obvious, but seldom mentioned, fact. As pointed 

 out by the authors, with hatchery fish ranging 

 from 30-80% of all fish caught from hatchery 

 streams and 20% of all Pacific salmon, no 

 management program could be successful with- 

 out explicit consideration of the hatcheries. In 

 this examination of 15 Oregon hatcheries pro- 

 duction functions were estimated which indicated 

 fixed input proportionality, constant returns 

 to size and substitution between the fixed 

 proportional input and water tempei'ature. 



In the study of entry and exit an irreversible 

 function was found to exist. Entry followed 

 good years, but exit did not follow bad years 

 to the same degree. Thus, successful "hatchery 

 years" would lead to entry and expanded fleet 

 size which could not be justified by lesser, even 

 average years. This is a further enforcement of 

 the argument for limited entry as the effective- 

 ness of hatcheries programs in raising fisher- 

 men's incomes will be mitigated unless the 

 countervailing tendency to overcapitalize is 

 restricted. Part of this restrictive element may 

 include a deliberate effort to increase opportunity 

 costs, as discussed previously. 



Keen is the only author here reflecting on a 

 historical system used to limit entry, the 

 Japanese experience. When reviewing this work 

 it is necessary to recall that the principal 

 objective of the Japanese program has always 

 been "to maintain the viability of the individual 

 enterprise." As this objective is somewhat akin 

 to "maintaining the family farm" it differs from 

 the objective held by most economists to be 

 desirable. If the Japanese program can be judged 

 successful in meeting its own objective, it may 

 still not be suitable to our purposes. Neverthe- 

 less, we can proceed to evaluate the components 

 of the program to determine its failure and 

 successes and to gain an appreciation of the 

 critical decisions which need to be made in a 

 management program as it evolves over time. 



The Japanese system began in 1946 when all 

 craft greater than 10 tons had to be licensed. It 

 evolved to include area restrictions and to be 

 divided into tonnage groupings, with different 

 restrictions for distant-water fisheries as these 

 developed. Its principal overall characteristic 

 was its pliability. When pressures for additional 

 development of certain fisheries mounted, ad- 



justments were made to allow for some of this 

 investment. In some instances, when certain 

 fishing operations were no longer viable, attrac- 

 tions to divert excess effort to other fisheries 

 were established. The principal thrust of these 

 regulations was to modify the tendency to over- 

 invest and dilute capital values. In some in- 

 stances, the growing value of fishing licenses 

 attest to the success of this program. 



Critical is the effect of these programs on the 

 development of technology. It can be shown that 

 in some cases technology took some strange 

 courses because of the regulations, somewhat 

 akin to our own Alaskan limit seiners. This and 

 other elements of an existing scheme could 

 prove a fruitful area of examination in the 

 future, now that substantial progress has been 

 made in theoretical studies. 



The final paper by Huq is so timely as to 

 appear to be at the unanimous request of the 

 other authors and participants in the workshop. 

 This is because the subject is labor mobility and 

 social transfer costs, with the .study reported on 

 being confined to three representative com- 

 munities in the Maine pot-lobster fishery. 



In this study the goal is to evaluate such 

 measures of labor mobility as age, level of 

 education, income levels, technical skills, other 

 employment, time in present occupation, invest- 

 ments in the fishery, attitudes toward fishing 

 as an occupation, and attitudes toward certain 

 elements of the harvesting process so that alter- 

 native forms of limited entiy would be evaluated. 

 Results indicate that immobility is substantial, 

 but that this may not be a problem as the 

 limitation may successfully be applied to capital 

 inputs with little reduction in the labor input 

 for much of the sample examined in the three 

 communities. For the remainder, some form of 

 an adjustment assistance program may be 

 necessary, particularly since a portion of the 

 labor force in the fishery is currently supple- 

 menting public assistance or social security 

 incomes with its lobstering activity. These 

 members of the labor force truly have limited 

 opportunities. Restricting their participation 

 would place a greater burden on other family 

 members, who may also be in the lobster fishery. 



A.A.S. 



105 



