CALIFORNIA FISII AND GAME 161 



Explanations 



"Abundance," as used in the above predictions, means relative numbers of 

 siirdiues only. When we speak of an abundant supply we refer to more than 

 average, and when we mention "scarcity" we mean less than average. During a 

 season when we predict a scarcity of fish, boats may and probably will experience 

 good fishing for short periods. On the other hand, when we predict abundant fish 

 for a season, there will be time intervals in the season when the boats will have 

 difficulty in locating fish. 



Under present conditions of the industry, we are not able to predict the 

 actual tonnage to be expected for a given season. This is due to the fluctuating 

 effort expended by the canneries and the fishermen. In a season when fish are 

 scarce, the fi.shermen may exert greater effort and the total tonnage caught may 

 equal or exceed a season when fish are abundant. Predictions of total catch can 

 not be made unless an industry is stabilized and exerts the same amount of fishing 

 effort each year. 



These predictions were borne out to a remarkable degree of 

 accuracy. Tlie fishery is entering a period of comparative scarcity 

 of fish and it is the prudent thing to take good care of the present 

 supply of sardines. It was due to this warning that the Commission 

 cut down the amount of the reduction permits issued to each plant 

 by 1500 tons under that of last year. Sardine shore plants naturally 

 object to having their reduction activities curtailed while the float- 

 ing plants, operating offshore outside the State's jurisdiction, can 

 operate without any restrictions. 



The sardine industry of California was about the first of the fish- 

 ery industries to formulate a code of fair competition acceptable to 

 the code committee at Washington, D. C. The object of the N. R. A. is 

 not onl}' to eliminate unfair competition but also to conserve natural 

 resources, and, as members of the sardine industry believed the floating 

 reduction plants are unfair competitors and are a menace to the future 

 supply of sardines on our coast, they sought to include those plants 

 Avithin the scope of the code and thus bring them under the jurisdic- 

 tion of the State, the same as the shore plants. This was naturally 

 opposed at Washington by the floating reduction plant interests. 



The Division of Fish and Game aided the sardine canners in their 

 move to bring these plants under the same State control as the shore 

 plants by submitting a brief by N. B. Scofield for the final Washington 

 hearing on the sardine code pertaining to the effect of floating plants 

 on the sardine conservation program of the Division. This brief was 

 presented and defended at the Washington hearing on January 29 

 by John L. Farley, Executive Officer of the Division. The code has not 

 as yet been signed (March 5) although, to hurry its acceptance so as to 

 curb the immediate evils of price cutting, it was agreed to let the 

 matter of including the floating plants in the code go over for further 

 investigation and future action on the part of the executive committee 

 of the regional code. 



The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries has been of considerable 

 assistance to different fisheries groups which have been formulating 

 codes. From the records of the Fisheries Laboratory, charts were 

 prepared giving the daily sardine landings at Monterey and San Pedro, 

 to be used in showing fluctuations in the sardine supply and their 

 effect on the hours of labor of cannery employees. Similar informa- 

 tion for salmon, shad, striped bass and albacore for the region from 



