12 MANAGEMENT OF HIGH SEAS FISHERIES 



reason to believe that the first concept is generally accepted there. 

 On the other hand, ^vhile Japan has indicated some acceptance of the 

 maximum sustained yield concept, the Japanese, as will be pointed 

 out below, take a considerably different view of the meaning of this 

 principle than does the United States or Canada. There is little 

 evidence to date that either the U.S.S.R. or Japan, or the United 

 States and Canada for that matter, are willing to substitute "maxi- 

 mum economic yield" for maximum sustainable yield. 



The above listing serves only to demonstrate the difficulty in 

 locating and defining common objectives for fishery management of 

 the North Pacific. Yet, only when these common objectives are 

 agreed upon can an intelligent program of fisheries management be 

 created for this area, and a treaty or treaties be prepared to carry out 

 such a program. 



Before endeavoring to suggest new lines of approach to the fishery 

 management problems of the northeastern Pacific, it is appropriate 

 to see what has been done in the past. As indicated above, treaty 

 regulations to date, in this area, have been concerned with halibut 

 and salmon. 



HISTORY OF THE NORTHEASTERN PACIFIC 

 HALIBUT FISHERY 



The United States and Canadian fishermen and fishing industry 

 have opposed the extension of Japanese fishing into the northeastern 

 Pacific for a number of reasons. In the first place, they have had the 

 northeastern Pacific fisheries to themselves since they were devel- 

 oped. In particular the halibut fishery in the northeastern Pacific 

 has been completely undisturbed by other nations. An attempt by a 

 British company to send a mothership with auxiliary fishing craft to 

 the Pacific to exploit the halibut in the Gulf of Alaska in the 30's 

 was thwarted by the Canadian and United States governments, after 

 much prodding by fishermen and industry, through several actions 

 including the closure of markets to halibut not taken in conformity 

 with Commission regulations. These actions, combined with direct 

 representations of Canada to the ''mother country," sufficed to dis- 

 courage the backers of that enterprise (Pacific Fisherman^ 1937). 



United States and Canadian control of the halibut fishery has been 

 carefully guarded in the past, and for a good reason. It was devel- 



