10 U. S. BUREAU OF FISHERIES 



The commission is fully aware of the care that must be used in 

 undertaking a task of this character. It has given careful consid- 

 eration to the determination of the minimum reduction consistent 

 with the perpetuation of the fishery, having in mind the least possible 

 harm to the industry. 



There has been, without restrictions, a decrease in the total catch 

 from the older areas. The banks south of Cape Ommaney yielded, in 

 1910, more than 50,000,000 pounds, whereas at present there are not 

 more than 21,000,000 taken. Since the amount of fishing that pro- 

 duced these totals is and has been too great for the banks in their 

 present state, this decrease must be taken into account, and the re- 

 strictions imposed must be sufficient to more than cover this decline 

 or it would be meaningless. 



This declining total yield is secured by means of an increasing 

 amount of gear. In other words, the intensity of the fishery has 

 become greater, and a constantly higher proportion of the stock is 

 taken. Six units of gear are set now for the same result that one 

 formerly yielded. This increase in the amount of gear and vessels 

 is not in the best interests of either the fishermen or the halibut, and 

 it is the greatest danger to which the fishery is subjected. The in- 

 creased i^roportion of the stock taken lowers the abundance of fish on 

 tlie banks progressively until a very minimum is produced, not 

 merely for the effort involved but in total. Therefore, if stability of 

 return from the fishery is sought, the intensity of the fishery should 

 not be continually increased. 



Without positive restriction, the investment in gear and vessels 

 already existent will face a decline in returns of fish in accord with 

 the decline in yield per set of a standard unit of gear, the " skate." 

 This yield reflects the abundance of hali])ut on the banks and its 

 changes; and a certain number of sets of such skates should, on 

 the average, take a definite proportion of the total stock on the 

 banlcs. So that, to maintain the present rate of removal or propor- 

 tion of the existing supply taken annually, the total catch allowed 

 from a given area must be diminished at a rate at least equal to 

 tlie rate of this decline in returns of the gear in present use. 



liut, knowing that the present proportion of the supply cap- 

 tured is too great a strain upon the species, what hope can be held 

 forth that the retention of that rate of removal would bring stability 

 or permanence to the yield? The proportion taken is already in 

 excess of the rate of replacement. We know that witli the total yield 

 as it is, this abundance, as measured by the yield per unit of gear, 

 is still declining. Is there anj^ ground for believing that this decline 

 would stop? 



Hopefulness lies in the fact that the rate of replacement varies 

 with the condition of the fishery. It is a well recognized biologi(-al 

 l:»\v tliat under a state of nature a maximum population brings 

 :il)out a decline in the rate of reproduction until replacement just 

 balances mortality. This is self-evident, since species can not go on 

 increasing indefinitely without overpopulating the world, which none 

 of them do. But where, from one cause or another, the maxinnmi 

 j>opulation is not present, the rate of reproduction is much higher 

 than the mortality and up to a certain point becomes increasingly 

 so. This has been observed in many organisms, langing from man 



