and in more places. Another approach would be to promote the retrieval of debris observed while on the water; this has been done in the Gulf of Mexico through the offering of rewards in fishing tournaments.

Education is a critical tool, due to the poor intelligence and minimal control capabilities in this sector. Information about Annex V and compliance strategies can be distributed through existing channels, such as boating safety courses and the Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service (described in Chapter 6), and new activities, such as volunteer efforts by boating groups. International channels, such as racing associations, could be employed as well. Instructors can exploit group dynamics (i.e., peer pressure and the desire of individuals to conform with group behavior). In addition, it might be useful to train Coast Guard and customs officials and state marine police in techniques for persuading boaters to comply.

Selected regulatory and enforcement interventions might be effective. For example, boat racers must comply with racing rules, which could be amended to mandate Annex V compliance and disqualify violators. Such a measure would affect only a small segment of the boating community, however. To reach more boaters, state boating and marine officials might be authorized to assess flues for Annex V violations. Peer reporting could be a useful supplementary tool; the Coast Guard plans to publicize the telephone number for reporting violations to the National Response Center (1-800-424-8802).

Economic interventions include several that might promote recycling—offering boaters credits on marina fees for return of recyclables, holding deposits for return of garbage to shore, and charging extra for return of unsorted garbage. While such schemes might be complicated to implement, recycling merits promotion because it reduces amounts of garbage (which may be discharged overboard, legally or otherwise) and has become a standard component of integrated land-based waste management (see Chapter 5). Other options include imposing surcharges on disposable items sold at marina stores, and increasing and publicizing fines for Annex V violations.

The federal government has scrutinized the practices of U.S. commercial fisheries for decades, but the focus has been on ensuring the strength of biological stocks rather than reviewing garbage disposal practices. Some information is available on numbers of vessels and their general operations while at sea, but reports of garbage management practices are largely anecdotal (see sidebar). Until recently, neither vessels nor operators were regulated directly by the Coast Guard, and the fishing community argued strenuously against government oversight of vessel conditions and operations. It is only since 1989 that the Coast Guard has had congressional authority to oversee the safety of fishing vessel

construction and operation (National Research Council, 1991), so the agency has had little time to become familiar with the diverse operations of fishing fleets.

Fisheries employ a wide variety of gear and methods and therefore produce assorted wastes. But the vast majority of fishing vessels take short trips, so most should be able to refrain from discharging any garbage at sea. Exceptions to this rule include the vessels in some fleets that eviscerate or process the catch and discard the processing waste at sea. On some vessels, the combined fishing/ processing waste can far outweigh the garbage generated by the crew.

Despite the shortage of official intelligence, informal communications networks proliferate in this sector. Commercial fisheries typically require that a catch be landed at a fishing port rather than a general-purpose waterfront. A sense of community can develop among fishermen working out of local ports, and vessel operators using the same facility usually become well acquainted. This community often is extended, because fishing can be a family business. In addition, the harbor master or other individual acting as a port authority often is

familiar with the operations of boat owners. Thus, there are many informal sources and conduits of information among fishermen.

A potential official intelligence-gathering capability may be found in the complicated NMFS regulatory regime, which establishes fishing seasons and catch allocations designed to permit the maximum allowable harvest of the standing stock, now solely reserved for U.S.-based fisheries. The legal framework for fisheries management within the 200-nautical-mile-wide Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), the Fisheries Conservation and Management Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-265), was developed in the mid-1970s to control access to U.S. fishing stocks,