Table 1. — Catch and Effort Data for the Peruvian 

 Anchoveta Fishery, 1960-1969. 



Source: (1), (2). (4): Years 1960-1968, from Schaefer (1970) 



Year 1968-1969, from Institute del Mar del 

 Peru, Resumen General dela Pesqueria, 

 Lima, 1970. 

 (3): From Sociedad Nacional de Pesqueria, unpublished 

 materials. 



in the Peruvian stock, since landings have 

 increased throughout the period. However, by 

 analyzing data for calendar years up to 1969 

 a different picture of the situation is observed. 

 During recent years annual landings have been 

 as follows: 



Year 

 1961 

 1962 



1963 

 1964 

 1965 

 1966 

 1967 

 1968 

 1969 



Million Metric 

 4.58 

 6.28 

 6.42 

 8.80 

 7.23 

 8.53 

 9.82 

 10.44 

 8.95 



Tons 



It is clear from these data that landings will 

 not continue to increase at the rates experienced 

 in the past, and that we can only expect to 

 see fluctuations in landings around the MSY, 

 if fishing effort is kept under control. 



The result given by equation (6) as to the 

 optimal level of fishing effort is less than 

 satisfactory. The value given by this equation, 

 and which is close to that obtained by Schaefer 

 (1970), is 23 million ton-trips. Observing the 

 data in Table 1 we can see that this value of 

 fishing effort has not been obtained up to now. 

 This result is very unrealistic since it says that 

 the Peruvian fishery has actually surpassed 

 the MSY but has not yet reached the optimum 



level of fishing effort. However, from the 

 discussion in the first part of this paper, it 

 seems that the measure of fishing effort used 

 is inadequate. 



In equation (6) we can see that the value of 

 0.7 for the Durbin-Watson statistics indicated 

 that there is a strong autocorrelation of the 

 error term. This level of autocorrelation is an 

 indication that important variables have been 

 omitted from the equation. Using the procedure 

 indicated above, several input variables will be 

 introduced in equation (6), in order to determine 

 their significance and the bias of the estimation 

 of fishing effort. Some of the regi'essions that 

 were run are the following: 



(7) C = 



(8) C 



+ 



0.7022 £• - 



(15.7) 



+ 



0.5225 E 



(2.7) 

 561. IT 



(5.1) 



+ 



(9) C 



= 0.499 E 



(4.2) 

 + 733.7 T 



(5.2) 



0.2167 E-^ «2 = 0.97 

 (-9.5) D-W = 1.8 

 541.0 T SEE = 382 



(5.2) 



0.1722 £72 /?2 = 0.98 



(-3.4) D-W =2.2 



0.0884 L SEE = 384 



(1.0) 



0.1556 E"' R' = 0.98 

 (-4.0) D-W = 2.8 

 903.0 V SEE = 325 

 (1.8) 



62 



