FISHERIES PROSECUTED BY CALIFORNIA FISHERMEN IN 

 MEXICAN WATERS.^ 



By R. A. Coleman, Agent, U. S. Bureau of Fisheries. 



As there is no natural boundary on the Pacific coast marking off 

 the dividing line between the waters of the United States and Mexico, 

 and* since the conditions immediately north and south are almost 

 identical, it is not to be wondered at that fishermen have been accus- 

 tomed to ignore the existence of such a line. Records of occasional 

 visits are to be found as far back as it is possible to pursue the in- 

 quiry. As illustrating this fact quotations may be made from 

 appendixes to early issues of the Report of the Commissioner of 

 Fisheries, United States Commission of Fish and Fisheries. In an 

 appendix to the Report for 1888, J. W. Collins (1892), speaking of 

 the fisheries of San Diego County, says : 



The fishing grounds for bonito and barracuda can not be definitely described. In 

 general, however, they extend along the coast from north of San Diego to a long dis- 

 tance southward, off Mexico. Sometimes, when fish are not found in abundance near 

 the home port, the vessels go from 200 to 300 miles to the southward for fares * * * 

 [p. 28]. , _ _ 



The Chinese engaged in the junk fishery work chiefly among the islands and along 

 the coast of Mexico, where they gather abalones from the rocks. Abalones were 

 formerly abundant in the vicinity of San Diego, but the local supply hag been ex- 

 hausted. The fishing grounds principally resorted to by the Chinese, therefore, may 

 be said to be off the Mexican coast. * * * Bartoleme Bay [Turtle Bay], Lower 

 CaUfomia, is a favorite resort for the junk fishermen [p. 31]. 



In an appendix to the Report of the United States Commissioner 

 of Fisheries for 1893, William A. Wilcox (1895) says: 



Year by year the Chinese have been withdrawing from the business [of fishing], 

 deeming it too hazardous on account of the danger of seizure by the Mexican Govern- 

 ment for illegal fishing, and the possibility of not being permitted to reenter the United 

 States [p. 188]. 



References of similar purport from other sources might be multi- 

 plied, especially in regard to whaling, sealing, etc., which were at 

 one time prosecuted extensively along the Lower California coast. 

 In all statistical records, however, except those compiled since 1918, 

 almost no attempt has been made to distinguish between fish taken 

 south of the line and those taken in waters of the United States. 

 The catch has been credited without comment to the places where 

 landed. Naturally, since it is right at the border, San Diego has 

 received the largest proportion of these fish, which have been re- 

 ported as from that place. 



Until 1907 or 1908 the proportion of fish taken south of the line 

 was comparatively small, owing to their abundance and the ease 



. I Appendix XIV to the Report of the U. S. Conunissioner of Fisheries for 1922. B. F. Doc. No. 937. 

 22480°— 23 I 



