95 



the U.S. fishing capacity to surpass that of the foreign fisheries 

 that once operated in what is now the U.S. EEZ. 



In this testimony I will point out some of the egregious problems 

 facing the status of our Nation's fisheries and recommend specific 

 changes that should be addressed during the reauthorization proc- 

 ess. 



One of these egregious problems is what we term unsustainable 

 fishing practices. The waste and discard issue is highlighted — is 

 easily highlighted in a fishery called the rock sole fishery pros- 

 ecuted in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands area. If you have a prob- 

 lem with my testimony, I would ask that you refer to the last chart 

 in the testimony, which is the fishery management report from Na- 

 tional Marine Fishery Service on the rock sole fishery in 1993. I 

 will just go over some points with you. 



In 1993, this fishery, which is conducted by the use of bottom 

 trawls, reported catch figures as follows: total catch 73,804 metric 

 tons, the retained catch 23,411 metric tons and a discarded catch 

 of 50,393 metric tons. In more familiar terms, the discards amount- 

 ed to an excess of 110 million pounds of fish. The composition of 

 the discards, as you can see, was Pacific cod, pollock, flounder, rock 

 sole, and other species. 



This fishery is conducted during the spawning period for rock 

 sole, and the target is females with roe or eggs. Because this prod- 

 uct fetches a high market price, the fishery is economically impor- 

 tant. But the question is, Is this type of fishery sustainable? In ac- 

 tuality, we know little about the impacts of targeting on spawning 

 aggregations. We do know that it is much easier to catch the fish 

 because of their aggregated formations during spawning. But what 

 of the impacts on the population? And what of the impact of the 

 other species which are considered bycatch and are subsequently 

 discarded? And what of the impact on the benthic environment? 

 Because there are no scientific answers to these questions, we give 

 the benefit of the doubt to the lucrative fishery. They justify their 

 response by explaining that, since we cannot prove that this fishery 

 impacts the rock sole population or other species that are caught, 

 we have no reason to disallow the fishery. 



Yet, it can be argued that the foregone opportunity of other fish- 

 ers who are targeting Pacific cod or pollock is, in fact, worthy of 

 economic consideration. And furthermore, disrupting the benthos 

 and the productivity of the ecosystem may cause irreparable dam- 

 age to the health of the rock sole fisheries and other marine species 

 that are interdependent in this food web. 



We propose that fisheries be conducted in a more sustainable 

 and selective manner. Gear selectivity is an area where numerous 

 wasteful fisheries could be eliminated simply by allowing cleaner 

 gear to prosecute those fisheries. Specifically, preferential alloca- 

 tion should be the reward of clean fishing practices. 



We recommend that the act be amended to provide broader au- 

 thority to manage bycatch problems through fishery management 

 plans. The act should contain a directive to reduce the problems 

 caused by bycatch and provide the tools to reach that goal. Addi- 

 tionally, incentives must be created for conservation engineering so 

 that low-impact types of fishing gear can be developed. 



