References in Text
This chapter, referred to in subsecs. (a)(1), (2), (3)(C) and (b)(1)(A), was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 94–265, Apr. 13, 1976, 90 Stat. 331, as amended, known as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1801 of this title and Tables.
1996—Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 104–297, § 112(a), amended par. (3) generally. Prior to amendment, par. (3) read as follows: “Except as otherwise provided by paragraph (2), a State may not directly or indirectly regulate any fishing vessel outside its boundaries, unless the vessel is registered under the law of that State.”
Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 104–297, § 112(b), added par. (3).
Subsec. (c)(1)(A). Pub. L. 104–297, § 112(c)(1), substituted “(4)(C) or has received a permit under section 1824(d) of this title;” for “(4)(C); and”.
Subsec. (c)(1)(C). Pub. L. 104–297, § 112(c)(2), (3), added subpar. (C).
1990—Subsec. (c)(1)(B). Pub. L. 101–627, § 112(1), inserted before period at end “and the application specifies the species to be processed”.
Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 101–627, § 112(2), added par. (2) and struck out former par. (2) which read as follows: “The Governor of a State may not grant permission for a foreign fishing vessel to engage in fish processing under paragraph (1)(B) if he determines that fish processors within the State have adequate capacity, and will utilize such capacity, to process all of the United States harvested fish from the fishery concerned that are landed in the State.”
1986—Subsec. (b)(1)(A). Pub. L. 99–659 substituted “exclusive economic zone” for “fishery conservation zone”.
1984—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 98–623 designated existing provisions as pars. (1) to (3), in par. (2), as so designated, redesignated cls. (1) and (2) as subpars. (A) and (B), respectively, and added subpar. (C), and in par. (3), as so designated, inserted exception relating to par. (2).
1983—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 97–453 inserted provision delineating the jurisdiction and authority of a State over waters adjacent to the State and over Nantucket Sound.
1982—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 97–191 added subsec. (c).
Authority of States of Washington, Oregon, and California To Manage Dungeness Crab Fishery
Pub. L. 105–384, title II, § 203, Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3453, as amended by Pub. L. 107–77, title VI, § 624, Nov. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 803; Pub. L. 109–479, title III, § 302(e), Jan. 12, 2007, 120 Stat. 3624, provided that:
Subject to the provisions of this section and notwithstanding section 306(a) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1856(a)
), each of the States of Washington, Oregon, and California may adopt and enforce State laws and regulations governing fishing and processing in the exclusive economic zone adjacent to that State in any Dungeness crab (Cancer magister) fishery for which there is no fishery management plan in effect under that Act [16 U.S.C. 1801
“(b)Requirements for State Management.—Any law or regulation adopted by a State under this section for a Dungeness crab fishery—
except as provided in paragraph (2), shall apply equally to vessels engaged in the fishery in the exclusive economic zone and vessels engaged in the fishery in the waters of the State, and without regard to the State that issued the permit under which a vessel is operating;
shall not apply to any fishing by a vessel in exercise of tribal treaty rights except as provided in United States v. Washington, D.C. No. CV–70–09213, United States District Court for the Western District of Washington; and
shall include any provisions necessary to implement tribal treaty rights pursuant to the decision in United States v. Washington, D.C. No. CV–70–09213.
“(c)Limitation on Enforcement of State Limited Access Systems.—
Any law of the State of Washington, Oregon, or California that establishes or implements a limited access system for a Dungeness crab fishery may not be enforced against a vessel that is otherwise legally fishing in the exclusive economic zone adjacent to that State and that is not registered under the laws of that State, except a law regulating landings.
“(d)State Permit or Treaty Right Required.—
No vessel may harvest or process Dungeness crab in the exclusive economic zone adjacent to the State of Washington, Oregon, or California, except as authorized by a permit issued by any of those States or pursuant to any tribal treaty rights to Dungeness crab pursuant to the decision in United States v. Washington, D.C. No. CV–70–09213.
“(e)State Authority Otherwise Preserved.—
Except as expressly provided in this section, nothing in this section reduces the authority of any State under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801
et seq.) to regulate fishing, fish processing, or landing of fish.
“(f)Termination of Authority.—
The authority of the States of Washington, Oregon, and California under this section with respect to a Dungeness crab fishery shall expire on the effective date of a fishery management plan for the fishery under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act [16 U.S.C. 1801
The definitions set forth in section 3 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1802
) shall apply to this section.
This section shall have no force or effect on and after September 30, 2016.
“(j) Not later than December 31, 2001, and every 2 years thereafter, the Pacific State Marine Fisheries Commission shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Resources [now Committee on Natural Resources] of the House of Representatives a report on the status and management of the Dungeness Crab fishery located off the coasts of the States of Washington, Oregon, and California, including—
stock status and trends throughout its range;
a description of applicable research and scientific review processes used to determine stock status and trends; and
measures implemented or planned that are designed to prevent or end overfishing in the fishery.”
Pub. L. 104–297, title I, § 112(d), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3596, as amended by Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, § 101(a) [title II, § 211(b)], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009, 3009–41, which provided interim authority to the States of Washington, Oregon, and California to enforce State laws and regulations governing fish harvesting and processing against any vessel operating in the exclusive economic zone off each respective State in a fishery for Dungeness crab (Cancer magister) for which there is no fishery management plan implemented under this chapter, was repealed by Pub. L. 105–384, title II, § 203(g), Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3454.
Foreign Fish Processing in Norton Sound
Pub. L. 99–509, title V, § 5004, Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1912, provided that for purposes of processing pink salmon within the internal waters of the State of Alaska, the geographic area bounded on the north by a parallel of latitude of 64 degrees, 23 minutes, on the south by a parallel of latitude of 63 degrees, 51 minutes, on the east by the baseline from which the territorial sea was measured, and on the west by the outer limit of the territorial sea, was to be considered to be internal waters of the State of Alaska for the purposes of subsec. (c)(4)(B) of this section until Sept. 30, 1993.
Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone of United States
For extension of territorial sea and contiguous zone of United States, see Proc. No. 5928 and Proc. No. 7219, respectively, set out as notes under section 1331 of Title 43, Public Lands.