|
Resource
Ecology &
|
Dover sole | 353 | Atka mackerel | 1,474 | |
Northern rock sole | 968 | Pacific whiting | 1,793 | |
Yellowfin sole | 1,265 | Pacific ocean perch | 986 | |
Walleye pollock | 11,701 | Northern rockfish | 493 | |
Sablefish | 4,150 | Light dusky rockfish | 653 |
Total production
figures were 23,836 with 6,395 test ages and 316
examined and determined to be unageable.
By Dan Kimura
SOCIOECONOMIC ASSESSMENTS PROGRAM
Cost, Earnings, and Employment Survey Update
Cost, Earnings, and Employment Survey questionnaires
were delivered to all participants in the Bering
Sea-Aleutian Islands walleye pollock fishery in
mid-January. Participants include owners of
catcher vessels, catcher processors, shoreside
processing plants, and motherships. Extensive
follow-up was conducted in order to increase survey
participation, with replacement surveys sent to
those who had not received or lost their surveys.
REFM economists also contacted industry
organizations to encourage more responses, assured
that the responses would remain confidential, and
provided industry with a NMFS policy statement on
protecting such data from disclosure. Despite these
efforts, the Center has received only a few
questionnaire responses. Only one catcher processor
responded; no inshore processor or motherships
responded, and only a few catcher vessels responded,
none of which were major participants in the pollock
fishery.
Associations representing most pollock processors
organized a meeting held in May where industry
members expressed their reluctance to provide the
Center with vessel, plant, or company data.
They also expressed reluctance to provide revenue by
product grade and some input data. As a
substitute for the Center’s current data
collection project, representatives from the
processor associations have offered to collect data
from their members, which would then be verified and
aggregated before being made available to the
Center.
This type of aggregate data could potentially
provide useful economic information. However,
the absence of disaggregated data presents several
problems and limitations on the types of analyses it
can support. For example, cost functions,
profit functions, and random utility models could
not be estimated. The Center is currently
examining other data limitations arising from
collecting aggregate data and other logistical and
practical consequences.
Based on the outcome of the meeting discussed above
and the minimal number of returns from pollock
processors and catcher vessels, we have concluded
that a voluntary survey will not successfully
collect vessel and plant level data. Voluntarily
provided aggregate data may be useful. However,
if the North Pacific Fishery Management Council
(NPFMC) and NMFS determine that vessel and plant
level data are needed, it will likely be necessary
to make provision of that data mandatory. The
Science and Statistical Committee of the NPFMC was
informed in June of the current state of the Cost,
Earnings, and Employment data collection effort.
Center economists participated in the NPFMC’s
Social and Economic Data Committee meeting help at
the Center in August. The meeting focused on
two parallel issues:
aggregate versus disaggregate data relative to the Cost, Earnings, and Employment Survey
identification of a suite of data needs for economic analysis in light of regulatory analysis requirements.
It was agreed that representatives of the four sectors of the Bering Sea-Aleutian Islands pollock fishery would develop a draft proposal that would identify the following:
the data which industry cannot or will provide, the data which will be provided in the aggregate, and the data which will be provided at the individual firm/plant/vessel level
a process for collecting, verifying, and making that data available to agency and Council economists.
The committee formed
an industry and agency workgroup that will review
the industry proposal and develop a process to make
improved cost, earnings and employment data
available to assess the economic performance of the
Alaska groundfish fisheries.
By Joe Terry.
U.S. GROUNDFISH OBSERVER PROGRAM
Training, Briefing, and Debriefing Statistics
During the third quarter of 2000, 243 observers were
trained, briefed, and equipped for deployment to
fishing and processing vessels and shoreside plants
in the Gulf of Alaska, Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands
region, and North Pacific waters off the coasts of
Oregon and Washington. They sampled aboard 210
fishing and processing vessels and at 16 shoreside
processing plants. These observers were
trained or briefed in various locations. The
University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) Observer
Training Center trained 35 first-time observers and
another 104 observers with prior experience were
briefed at this site. The AFSC Observer Program in
Seattle trained 19 first-time observers and briefed
another 59 observers who had prior experience. At
the program’s field office in Kodiak, 7 more
observers was briefed and 19 were excused from
briefing because they had just completed a cruise
successfully and were returning immediately to the
field. The third quarter 2000 observer
workforce thus comprised 22% new observers and 78%
experienced observers.
The Observer Program conducted a total of 124
debriefings during the third quarter of 2000. Four
debriefings were held in Kodiak, five in Dutch
Harbor, 19 in Anchorage, and 96 were held in
Seattle.
Observer Program Review and Proposed Action
An extensive, independent review of the Observer
Program began in late 1999. The review was
carried out by the consulting firm Marine Resources
Assessment Group (MRAG) Americas, Inc. The purpose
of this review was to provide recommendations for
changes in Observer Program operations and
organization to its ability to meet its mission and
goals. The final report along with a response
from the AFSC was made available to the NPFMC in
September.
Two key recommendations in the MRAG report are 1)
reestablishing program goals and objectives and 2)
developing a contractual relationship between
NMFS and the observer companies. Reestablishing
goals and objectives is an important step in
defining and guiding the role and direction of the
Observer Program. Development of a contractual
relationship between NMFS and the observer companies
is an initiative toward eliminating any real
or perceived conflicts of interest between the
observer companies and the fishing fleet they
service. As a first step, the Observer Program
proposes developing a pilot contract using the
American Fisheries Act (AFA) catcher processor and
mothership fleet. Under the arrangement, the
AFA fleet would be required to seek their observer
coverage from the observer company that holds that
contract with NMFS. The contract is envisioned
as a “no cost” arrangement where the observer
company receives payment for services directly from
the AFA fleet and must abide by the performance
standards of the contract in order to retain its
exclusive rights to provide observers to the AFA
fleet. This contractual arrangement will place
the NMFS Observer Program in the role of
“client” in the eyes of the observer company,
and is designed to significantly reduce any
perceived or actual conflict of interest between the
AFA fleet and the current observer companies that
service that fleet.
In addition to the MRAG review, the Observer Program
has also been reexamined this year along with all
other NMFS observer programs, through the annual
NMFS management control review (MCR) process.
The new National Observer Program Advisory
Team (NOPAT) has been actively involved in this
endeavor. NOPAT is made up of representatives from
all NMFS regional offices, science centers and
observer programs and is coordinated through the
NMFS National Observer Program. The AFSC’s
Observer Program contribution to the MCR report was
completed in late September, and the complete
national MCR report will be available soon.
By Bob Maier.