ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 49 



to carry out a 33V{i per cent reduction would provide ample oppor- 

 tunity to analyze its effects. In the more distant future further 

 reduction may then be indicated. 



We have considered carefully the possibility that restricted licenses 

 might tend to drift into the control of processors. It has been evident 

 throughout this study that the urgent need for capacity operation to 

 achieve reasonable operating costs in the canning operation has led 

 to a wide variety of open or concealed subsidy payments to fishermen. 

 The fact that such payments by one packer are matched by others and 

 are therefore largely self-defeating does not appear to have stopped 

 the practice. 



There is a strong possibility that the canners would again com- 

 pete for a larger share of a limited supply of salmon by purchasing 

 licenses in order to assure deliveries of fish. On the other hand, it 

 has been argued that much of the financial control by canners over 

 fishing vessels is a result of the dire financial situation of the fisheries. 

 If a gear reduction program raises incomes to more satisfactory levels, 

 it may be that fishermen would prefer to finance their own boats and 

 gear independently and that the problem of extension of control over 

 fishing by the processors will not arise. It is suggested that the legis- 

 lature direct further attention to this problem. It would be possible: 

 ( 1 ) to prohibit the ownership of licenses by packers; (2) to permit 

 retention of licenses presently held but to prohibit the acquisition of 

 additional ones; or (3) to permit packers to own licenses freely. 



Alternative Proposals 



It has been suggested that one alternative to gear reduction might 

 be a system of random rotation of fishing days. This would involve 

 dividing the fleets into segments with the starting dates and actual 

 fishing dates of each segment so determined that no single group 

 would be favored. The same division presumably would carry 

 through for all types of gear. It is argued that under this type of 

 arrangement the basic biological or management weaknesses of the 

 present situation could be remedied without having to deal with the 

 difficult economic and social problems involved in reduction of gear. 



Discussions with qualified experts in the management field sug- 

 gest that there would be administrative difficulties in handling a 

 program of this sort, although these are less serious than they might 

 appear. The proposal has not been analyzed in detail, however, since 

 it obviously fails completely to come to grips with the economic 



