»»: V f RAMI VVUKk K)R ( OMMl KC I \1 IKINSINt; 



economical amount tor their tislimg units. Ilic more lloxi- 

 bl> the quotas can be divided anil Ci)nibmed, the more 

 they will encourage this kind ot rationali/iition. And in 

 some of our most overcrowded fisheries, the initial quotas 

 will sometimes be uneconomically small, si) the opportu- 

 nity to combine them is imperative to improve economic 

 performance. 



Were transfers prohibited, a fisherman who wanted to 

 withdraw fri>m the fishery during the term of his licence 

 would not be able to do so without losing the value of his 

 (unlicensed) vessel and gear as well: this would impose 

 excessive hardship on those who become incapacitated 

 through old age or illness. Special rules could be invoked 

 to permit transfers to next of kin or partners, but this 

 would simply amount to a form of constrained transfera- 

 bility. 



Finally, prohibiting transfers is extremely difficult. 

 Experience has shown that restrictions can be circum- 

 vented through legal mam^euvers involving changes in 

 company shareholdings, leases, trusts and so on, which 

 simply raise the costs of effecting transfers. 



The only valid objection to licence transferability lies 

 in the threat of monopolization or concentration of 

 fishing rights. This should be dealt with by means of sim- 

 ple but strict rules that fix a limit to the number of privi- 

 leges that any person or company may hold an interest 

 in, as recommended later in this chapter. 



With this protection, and with a system of fees that 

 ensures that the public will receive the value of the 

 resources used in excess of a reasonable return to fisher- 

 men and vesselowners, transferability should be permit- 

 ted. Accordingly, I make the following recommenda- 

 tions: 



19. Subject to specific limits recommended below, all 

 limited-entry and quota licences should be freely 

 transferable from person to person. Quota licences 

 should be transferable in whole or in part and, for this 

 purpose, quotas should be denominated in units for 

 each species. 



20. Mariculture leases should be transferable only with 

 the consent of the Minister. 



Under current regulations most licences can be trans- 

 ferred with the licensed vessel, subject to the approval of 

 the minister, which is rarely withheld. My proposals 

 would make transfers simpler and more flexible, requir- 

 ing ministerial consent only in the case of mariculture 

 leases where the government needs the assurance that 

 transferees will be able to carry out the contracted man- 

 agement responsibilities. 



21. licence transfers should be required to be reported to 

 the Department within 15 days. 



Ihis reporting requirement is necessary to enable the 

 Department to eflectively monitor the fisheries and 

 enforce the limits on licence holdings. 



Coinbiniii^ and Dividing Licences 



Eadier m tins chapter I recommend that licences be 

 specific to species, to defined areas and, m limited-entry 

 fisheries, to gear sectors as well. This does not imply that 

 the number of licences a licensee may hold should be 

 restricted, apart from certain general limits on the total 

 holdings of individual licensees proposed below. Indeed, 

 several advantages can result from licensees and their 

 vessels engaging in more than one fishery. Employing 

 vessels, equipment and crews in a variety of complemen- 

 tary fisheries presents opportunities for substantial econ- 

 omies in capital, insurance and other fixed costs as well 

 as longer employment for fishermen. Moreover, holders 

 of limited-entry licences, by combining licences to fish 

 two or more species, in two or more areas, or with a 

 second gear, can spread their opportunities. In conjunc- 

 tion with the vessel replacement rules, this will have the 

 beneficial effect of reducing the number of vessels in the 

 fleets. I therefore recommend that — 



22. Licensees should not be restricted in acquiring 

 licences to fish or using their vessels to fish more than 

 one species, area or gear. However, transfers of lim- 

 ited-entry licences should be subject to vessel replace- 

 ment controls (described in Chapter 9). 



Within a particular limited-entry fishery, holders of 

 combination licences that authorize using more than one 

 gear or fishing in more than one area should not be per- 

 mitted to separate them; to do so would allow additional 

 vessels to enter the fleets. Thus — 



23. Holders of licences for more than one gear type or 

 area on the same designated vessel in the same 

 limited-entry fishery should be prohibited from sepa- 

 rately transferring one without the other. Beyond this, 

 restrictions against "splitting" licences should be abol- 

 ished. 



This restriction will apply mainly to combination 

 licences authorizing troll and gillnet gear in the salmon 

 fishery. Separating licences for separate fisheries need not 

 be restricted because this will not add to the licensed 

 capacity in either. And in the case of quota fisheries, 

 transfers of quota will not threaten to increase vessel 

 capacity in any event. 



Limits on Licence Holdings 



In the interest of maintaining a vigorous and competi- 

 tive fishing industry, undue concentration or monopoliza- 

 tion of fishing pnvileges should be forestalled. Provisions 

 to limit the licence holdings of individual persons or cor- 

 porations may be particularly desirable in the face of a 



