85 



The Chairman. And somehow we have to ensure, once the plan 

 is there and submitted and approved, that implementation takes 

 place in a reasonable period of time. 



Let me jump for a minute to Captain Dorsey and ask him about 

 these community development quotas on the enforcement side. 

 How about it? Are you having difficulties with those or are there 

 any difficulties? 



Captain Dorsey. Well, sir, given the nature of our enforcement 

 locally, we have very little dealings with that program. 



The Chairman. Oh. 



Captain Dorsey. Our folks at the district office level are the ones 

 who would best be able to provide information on that program and 

 the effects of it. 



[The information referred to follows:] 



The community development quota (CDQ) fishery does not entail special enforce- 

 ment requirements for the Coast Guard and we nave not experienced difficulties 

 with CDQ enforcement. 



The CDQ fishery is routinely conducted immediately prior to or following the tra- 

 ditional pollock A and B seasons. CDQ fisheries enforcement is conducted as part 

 of our overall program to ensure that total allowable catch (TAC) for pollock is not 

 exceeded. 



Pollock fishery efforts are satisfactorily monitored through a combination of Coast 

 Guard presence on the grounds, at-sea boardings during the transition periods be- 

 tween the CDQ and traditional A and B fisheries, and high observer coverage for 

 the CDQ fishery. 



The Chairman. Mr. Benton, one other thing that I have yet to 

 hear about is fees. We have heard suggested perhaps a fee should 

 be enacted to promote research, more observers, better implemen- 

 tation, and so forth of the council's decisions and, of course, the fees 

 or revenues thereon would be retained and used in that particular 

 region. And you talk about community development. Do you have 

 a view about any kind of fee? 



Mr. Benton. Mr. Chairman, the State really has not taken a po- 

 sition on fees other than to say that if a fee is charged, then it 

 should be specifically targeted at management and enforcement of 

 those fisheries in the region where the fee is assessed. 



From personal experience I know that fundings for these pro- 

 grams is tight, going down, not up. The Nation is in a situation 

 where we have to tighten our belts, just like — and the State's in 

 the same position. And I cannot see how we can avoid at some 

 point extracting the costs of management and enforcement to make 

 that industry profit from that economic activity that the industry 

 generates. 



It is a matter of degrees, and I think it has to be reasonable. If 

 the fee is charged, and I think it really does have to come back to 

 the region because that is where the burden, if you would, of Gov- 

 ernment services comes from. 



The Chairman. Very good. Captain Dorsey, as I understand your 

 testimony a solution to the Dixon Entrance dispute is more or less 

 on course, at least de facto not de jure, not in law. As you see it 

 now, with fewer violations from both sides, and helping the Amer- 

 ican fishermen with their particular vessels if they get over the line 

 or otherwise, should we leave it alone or what should we do? 



Captain Dorsey. Well, certainly, Mr. Chairman, the ongoing ne- 

 gotiations between the United States and Canada would hopefully 



