I think we ought to put our eyes back on the goal that we sought to achieve with the original Magnuson Act, and that was to protect the species, to assure the reproductive capability of the North Pacific was to be the primary source of…

If it is increased next year by 20 percent, the same processors get 90 percent. Is that right?

We have got to move on here.

I have in mind some sort of an amendment that would say that anyone that did that would forfeit forever their interest in the 90 percent.

Ms. Freed, why is not there an avenue for Kodiak to increase its shore-side processing by purchasing some of the shares of the catcher-processors?

I am going to have to cut you off there, Kevin. Thank you very much.

Must they be allocated to those that hold the 90 percent?

It does seem, however, that when we pass this bill, if we do, we have established a new paradigm for the king crab as far as the Council's authority for the future.

We never have. We have never done that before, because we created the Council with the idea that regional management was better than management from Washington.

But we envision that this thing will operate similar to the AFA, that there are so many advantages to the fishermen joining coops.

If you think that, for 1 minute, that a processor can demand that they get part of the 10 percent in exchange for an agreement to buy part of the 90 percent, you have got yourself an antitrust case right there.