part of this bill would repeal the mission of the GSEs to serve the section 202 elderly market.

I look forward to a robust oversight of NOAA's programs and activities to ensure that species, coastal areas--and American jobs--are protected.

The lack of regulations has created uncertainty in the region and has had an adverse impact on job creation and the local economy.

What I am trying to understand though is that if you have less fleet days, and yet you feel that you are going to actually catch up on the surveys, how do you recognize that?

Some of the data is as old as 10 years, and so are you putting that at a priority as well, going back to those that are maybe the most overdue?

Is it fair to say that if stock surveys and assessments are not done in a timely manner by your agency, fishermen pay the price because of the scientists and managers having to build several layers of precaution into the models in order to…

Now, I understand that the NOAA fleet will be able to spend about half of the amount of time in Fiscal year 2011 as it did in Fiscal Year 2010 for fisheries stock assessments.

So if you really wanted to create jobs, you would have abandoned these global warming fairy tales and shifted your efforts to ending the drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico.

I would urge you, consistent with your agency's mission to 'conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to meet our Nation's economic, social and environmental needs' to be a part of the development of this approach...

I think that we lost a couple of them in the oceans here not too long ago.

I believe this hearing will fall far short of providing a meaningful discourse on the subject.

Old data means your scientists and fishery managers include multiple layers of precaution when running their models.

Lower harvest levels mean fishery closures or restrictions which means less jobs and more economic harm to coastal communities.

However, satellites are darn expensive.

Are we really being penny wise and pound foolish by spending so much money on things that have a very vague and maybe long term aspect?

Old data means that your scientists and fisher managers include multiple layers of precaution when running their models.

I don't think there is.

I am troubled that these executive branch actions are moving forward without Congressional or statutory approval.