncontroversial resolution, as amended, and commend Ms. Bordallo for her leadership on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I also yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 94, and yield myself such time as I may consume.

House Concurrent Resolution 94 has been adequately explained by the majority, and I urge adoption of the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and therefore, I yield back the balance of my time.