G23 Inshore/Offshore Allocations for Pollock
Purpose and Need
GOA Amendment 23 and BSAI Amendment 18 developed out of a concern to prevent preemption of resources by one industry sector over another. Substantial processing of pollock by several catcher/processor vessels contributed to an early closure of the pollock fishery in the Shelikof Strait area in 1989, effectively preventing inshore components from realizing their anticipated economic benefit from processing pollock. Upon industry request, the Council considered the issues of coastal community development and shoreside preference at its June 1989 meeting and adopted the Fishery Planning Committee’s suggested management alternatives for analysis. The problem statement adopted by the Council identified the issue as a resource allocation problem and stated that specific processing allocations for the inshore and offshore sectors established at the beginning of a fishing year would resolve the preemption problem and allow operators to better plan their harvesting and processing activities for the year.
To address this problem, the Council determined the need to establish inshore/offshore allocations of pollock and Pacific cod in the GOA, and pollock in the BSAI. In addition, the amendments would establish a Catcher Vessel Operational Area (CVOA) in the Bering Sea, which would limit access to pollock within the area to catcher vessels delivering to inshore or offshore processors. These amendments also established the Western Alaska Community Development Quota (CDQ) program pollock allocations, to provide Western Alaska communities with long-term employment and access to the fisheries. The primary purpose of Amendments 18 and 23 was to protect the inshore component of the fishery from preemption by the offshore fleet. The amendments provided an interim solution for the inshore component, which includes small coastal communities that are highly dependent on fishing to maintain economic stability. While the amendments did not directly address overcapitalization in the fisheries, the approval by the Council specifically expressed intent to develop and implement a more comprehensive, long-term limited access program.
Analysis
An extensive final EIS and EA/RIR/IRFA and a 265-page appendix containing community profiles were prepared for these amendments. Eight alternatives including the status quo were considered. The alternatives not chosen would have implemented traditional management tools or formed an allocation system with a different basis, such as vessel class, species, or at the individual vessel level. The alternative chosen was broadened to include development of a Comprehensive Fishery Rationalization Program, of which inshore/offshore allocations would be a part.
Regulation Summary
The preferred alternative, when it was approved, defined the inshore and offshore components of the fisheries. The GOA inshore component was allocated 90% of the Pacific cod TAC and 100% of the pollock TAC for each fishing year. While catcher/processors from the offshore component would not be able to conduct directed pollock fishing in the GOA, they would be allowed appropriate bycatch amounts.
- Final Rule (57 FR 61326, 12/24/1992)
- Proposed Rule (57 FR 46133, 10/07/1992)
- Notice of Availability (57 FR 45602, 10/02/1992)
- Final Rule (57 FR 23321, 06/03/1992)
- Proposed Rule (56 FR 66009, 12/20/1991)
- Notice of Availability (56 FR 64738, 12/12/1991)
Results
GOA Amendment 23 resulted in 100% of the pollock quota and 90% of the Pacific cod quota (less bycatch amounts in other fisheries) being reserved for harvest by vessels delivering to onshore processors. This amendment was approved for a three-year period, through the end of 1995 (see Amendments 40, 51, and 61 which extended these measures). The allocation implemented by this amendment provided protection and operational stability for harvesters and processors and the coastal communities in which they operated.