3. If the number of units of fishing gear were reduced to two- 

 thirds the recent number, the additional income to boat owners 

 and fishermen would range from $700,000 to $2,500,000 

 annually, depending on the size and composition of the run. 



4. Any further increase in the numbers of units fishing or 

 decrease in the size of the runs will cause more severe 

 economic loss. 



5. Conservation regulations can be more precise with fewer units 

 of fishing gear and the runs will be subject to less risk of 

 overfishing. 



6. Broadly speaking, if legislation to limit the number of fisher- 

 men is enacted, it would seem likely to withstand challenge 

 based on the constitutional concepts of due process and 

 equal protection, for the following basic requirements would 

 be met: The legislature has proceeded upon some basis 

 in fact; it has made a rational determination that some benefit 

 to the general welfare of the people would be served by the 

 legislation; and, further, it has made a rational choice of 

 means to accomplish that benefit. Such legislation should 

 not, nor is it contemplated that it would, discriminate against 

 nonresidents of the state. As to specific provisions of such 

 legislation, the conclusion is drawn that a grandfather clause 

 would be valid, but other details have been examined cursorily 

 or not at all, since the detail of proposed legislation has not 

 been determined. 



Recommendations are made for specific steps to reduce the 

 number of units of fishing gear. 



VI 



