70 



etary — that has to do with the way a guy fishes or the way a com- 

 pany operates, and there are some legitimate reasons for that. 



But for the bycatch information, you can just post the boat name 

 with how much bycatch it caught. The fleet needs that information 

 to know who is ruining things for them. 



Senator Stevens. But you do not want to abolish the PIN num- 

 ber practice? 



Ms. Graham. There are good reasons for keeping it. 



Senator Stevens. I have always thought that for waste, you 

 would use the boat name without regard to the PIN number. Do 

 you agree on that? 



Mr. Thomson. Yes. 



Mr. CURRY. I think it would work; yes. 



The Chairman. Do you all agree on weighing the catch? How 

 about the folks on factory trawlers, do they like that idea, too? 



Mr. Curry. Actually, you will have to ask them directly, but I 

 know something about that because I recently was with them. I 

 think that there is a growing awareness and they are working to 

 have a system that will be practical for them. I think it can be 

 done, but I will not answer for them. 



The Chairman. Do you have any other questions? 



Senator Stevens. No. 



Mr. Chairman, let me tell my fellow Alaskans here the advan- 

 tage of what we are doing. The chairman is both chairman of this 

 committee and of the Appropriations subcommittee. If we had these 

 hearings in Washington, 3 days of hearings, we would be lucky to 

 find a spot for one of you on one of the panels. 



Instead, by coming to Alaska and be willing to hold a hearing in 

 Dillingham and here and in Ketchikan, we now have another op- 

 portunity to reeducate my friend. And he has been here many 

 times before this, some of us may not know that, but we also get 

 the chance to get in the record the information from three different 

 geographical areas and to some extent some different perspectives 

 in 3 days. 



And I think it is invaluable and I really want you all to join me 

 in thanking my friend for coming to Alaska, bringing his full staff 

 that works on fisheries with him. That, too, is essential, that they 

 all know the difference between Ketchikan and Kotzebue. And I do 

 think that this is developing into a very good record from which we 

 can glean some changes in the Magnuson Act which will improve 

 it. I am particularly pleased with the beginning of the hearing, 

 however, that said that the Magnuson Act has worked. 



The Chairman. Yes. 



Senator Stevens. I think that is the main message. 



The Chairman. You preempted me. I have been in the position 

 of doing the work and the other fellow has had the acts named 

 after him, and that was appropriate. I had 3 years working on 

 coastal zone management — as the Magnuson Coastal Zone Manage- 

 ment Act. It was proper because Maggy was the chairman of the 

 committee and he provided the leadership, but this could well have 

 been the Stevens Act. 



Now, it is fortuitous that we did not name it the Stevens Act be- 

 cause nobody would come and testify against it, I can tell you that, 

 not in Alaska, but Ted Stevens led the way in the 1970's on getting 



