58 



to guess what the closure date will be, so they can preannounce 

 and get printed in the Register and go through all this paperwork. 

 It is not good enough. Things change rapidly. 



Senator Stevens. If the same authority existed beyond the 3- 

 mile limits currently within the State waters, would that be suffi- 



cient? 



Ms. Stewart. Absolutely. And I think you get your public review 

 during the FMP. We understand from the FMP, we are going to 

 allow the regional director this authority to make these closures 

 and people have the opportunity to comment during the FMP on 

 how that will impact them. And no one reads the Federal Register, 

 with all due respect, anyway. It is not like that really informs the 

 fishing industry. 



Senator Stevens. I think it is good what your are pointing out. 

 I have never thought it was very effective to put out a notice that 

 we are going to cut your leg off in 2 days; it does not really help 

 you. You mentioned, Chris, the problem of the bottom line and— 

 I thought we had handled that. 



Ms. Blackburn. Yes, Senator, you did, but it was over the objec- 

 tions of the economists, and every time you try to do something, 

 we have to work very hard to overcome the economic analysis that 

 says whatever this wasteful practice is, that actually makes more 

 profits than what you are suggesting. 



Senator Stevens. I do not think that the Magnuson Act was in- 

 tended to have a profit orientation at all. 



Ms. Blackburn. It speaks to the necessity to consider net profit 

 to the Nation and that has been interpreted as maximum short- 

 term corporate profits. You saw that in "inshore-offshore," too, 

 where we overcame that with social arguments. But the economic 

 analysis said the best way to do it is take a great big factory trawl- 

 er and go out to sea. 



Senator Stevens. Well, that is where you could help us, I think, 

 by suggesting some language. I distinctly recall that we thought we 

 had passed a bill that had the preservation of species as its first 

 objective, not bottom line economics. 



Ms. Blackburn. We will be happy to submit some language that 

 may help mitigate. . _ 



Senator Stevens. Very provocative testimony, Mr. Chairman, 1 

 think. 



The Chairman. Well, let me ask Mr. O'Leary, because I am 

 learning, we now legislate the area and the time of catch, or fish- 

 ing. Could it be, to solve this bycatch problem, we legislate the gear 

 itself? You keep coming back to the gear. I have a similar problem 

 in the shrimp industry in my own backyard, but in different areas, 

 it would require different gear. I am learning that maybe we are 

 using the wrong gear as regards bycatch. Is that right? 



Mr. O'Leary. Yes, that is exactly the point, Senator. 



The Chairman. Well, now, I have a trawler and you are going 

 to legislate the gear. How much is that going to cost me? Do you 

 have any idea of what the new gear would be like? Elaborate on 

 that idea. 



Mr. O'Leary. OK. If you chose to prosecute a fishery because a 

 certain gear type had less overall bycatch for equal production of 

 product, right now the way the industry is constituted you have got 



