On the recordJune 19, 2006
We are both justifiably proud of the success of the pollock cooperatives established under the American Fisheries Act, AFA, and particularly their low bycatch rates. However, it is my understanding from speaking with NOAA and council staff that making this directed fishing allowance in statute for the CDQ portion of these other BS/AI groundfish fisheries would deprive the council of its current authority to limit incidental catch associated with these allocations, although it would retain such authority for the non-CDQ allocations. I am concerned that this lack of authority could unintentionally promote increases in incidental catch for CDQ groups. In addition, any unconstrained growth in incidental catch under the legislatively directed fishing allowances could result in less available catch allowance for the non-CDQ groups subject to incidental catch controls, which seems contrary to your intent that each set of groups be subject to the same management controls. While the pollock fishery has very low incidental catch rates, in 2005 its incidental catch was only 0.16 percent above the directed fishery allowance, the directed fisheries of the BS/AI, other than halibut, sablefish, pollock, and crab, have a relatively higher level of bycatch. The council has taken actions to limit and reduce the amount of incidental catch allowance to all directed fishery participants in order to reduce overall bycatch levels.…
Source
govinfo.gov




