1255 
A particular stock of marine or andromous fish migrate between the 
waters of one State and those of another, or between territorial waters and 
the contiguous zone or high seas, and 
The catch enters into interstate or international commerce, and 
Sound biological evidence demonstrates that the stock has been signifi- 
cantly reduced or endangered by acts of man, and 
The State or States within whose waters these conditions exist have not 
taken effective remedial action.” (Rpt. p. 97.) 
CMC Comment.—Very few fish understand state, international, political or 
regulatory boundaries, whatever arrangements are made among political entities 
and management of species crossing such boundaries must be based on the popu- 
lations themselves. CMC views this particular recommendation with keen interest 
and expects it to be a sharp spur to the State of California to undertake proper 
and competent management of those marine resources under its jurisdiction. 
B. Recommendations Disapproved 
1. Recommendation that “fisheries management have as a major objective pro- 
duction of the largest net economic return consistent with the biological capabil- 
ities of the exploited stocks.” (Rpt. p. 92.) 
2. Recommendation that ‘voluntary steps be taken—and, if necessary, Gov- 
ernment action—to reduce excess fishing effort in order to make it possible for 
fishermen to improve their net economic return and thereby to rehabilitate the 
harvesting segment of the U.S. fishing industry.” (Rpt. p. 93.) 
CMC Comment.in the management of a flow resource, such as fishery, the 
absolute minimum objective of management should be the protection of the 
resource against being so depleted that it is incapable of recovery when exploita- 
tion rate is decreased. In the case of most fisheries the socially and economically 
desirable level of fish population and average catch is above this level. 
Since most fisheries resources are not private property that would allow this 
level to be attained by the operation of the market system, it needs to be opera- 
tionally determined by constraints imposed by government. In most cases the 
appropriate constraint is the maximum sustainable physical yield. 
It is desirable in general to increase net economic return within the constraint 
of maximum sustainabie yield. In some cases, however, full employment or other 
social objectives may dictate some decreases in net economic return to attain 
such objectives. Increasing the net economic return involves creation of property 
rights in one form or another. It is important that this be done in a manner to 
increase, not decrease, the efficiency and capability of the fishing industry. 
3. Recommendation that ‘‘the United States seek agreement in ICNAF to 
collaborate with NEAFC in fixing a single annual overall catch limit for the cod 
and haddock fisheries of the North Atlantic, including the whole ICNAF area 
and Region 1 of the NHAFC area (Hast Greenland, Iceland, and the Northeast 
Arctic). This single annual overall catch jimit should be designed to maintain 
the maximum sustainable yield of the fishery and, in turn, should be divided into 
annual national catch quotas. The overall catch limit should be adjusted regularly 
to take account of such factors as year-class fluctuations of the stocks, recovery 
of the stocks due to conservation measures, and errors in setting prior limits. 
“Every participating nation should be authorized to transfer all or part of its 
quota to any other nation.”’ (Rpt. pp. 105, 106.) 
CMC Comment.—One thing that is demonstrated both by theory and by exper- 
ience, especially with the Antarctic whales, is that separate species and separate 
population units have to be considered separately if there is to be rational man- 
agement of the fishery to maintain the various populations in that condition 
where they will be capable of providing the maximum sustainable yield. Other- 
wise, if all are treated as a single pot of fish, the most valuable, or most readily 
available species or stocks will be badly overfished, while others remain under- 
fished. 
4. Statement that “the allocation of national catch quotas is not a problem 
of either biology economics, law or logic . . . .” (3 Panel Rpts., Marine Resources 
and Legal-Political Arrangements for Their Development, p. VIII—59. ) 
OCMC Comment.—It is doubtless true that other factors will need to be taken 
into account, but a rational solution cannot be determined by ignoring both 
biology and economics. For example, if the quota system is to maximize the 
economic yield, let alone take care of equity among nations, it will certainly be 
necessary to take into account the nature of the stock structure and migrations, 
the availability of fish from various stocks in relation to the running time from 
various ports. Much of this requires knowledge of the biological factors. 
