ECONOMICS OF THE FISHERIES 465 



fisheries in waves at different times in different parts of the State, and the 

 subdivision of the producing region by sounds and rivers, taken together, 

 make it difficult or impossible, with the present marketing organization, for 

 the State to furnish a continuous and dependable supply of fish even to its 

 own population. These complications multiply the number of dealers, hold 

 down the size of business that each dealer does, prevent the practice of 

 packaging and the manufacture of by-products, and generally increase the 

 costs of handling and distribution. These two problems of time and place 

 probably have more to do with the general backwardness of the fisheries of 

 the State than any other determinants. 



Our first recommendation therefore is that this particular problem, or 

 pair of problems, be made the subject of a special and thorough study. It 

 may be that the State or the University as such cannot solve it; but by 

 analyzing it thoroughly and presenting the facts they might be instrumental 

 in stimulating thought and interest in the subject on the part of business 

 people who could do something about it. 



The State fisheries may be actually losing ground in their home market 

 by reason of their failure to produce packaged edible portions, whether or 

 not frozen. Round fish are generally unsuitable as merchandising items for 

 chain stores, and chain stores have proved to be exceedingly effective 

 mechanisms for distribution of fish. In North Carolina they are not at all 

 dependent on State fisheries. If the State cannot supply what they need, 

 they can easily get it in Norfolk, Baltimore, or further north, as no doubt 

 they do. If therefore appears that the State has little option but to modern- 

 ize itself in this respect, or to see its markets continue to drift away to 

 out-of-State sources. 



The next subject of our observations and recommendations has to do 

 with the business strategy of the fisheries of the State. 



It appears to us that the sciences of biology and economics might effec- 

 tively unite (as they rarely do) to lay down for the consideration of the 

 industry a general strategy by means of which the State could make the 

 most of its opportunities. Our case histories of 20-odd species in the United 

 States (based on the long term) show clearly that different species of fish 

 and shellfish behave in very diverse economic patterns. In some of them 

 the market says clearly that it does not want any more, the price goes 

 down on increased production, or on unchanged or even smaller production. 

 In other cases, the market says clearly by rising prices even in the face of 

 rising production that it wants more. It has said this for shrimp and it seems 

 to say so for flounders, and, less emphatically, for mullet. Data were not 

 available for similar case histories (for the long term comparison) of some 

 other North Carolina species, but bay scallops (as distinguished from the 

 large sea scallops) are in strong demand at all times, and just now at very 



