RATIONALIZING THE SALMON AND ROE-HERRING FISHERIES 101 



Ownership 



The ownership of the salmon fleet is widely dispersed. 

 The larger processing companies maintain fleets of their 

 own; other companies involved in fishing own several 

 vessels each; but most of the fleet is owned by individual 

 vesselowners. 



When limited-entry licensing was introduced into the 

 salmon fishery in 1969, processing companies that 

 comprised the membership of the British Columbia Fish- 

 eries Association owned 13.2 percent of all salmon ves- 

 sels. The companies were advised by the Minister that 

 they would not be permitted to exceed this prof)ortion 

 and, as the total number of licensed vessels was reduced, 

 they would have to reduce their fleet in proportion. 

 Through sales of vessels and the pyramiding of smaller 

 vessels into larger seine vessels in the years that followed, 

 the number and proportion of vessels owned by proces- 

 sors declined, and in 1981 was slightly more than 1 1 per- 

 cent of the number of licensed salmon vessels. 



These numbers refer only to vessels wholly owned by 

 processing companies; they do not include vessels in 

 which processors have a partial equity or other financial 

 interest such as a mortgage. From the point of view of 

 public policy, the important issue is the extent to which 

 such arrangements are used to "tie" vesselowners and 

 thereby lessen the competition for fish. Significantly, in 

 recent years, vesselowners appear to have become less 

 dependent on processing companies for financial sup- 

 port, and the companies have preferred to withdraw from 

 financial commitments to fishermen, so that the control 

 of the fleet by processors has almost certainly declined. 

 This year, the largest company, British Columbia Packers 

 Limited, began to divest itself of some of its fleet (see 

 Chapter 12), and it appears that the trend toward dimin- 

 ishing control of the fleet by processors is continuing. 



THE ROE-HERRING FISHERY 



Figure 9-3 illustrates the history of wide fluctuations in 

 roe-herring harvests and shows the recent trends in 

 landed value. As indicated in that figure, earnings in the 

 roe-herring fisher>' have been extremely volatile. In the 

 record year of 1979 when total landed value reached $125 

 million, gillnet vessels averaged gross earnings of $50 

 thousand and .seine vessels about $268 thousand, but as 

 in the salmon fishery, a wide range exists around these 

 averages. The "herring bonanza" of the 1970s was associ- 

 ated with strong markets for roe in Japan. In 1980, a 

 weak market, compounded by a fishermen's strike, 

 caused landed values to decline to $24 million. Landings 

 were considerably higher in 1981 and 1982, but prices 

 have stabilized at lower levels. In 1981 the landed value 

 was $33 million and a preliminary estimate places the 

 value of 1982 landings at $29 million. 



Figure 9-3 Landings and landed value of herring since 

 1972 



1972 197.^ 



1974 197? 



I'rn 1979 



1980 



Sources: Fisheries Slalistics of British Columbia . Department of Fish- 

 eries and Oceans. Vancouver, various years. 



EVOLUTION OF THE LICENCE SYSTTEM 



The salmon and roe-herring licence systems were the 

 earliest of the limited-entry licences introduced and are 

 particularly complicated. This section sketches their his- 

 torical development and present structure. 



Sainton Liceasing 



The pioneenng scheme for the salmon fisher)' was the 

 Davis Plan, which was announced in 1968 as — 



Measures to increase the earning power of 

 British Columbia salmon fishermen and to 

 permit more efiective management of the 

 salmon resource by controlling the entry of 

 fishing vessels into the fishery. . . } 



Background This program's evolution since it was 

 introduced is described in other publications, and so will 

 be summarized only bnefly here.^ 



The first step was an attempt to freeze the fleet. All 

 vessels that had recorded landings of 10 thousand pounds 

 of pink or chum salmon or the equivalent in other salmon 

 species in either of the two preceding fishing seasons were 

 declared eligible for "A" licences (referred to here as 

 "ordinar>'" salmon licences). These licences were applied 

 to the vessel, they were transferable with the vessel, and 

 the licensed vessel could be replaced. Vessels that had 

 recorded salmon landings of less than the qualifying 

 amount were awarded "B" licences at a reduced fee; 

 these vessels could not be replaced (and are therefore 

 referred to here as "temporary" licences). No new 

 licences were to be issued. 



