By David Benton
For the Journal

For nearly 30 years, the Magnuson-Stevens Act has worked well to regulate our nation's marine fisheries, those out to the 200-mile limit. An upcoming congressional review of the legislation presents an opportunity to strengthen its provisions to better conserve the nation's fish stocks, and Alaska has a lot at stake in the outcome.

Alaska's marine fisheries are a potent economic force, accounting for more than half the nation's seafood and 35,000 jobs across the state, including much needed jobs in remote communities. The gross value of the 2003 Alaska groundfish catch, after primary processing, was approximately $1.5 billion.

Offshore fisheries in the nation's Exclusive Economic Zone are managed by eight regional councils created by the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The act was passed by Congress in 1976 and named after its prime sponsors, the late Washington Sen. Warren Magnuson and Alaska's Sen. Ted Stevens.

The regional council idea decentralized the management of America's fisheries, putting decision-making in the hands of regional federal and state fishery managers, local residents, fishery participants and members of the public who know their resources and challenges the best - all backed by a team of scientific advisors.

Open to the public and with appropriate checks and balances, the regional council process allows local fishermen, residents of coastal communities and others to work alongside fishery managers and scientists in making decisions that affect them and their communities.

The regional council process has been a big success in fostering Alaska's fisheries. The underlying reason for this success is that, in Alaska, the council listens to what the scientists tell them about sustainability.

Fishermen here stay within scientifically set catch limits, and, as a result, the North Pacific has no over-fished stocks of groundfish. Based on scientific evidence, the council has taken significant steps to protect fish habitat. Earlier this year, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council tripled the amount of waters off Alaska closed to bottom trawling to 388,000 square miles, an area larger than the state of Texas. It was a move praised by environmentalists and the seafood industry alike.

That's why the Alaska model is often cited by groups such as the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy as a model for managing our nation's fisheries. And Alaska fishermen have discovered that a sustainable fishery is good for sustainable businesses and communities.

While all U.S. fisheries are managed by the same regional council process, the record elsewhere is admittedly mixed. Not all councils have confidence in their scientific advisors. Here is where the Magnuson-Stevens Act needs to be strengthened, by requiring that the councils set harvest levels at or below levels recommended by their scientists.

The act is up for periodic review by Congress this year, and a high-level congressional delegation, including Congressman Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland and Alaska's Congressman Don Young, were in Alaska in July to listen to our story. They heard from the Alaska seafood industry that the act should require all regional councils to follow their scientific advisors. With better integration of science into the regional decision-making process, improved conservation and improved fisheries will be the result.

They also heard that efforts to further incorporate ecosystem considerations into fisheries management can be strengthened by increased funding for research to give a better scientific understanding of our fish stocks and the marine ecosystem.

What we don't need is a change in the act's council process. Despite Alaska's successful model, some think the regional council system should be scrapped and fishery management placed in the hands of federal bureaucrats in Washington D.C. This would benefit no one.

As Alaska has shown, the best decisions are made when the people whose livelihoods and communities are most at stake are directly involved in the process and are backed up by the best available science.

Strengthening the role of science in fishery management would be a step in the right direction for Alaska business and the conservation of America's fish resources.

David Benton is former deputy commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and former chair of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council. He is now the executive director of the Marine Conservation Alliance that represents harvesters, processors and communities involved in Alaska's groundfish and shellfish fisheries.