260 



members who have have no ties whatever to the fisheries. Thie 

 suggests thu criterion for council membership should be an absence 

 of knowledge and experience, which would prove a serious handicap 

 to effective management of our nation's axteamely aomplex 

 fisheries. 



Because there are no easy solutions to the problems facing 



fishery manager n, it is the duty of Oongresn, the Department of 



Commerce , and the state governors to be certain the council members 

 are the most knowledgeable people available, and those of the 

 highest caliber. 



L imiting Access t oj fre Fl shey&ga 



There has been a growing trend around tho country towards 

 limiting access to the common property resource, always s contro- 

 versial subject. The drafters of the Magnuson Act, a remarkably 

 fn» -sighted piece of legislation, foresaw the need for limited 

 entry to protect the health of the fisheries and provided a list of 

 standards that must bo followed in developing such programs These 

 criteria weira intended to ensure that the benefits would accrue to 

 the nation as a whole, rather than to any ono state or narrow group 

 of interests. Achieving this balance is no small task and, in gen- 

 eral, we believe the councils and the Secretary have accomplished 

 it to the betterment of both the resource and the fishermen whose 

 livelihoods depend on it. 



Except for the few fisheries that have some form of limited 

 access, all others operate under the Olympic system, a first-come- 

 first'Servad approach. Tha race for fish this has engendered has 

 resulted in overcapitalization of both harvesting and processing 

 capacity nationwide. In consequence, there is increasing pressure 

 on the resource and decreasing stability in the industry. Our 

 association is a strong supporter of an individual quota system for 

 harvesters, because we believe it will stop the race for target 

 apacies while providing greater individual accountability regarding 

 byenteh and discard of non- target species. 



Much of the controversy surrounding programs such ss indivi- 

 dual quota system* oonoeirnc the public policy issue of ownership of 

 the resource. Our association favors an individual quota system 

 that conveys only a fishing privilege, not an entitlement. The 

 quotas can be revoked by the government: for Just cause at any time 

 without compensation. Tn addition, the federal government should 

 continue to establish harvest limits, and each individual quota 

 should be expressed as a percentage of tha annual harvest level , 

 not as a guaranteed tonnage. The advantage of such a system lies in 

 the increased order and stability that is brought to the fishery, 

 allowing a greater possibility to earn a living while protecting 

 the health of tha resource. Ve think Congress should express 

 strong support for any system that achieves these ends. 



Several of the points above are addressed in my written testi- 

 mony submitted to the committee for the field hearing, and I appre- 

 ciate this opportunity to expand on them. 



