Protection and Indemnity Insurance 



Still other considerations tend to aiTect an owner's decision 

 to carry or not to carry protection emd indemnity insurance. Here, 

 protection is a means of minimizing probable losses arising from 

 his unlimited liability for personal mishaps to the crew rather 

 than for overcoming or solving his financial difficulties as may 

 be the case with hull insurance. "I insui'ed my vessel for protec- 

 tion and indemnity insurance after 1952 because I became afraid of 

 the rising tide of large claims" a New England owner remarks. An 

 owner from the Gulf Ar-ea explains: "Business good during those 

 years (1950-5^) and very few suits; now have to protect myself I" 

 The survey field supervisor for one area along the Gulf coast reports: 

 "I'Jhlle I was there, rumor among the operators had it that the first 

 suit of its kind, a $50*000 damage claim for back Injury against 

 one boat owner had been filed." Apprehension may partly explain 

 the constant rise of the proportion of vessels which are insured 

 for protection and indemnity in the Gulf Area. (Table A-1, Gvilf 

 Area in Appendix A) . 



5. Other reasons for insurance or noninsurance . 



No attempt will be made here to cover all possible factors 

 largely because the subject is a major study in itself. For our 

 purpose, other re?r;oas for insurance or noninsurance are conveniently 

 grouped under the following headings: the owner's background, the 

 owner's lack of knowledge and information, port of vessel registra- 

 tion, self -insurance, insurance practices, and the owner's image 

 of the insurance business. 



The ovmer's background . Vessels with officer personnel of 

 Cajiadlan, Scandinavian, origin in the New England Area, French, 

 Italian, and Anglo-Saxon origin in the Gulf Area and Yugoslav and 

 Portuguese in California showed a higher propensity to insure than 

 the sample percentage (table 5)- For vessels with officer personnel 

 of Italian origin in New England, American in the Gulf, and Anglo- 

 Saxon and American in California, the proportion is lower than the 

 sample percentage. It is likely that the relation is spurious and 

 perhaps due to a combination of factors already stated, such as age, 

 vessel size, type of ownership, family relationship, type of fishing 

 operations, etc. On the other hand, it should not be forgotten that 

 a large n\imber of vessel owners and crew may have a strong attachment 

 to their national heritage. Their cultural backgrounds are likely 

 to permeate their whole attitu(?£ toward the insurance problem, 

 including their decision to cariy or not to cariy insurance. 



35 



