insurers in California, on the average, were able to pay losses and 

 expenses and realize some gains. This over-all experience, however, 

 conceals the fact that in all three eireas some insurers sustained 

 heavy losses ajid ceased underwriting commercial fishing vessels; 

 others broke even, and a few realized some profits. 



Insurers underwriting vessels for protection and indemnity 

 insurance may have sustained heavy losses in New England and heavier 

 losses in California since, according to our best estimates, paid 

 losses and adjustment expenses during 1950-5^^- averaged from 89 to 9^ 

 percent of earned premiums in New England and from 15^ to 159 percent 

 in California. Loss experience in the Gulf Area was very satisfactory, 

 according to our sample findings and insurers' reports. 



It was shown that, willingly or otherwise, the majority of insurers 

 have sustainec" losses particularly for protection and indemnity coverage, 

 to the extent that their average loss experience was higher than their 

 break-even ratio during the period 1950-5^. 



h. The record of accidents . During the years 1950-5^> damages 

 to the hull of vessel were the most frequently occurring hull insur- 

 ance accidents in New England and especially in the Gulf, while the 

 most frequent accidents in California consisted of damages to machinery 

 and equipment. Of the damages to machinery and equipment, motor trouble 

 seems to be more frequent than damages to electrical equipnent, winches, 

 and fishing gear in all three areas. Navigation hazard, mechanical 

 failure, and weather were the three most frequent hazards, in that 

 order, in New England and Gulf Area, while in California; mechanical 

 failure was more frequent than navigation hazard and weather. A 

 multiple classification of accidents disclosed that "struck submerged 

 object" was the most frequently occurring cause in New England and 

 particularly in the Gulf Area, followed by "error of crew" and weather. 

 "Wear and tear" was the most frequently cited cause in California, 

 followed by "error of crew" and "struck subrtierged object." "Wear and 

 tear" was almost as important in New England as weather, while collision 

 with ajiother vessel was frequent in all three areas. 



In terms of amount of loss for hull insurance accidents, the adverse 

 loss experience of insurers in New England and the Gulf Area was due to 

 both frequency of petty claims of $500 or less and large claims of more 

 than $5^000. In California, losses were due to large claims to a greater 

 extent than to petty losses. Total loss of vessels contributed 39 per- 

 cent of all losses in New England, 50 percent in the Gulf, and 71 percent 

 in California, with the remaining portion shared by partial losses of 

 active wood and of steel vessels. Although fire hazard was the least 

 frequently occurring cause, it was the source of the largest average 

 amount of partial loss per claim in all three areas and contributed to 

 the largest portion of total losses in New England and the Gulf Area. 

 Weather in New England, navigation hazard in the Gulf, and mechanical 

 failure in California contributed the largest proportion of paid 

 partial losses. Navigation hazsurd accounted for the largest part of 

 total losses in California and was second to fire hazard in total 

 losses in New England. 



