January 1, 1954-December 31. 1955, on the other hand, did not increase 

 (reference is made here to the Biennial Report of the Montana Fish 

 and Game Commission for 1952-1953 and Tables 1 and 2 of this report). 

 Part of this increase in production and decrease in costs can be explained 

 by the overlap of four months in the two bienniums but, since very 

 little planting is done during January through April, most of the dif- 

 ference is a result of more efficient methods being adopted at the 

 various stations. 



A different approach to a cost and production analysis of the 

 Montana Hatchery System for the bienniuni 1954-1955 was adopted 

 since no consideration had been given in the past to fish on hand at 

 the hatcheries at the beginning and end of the year. A common fallacy 

 has been to compute the cost of production on a pounds-of-fish-planted 

 basis without consideration of inventory. Along this line, an explanation 

 of Tables 1 and 2 is in order. If production (columns 1 and 2) is 

 compared to fish planted (columns 3 and 4) it appears that more fish 

 were planted than were produced. The method used to calculate the 

 pounds of fish produced is similar to the inventory methods used by 

 many business firms. The formula is: Pounds of fish planted, plus 

 pounds of fish on hand at the end of the year, minus pounds of fish 

 on hand at the beginning of the year, minus pounds of fish received 

 from other stations. If a station had more fish on hand at the be.s?inn'ng 

 of the year( to be used for that year's planting crop) than it inventoried 

 at the end of the year (to be used for the subsequent year's planting), 

 it would show less fish produced than planted and in some cases may 

 actually show a minus figure concerning numbers of fish (Blucwater 

 1954 and 1955, McNeil 1954). 



It is impossible to adapt the above formula to a method of com- 

 puting the cost of fish produced on a numbers basis, because some 

 hatcheries hatch and start fish for other stations. Both stations cannot 

 be credited with producing the same fish; therefore, the cost per fish 

 was computed on the basis of fish planted. However, the discrepancy 

 resulting from this change in methods amounts to only a few few 

 mills per fish when computed on a total-produced, total-planted basis. 



Attention is called to the two different sets of averages concerning 

 the cost of fish produced (Tables 1 and 2). The first set of averages is 

 computed on a statewide basis whereas the second set excludes the 

 expenditures and productions of the McNeil, Ovando, Poison and 

 Somers stations. These hatcheries are not designed to produce catch- 

 able size fish. Production at McNeil, Ovando. Poison and Somers is 

 restricted to small fish for lake planting and when the production of 

 these hatcheries is computed on a jier-pound l>asis, the cost appears 

 excessive. In reality it is nominal since a iKnind of tlicsc small fish 

 numbers between 1,431 and 49.325 individuals (Table 3). 



Forty-nine percent more fish were planted in 1955 than in 1954 

 (Table 3) while the poundage of fish planted decreased eight percent 

 in 1955 and total expenditures of tlic llatcliery System decreased 23 

 percent (Tables 1 and 2). Tlie cost of producing fish in the Montana 



— 62 — 



