U.S. Code » Title 16 » Chapter CHAPTER 71— ATLANTIC COASTAL FISHERIES COOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

16 U.S.C. § 5103

State-Federal cooperation in Atlantic coastal fishery management

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 16 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Federal support for State coastal fisheries programs

The Secretary in cooperation with the Secretary of the Interior shall develop and implement a program to support the interstate fishery management efforts of the Commission. The program shall include activities to support and enhance State cooperation in collection, management, and analysis of fishery data; law enforcement; habitat conservation; fishery research, including biological and socioeconomic research; and fishery management planning.

(b) Federal regulation in exclusive economic zone(1) In the absence of an approved and implemented fishery management plan under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), and after consultation with the appropriate Councils, the Secretary may implement regulations to govern fishing in the exclusive economic zone that are—(A) compatible with the effective implementation of a coastal fishery management plan; and(B) consistent with the national standards set forth in section 301 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1851).The regulations may include measures recommended by the Commission to the Secretary that are necessary to support the provisions of the coastal fishery management plan. Regulations issued by the Secretary to implement an approved fishery management plan prepared by the appropriate Councils or the Secretary under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) shall supersede any conflicting regulations issued by the Secretary under this subsection.(2) The provisions of sections 307, 308, 309, 310, and 311 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1857, 1858, 1859, 1860, and 1861) regarding prohibited acts, civil penalties, criminal offenses, civil forfeitures, and enforcement shall apply with respect to regulations issued under this subsection as if such regulations were issued under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).(Pub. L. 103–206, title VIII, § 804, Dec. 20, 1993, 107 Stat. 2449; Pub. L. 104–297, title IV, § 404(b), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3619; Pub. L. 106–555, title I, § 122(b)(3), Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2766.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 94–265, Apr. 13, 1976, 90 Stat. 331, which is classified principally to chapter 38 (§ 1801 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1801 of this title and Tables.

Amendments

2000—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 106–555 substituted “Magnuson-Stevens Fishery” for “Magnuson Fishery” wherever appearing.

1996—Subsec. (b)(1)(A). Pub. L. 104–297 substituted “compatible with” for “necessary to support”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1996–2022 · leading case: Ace Lobster Co., Inc. v. Evans, 165 F. Supp. 2d 148 (D.R.I. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ace Lobster Co., Inc. v. Evans, 165 F. Supp. 2d 148 (D.R.I. 2001). · cites it 8× “Did defendant exceed his statutory authority under the ACFCMA in issuing the regulations, because he did not first consult with the appropriate councils or because the uniform trap cap is incompatible with effective implementation of a coastal fishery management plan? Plaintiffs…”
Campanale & Sons, Inc. v. Evans, 311 F.3d 109 (1st Cir. 2002). · cites it 3× “16 U.S.C. § 5103 (b)(1) (emphasis added).”
Little Bay Lobster v. Sec'y of Comm, 352 F.3d 462 (1st Cir. 2003). · cites it 4× “16 U.S.C. § 5103 (b)(1) (2000). This case involves such a plan under the new statute.”
North Carolina Fisheries Ass'n, Inc. v. Brown, 917 F. Supp. 1108 (E.D. Va. 1996). · cites it 3× “Constitution; (2) the rule violates § 804(b)(1)(A) of the Atlantic Coastal Act, 16 U.S.C. § 5103 (b)(1)(A), because it does not meet the “necessity” requirement of that section; and (3) the rule violates several national standards contained in § 301 of the Magnuson Fishery…”
Martha's Vineyard/dukes Cnty. Fishermen's Ass'n v. Locke, 811 F. Supp. 2d 302 (D.D.C. 2011). “”) (emphasis added); 16 U.S.C. § 5103 (b) ("In the absence of an approved and implemented [FMP] under the [Magnuson-Stevens Act], and after consultation with the appropriate Councils, the Secretary may implement regulations to govern fishing in the exclusive economic zone.”
Little Bay v. US Com., 2002 DNH 096 (D.N.H. 2002). · cites it 4× “34 demonstrating that the new boundary line meets the requirements of 16 U.S.C. § 5103 (b)(1)(A). However, in their motion for summary judgment, plaintiffs appear to abandon any claim based upon § 5103(b)(1)(A); that statute is not mentioned in their discussion of Count I, nor…”
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Ross (D.D.C. 2022). “198-1 (State of Maine Cross-MSJ) at 4; see also 16 U.S.C. § 5103 (requirements for state-federal cooperation in managing Atlantic coastal 3 fisheries).”
Martha's vineyard/dukes Cnty. Fisherman's Ass'n v. Locke (D.D.C. 2011). “") (emphasis added); 16 U.S.C. § 5103 (b) ("In the absence of an approved and implemented [FMP] under the [Magnuson-Stevens Act], and after consultation with the appropriate Councils, the Secretary may implement regulations to govern fishing in the exclusive economic zone.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.