different fish stocks in different parts of the areas 

 in question.'" In time, as operating experience 

 builds up with the proposed single overall catch 

 limit and a single overall catch quota for each 

 nation participating in the fisheries, it may be 

 possible to shift to individual area regulation. 



In the meantime, excessive pressure on individual 

 fish populations may be relieved in a number of 

 ways: closed seasons of suitable length in certain 

 areas (excepting the small, immobile fleets of some 

 of the North Atlantic participants); advisory 

 quotas for individual areas; and possibly even the 

 adoption of a weighted system of quotas, with 

 smaller allowable catches from areas under heavy 

 pressure and larger allowables for areas in which 

 expansion of effort could be accommodated. 



To alleviate these difficulties and assure that 

 each nation will rationalize its fishing effort, it has 

 been proposed that ICNAF should (by negotia- 

 tion) directly allocate to each participating nation 

 the maximum amount of fishing effort that it may 

 devote to the fisheries in question, making certain 

 that the total amount of fishing effort thus 

 allocated is no more than required to maximize 

 net economic return from these fisheries. 



There are both practical and policy objections 

 to this alternative. The United Kingdom ICNAF 

 Commissioners well stated what many writers have 

 pointed out about the concept of maximum or 

 optimum net economic yield when applied to 

 fisheries involving several species, wide geographic 

 distribution of fishing effort and international 

 participation (27 nations in our case): 



The theoretical maximum economic yield will be 

 affected by changes in market prices and other 

 relevant factors which reduction in effort may be 

 expected to bring about and the variation between 

 countries of fishing methods, economic and social 

 conditions [producing different cost structures 

 and different market preferences], as well as 

 international trade in fish, would make it difficult 

 to determine on any objective basis at what level 

 of total fishing effort the maximum economic 

 yield would be obtained. There may in fact be no 

 single optimum economic level of effort for an 

 international fishery. ' ^ 



It is very doubtful, therefore, whether inter- 

 national agreement could be reached on the 

 appUcation of the principle of maximum net 

 economic yield to any specific situation. However, 

 unless the direct limitation of fishing effort is 

 based upon some such principle, it will not benefit 

 the participating nations, unless there is over- 

 fishing in the biological sense and it succeeds in 

 restoring the maximum sustainable yield. The 

 proposed overall catch limit and accompanying 

 national catch quotas will also maintain the 

 maximum sustainable yield, an objective all na- 

 tions profess. In addition, they will enable any 

 nation that wishes to do so to rationalize its own 

 effort to catch its quota so as to maximize its net 

 economic yield. 



From the biological point of view, too, the 

 proposed system may be preferable to the direct 

 limitation and allocation of fishing effort. If stocks 

 are more (or less) available to capture than usual, a 

 direct effort limit, unlike a catch Umit, would 

 result in the taking of too many (or too few) 

 fish.'* 



As a practical matter, also, it is impossible to 

 devise a workable program to restrict fishing effort 

 directly. Total fishing effort is a function of many 

 factors: the number of vessels employed; their 

 size, power and type of gear; the number of hours 

 spent in fishing; and the particular season and 

 grounds fished." Regulation in terms of one 

 factor only, for example limiting the number of 

 hours spent in fishing, could be nuUified by the 

 adjustment of one or more of the other factor, 

 such as curtailing the fishing time of the least 

 efficient units in the fleet or improving the gear 

 used. 



There are no internationally-accepted standard 

 units of "fishing effort" which combine all these 

 factors. Even if there were, constant adjustments 

 would be necessary to take account of new designs 

 and technological innovations in both vessels and 

 gear. Moreover, if aU other problems were solved, 

 it would be virtually impossible to enforce direct 

 limits on the amount of fishing. It might be 

 possible to check on the number of hours fished 

 by relatively small vessels making short trips to 

 fishing grounds near their home ports. The number 



75 



See, for example, id. at 7. 

 Id. at 9. 



77 



°Id. at 4. 

 Ibid 



VIII-62 



