20 



stage for us to work more directly with the Commission, the Atlan- 

 tic States Marine Fisheries Commission for predominantly state 

 fisheries so that the management could become more effective. 



We proposed, for example, last year before the regulatory reform 

 initiative began to either withdraw the American Lobster FMP, 

 which is currently a Council FMP, manage it through the Commis- 

 sion's FMP. This is the same process that we are proposing for 

 bluefish, and we told folks a year before we actually proposed it, 

 that there may be a proposal that would be forthcoming. We pub- 

 lished an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on that par- 

 ticular FMP which is very analogous to the bluefish. 



It is, however, with bluefish even more appropriate from our per- 

 spective because there is a joint plan already in existence for blue- 

 fish that is identical between the Mid-Atlantic Council and the At- 

 lantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. 



So, it seems to us that to get the management closer to the peo- 

 ple that are affected by it to put this in the hands of the states, 

 and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is a compila- 

 tion of the states, both the state agency directors, fishermen and 

 legislators. 



Mr. Pallone. But the only thing, Mr. Matlock, is you have to go 

 beyond and I don't know how much money would actually be saved 

 which I guess is the purpose of these reinventing things is that you 

 save money and maybe you can give us that information but even 

 if it is a sizable amount and maybe you can tell me, you have to 

 think beyond that. 



The public obviously is concerned because obviously they feel 

 that through the joint management they maybe have two opportu- 

 nities to be heard and obviously there is concern because the Com- 

 mission's process and I don't know exactly why, maybe some of the 

 next panel can explain it to us, but doesn't seem to provide as 

 much public input or at least not here in New Jersey or sufficient 

 input. 



So I guess my question is and I would like to know how much 

 you are really saving because it doesn't seem to me that it is a lot 

 and you have to weigh that against the fact that the public is not 

 too happy and they feel that there is going to be less input. 



Mr. Saxton. Let me just interject before Dr. Matlock answers. 

 This proposal has been called by some insensitive, by others unfor- 

 tunate and unwise by others, a disaster and by others not bene- 

 ficial to the stocks or the participants and I suspect there may be 

 some people here with us today who feel that way. 



Would you address that? If this is not going to meet with accept- 

 ance from the public that is the most concerned about this issue, 

 it would seem to me that someone might want to take another look. 



Dr. Matlock. Let me, if I may, try to answer the first question 

 on cost and tell you I don't have a total dollar cost for you but I 

 can give you some pieces to that. Currently there are about 872 

 commercial permits that are issued to fishermen by the Federal 

 Government. 



In the absence of a Federal FMP, and left only with the Commis- 

 sion's FMP, those permits and the processing of them and the bur- 

 den on the public to get what amounts to two permits now would 

 be gone so there would be an elimination of the costs associated 



