FISHERY BULLETIN: VOL. 75, NO.3 



TABLE 3. — Estimated earnings per operating unit by fishery with the present number of entry permits. 



Fishery 



Net return per entry Net return per entry 



permit holder with no permit holder with Total annual income 



Gross allowance for opportunity capital from all sources per 



return capital costs cost of 10% entry permit holder 



Purse seine: 



Southeastern 



Prince Wm Sound 



Cook Inlet 



Kodiak 



Chignik 



Peninsula-Aleutians 

 Drift gill net: 



Southeastern 



Prince Wm Sound 



Cook Inlet 



Peninsula-Aleutians 



Bristol Bay 

 Set gill net: 



Yakutat 



Prince Wm Sound 



Cook Inlet 



Kodiak 



Peninsula-Aleutians 



Bristol Bay 

 Power troll: 



Statewide 



6,820 



1,432 



-650 



4,873 



operating units have been estimated, it is possible 

 to compare these figures with similar data from 

 other sectors of the economy. This provides some 

 indication of the magnitude of cutbacks in fleet 

 size that may be necessary to achieve similar earn- 

 ings in the fisheries. 



Comparison With Wages 

 Earned in a Similar Industry 



As a minimum, the average rate of return 

 should be sufficient to cover all normal operating 

 expenses, labor costs besides those of the operator, 

 depreciation, and a minimum return on invest- 

 ment of about 10%. An amount less than this indi- 

 cates that the average return to the operator's 

 labor is actually zero or less than zero. As Table 3 

 shows, with the present number of operating 

 units, returns in the Cook Inlet and Kodiak set net 

 fisheries, the Cook Inlet purse seine fishery, and 

 the power troll fishery are not adequate. In these 

 four fisheries, returns under this assumption were 

 negative. 



It is reasonable to expect, however, that the 

 fisheries should provide some wage for the 

 operator's physical labor and ability to work with 

 mechanical equipment under hazardous working 

 conditions. The contract construction industry is 

 similar to the fisheries in this respect, as well as 

 the fact that work is highly seasonal and charac- 

 terized by long periods of unemployment. The 

 comparison used here assumes that a fisherman 

 should earn a wage equal to that of a worker in the 



contract construction industry during the time he 

 is actually fishing. 



The time spent in each fishery was derived by an 

 examination of the dates of fish landings. The 

 number of weeks shown in Table 3 represents the 

 typical maximum length of the season between 

 1969 and 1972. It is recognized that not all boats 

 fish every opening in a season, but these figures 

 also make no allowance for the time spent prepar- 

 ing vessels and gear, travelling to the fishing 

 grounds prior to the season, or time spent storing 

 and repairing gear at the close of the season. For 

 this reason the figures are probably somewhat 

 conservative. Prior to the construction boom 

 created by the Alaska pipeline, the 1973 average 

 weekly earnings of workers in the contract con- 

 struction industry in Alaska was $378 per week 

 (Anonymous 1973b). Table 4 shows the average 

 wage earned in the construction industry in a 

 period of time equal to the length of the fishing 

 season. This is compared with the number of 

 operating units that would provide an equal rate 

 of return to the fisherman; which can then be com- 

 pared to the number of operating units now 

 licensed. 



None of the large set net fisheries or the power 

 troll fishery are capable of earning a comparable 

 rate of return with even a 45% reduction of entry 

 permits. The southeast and peninsula drift gill net 

 fisheries would require some reduction and the 

 other drift gill net fisheries including Bristol Bay, 

 Cook Inlet, and Prince William Sound would re- 

 quire substantial reductions. The purse seine 



488 



