68 



statement also sets forth a set of proposals to address these and 

 other problems. I would like to focus my oral testimony on those 

 proposals. 



First, the ACC, along with other major industry organizations 

 based in Washington State, recommends that the act be amended 

 to include a new national standard requiring that fisheries man- 

 agement measures promote the safety of life and property at sea. 

 It has become a matter of issue in the public and national press 

 that safety, death at sea, in fisheries is a major issue. 



Second, the ACC, again joined by other major fishing organiza- 

 tions, recommends amendment of the act to bring into closer com- 

 pliance the objectives and standards established by the inter- 

 national community at the United Nations Conference on Environ- 

 ment and Development, the 1992 Conference on Responsible Fish- 

 ing, and the 1993 Inter- American Conference on Responsible Fish- 

 ing. This means amending the act to provide expressly for the 

 minimization of waste, including the bycatch of nontarget species 

 and the discard of targeted species. It also means the avoidance, 

 reduction, and elimination of excess fishing capacity. 



On the latter point, it is now universally recognized, as reflected 

 in recent studies undertaken by the United Nations Food and Agri- 

 cultural Organization, that overcapitalization is a major contribu- 

 tor to conservation problems in the fisheries of the world. This com- 

 mittee should be conscious of the fact that overcapitalization in the 

 fisheries off the coast of Alaska poses a severe challenge to the sus- 

 tainability of target and nontarget resources alike. 



In closing, I would like to focus on two more points which are 

 closely and interrelated. The ACC recognizes there is considerable 

 interest in establishing Federal fishing fees. My organization can 

 accept new fees, but only if they are set at economically sensible 

 levels. That means that other fees, taxes, and costs must be taken 

 into account. In this region, the State of Alaska already charges 

 substantial fee impasses and the operational costs of fishing are 

 very high. 



In addition, the State is pressing for the extension of fishing 

 quotas for coastal communities. That reduces the available re- 

 sources for those within the fisheries who must attempt to survive 

 in an already overcapitalized economic environment. 



In short, there are limits to what the crab fleet can sustain. New 

 fees and new quotas for the coastal communities cannot be consid- 

 ered in isolation from one another, nor in isolation from other fees, 

 taxes, and costs borne by our fisheries. 



In addition, it may well be that the elimination of excess fishing 

 capacity in the existing fleet will be indispensable for the further 

 development of coastal community-based fishery operations. 



That concludes my remarks. 



The Chairman. Mr. Thomson, what would you do with a fee? Let 

 us assume it is a reasonable one that has been paid into a fund. 

 What am I going to do with it? 



Mr. Thomson. We hope it would come back to the region, in 

 terms of being applied to fisheries management and research with- 

 in the region where the fees are collected. 



The Chairman. With respect to research, would you institute a 

 different endeavor such as the University of Alaska? How would I 



