Bottomfish brouhaha.

• Author: Holmes, Krys
• Position: Groundfish fisheries

The crisis in the North Pacific can be narrowed down to a Gordian tangle of economic, social, biological and political issues. Who has rights to take America's largest remaining commonly owned fish resource, and who should be excluded? Should a big-money boat from Ballard, Wash., be allowed to take more fish from a bay 50 miles out of Kodiak than is a second-generation Kodiak fisherman? Should halibut longliners lose some of their fish to other fishermen who catch halibut incidentally by the thousands? Should limited entry be imposed, giving fishing rights only to those companies smart or flush enough to get into the bottomfish boom before the door slams shut?

America's got hold of the largest congregation of finfish in the world. Within our 200-mile limit, feeding off the mineral-rich nutrients that make the eastern Pacific continental shelf the most bountiful waters on the globe, an immeasurable biomass of fishes are gathered.

And those fish have got us by the gills.

Swamped with Success. When the United States claimed ownership of all resources within 200 miles of shore in 1976, the nation captured one of the seven wonders of the fisheries world: billions of dollars worth of pollock, cod, flatfish, rockfish, crab, shrimp, and a smattering of other species. The 200-mile-limit law, called the Magnuson Act, paved the way for increased American control over North Pacific groundfish fisheries, which were then dominated by foreign fishing companies. Americanization of groundfish happened fast - too fast, some say. Investments poured into the U.S. fishing and processing industry from all over: from Wall Street; from small U.S. companies confident of a future in seafood; and from Japan, Korea and Norway.

In 1980 there were no factory trawlers, and Trident Seafoods in Akutan, on the Aleutian chain, was still trying to prove that groundfish processing on shore could be a profit able enterprise. Today there are more than 70 factory trawlers and two dozen shore-based plants processing groundfish.

Billions of dollars were invested in the North Pacific fisheries in the 1980s. Shore plants attracted investment from some of the world's major fishing companies, including Japan's kingpins, Nissui and Tiayo. The factory trawler fleet swelled like a tick on a hunting dog.

Now the fishery is completely Americanized. There is more than enough harvesting and processing capacity to catch and process all 2.3 million metric tons of allocated groundfish in the Bering Sea and the Gulf of Alaska. Most observers think the fishery is overcapitalized. In fact, fishermen and processors told the National Marine Fisheries Service last year that they would need as much as 5 million metric tons of groundfish to keep every boat and processing line operating year-round.

"Now we're not fighting Japan and Korea any more; we're fighting the next generation down,' says Nancy Munro, a longtime seafood industry observer who spent six years on the advisory panel to the North Pacific Fishery Management Council. Now we have to ask ourselves, 'Who gets the fish?"

The North Pacific Fishery Management Council sets allocations of all groundfish, except halibut, in the Gulf of Alaska and in the U.S. waters of the Bering Sea. Now before the council and volleying across every seaside barroom and gear group boardroom, heated debates focus on the multibillion-dollar question of who gets how much groundfish. Allocation Argument. This inshore/ offshore debate is the demon-child of the rapid growth in the groundfish fishery. Because the industry's demand for the resource exceeds availability, fishermen and processors are fighting to protect their investments, their livelihoods, their futures.

Factory trawlers take an estimated 87 percent of all groundfish in the Bering Sea. Shore-based processors, which depend on smaller vessels to deliver to shore, took only 13 percent in 1990. Although the Gulf of Alaska shore plants processed 90 percent of that area's 1990 groundfish allocations, their managers fear that the overcapitalized factory trawler fleet, after swallowing catch limits in the Bering Sea, will roar into the Gulf and suck up more. The limit then would be reached a lot faster, and shore plants could spend the last few months of the year standing idle while the big ships move on to other fisheries.

Shore-based processors and fishermen are asking for preferential treatment over factory ships when allocations are made. The shoreside plants claim these advantages: hiring more locals, using more of the fish, supporting Alaskan communities and balancing activities for year-round operation.

Factory ships are crying foul. Ship owners say that the industry, which was encouraged to develop the groundfish fisheries and has invested heavily in doing so, now faces penalties for being successful.

The factory trawler fleet has invested - and continues to invest - too much, say shoresiders. Chris Blackburn, president of Alaska Groundfish Data Bank and...