123 



Many of the regulatory amendments promulgated by the North Pacific Fishery 

 Management Council are promoted by industry for conservation reasons — and are 

 thwarted by the slowness of the process. 



Those of us who maintain Washington, DC, lobbyists have our lobbyists hand 

 carry the documents from desk to desk. 



6. Include under the MFCMA noncommercial fish species which are important 

 prey items. In the Gulf of Alaska it is absurd that there is no mandate to survey, 

 assess, evaluate or in any way pay any attention to forage fish such as sandlance, 

 capelin and euphausids which are important food species for most of the commer- 

 cially important species. 



Because there is no emphasis on forage fish which aren't commercially fished, 

 there is no incentive for research on these species and those who might want to 

 study forage fish find it impossible to obtain funding. In the age of ecosystem con- 

 sciousness and ecodiversity concerns, this oversight is unconscionable. 



7. Make provisions for mandatory industry assessments to pay for industry ap- 

 proved research. The first step in this direction was taken with the North Pacific 

 research plan, intended to allow industry to assess itself to pay for its observer pro- 

 grams in Alaska. Salmon fishermen, under Alaska law, can form regional 

 aquacultural associations and assess themselves to pay for hatcheries and enhance- 

 ment projects. 



It is important that the federally managed fisheries and industry have this same 

 opportunity on a regional basis. We do not want assessments that disappear into 

 the general fund or end up funding work in Maine and Alaska money. 



8. Make provisions that allow for sale of the resource to pay for survey work. This 

 method is used by the International Pacific Halibut Commission to fund its halibut 

 surveys. We feel much of the survey work needed in Alaska could be funded in the 

 same way. The fish needed to fund the survey work could be subtracted form the 

 quota if necessary. 



Thank you for this opportunity to appear before the Committee on Merchant Ma- 

 rine and Fisheries and for your continued work to assure the health of our marine 

 resources and our fishing industry. 



Prepared Statement of Kevin B. O'Leary, Vice President, Kodiak Longline 



Vessel Owners' Association 



For the record, my name is Kevin O'Leary and I am vice-president of the Kodiak 

 Longline Vessel Owners' Association (KLVOA). The KLVOA was formed in 1987 by 

 a group of Kodiak fixed gear vessel owners and now represents hook-and-line and 



f»ot catcher and catcher/processing vessels participating in the groundfish and crab 

 isheries in the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea. We are represented at North 

 Pacific Fishery Management Council meetings and the KLVOA president is a mem- 

 ber of the Council's Advisory Panel. We also attend International Pacific Halibut 

 Commission and Alaska Board of Fisheries meetings, as well as other federal and 

 state meetings which impact our industry. We are involved in many issues which 

 affect members of the group and instruct our director to spend a large portion of 

 her time on concerns we have with conservation of the resource. Our director, Linda 

 Kozak, is president of the Fisheries Conservation Action Group which consists of 15 

 catching and processing groups in Alaska, Washington and California. This coalition 

 speaks regularly before the North Pacific Fishery Management Council on bycatch 

 and conservation issues. 



My testimony today will focus on a few of the areas we feel are important in the 

 process of reauthorizing the Magnuson Act. 



CONSERVATION OF THE RESOURCE 



We believe the primary concern in this current reauthorization is the need to 

 prioritize conservation of the resource. The Commerce Department has recently 

 begun to review allocation proposals from primarily a narrow economic perspective 

 using a cost/benefit analysis which defines net benefit as profits made by partici- 

 pants in the industry. This leads to some concern; a short-term economic profit may 

 not be in the national long-term interest. The social and biological impacts as well 

 as long-term economic health of the resource and participants nave not been of pri- 

 mary importance. It is our opinion that the conservation elements of allocation deci- 

 sions need to be considered on an equal or higher degree as the short-term economic 

 benefits. We believe that selective gear should receive a preference whenever pos- 

 sible. With many species, a selective gear group such as pots or hook-and-line can 

 easily prosecute the fishery without the incidental bycatch and wastage problems. 



