Abstract:
The groundfish fisheries of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the US are valuable economically
and ecologically. The industries in the two locations have faced depleted stocks and increased
regulations by the New England and Pacific Fishery Management Councils over the years. Both
fisheries contain a varied array of demersal fish in separate ecosystem contexts, and similar gear
types are used in both locations. However, the community and geographical structures,
composition and interactions of the Fishery Management Councils, industry organization, and
activism create a different historical perspective with which to view management failures and
successes. In New England, factors such as a greater value of independence, a lack of
cooperation and coordination between stakeholders and scientists, and a longer history of fishery
decline have contributed to the current management climate. The Pacific groundfishery has
experienced a more recent illumination of overexploitation, but there is a longer history of
cooperation between states, fishermen, and scientists. In addition, differences in the Pacific
Fishery Management Council structure and process have created a distinct management picture.
The management measures enacted by the two councils since the implementation of the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act have differed, but neither has been
successful—as evidenced by overexploited stocks. Recently, both fisheries management plans
have undergone changes in response to the declines and subsequent lawsuits by stakeholder
groups. From comparing the characteristics of the two council systems, their methods, and their
participants, important lessons can be learned as fisheries management on both sides of the US
continues, out of necessity, to evolve.
