eg BB: ‘ 5 } | ‘ machinery have been beyond the capacity.of most neigh- bouring countries. On the North Pacific Coast, Canada and the United States have set a pattern of international co-operation in the joint control and development of their sea fisheries, once threatened with depletion. As their jointly conducted work broadens with the years, the results confirm that a workable international fisheries formula, has been found particularly adapted to the problems of this coast and effective in the rehabilitation and perpetuation of its highseas fisheries. ‘ This work is embraced in the functions of two joint commissions, the International Fisheries Commission, organ- ized for the regulation of the North Pacific halibut fisheries and now nearing the twentieth year of operation, and the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission, created more recently to rehabilitate and develop the sockeye salmon fishery of the Fraser River. International Fisheries Commission.—The North Pacific halibut fishery had its beginning late in the last century on grounds off Cape Flattery, Washington; by 1910, the fishery had pushed 600 miles north, and in 1913, it was carried across the Gulf of Alaska. The halibut is a fish of slow growth, and the result of overfishing was that by 1929, on the older grounds, six units of gear were required to equal the catch of one unit in the early days of the fishery; it became clear that throughout the North Pacific waters the halibut grounds were approaching deple- tion. Through these years, while Canadian and American fleets fished their respective inshore waters outside the three-mile limit, vessels of both nations fished side by side, and with the Americans extending their operations farther and farther northward and outnumbering the Canadians, friction began to develop. To add to the confusion, national regulations under which nationals of one country were permitted to use the ports of another were often poorly defined and changed frequently, and it is worthy of particular note that initial moves looking to some uni- formity came from the fishermen themselves. Through the first two decades of the century, international negotia- tions made little progress, but, in 1923, a convention was signed for the conservation of the halibut industry; incident- ally, this was the first treaty ever signed by Canada in her own name. This treaty provided for a three-month closed season each year (November 16 to February 15) and set up a commission of four members, two from each nation, to draft regulations for the preservation and development of the halibut fishing based on a study of the life history, characteristics, and habits of the halibut. Specifically, the objective was to arrest the decline of the fishery and restore the fishing grounds to the maximum of productive- ness. The early successful work of the commission resulted in the signing in 1937 of a new convention which remains in effect. [ 62 | This treaty, aimed at providing for “the preservation of the halibut fishery of the North Pacific and Bering Sea” provides for a closed season, from November 1 to February 15 each year. Under it, the International Fisheries Com- mission has power to suspend or change the closed season and to regulate the taking of halibut caught incidental to the taking of other species. The Treaty directs the Com- mission to continue its researches and to publish its results. The Commission is empowered: (a) To divide the Treaty waters into divisions. (b) To limit the catch from each division. (c) Control departure of vessels after dates that might result in exceeding catch limits. (d) Fix size and character of fishing appliances. (e) Regulate collection of statistics by areas and banks. (f) Close areas populated by immature halibut. The divisions set up by the Commission for regulating purposes are as follows: (1) South of Willipa Harbour, Washington. (2) Willipa Harbour to Cape Spencer, Alaska. (3) Cape Spencer to Aleutian Islands. (4) Bering Sea. The most important area in present conditions of fishing is Area 3. Area 2 is the section that suffered the most severe depletion in pre‘CCommission years. Areas 1 and 4 are less important. In Area 2, the catch limit has already been stepped-up, and for Area 3, the limit has been raised from 24,300,000 pounds (1932 to 1937) to 26,800,000 pounds (1942). The regulations of the Commission have not only been supported but have been supplemented voluntarily by the halibut fleet, who have been allocating the fishing among their members to ensure orderly marketing. This voluntary co-operation augurs well for the continued ‘success of the international Commission and for the future of the halibut fishery in the North Pacific. The fact that the members of the Commission serve without salary does not appear to have detracted from the earnestness of their effort, and the diligence with which they have pursued their objective. It has been estimated () that, under uncontrolled conditions, the catch of halibut in the North Pacific could not now exceed 40,000,000 pounds annually. As the.following table (Table [V)(2) will show, the catch has grown steadily from 44,487,000 pounds in 1932 to 54,665,000 pounds in 1945, which begins to approach the high figure of 63,254,000 pounds landed in 1915. (?) Dunlop and Bell in Pacific Fisherman Yearbook. (?) Pacific Fisherman Yearbook 1945.