1999 

 NATIONAL OVERVIEW 



Table 14 lists the individual stock groups for which RAY increased by S0% or more 

 during the same time period. Many of these stocks are from the Alaska Region, where 

 overfishing has not been widespread in the past. Examples ot Alaska stocks with large gains 

 in RAY include Atka mackerel, chum salmon, rock sole, and various other flatfishes (Table 

 14). In the Northeast Region, RAY increased for striped bass alter an aggressive rebuilding 

 program and a series of good recruitments. Other Northeast stocks that experienced large 

 gains in RAY are often less traditional species like spiny dogfish, which replaced the more 

 traditional stocks when they became depleted. In the Southeast Region, large relative gains 

 in RAY were observed for shrimps and, despite low population sizes, lor stocks such as red 

 snapper and red drum in the Gulf of Mexico. Environmental conditions ohen modulate 

 long-term trends in stock abundance. The increased levels of RAY lor coastal pelagic fishes 

 like herrings and sardine are partly due to more favorable environmental conditions. The 

 overall gain in RAY for the 37 stocks in Table 14 amounts to 413,500 t. However, part of 

 that total includes catches of tuna and tuna-like species made by other countries. The total 

 gain excluding these stocks amounts to nearly 372,000 t. 



It is evident from Table 13 that many of the stocks that experienced declines in land- 

 ings are below the level that supports LTPY (63% of the stocks ol known status in Table 13 

 are below LTPY). That is, the landings for many ol these stocks decreased because their 

 population sizes can no longer support historical levels ol catch, or because ot restrictive 

 management regulations aimed at rebuilding the stocks, or both. In contrast, many ol the 

 stocks that had very large increases in landings had population sizes that could support 

 LTPY (62% of the stocks of known status in Table 14 are near or above LTPY). 



Stacking a salmon purse 

 seine, Dutch Harbor, Alaska. 



Table 14 (facing page) 



Comparison of recent aver- 

 age yield (RAY, U.S. share 

 only, m metric tons (t) ex- 

 cept for highly migratory 

 stocks from Units 5 and 18, 

 which have a very high per- 

 centage of non-U. S. land- 

 ings) between OLO '92 and 

 OLO '99. Only stocks with 

 RAY changes greater than 

 -i-50% are listed. Nearshore 

 resources are not included. 



Protected Resources 



Perhaps the most positive development over the period 

 since enactment of the 1994 MMPA Amendments has been 

 the increase in quality of NMFS stock assessment informa- 

 tion covering a greater number ol separate stocks. OLO '92 

 reported on 82 stocks ol marine mammals and sea turtles 

 from the Atlantic and Pacific Regions, but with fully 74% 

 having unknown status. In this report, about twice that num- 

 ber of marine mammal and sea turtle stocks (ISS) are enu- 

 merated. Still problematic is that trends can only be assigned 



37 



