18 

 likely to represent a loss of income to fishermen. There are 

 several sets of factors involved. First, the results of 

 fisheries management program.s v;ill probably not show up for 

 years. This means that the costs of management (in terms of 

 decreased catches) will be borne by the men currently in the 

 fishery. The benefits will be gained by future generations of 

 fishermen. Second, even if the benefits of management were to 

 occur relatively quickly , the men currently in the fishery would 

 bear the costs, but they would not be the only ones to gain. In 

 the Maine lobster industry, for example, a substantial proportion 

 of the licenses are held by men who are not active fishermen, 

 but who would become active if the catches and potential revenues 

 to be gained from the fishery increased. Full time Maine fisher- 

 men are not likely to take kindly to management schemes which put 

 all the costs on them and benefit the hated "part-timer." I 

 believe a similar situation exists in most other major fisheries 

 in the country. 



Third, management of fisheries will clearly pass on 

 other kinds of costs to the people in the industry which reduces 

 the utility they receive from management. One of the most 

 important mangerial plans likely to be adopted under PI 94-265 is 

 limited entry. (This will solve many of the problems discussed 

 above but not all of them. It certainly cuts down on fishing 

 effort; and it solves the problem of inefficiency, since it removes 

 from the fishery boats whose marginal productivity is zero.) 



