36 



from fish processors and exporters there is a strong incentive to comply. 

 In Norway submission of cost and earnings records (for vessels over 40 feet 

 in length) is voluntary, but the vessel owners are paid 300 Norwegian Crowns 

 ($55 U.S.) for each usable record. This has resulted in a rate of response 

 of about 40 percent. 



It is not only in foreign nations that one finds collection of cost 

 and returns data for an atomistic industry. In the U.S. and Canada there 

 is a long history of public support for this activity in agriculture where 

 collection of data was intimately connected with farm management research 

 and extension programs of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Land 

 Grant Colleges. These programs have evolved over time into computerized 

 systems which furnish monthly summaries and comparative analyses for parti- 

 cipating farmers. 



Through these programs farmers benefitted from a built-in feedback of 

 summaries and analyses. Public agencies, especially the USDA and Congress, 

 have been able to make more informed decisions with respect to various agri- 

 cultural programs. One possible drawback is that such a system may not 

 provide a representative data base in that participation would probably be 

 biased toward larger, full-time fishermen. 



Therefore the Federal government may have to supplement such a program 

 by mail survey questionnaire, standardized to suit all vessel categories. 

 The U.S. has no built-in "carrots" in its fishery policy to secure cooperation. 

 To argue that it is necessary for fishery management purposes, or by making 

 it compulsory to submit the records, might for many be more of a dis- 

 incentive than an incentive. However, to pay the vessel owner for his time 

 and labor involved in filling in the questionnaire, would be an incentive 

 and would be appropriate. A $100 payment, for example, for each usable 

 record would be an inexpensive way to obtain cost and earnings data, and 



