Fishery Management: Market Impacts of the American Fisheries Act on the
Production of Pollock Fillets (Letter Report, 06/30/1999,
GAO/RCED-99-196).

As the supply of better-known groundfish has dwindled, the demand for
pollock, which is valued for fillets, fish paste, and other products,
has increased. Over the years, the pollock fishery off the coast of
Alaska has become overcrowded with too many ships chasing too few fish.
Last year, Congress eliminated some vessels from the fishery, changed
the way that the annual allowable pollock catch was distributed among
the various sectors of the fishing industry, and set up a structure for
the formation of fishing cooperatives. GAO was required to report on
whether the act harmed the market for pollock fillets, including any
reduction in their supply. This report provides information on the
production of pollock fillets and the actions that affected production
for the first and largest of the three 1999 pollock fishing seasons,
which ran from January through March 1999. It also includes a historical
perspective on the pollock fishery and discusses factors that could
affect future production.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  RCED-99-196
     TITLE:  Fishery Management: Market Impacts of the American
	     Fisheries Act on the Production of Pollock Fillets
      DATE:  06/30/1999
   SUBJECT:  Fishing industry
	     Prices and pricing
	     Fishery legislation
	     Fishes
	     Marine policies
IDENTIFIER:  Russia
	     Alaska
	     Bering Sea

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  This text was extracted from a PDF file.        **
** Delineations within the text indicating chapter titles,      **
** headings, and bullets have not been preserved, and in some   **
** cases heading text has been incorrectly merged into          **
** body text in the adjacent column.  Graphic images have       **
** not been reproduced, but figure captions are included.       **
** Tables are included, but column deliniations have not been   **
** preserved.                                                   **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************

    United States General Accounting Office GAO                Report
    to Congressional Committees and Requesters June 1999
    FISHERY MANAGEMENT Market Impacts of the American Fisheries Act on
    the Production of Pollock Fillets GAO/RCED-99-196 GAO
    United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20548
    Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division B-282737
    June 30, 1999 Congressional Committees and Requesters The Alaska
    pollock fishery is the world's largest, single-species groundfish1
    fishery, and nowhere are more pollock caught than in the Bering
    Sea off the coasts of Russia and Alaska. As the supply of better-
    known groundfish has dwindled, the demand for pollock, which is a
    valued source of fillets, surimi,2 and other products, has
    increased. This increased demand has led to a virtual "race for
    fish" in the U.S.-controlled portion of the fishery. Each fishing
    season, vessels compete to catch as many fish as possible before
    the overall catch limit is attained and the season is closed.
    Vessels that catch the most fish before the catch limit is reached
    make the most money. Over the years, as more and more vessels
    joined this race, the pollock fishery became overcrowded with too
    many vessels chasing a set amount of fish. To address this
    situation, in 1998, the Congress passed the American Fisheries Act
    (P.L. 105-277, Division C, Title II). The act eliminated certain
    vessels from the fishery, changed the way the annual allowable
    pollock catch was distributed among the various sectors of the
    fishing industry, and set up a structure for the formation of
    fishing cooperatives. During the debate on the act, concerns were
    raised that the banning of certain vessels and the redistribution
    of the annual allowable pollock catch would result in restaurants
    and seafood companies being unable to obtain enough fillets to
    supply their markets. As a result, section 213(e) of the act
    required us to report by June 1, 2000, on whether the act had
    negatively affected the market for pollock fillets, including any
    reduction in their supply. We are responding to that requirement
    with this interim report, which will be followed with a final
    report by the required date. This interim report provides
    information on the production of pollock fillets and the actions
    that affected production for the first and largest of the three
    1999 pollock fishing seasons, which ran from January through late
    March 1999. It also includes a historical perspective on the
    pollock fishery and discusses some factors that could affect
    future production. Results in Brief    For the January to late
    March 1999 fishing season, the U.S. production of Bering Sea
    pollock fillets increased 13 percent, from 33.9 million pounds 1A
    general term that refers to fish that live on or near the
    seafloor, including cod, haddock, pollock, and ocean perch.
    2Surimi is a fish paste that is converted to imitation crab,
    lobster, and other products. Page 1
    GAO/RCED-99-196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 during the
    comparable 1998-fishing season to 38.2 million pounds in 1999. The
    increase is attributable to three main factors. First, demand for
    the fillets increased as worldwide groundfish supplies and Russian
    production of pollock fillets declined. Second, reflecting this
    increased demand, pollock fillet prices increased by as much as 74
    percent in the past year, providing an incentive to produce more
    fillets. Finally, the formation of a fishing cooperative, provided
    for in the act, guaranteed the cooperative's members a certain
    amount of fish and effectively ended their race for fish. With the
    end of the race for fish, cooperative members were able to shift
    production from surimi, which is faster to produce, to the slower
    but more profitable production of fillets. Although demand for
    pollock fillets continues to be high, several other factors, such
    as where pollock fishing will be allowed in the two remaining 1999
    pollock fishing seasons, could affect future production and
    prices. Despite a recent decline in pollock, the fishery is
    considered to be healthy and in no immediate danger of being
    overfished. Background    The worldwide catch of Bering Sea
    pollock was about 3 million metric tons3 in 1997 with over one-
    third of it caught in American-controlled waters. Alaska pollock
    remains the largest U.S. fishery by landed weight, about 1.1
    million metric tons. Just two decades ago, however, the American
    fishing industry's interest in pollock was slight. According to an
    industry official, pollock was considered a low-valued fish, and
    Americans preferred to fish for the higher-valued salmon, crab,
    herring, and halibut. However, increased market demand for Alaska
    pollock fillets as a substitute for declining supplies of
    traditional groundfish species caused a number of American
    fishermen to switch to pollock fishing. The growth of the American
    Bering Sea pollock fishery was made possible by the Fishery
    Conservation and Management Act of 1976,4 later amended and now
    known as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
    Act. This act established a fishery conservation zone that
    extended federal jurisdiction for fishery resources in coastal
    waters beyond state boundaries to 200 miles from the U.S.
    coastline and gave priority to domestic enterprises to fish within
    this zone. The Secretary of Commerce has final authority to
    administer the Bering Sea pollock fishery. The Secretary manages
    the fishery through the National Marine Fisheries Service, an
    agency within the Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and
    Atmospheric Administration, and through the North Pacific 3A
    metric ton equals 2,205 pounds. 416 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Page 2
    GAO/RCED-99-196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 Fishery Management
    Council (Council).5 The Council acts as an advisory board and
    recommends fishery management actions to the Secretary of
    Commerce. Although at first content to catch and deliver pollock
    to foreign processing ships, Americans soon started investing in
    vessels capable of both catching and processing pollock at sea.
    After these catcher/processor vessels proved that pollock could be
    harvested profitably, companies (primarily Japanese) began
    constructing processing plants on land. However, by 1990, the
    catcher/processor vessels were catching an estimated 80 percent of
    the total allowable annual catch, and controversy developed over
    how the annual pollock catch should be distributed. To protect and
    expand their investment in processing plants built onshore, these
    companies and their U.S. trade association petitioned the Council
    to divide the allowable annual catch of Bering Sea pollock between
    the offshore segment of the industry and the "inshore" sector-
    those catching pollock and processing it either in shore-based
    plants or in processors near the shore. In 1991, the Council
    approved such an allocation formula. From the annual total
    allowable pollock catch, an amount was first set aside as a
    contingency reserve,6 half of which was allocated to western
    Alaskan native communities in what is termed a Community
    Development Quota. These communities do not, for the most part,
    actually catch or process pollock but instead sell their
    allocation to the highest bidder in either the offshore or inshore
    sector. After this initial deduction, the rest of the total
    allowable catch was distributed as follows: * 65 percent to the
    offshore sector. This sector consists of three types of vessels:
    (1) catcher/processor vessels capable of both catching the pollock
    and processing it into fillets, surimi, and other products; (2)
    motherships that process pollock but do not catch it; and (3)
    catcher vessels that catch pollock and deliver them to the
    motherships and catcher/processors for processing. * 35 percent to
    the inshore sector. The inshore sector consists of plants located
    on or near the shore, along with catcher vessels that catch the
    pollock and deliver it to the processing plants. Although this
    allocation formula set limits on how much pollock each sector
    could harvest, it did not limit how much pollock individual
    vessels 5The Magnuson-Stevens Act established eight regional
    councils and required them to prepare fishery management plans for
    each fishery within their jurisdiction that they determined
    required active federal management and to review and revise these
    plans as necessary. 6This reserve was used to adjust for changed
    stock conditions and operational problems in the fishery. Page 3
    GAO/RCED-99-196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 within each sector
    could catch. While the two sectors no longer had to race each
    other for fish, within each sector the race for fish remained.
    Each fishing season, vessels raced to catch as many pollock as
    possible until the allocation was reached and the season closed.
    Vessels that caught the most fish made the most money. As more
    vessels joined this race, the pollock fishery became more and more
    crowded. The Council's allocation formula also did not end the
    controversy over how the annual allowable catch should be divided
    between the offshore and inshore sectors. The formula had
    initially been approved by the Secretary of Commerce as an interim
    measure until a more comprehensive program for the fishery could
    be developed. In 1994, because the new management program had not
    been completed, the Council decided to extend the interim
    allocation formula into 1998. However, in 1997, a coalition
    representing the inshore sector petitioned the Council to double
    the inshore allocation to 70 percent. To address issues such as
    the allocation between the offshore and inshore sectors,
    overcrowding, foreign investment, and the race for fish, the
    Congress enacted the American Fisheries Act in 1998. The act
    changed the American Bering Sea pollock fishery in many ways.
    First, it eliminated nine, predominantly foreign-owned,
    catcher/processor vessels from the offshore sector. Second, it
    increased the allocation for the Community Development Quota
    program and then divided the remainder equally between the inshore
    and offshore sectors.7 The offshore sector's 50 percent was
    further split with the catcher/processors and their catcher
    vessels receiving 40 percent and the catcher vessels supplying the
    motherships the remaining 10 percent. The American Fisheries Act
    also provided the framework for the formation of fishing
    cooperatives. These cooperatives were designed to eliminate the
    race for fish by assigning a specific amount of fish to each
    member of the cooperative. Members could then catch their fish
    allocation at their own pace. Catcher/processors formed a
    cooperative before the start of the 1999 season. The act does not
    allow the motherships or the inshore sector to operate as
    cooperatives until January 1, 2000. 7An additional amount was
    subtracted from the total allowable catch to allow for the
    incidental taking of pollock by vessels harvesting other
    groundfish species. This is called a bycatch allowance. Page 4
    GAO/RCED-99-196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 U.S. Fillet
    Production                   U.S. production of pollock fillets
    for the first fishing season in 1999 Rose by 13 Percent
    increased 13 percent over 1998 despite a number of factors that
    could have resulted in a significant decline. This increase
    occurred in both the inshore Despite Factors
    and offshore sectors (see table 1). Indicating a Potential Decline
    Table 1: Total Fillet Production by Sector, 1998 and 1999 First
    Season       Pounds in millions Percent 1998 first season
    1999 first season             increase in Percent of
    Percent of          pounds, Sector                  Pounds
    total      Pounds               total       1998-99 Offshore
    catcher/ processors                  24.0                71
    26.5               69             10 Offshore motherships
    0                                0 Inshore producers
    9.9                29           11.7               31
    18 Total                       33.9               100
    38.2              100             13 Note: Production figures
    include the Community Development Quota, the majority of which was
    purchased by the offshore sector. Source: National Marine
    Fisheries Service. This 13 percent increase occurred despite
    several factors that signaled the potential for a substantial drop
    in fillet production. Some factors were part of the American
    Fisheries Act itself, while others were not. Specifically: * The
    act reduced, from 65 percent to 50 percent, the allocation of
    pollock to the offshore sector, which historically accounted for
    most of the fillets produced, and increased the allocation to the
    inshore processors, a sector that had historically produced
    relatively few fillets. Furthermore, industry officials stated
    that the nine catcher/processors the act banned from the fishery
    had been the main producers of fillets for the offshore sector. *
    One inshore fillet processor sustained major fire damage and was
    unable to produce fillets during the first season in 1999. Many of
    the remaining inshore processors had historically concentrated on
    surimi. Page 5
    GAO/RCED-99-196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 * To protect
    declining pollock stocks and the Steller sea lion,8 which eat
    pollock, the Council reduced the total allowable pollock catch by
    almost 11 percent between 1998 and 1999. Furthermore, it reduced
    the percentage of the harvest that could be taken during the first
    season. Taken together with an increase in the Community
    Development Quota, the subtraction of the bycatch allowance, and
    the change in the allocation formula, the total allowable catch
    available to the catcher/processors of the offshore sector during
    the first season dropped by almost 50 percent between 1998 and
    1999. These same factors resulted in about a 4-percent increase in
    the amount of pollock allocated to the inshore sector. Even with
    an almost 50 percent decrease in the catcher/processor's total
    allowable catch, the vessels managed to increase their total
    fillet production by 10 percent between the first seasons in 1998
    and 1999. Catcher/processors also managed to maintain their
    overall share of total fillets, producing 71 percent of all
    fillets in the first season of 1998 and 69 percent of the fillets
    in the first season of 1999. During this same period, the inshore
    sector managed an 18-percent increase in the production of pollock
    fillets, although there was very little increase in allowable
    catch. Price Increase and       Pollock fillet production for the
    first 1999 season increased, despite the Fishing Cooperative
    negative factors discussed above, for three main reasons. First,
    concerns over falling Russian pollock fillet production and the
    declining worldwide Spurred Production       supply of groundfish
    increased the demand for American pollock fillets. Increase
    Second, average prices for pollock fillets increased by as much as
    74 percent. Third, because the American Fisheries Act allowed the
    catcher/processors of the offshore sector to form a cooperative
    and end their race for fish, this sector was able to respond to
    increased demand and rising fillet prices by increasing fillet
    production while decreasing surimi production. According to some
    industry officials, pollock fillet prices increased this year
    principally because of the severe decline in the amount available
    from Russia. Russia has historically produced a large portion of
    the total pollock fillets available, but its production has
    dropped drastically recently, with over-fishing cited as the
    reason for the decline. Although we could not obtain actual
    figures, we were told that the Russian catch might be down by as
    much as 50 percent. 8The Steller sea lion is protected by the
    Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
    Page 6                                                  GAO/RCED-
    99-196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 Many industry officials we
    talked to agreed that the severe decline in Russian production,
    coupled with an overall decline in worldwide groundfish stocks,
    increased the demand for American Bering Sea pollock and spurred
    an increase in prices for pollock fillets. From the first season
    in 1998 to the first season in 1999, average pollock fillet prices
    increased 41 to 74 percent, depending on the type of fillet.
    Although most types of pollock fillets are similarly priced, deep-
    skin fillets are priced higher and are preferred by many Americans
    because the fat layer has been removed. Table 2 compares the
    average prices paid between 1998 and 1999 for deep-skin fillets
    and the other fillet types. Table 2: Average Price Per Pound of
    Pollock, 1998 and 1999 First Seasons
    Percent of Product                        1998 first season 1999
    first season              increase Deep-skin fillets
    $1.28                 $1.81                 41 Other fillets
    $.91                 $1.58                 74 Source: Fisheries
    Market News Report. The American Fisheries Act allowed the
    catcher/processors to respond to the increased market demand and
    prices in a way that would have been difficult to do previously.
    The race for fish induced processors to emphasize surimi
    production because it is the fastest way to process large
    quantities of fish caught at one time. Because the act provided
    the framework for the formation of a cooperative by the
    catcher/processors of the offshore sector, this segment of the
    industry was able to end its race for fish and produce products
    with higher value. In addition, because the cooperative guaranteed
    each member a certain amount of fish, members could invest in
    machinery capable of producing the higher-valued fillets and could
    slow down by fishing only when their fillet-processing machines
    needed additional fish. We spoke to representatives for six of the
    nine members of the offshore catcher/processor cooperative, and
    they were universal in their praise of how well the cooperative
    has worked and how it has improved overall operations. They stated
    that the elimination of the fish race had other benefits as well.
    For example, they stated that their yield rates were up as much as
    25 percent because, with the race for fish over, they could now
    afford the time to make less valuable products like oil and
    fishmeal and store them until they could be brought to shore.
    Previously, any part of the fish not used for fillets or surimi
    was often tossed overboard. Companies could not afford to waste
    storage space on low-valued products when the Page 7
    GAO/RCED-99-196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 same space could
    be used to store fillets and surimi. They also could not afford
    the time to travel to a port and unload low-valued products; they
    had to stay in the race. We were also told that the cooperative
    has led to savings in fuel consumption, increased safety because
    vessels no longer have to fish during extreme weather conditions,
    and more time to search for the size of fish most conducive to the
    products processors want to produce. Various Factors Could Pollock
    fillet production increased during the first season in 1999
    because Affect Future Seasons the factors discussed above acted
    together to encourage that result. If these conditions change in
    the future, the results may differ. For example, if the Russians
    increase fillet production and fillet prices fall, American
    processors might return to emphasizing surimi production. This
    could result in American restaurants and seafood companies having
    to find new sources of supply. In the near term, however, industry
    officials do not expect much change. Officials representing both
    the inshore and offshore sectors expect the outlook for pollock
    fillet production to remain strong if declines continue in the
    worldwide supply of Russian pollock and other groundfish, such as
    cod, hake, and whiting. If the demand and price for pollock
    fillets remain high, several processors in both sectors said that
    they plan to invest in additional fillet production equipment and
    produce more fillets in the two remaining 1999 seasons, which
    start in August and September. Another factor that could affect
    supply is the closure of areas deemed critical for the survival of
    the protected Steller sea lion. Some industry officials expressed
    concern that even with additional equipment, fillet production in
    the two remaining 1999 pollock seasons could be limited by the
    long distances fishermen may have to travel to avoid fishing in
    closed areas. Pollock caught in these more remote areas may be too
    small to be used for fillets or may need to be processed into
    surimi because they cannot be transported to inshore processors
    fast enough to be made into fillets. Still another factor that
    could affect production is the formation of an inshore
    cooperative. We talked to five of the seven inshore processors,
    and four were in favor of a cooperative similar to the offshore
    one if it would eliminate the race for fish. As with the offshore
    cooperative, such an agreement could potentially provide the
    inshore sector the opportunity to switch to producing more
    fillets. Page 8                                     GAO/RCED-99-
    196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 Agency Comments    We provided
    the Department of Commerce with a draft of this report for review
    and comment. While the Department did not indicate whether it
    agreed with the overall message of our report, it did provide
    technical comments that we incorporated as appropriate. Scope and
    To obtain background data and make preliminary observations, we
    Methodology        reviewed volume data on the production of
    pollock products, which we obtained from the National Marine
    Fisheries Service. We obtained and reviewed price data from
    industry market reports, the processors, and their customers. We
    did not perform reliability tests on either the volume or price
    data. We also reviewed the act itself; its legislative history;
    and various industry publications, market reports, and Federal
    Register notices concerning the act. We also attended meetings of
    the North Pacific Fishery Management Council to hear initial
    reactions to the act's implementation and discussions of
    regulations for the remaining 1999 seasons. To learn about the
    history of the pollock fishery, the development of the American
    Fisheries Act, and the experiences during the initial fishing
    season, we interviewed representatives for six of the nine members
    of the offshore catcher/processor cooperative and five of the
    seven inshore processors. We also talked to companies identified
    by both the offshore and inshore sectors as their major customers.
    The processors and seafood companies we contacted are listed in
    appendix I. Finally, we talked to officials from the National
    Marine Fisheries Service and associations representing the fishing
    industry. We conducted our review from December 1998 through June
    1999 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
    standards. A copy of this report is being sent to the Honorable
    William M. Daley, Secretary of Commerce; Dr. James Bake, Director,
    the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Penny Dalton,
    Director, the National Marine Fisheries Service; Richard Lauber,
    the Chairman of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council; and
    other interested parties. We will also make copies available to
    others upon request. Page 9
    GAO/RCED-99-196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 If you have any
    questions about this report, please contact me or Jill Berman at
    (206) 287-4800. Other key contributors to this report were Jerry
    Aiken and Bill Wolter. James K. Meissner Associate Director,
    Energy, Resources and Science Issues Page 10
    GAO/RCED-99-196 American Fisheries Act B-282737 List of Committees
    and Requesters The Honorable Judd Gregg Chairman The Honorable
    Ernest F. Hollings Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on
    Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies
    Committee on Appropriations United States Senate The Honorable
    Harold Rogers Chairman The Honorable Jos Serrano Ranking Minority
    Member Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary and
    Related Agencies Committee on Appropriations House of
    Representatives The Honorable Slade Gorton United States Senate
    The Honorable Mitch McConnell United States Senate The Honorable
    Frank Murkowski United States Senate The Honorable Ted Stevens
    United States Senate The Honorable Patty Murray United States
    Senate Page 11                                    GAO/RCED-99-196
    American Fisheries Act Appendix I Companies and Associations
    Contacted Catcher/Processors    American Seafoods Company Tyson
    Seafoods Group Arctic Storm, Inc. Glacier Fish Company F/T
    Highland Light F/T Starbound Motherships           Supreme Alaska
    Seafoods Golden Alaska Seafoods, Inc. Inshore Processors    Unisea
    Seafood Corporation Tyson Seafood Group Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc.
    Trident Seafoods Corporation Westward Seafoods, Inc. Seafood
    Companies     Icicle Seafoods, Inc. Gorton's Inc. L. D. Foods Fish
    Products International Cold Water Seafoods Corporation Long John
    Silvers Burger King Page 12                            GAO/RCED-
    99-196 American Fisheries Act Appendix I Companies and
    Associations Contacted Industry Associations    At-Sea Processors
    Association Pacific Seafood Processors Association (141268)
    Page 13                                   GAO/RCED-99-196 American
    Fisheries Act Ordering Information The first copy of each GAO
    report and testimony is free. Additional copies are $2 each.
    Orders should be sent to the following address, accompanied by a
    check or money order made out to the Superintendent of Documents,
    when necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted,
    also. Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single
    address are discounted 25 percent. Orders by mail: U.S. General
    Accounting Office P.O. Box 37050 Washington, DC  20013 or visit:
    Room 1100 700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW) U.S.
    General Accounting Office Washington, DC Orders may also be placed
    by calling (202) 512-6000 or by using fax number (202) 512-6061,
    or TDD (202) 512-2537. Each day, GAO issues a list of newly
    available reports and testimony.  To receive facsimile copies of
    the daily list or any list from the past 30 days, please call
    (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone.  A recorded menu will
    provide information on how to obtain these lists. For information
    on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET, send an e-mail
    message with "info" in the body to: [email protected] or visit
    GAO's World Wide Web Home Page at: http://www.gao.gov PRINTED ON
    RECYCLED PAPER United States General Accounting Office
    Bulk Rate Washington, D.C. 20548-0001     Postage & Fees Paid GAO
    Permit No. G100 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300
    Address Correction Requested

*** End of document. ***