151 



Sublic resources are properly utilized. This includes controlling and reducing 

 ycatch, and eliminating the waste associated with economic discards. 



Economic discards are fish which are harvested in a target fishery but not proc- 

 essed because they are the wrong size, the quality is poor, or for some other eco- 

 nomic reason. These fish could be processed into ancillary products such as meal 

 and oil, and some of their value retained. Instead, they are simply thrown away. 

 An example would be undersized pollock which are taken in a directed fishery for 

 pollock but discarded due to their size. 



Economic discards, and the biological and economic losses resulting from this 

 practice, are a major concern to the State. In 1991, pollock discards totaled 111,313 

 metric tons (mt) in the directed pollock fishery in the Bering Sea. This was approxi- 

 mately 245,400,000 pounds of discarded fish, which was roughly equivalent to ap- 

 proximately six times the entire commercial harvest of salmon in Washington State, 

 or the entire combined commercial harvest of herring, halibut, and shellfish in Alas- 

 ka in 1990. These economic discards represented approximately $35 million in lost 

 value to the Nation for this one fishery. 



Bycatch differs from economic discards. Bycatch is a term for fish or shellfish 

 taken in a directed fishery which is targeting on a different species. The use of 

 nonselective harvesting methods such as trawls, longlines, and pots often yield catch 

 composed of a variety of species including both target and incidental (bycatch) spe- 

 cies. Conflicts arise when bycatch in one target fishery reduces the amount of re- 

 source available to a different directed fishery. In extreme cases, bycatch of species 

 or stocks with low or declining populations can lead to conservation problems for 

 those species or stocks. Incidental catch of halibut, Tanner crab, king crab, herring, 

 and salmon have been of particular concern in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska. 



Out of our growing concern regarding the increasing problems of bycatch control 

 and discard waste, the State of Alaska commissioned a report to document the 1992 

 levels of bycatch and economic discards in the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea/Aleu- 

 tian Island groundfish fisheries. The report relies entirely on NMFS data taken 

 from vessel operator/processor reports. It does not look at data from the federal ob- 

 server program. This is an important distinction. Generally it means that the data 

 presented in the report are very conservative, because in most instances bycatch 

 and discard data are higher in observer reports. For comparison, the pollock discard 

 level in the Bering Sea reported by operators was 47,772 mt, while federal observers 

 reported 113,000 mt (249,000,000 pounds), a 237 percent difference. 



The findings in this report are startling: 



• Over 507 million pounds of groundfish were thrown away as bycatch or as eco- 

 nomic discards, 462 million pounds came out of the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands 

 (BSAI) alone. 



• In one fishery, the BSAI Rocksole trawl fishery, 61 percent of the harvest was 

 discarded, as well as two million crab. 



• In BSAI trawl fisheries, 47 percent of the discards consisted of the species 

 being targeted. In fixed gear, 2 percent of the discards consisted of the species being 

 targeted. 



• The mortality of halibut taken as incidental bycatch totaled over 20. million 

 pounds, 14 million pounds were taken in the BSAI. 



• The average size of halibut taken as bycatch in the BSAI trawl fisheries was 

 0.94 pounds per halibut; in the pot fisheries the average size was 2.16 pounds per 

 halibut; and, in the hook and line fishery the average size was 11.94 pounds per 

 halibut. 



• 20.4 million crab, almost 100,000 salmon, and over one million pounds of her- 

 ring were discarded. 



What these data show is that the losses due to economic discards and bycatch 

 clearly constitute enormous waste and are a major loss to the Nation. Although 

 there are many reasons why bycatch and discards occur, losses of this magnitude 

 must not be condoned. The general public in Alaska understands this very clearly 

 since in Alaska the state will fine and imprison individuals who engage in the wan- 

 ton waste of harvested fish and game resources. The wanton waste of our fisheries 

 resources should not be tolerated as a matter of national public policy, and would 

 not be tolerated if the activity was occurring in state waters. 



The State of Alaska and the North Pacific Fishery Management Council have 

 often been frustrated by Secretarial interpretations of the Act which emphasize har- 

 vest efficiency and economic return over conservation. Economic discards and 

 bycatch are treated more as a cost of doing business than as a form of waste. By 

 focusing on economic efficiency the Secretary has made it difficult for regional coun- 

 cils to effectively address the problems of discard waste and bycatch. 



During the next reauthorization of the Act, Congress can provide the leadership 

 to address this problem by strengthening the conservation provisions in the Act, and 



