Industry witness backs FISH Act; urges blacklist, port bans and international enforcement
Loading...
Summary
Industry and trade witnesses told a House subcommittee that the bipartisan FISH Act (referred to in testimony as HR 37 56) would give U.S. authorities new enforcement tools—an IUU vessel registry and U.S. port-entry/import bans—to stop illegally caught seafood from entering U.S. markets.
Justin Conrad, founder of Bay Hill Seafood Sales and chair‑elect of the National Fisheries Institute, told the subcommittee that illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing damages legitimate harvesters and consumer confidence and recommended stronger enforcement tools.
“The FISH Act would go after the bad actors,” Conrad said, describing a vessel blacklist, U.S. port-entry bans and import prohibitions tied to vessels and beneficial owners. He criticized the Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) as “burdensome and unworkable” and said SIMP’s post‑harvest data collection cannot stop IUU fishing at the source. “Scrapping SIMP and starting over would allow agencies to focus on government-to-government initiatives that actually work at combating IUU,” Conrad said.
Members asked how the blacklist and registry would be populated; Conrad described partnerships with regional fisheries management organizations and multinational agreements to identify risky vessels and beneficial owners. He said the measure would permit more proactive enforcement — in some cases cargo seizure or port-entry bans — and would strengthen bilateral and multilateral cooperation and training. Committee members raised concerns about implementation capacity and NOAA staffing levels; witnesses suggested reallocating resources and prioritized enforcement to address those gaps.
The hearing record contains no committee vote on the FISH Act. Members requested additional written responses; the subcommittee left the record open for follow-up.
