35 



Mr. Johnson. Well, if you are referring to the specific recom- 

 mendation that they made that there be a time deadline, I can see 

 where that is something that might contribute to the process. We 

 would try to get our work done sooner. We have had more success 

 in getting decisions made when we were faced with a statutory 

 deadline. 



On the other hand, the real issue here is the quality of the deci- 

 sion that has been made. Just because it is made on a timely basis 

 doesn't mean it was the right decision. If we get in a situation 

 where we are forced to come to a conclusion in a specified period of 

 time, the quality of the decision might suffer. 



We have a process that we are looking at now to try to get a 

 little bit ahead of the power curve. You have to realize that we 

 have a great number of fisheries around the country that we are 

 regulating. Many of them have in-season changes and different ad- 

 justments that have to be made. I have asked my staff to start flag- 

 ging the time-critical issues well enough in advance that we will be 

 in a position to issue a timely regulation. 



One of the most frustrating things, which we seem to be repeat- 

 ing over and over again, is not to be able to tell the fleet when they 

 can go fishing, what they can catch, and how long they are going to 

 be out there, in time for them to buy their bait, get their fuel, and 

 hire their crews. That has happened at least twice this year on the 

 west coast. We're trying to correct that. 



Chairman Wyden. Well, I will tell you as you leave, that one of 

 the things that I am most concerned about is that Government 

 fishing policy is moving in a direction that is going to leave us very 

 few small prosperous fishing businesses left. 



When you look at the net effect of all these policies, the big guys 

 are going to be able to play. The big guys in some of these Wash- 

 ington economic analyses may actually be able to make the case 

 that these policies make sense. 



But if you factor in losing so many of the economic foundations 

 of these coastal towns, which is what we are going to do if we lose 

 these small businesses, I don't think you can say, then, that the 

 Washington, DC analysis in favor of the big companies and their 

 efficiency arguments, pencils out. 



That is why it is so important that for the next round I think 

 you've got to have specific economic analysis about what these deci- 

 sions mean on the Oregon coast if you are going to overrule people 

 like Mr. Warrens, who actually bring that kind of information to 

 the table. 



If you've got it, let's get it. Let's get it early and let's debate it. 

 But if you don't have it, I think that we ought to be going with the 

 decision to come out of the council, because they are in a position 

 to tell us what this means for the communities they represent and 

 the communities they deal with. 



We will excuse you. Thank you for your cooperation. 



All right. We are going to merge our last two panels in the inter- 

 est of time. Mr. Barry Fisher of Newport; Mr. Tom Libby of Ham- 

 mond; Mr. David Duncan of Hammond; Mr. Jerry Bates of New- 

 port; and Mr. Bohannon of Portland. 



None of you gentlemen have any objection to being sworn as a 

 witness? 



