Are Our Fishery Resources Being Properly 

 Developed and Managed? 



By J. L. Kask 



Director of Investigations, Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission 



La Jolla, Calif. 



The assignment I have been given at this session is to ask 

 the question : "Are our fishery resources being properly devel- 

 oped and managed?" I am assuming that the question is 

 being asked of the three countries meeting together today. 

 From this general question, I would like to develop four specific 

 questions to pose to our third and final speaker. Two of my 

 questions will be about resource development and two about 

 resource management. Management and development to- 

 gether, in my definition, add up to resource administration. 



By way of background to my first question, I would like to 

 review the following thoughts. 



I think it is pretty generally conceded that world fisheries 

 have made more progress and have developed faster in the last 

 15 years than in all the rest of this ancient industry's long 

 history. Technological advances in floating equipment, in 

 methods of fish detection and capture, in preservation, and 

 in distribution have made it easily possible to catch fish in 

 any waters of the world and to deliver the product to any 

 market in first-class condition. These developments have 

 ushered in distant-water fishing by many countries and in all 

 parts of the world ocean. 



The total world catch in 1950, just 15 years ago, according 

 to the FAO Fisheries Yearbook, was 20.8 million metric tons. 

 The catch in 1963, according to the same authority, was 46.4 

 million metric tons, or more than twice as much. This is 

 an increase of more than seven percent per year. In 1963, 

 the fishermen of four countries caught nearly half of the total 

 world catch, but no North American country was included 

 among the four. In fact, 15 years ago, three of the four lead- 

 ing fishing countries of 1963 (the USSR, Mainland China and 

 Peru) were not considered important fishing countries at all. 

 So, revolutionary fishery developments are taking place. 



In 1950 (again according to FAO) Canada, the USA and 

 Mexico together caught 3.6 million metric tons of fishery 

 products. In 1963, the same three countries caught 4.0 mil- 

 lion metric tons, an increase of 0.4 million. An examination 

 of these catches reveals that most of this modest increase for 

 North America as a whole was made by Mexico, whose catch 

 had increased slowly but steadily from 68,000 metric tons in 

 1950 to 244,000 metric tons in 1963. During this same period, 

 Canada's catch varied from just above to just below one mil- 



lion metric tons, showing no positive increase, and the U.S. 

 catch varied similarly, according to the availability of indus- 

 trial fish, between 2.5 million and 3.0 million metric tons. 

 Mexico, during this period, retained her relative position in the 

 world picture but the USA was deposed from second place 

 to fifth and Canada from fourth to seventh. As Mexico seems 

 to have moved more in step with world developments, the 

 question I propose to ask will apply principally to Canada and 

 the USA. 



With this background then my first question is : Why, when 

 world fish production has more than doubled since 1950, have 

 North American fish producers barely held their own, and this 

 in spite of the fact that effective demand for fish products has 

 continued to increase? The combined US and Canadian pop- 

 ulations increased by 55 millions during this period. This 

 represents a lot more fish eaters ; and in 1 963 the US imported 

 more by a third (6.6 billion pounds) fishery products than 

 her total domestic production, and three times Canada's total 

 production. And as you have already heard, this isn't for 

 want of available resources. 



Now to lead up to my second question, which deals with 

 another phase of development. 



It is generally recognized by authorities in the field of nu- 

 trition that fish products are among the finest sources of animal 

 protein in existence. Fish muscle contains all the "essential" 

 amino acids required for complete nutrition, and body building. 

 Fish liver oils contain needed fat-soluble vitamins and muscle 

 fats are polyunsaturated and thus contain additional thera- 

 peutic qualities that are important in these days of mass hyper- 

 tension. Besides all this, sea food is highly prized for its flavor. 

 A good sea food restaurant draws its clients from tens and 

 even hundreds of miles and to get a seat at a good fish eating 

 establishment requires both luck and patience. Fish also rates 

 among the most economical of good animal proteins, and its 

 relatively low price has remained surprisingly constant. Ac- 

 cording to the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, the average 

 price paid to fishermen for all fish products has remained be- 

 tween 7 and 8 cents per pound, since the end of World War II. 



Despite all of these obvious advantages, the average annual 

 per capita consumption of sea food has remained for all post- 

 war years a little above 10 lbs. in the USA, and a little more 



