Regional Fishery Management 

 Councils 



• biologically based estimates or predic- 

 tions of the maximum yield which can be 

 expected from each stock without future 

 depletion of that stock; 55 



• quality of the predictions or the range 

 within which they are likely to be accu- 

 rate so that safety margins can be built 

 into catch figures; 56 



• such relevant ecological factors as water 

 quality, destruction of breeding grounds, 

 disasters such as oil spills or severe 

 weather; and 



• economic and social factors of individual 

 fisheries which will be relevant in deter- 

 mining the effect of management options 

 on such interested parties as commercial 

 fishermen, sport fishermen, food proc- 

 essors, marketing groups, fish-food con- 

 sumers, and the general public. 57 



In reality, the exact meaning of optimum 

 yield and the best method of determining it 

 will be determined by the Regional Councils 

 through their decisions in the coming years. 

 In the absence of an analytical method, judg- 

 ments may be used to modify a maximum- 

 yield figure to reflect the factors listed above. 

 If data on these factors are not available or are 

 unreliable, further judgments may be used. 

 Even with an analytical method and reliable 

 data, there will be uncertainty and techniques 

 for dealing with that uncertainty will be 

 necessary. 



Public Law 94-265 establishes eight 

 Regional Councils which will set standards, 

 develop plans, and prepare regulations for the 

 management of fisheries in each region. The 

 regions and their jurisdiction are shown in 

 figure 17. Each council includes members 

 from industry and other parties of interest in 

 the region as well as representatives of State 

 fisheries offices, the Regional Director of the 

 National Marine Fisheries Service, a Coast 

 Guard representative, and a representative of 

 the Department of State. The Secretary of 

 Commerce, who appoints the voting members 

 of the councils from lists of potential members 

 submitted by the Governors of the States in 

 each region, has been asked to seek an amend- 

 ment to the Fishery Conservation and 

 Management Act which would require that 

 environmental interests be represented on the 

 councils. Similar consideration should proba- 

 bly be given to consumers. Figure 18 lists the 

 councils and their memberships on the effec- 

 tive date of Public Law 94-265. 



The Regional Councils have broad 

 authority to recommend fishery management 

 plans to the Secretary of Commerce for ap- 

 proval and implementation. The management 

 plans which the councils will be formulating 

 must, under the law, take into consideration 

 domestic fishing, foreign fishing, and recrea- 

 tional fishing. Once it is determined what por- 

 tion of the allowable catch can be harvested by 

 U.S. vessels, the remainder is to be allocated as 

 foreign catch. 



The general responsibilities of the councils 

 are clear (see figure 19), but their relationship 

 to the future operation of already established 

 Federal agencies is not so clear. The Federal 

 agency with the major responsibility in fish- 

 ery management is the National Marine Fish- 

 ery Service in the Department of Commerce. 

 The National Marine Fishery Service (NMFS) 

 has a dual-role of providing services to the 

 councils, mostly in the form of biological stock 



63 



