—Dietary habits of specific groups for whom 

 religious customs and differences in national origin 

 affect per capita consumption of fish 



—Price, availabihty, and relative quality of closely 

 substitutable products, of which meat and poultry 

 are much the most important 



—Tastes and preferences, including the relative 

 importance attached by consumers to shopping 

 convenience and ease of storage and preparation as 

 opposed to nutritive value or flavor of the fish 

 itself. 



1. Per Capita Income 



Overall direct consumption of fish in the 

 United States does not appear to be affected 

 significantly by changes in per capita income, but 

 this aggregate stability conceals wide differences in 

 the sensitivity of species to rising consumer in- 

 come. As would be expected, the strongest in- 

 fluence of income on demand for fish products 

 centers on: high-valued species with particularly 

 desirable flavor and texture; species that lend 

 themselves to relatively easy and convenient prepa- 

 ration, particularly those that can be sold in 

 packaged fillet and stick form; and shellfish. Fin 

 fish of lower quaUty, particularly those that are 

 not suitable for filleting and freezing, are likely to 

 show zero or even negative response to income 

 changes, as lower income consumers who take the 

 bulk of these fish shift to more desirable sea foods 

 and to meat and poultry with rising income. 



2. Population: Size and Ethnic Composition 



Population increase should have a nearly linear 

 effect on the demand for fish, with some modifica- 

 tion to reflect changes in the relative weight of 

 groups whose national origin or reUgious practices 

 create a special demand for fish products. 



This latter modification may have a slightly 

 negative effect on the demand for fish products in 

 the United States. Immigrants from countries 

 where large amounts of fish are consumed tend to 

 eat more sea food in this country as well, but this 

 influence dies away as succeeding generations drift 

 into more conventional American consumption 

 patterns. It is also possible that the newly author- 

 ized modification of dietary restrictions on Catho- 

 Ucs with respect to eating meat may influence the 



demand for fish products, but the direction of 

 change is not clear. Presumably, Friday purchases 

 of fish will be reduced, but this may well be offset 

 by increasing consumption on other days of the 

 week, not only among Catholics but among others 

 as well. Neither effect appears strong enough to 

 modify significantly the conclusion that aggregate 

 demand for fishery products as a whole would 

 follow closely changes in the aggregate size of the 

 population. 



3. Substitutes 



Over the next 10 to 15 years, the price and 

 availability of the principal substitutes for fish- 

 meat and poultry— are expected to be highly 

 favorable; this will act as a damper on the demand 

 for fish products. The most authoritative forecast 

 of prices of meat, poultry and other foods, 

 Landsberg et. al. (1963), points out that while the 

 recent technical revolution in poultry production 

 has largely run its course, some continued down- 

 ward movement in prices can be expected, and 

 there is no reason to anticipate a subsequent 

 increase. Similarly, they forecast a gradual bottom- 

 ing out of prices at lower levels for the majority of 

 U.S. red meat sources. For fish products consumed 

 directly, the "ceiling" imposed by the dominant 

 red meat and poultry segment of U.S. protein food 

 supplies will continue to be a fairly tight one for 

 the next two decades. This does not apply to fish 

 meal, however, since it is an important input for 

 the poultry, dairy, and meat industries. 



4. Tastes and Preferences 



The most striking change in the national market 

 for fish products has been the shift toward 

 freezing and packaging (a trend affecting many 

 other perishable foods). It is unlikely, however, 

 that these trends will affect the total demand for 

 fish appreciably; they represent essentially changes 

 in consumer preferences for processing and mar- 

 keting components of the final product, and their 

 impact on the demand for raw fish involves a 

 change in species composition (and perhaps in 

 quahty requirements) rather than a net addition to 

 consumer usage. 



On balance, then, it would appear logical to 

 assume that direct per capita consumption of 

 edible fish products would remain stable in the 



VII- 16 



