128 



(2)(a) Two weeks prior to any meeting of a Council for which final action on an 

 FMP or amendment to such FMP involving an allocation of fishing privileges has 

 been scheduled, each Council member shall disclose on the record any financial in- 

 terest, even if insignificant or of a type generally possessed by the public or a large 

 class of persons to which the Council member or a member of his or her immediate 

 family belongs (such disclosure will also be made orally during the beginning of each 

 council meeting or hearing). 



(b) Within one week of the scheduled meeting, the Chairman of such Council 

 shall, in consultation with NOAA General Counsel, make a determination about 

 whether the financial interest as disclosed is significant or of a type not generally 

 possessed by the public or a large class of persons to which the Council member 

 or a member of his or her immediate family belongs. If the Chairman determines 

 that such financial interest is not of a type possessed generally by the public or a 

 large class of persons to which the Council member or a member of his or her imme- 

 diate family belongs, the Council member subject to the determination shall be 

 barred from participation as a voting member. 



Prepared Statement of Vincent A. Curry, President, Pacific Seafood 



Processors Association 



Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee: My name is Vincent Curry. I am 

 the President of the Pacific Seafood Processors Association (PSPA). 



PSPA is a trade group representing companies involved in the commercial proc- 

 essing of various seafood products throughout the Northwest and Alaska. The mem- 

 ber firms that comprise the association handle a wide variety of species and product 

 forms, including salmon (fresh, frozen, canned, smoked), crab, halibut, and numer- 

 ous species of groundfish such as pollock and cod. The association is now in its 79th 

 year, and some of she member companies have been in existence even longer than 

 that. 



The main function of the association is to provide a forum for communication and 

 action by the members on issues of common concern. These issues, which are both 

 regulatory and legislative, occur on the local, state, and federal levels. The associa- 

 tion provides the membership with an opportunity to debate these issues, to form 

 opinions, to craft action plans, and to deliver the association's message to the rel- 

 evant decision makers. 



We are pleased to once again have the opportunity to participate in a reauthoriza- 

 tion of the Magnuson Act. PSPA was actively involved at the time of the Act's incep- 

 tion and we have continued to offer our thoughts each time it has been amended. 



It is our view that the Act, now in its 17th year, has been a great success, particu- 

 larly in the North Pacific. The management councils of the west coast and Alaska 

 had an advantage upon implementation of the Magnuson Act as they were given 

 management authority over stocks of marine life that were mostly in good health. 

 Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for all regions. In some cases fisheries man- 

 agers have been struggling since the late 1970's to develop plans balancing the need 

 to rebuild stocks with the need to maintain the economic health of coastal commu- 

 nities. We are glad that we did not have to face this difficult task for most of the 

 species under management in the North Pacific, although the problem of endan- 

 gered species of salmon promises to continue to be an extremely thorny issue. 



Maintaining healthy stocks in the face of ecological changes, growing fishing 

 power, and uncertain scientific data is a complicated management task demanding 

 commitment to the resource and intimate knowledge of regional fishing practices. 

 The North Pacific's uniquely blessed resources have generally been well cared for 

 by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council. It seems the members of the 

 North Pacific Council at appropriate times have viewed available biological data re^ 

 garding stock biomass and — commended harvest levels with healthy skepticism. For 

 example, the North Pacific council has chosen to set annual allowable harvest levels 

 for the North Pacific biomass well below the combined allowable catch levels which 

 NMFS mathematical models have recommended. This fundamental decision is often 

 cited as the basic management strategy which maintains the health of the overall 

 North Pacific fisheries biomass. In the North Pacific the continuing effort to hus- 

 band the resource pragmatically demonstrates one of the major advantages of hav- 

 ing the resource users on the Councils. The people who participate in the fishery 

 and whose livelihoods depend on it are often in a good position to interpret the sci- 

 entific data through the lens of real world experience. Given that the foremost duty 

 of the Councils is to protect the resource, and fisheries data is not 100 percent accu- 

 rate, this conservatism has probably been wise. 



