25 



Mr. Blum. Mr. Chairman, without equivocation, yes. We think 

 that the differential between how a plan amendment and a regula- 

 tory amendment are handled is counterproductive, and we think 

 that there ought to be the same speed. It doesn't do anybody any 

 good to be sitting there on April 15 wondering what the share is. 



Chairman Wyden. Well, that sounds constructive, and why don't 

 we excuse all of you on a constructive note as well, and we will be 

 working closely with you and appreciate your cooperation. 



Mr. Blum. Thank you very much. 



Chairman Wyden. Our next panel, Mr. Jay Johnson, Deputy 

 General Counsel, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- 

 tion, U.S. Department of Commerce. 



If we could, let's come back to order. We are so far behind on the 

 schedule. Mr. Johnson is being very gracious and is already on his 

 feet. I take it you have no objection to being sworn as a witness. 



[Witness sworn.] 



Chairman Wyden. Again, let me just ask our audience, in the 

 name of keeping this moving, we're going to have to be very quiet, 

 even as the panel is leaving. 



Mr. Johnson, welcome. You have been extremely cooperative 

 with this subcommittee in working for this hearing. We appreciate 

 your personal attendance as well. We will make your prepared re- 

 marks a part of the record. 



Why don't you make your oral statement, if you could, in about 5 

 minutes or so? 



TESTIMONY OF JAY S. JOHNSON, DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL 

 FOR FISHERIES, ENFORCEMENT, AND REGIONS, NATIONAL 

 OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPART- 

 MENT OF COMMERCE 



Mr. Johnson. This will be pretty much off-the-cuff. I have been 

 listening to everything that has been said here. I think that you all 

 deserve an explanation for what went on in Washington after we 

 received the proposal from the Pacific Council. 



This proposal was, in essence, a proposal to shift the sharing of 

 the Pacific whiting resource from the offshore sector to the onshore 

 sector. It was justified on the basis that there would be a greater 

 national interest in favoring the shore-based communities. What 

 you probably don't understand, however, is that there has been a 

 dramatic change in the world market for these resources. 



When the proposal was received in Washington, DC, the econo- 

 mists who work for the National Marine Fisheries Service, who are 

 as professional and as capable in their discipline as the fishery bi- 

 ologists who provide advice to the council, informed the decision- 

 makers in Washington that they could not accept the council's eco- 

 nomic analysis. 



There had been a 50-percent decrease in the price that had been 

 paid for pollock surimi in 1 year. Inventories of pollock surimi and 

 whiting surimi in Japan were at an all-time high, and were in- 

 creasing. 



There was still more product expected to come into Japan, the 

 principal market, in the early March 1993 timeframe as a result of 

 the Alaskan fisheries. 



