DFOraly

09078952

A FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT OF THE

COMMERCIAL HARVESTING OF ICELAND SCALLOP ON THE ST. PIERRE BANK

SH 380.62 C3 A57 49

iiisbaks

ARFEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL HARVESTING OF ICELAND SCALLOP ON THE ST. PIERRE BANK

WORK REPORT

SUBMITTED TO: Dr. LANITA CARTER FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND

BY:

SCOTT LANTLE WORK TERM I

APRIL 16, 1990 125 Pennywell Road, St. John's, NF A1C 2L3

Dr. Lanita Carter, Faculty of Business Administration, Memorial University of Newfoundland.

Dear Dr. Carter: I am pleased to submit this work report as required for completion of my first work term. My proposal has remained basically the same. As you will notice the table of contents has been changed slightly. Some topics are presented in a different order to improve presentation and headings have been added in some sections to better clarify certain aspects. The scope of the report, however, has remained in tact. Through completing this report I have learned a great deal about the scallop fishery. As well, aspects of report preparation and writing I have studied became much clearer through practice. This research has been challenging, enjoyable and a worthwhile learning experience. I look forward to your comments and suggestions for improvement. Yours truly,

Scott Antle. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ii LIST OF FIGURES iv ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION 1 Purpose 1 Background Information 1 Scope 2 Methodology 2 Limitations 3 Significance of the Report 3 OVERVIEW OF THE ST. PIERRE BANK SCALLOP FISHERY 5 History of the Fishery 5 Resource Availability 8 Sea Scallop 8 Iceland Scallop 9 1985 report findings 10 SCALLOP MARKET ASSESSMENT 13 Consumer Markets 13 Market Threats 14 Market Opportunities 14 Processing Operations 15 Processing Potential 16 ANALYSIS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SCALLOP FISHERY 18 Area of Operation 18 Landing And Catch Rates 19 Cost of Operations 19 Operating Revenues 21 Net Revenues 23 Breakeven Analysis 23 Future Projections 28 Supplementary Fishery 28 Full-Time Fishery 29 RECOMMENDATIONS 31 CONCLUSIONS 32 WORKS CITED 35 APPENDICES 36 Appendix I: Glossary Appendix II: Iceland Scallop Distribution Appendix Distribution of age groups of sea and iceland scallop on the St. Pierre Bank. Appendix IV: Map of scallop beds Appendix V: Description of vessels Appendix VI: Area of operation Appendix VII: Summary of scallop landings Appendix VIII: Detailed vessel logs Appendix IX: Work report proposal. LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1: Landings from St. Pierre and Georges Banks 6 from 1951 - 1983. Figure 2: Average selected costs for 38' - 44' vessels in 22 division 3Ps. Figure 3: Net operating revenues for 1989 scallop fishing 24 experiment. Figure 4: Estimated net revenue from scallop fishing. 25 Figure 5: Breakeven model. 27 Figure 6: Breakeven analysis. 27 V

ABSTRACT

Secondary sources were consulted in order to present a history of the St. Pierre Bank scallop fishery. Sea scallop resources on the Bank are fully utilized but the Iceland scallop resource is underutilized. The Iceland scallop resource was found to be abundant and stable enough to support commercial activity. In September 1989, NIFDA initiated a project, involving two fishermen and a processor, to experimentally harvest Iceland scallop on the St. Pierre Bank. This project was desirable in light of declining cod stocks in NAFO sub-division 3Ps, and the abundance and under utilization of the Iceland scallop resource. Fen Bungay, President of G&F Seafoods. and Michael Handrigan, Marketing Manager of the Fishing Industry Advisory Board were interviewed to obtain information on the markets for Iceland scallop. It was determined that the main market for Iceland scallop is in the food service industry in the United States. Mr. Bungay confirmed that he has arranged buyers for the 1990 fishing season and will be able to sell all production possible at the Grand Bank plant. The two vessels involved in the experiment, the Kealy Agnes and the Beulah & Patricia, fished from September 18 to December 2, 1989 completing a total of 23 fishing days each during that period. The Kealy Agnes landed 570 lbs. of scallop meats and 41,550 lbs. of round scallop with an average catch rate of approximately 135 lbs. per tow. The Beulah & Patricia landed 542 vi lbs. of scallop meats and 18,300 lbs. of round scallop with an average catch rate of approximately 96 lbs. per tow. Calculation of operating revenues for the two vessels revealed $1,312.00 operating profit for the Kealy Agnes and a $580.93 operating loss for the Beulah & Patricia. It was concluded that the St. Pierre Bank could sustain a supplementary fishery at present. It was noticed that the Kealy Agnes, a newer vessel, was significantly more successful than the Beulah & Patricia leading to the conclusion that newer more stable vessels would be preferable for this fishery. Projections for a full year of operation for a "typical vessel" on the basis of the three month experiment yielded a net loss of $5,115.53. Breakeven landings for a full season were calculated to be 213,160 lbs. per year or 2,665 lbs. per day. It was found that a price of 0.351 per pound would be needed to breakeven assuming the catch rate of the Kealy Agnes for a full season. The intent of these findings are not meant to be a definite statement for the future of this fishery. The costs presented here were based on two vessels only for the most part and other situations may vary greatly from these. As well, different vessel size and stability, experience in the fishery, and type of operation may affect the conclusions made here. Thus it is hoped that fishermen will compare the costs, vessels, gear etc. presented here to their own in determining the viability of this fishery in each particular situation. vii

Considering the large number of assumptions made here it is evident that further research would be desirable to better assess the future viability of this fishery. It is recommended that a vessel should be observed for a full season and also a survey should be done to determine the number of fishermen who will be entering the fishery in the future. Upon completion of this research a more definite statement may be made on the long term feasibility of a full-time Iceland scallop fishery on the St. Pierre Bank. 1

INTRODUCTION

Purpose To assess the economic feasibility of commercially harvesting Iceland scallop on the St. Pierre Bank.

Background Information The St. Pierre Bank is a westward extension of the shelf extending off the Avalon and Burin peninsulas commonly called the Grand Banks. Scallop beds are located throughout the St. Pierre Bank containing both Sea and Iceland scallops. The Sea scallop is the most widely sought after by commercial fishermen. This resource has been commercially harvested since 1953. The Sea scallop resource is presently fully utilized by Maritimes-based vessels. Presently, the Iceland scallop resource on the St. Pierre Bank is underutilized but has been getting increased attention with the depletion of other fish stocks (mainly cod) in the area. Attempts are now being made to utilize the Iceland scallop resource and make its harvesting a viable operation for Newfoundland fishermen. For example, the Canada/Newfoundland Inshore Fisheries Development Agreement (NIFDA) provided assistance to two fishermen and a processor to take part in an experimental Iceland scallop fishery on the St. Pierre Bank in 1989. NIFDA is a $60 million sub-agreement funded jointly by the Federal and Provincial governments under the Economic Regional Development Agreement. The sub-agreement provides funding in 2 three main areas; harvesting, processing and resource development (Department, 1988).

Scope In order to assess the economic feasibility of harvesting Iceland scallop on the St. Pierre Bank, two projects funded by NIFDA, were extensively studied. To supplement those findings previous studies on Iceland scallop on the St. Pierre Bank were referred to in order to give an accurate picture of the potential for that area and the resource. Revenues, costs, break even points and future projections are extensively covered in the analysis of the experimental scallop fishery as well as comments on vessels and equipment and areas of operation. The processing of Iceland scallop is addressed, but with much less detail than the harvesting. The developments in the processing area in terms of manual and mechanical methods could constitute an entire report in itself. Thus due to time constraints and in order to give adequate coverage of harvesting the processing section is limited to a discussion of quality and feasibility in the processors opinion.

Methodology Secondary sources include literature on the Iceland scallop, previous reports on the St. Pierre Bank and Iceland scallops, and vessel logs provided by the fishermen funded through NIFDA. 3

Primary sources include personal (or telephone) interviews with the two fishermen and the processor who participated in the experimental fishery and an employee of the Department of Fisheries Marketing Branch. Discussions with NIFDA employees provided familiarity with the topic as well as useful insight and information.

Limitations

Due to the lack of attention paid to Iceland scallops in the past a vast amount of time is needed to adequately prepare a complete assessment of an Iceland scallop Fishery. Therefore, only one side of the fishery, namely harvesting, is dealt with in adequate depth. Another report dealing with the processing aspect would be desirable in the future to complete this analysis. The analysis is based mostly on two vessels thus requiring generalizations and assumptions to be made. Therefore, the report should serve as a basis for comparison to each fisherman's own individual situation. Certain financial information, regarding the two participating fishermen, was withheld due to confidentiality. Where possible attempts were made to substitute average figures obtained from the Fisheries and Oceans Economics Branch.

Significance Of The Report. This report will assist in determining if a commercial Iceland scallop fishery could be a viable operation in the long - 4 -

term. That determination is of great significance to NIFDA in deciding the amount of funding to be provided in the future to the St. Pierre Bank fishery and Iceland scallops in general. NIFDA may also utilize this report as a basis for further analysis of the scallop fishery in terms of processing, markets, etc. The report will also be beneficial to fisherman in determining the feasibility of entering the Iceland scallop fishery. 5

OVERVIEW OF THE ST. PIERRE BANK SCALLOP FISHERY

History Of The Fishery The St. Pierre Bank scallop fishery began in 1953 soon after the discovery there of a commercially viable scallop bed (bold typed words are defined in a glossary found in Appendix I). The vessels that began to fish the bank were Maritimes-based vessels which normally fished Georges Bank. The St. Pierre Bank fishery was attractive at that time in light of increasing scallop prices and decreased landings on Georges Bank. The landings from St. Pierre Bank exceeded 100 tonnes from the start in 1953 to 1956, with a decline following in the late 50's due to an increase in activity on the Georges Bank. The landings from the St. Pierre Bank have fluctuated greatly since the 50's with increases and decreases largely dependent on the activity on Georges Bank. Figure 1 shows the landings from St. Pierre and Georges Banks from 1951 to 1983. A unique characteristic of the St. Pierre Bank is that both Iceland and Sea scallops are found in the same beds. Since the beginning of the fishery there have been problems dealing with the separation of the two species for storage, management, processing, etc. At the outset of the fishery on St. Pierre Bank only 10% of the catch was Iceland with Sea scallop making up the remaining 90%. Recently, however, Iceland scallop have been contributing to as much as 80% of the total catch (Naidu, 1984A). Thus it is evident than an effective means of dealing with the two species catch is essential. - 6 -

Figure 1. Canadian scallop landings (tonnes meat) from Georges and St. Pierre Banks.

Year Georges Bank St. Pierre Bank 1951 91 1952 91 1953 136 106 1954 91 143 1955 136 153 1956 317 107 1957 771 70 1958 1179 2 1959 1950 1960 3401 9 1961 4580 1962 5669 1963 5941 40 1964 5986 343 1965 4434 14 1966 4878 1967 5019 164 1968 4822 9 1969 4318 83 1970 4097 127 1971 3908 27 1972 4161 29 1973 4223 36 1974 6137 1975 7414 1976 9726 1977 13089 1978 12189 23 1979 9207 1 1980 5221 35 1981 8013 1982 4306 717 1983 2839 594

(Naidu, 1984C) 7

One of the problems associated with the two species appearing in the same catch is the management of the resources. scallop resource management is controlled through a meat count regulation . Meat count refers to the number of scallop it takes to make up 1 pound of weight. The Iceland scallop is smaller than the Sea scallop thus a common meat count regulation is difficult to set. In the past, attempts were made to implement a common meat count at 40 meats per pound. This method led to little exploitation of Iceland scallop as most were below this regulation size. In 1985 the meat count regulation was lifted for St. Pierre Bank in order to encourage exploitation of the Iceland scallop. Another problem with the two species catch is the difference in shelf lives. Iceland scallop have a shelf life of less than 10 days where Sea scallops can be kept as long as 12 days. Thus if Iceland scallop are mixed with the Sea scallop a 12 day holding period will cause the Iceland portion of the catch to spoil.

A third problem is that Iceland scallop shucking is much more labour intensive than that for Sea scallop. This is due to Iceland scallop being smaller and having a particular curvature that makes inserting the shucking knife difficult. With more time being spent shucking, fishing time and total catch is reduced. Despite the problems associated with Iceland scallops appearing in the catch it is felt they are very important to the St. Pierre Bank fishery. As early as 82 (Naidu, 1983B) it was 8

suggested that the Sea scallop resource would be depleted and emphasis should be turned to the Iceland scallop. The need to utilize this resource has gained acceptance over the past several years and it is generally accepted that the future of the St. Pierre Bank fishery is dependent on the Iceland scallop. Many attempts have been made to develop an Iceland scallop fishery in Newfoundland. Two problems remain after surveys, studies and experiments are completed: the willingness to initiate the fishery and confirmation of economic viability. The processors are not willing to set up without an established fleet and the fishermen are not willing to begin harvesting before a processor is established.

Resource Availability Sea Scallop The Sea scallop, also called Giant scallop (Placopecten magellanicus), are found in the northwest Atlantic from the Gulf of St. Lawrence to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina. St. Pierre Bank is near northern limit if Sea scallop distribution and thus population is largely restricted to shallow areas of the bank less than 30 fathoms in depth. Only 13% of the St. Pierre Bank is less than 30 fathoms deep thus Sea scallop occurrence is limited (Naidu, 1984C). The recruitment (the number of scallop born each year) of Sea scallops on St. Pierre Bank is highly variable. This can be attributed to the areas dependence on recruitment from outside "parent beds". Since recruitment is from outside, the retainment 9 mechanism is mainly based on water circulation. Naidu and Anderson reported in 1984 (Naidu, 1984B) that waters over St. Pierre Bank are highly variable, influenced by three different water currents. Due to these variable waters recruitment in turn varies from year to year. As a result of the irregular recruitment, abundance of Sea scallop stock changes greatly from year to year and therefore the resource cannot be expected to support a stable fishery in the long-term. Landings of Sea scallop on St. Pierre Bank have varied greatly in the past and are expected to continue in that pattern. Fishermen have utilized the Sea scallop resource for many years but only on an opportunistic basis when stocks have decreased elsewhere. The Sea scallop resource is not expected to support any activity above that at present due to the recruitment irregularities.

Iceland Scallop The Iceland scallop (Chlamys islandica) is found in substantial quantities on St. Pierre Bank, in the Strait of Belle Isle and along the Labrador Coast. On St. Pierre Bank Iceland scallop are distributed in depths of 25 to 100 fathoms, with best catches being found at 40 to 50 fathoms. The distribution of Iceland scallop as found in a survey conducted in 1983 (Naidu, 1983A) is given in Appendix II. It is generally accepted that distribution of age groups of scallops gives evidence to the regularity of their recruitment. During experimental scallop fishing, age of scallops is - 10 - determined by counting the rings on the shell. A ring is made each year when the scallops' growth is slowed during the winter. Naidu and Anderson (Naidu, 1984B) reported that Iceland scallop showed an approximately normal distribution of age groups as opposed to the irregular distribution of Sea scallop age groups on the St. Pierre Bank. Appendix III compares the distribution of age groups of the two species as was found in a 1983 survey (Naidu, 1983A). The regularity of successful year-classes suggests relative stability of recruitment of Iceland scallop on the St. Pierre Bank. It is reported that this regularity will maintain Iceland scallop abundance to such a level that commercial fishing of the resource is sustainable in the long-term.

1985 Report Findings An offshore scallop fishing experiment was conducted on the St. Pierre Bank in 1985 and a report on that experiment was published in January of 1987 (Barney, 1987). Little has been documented on the St. Pierre Bank since then, thus this report will update and expand on the findings of that report. In that light some important results of the 1985 report will be outlined in this section to serve as a basis for comparison in this analysis. Care must be taken in utilizing the results of the previous report as certain details of the fishery operation were different in 1985 and 1989. There were differences in vessel size and gear type, as well the vessels were surveying in 1985 while the vessels were commercially fishing in 1989. Due to those discrepancies only the general results will be utilized for comparison. In 1985 the two vessels chartered discovered two large beds

of Iceland scallop. The first bed found extended from 40° 41' north to 40 ° 45' north latitude and from 57 ° 10' west to 57 ° 20' west longitude which represents the northwestern corner of St. Pierre Bank. The second bed is found on the northeastern side of the bank from 46 ° 35' to 46 ° 43' north latitude and from 56 ° 45' west to 56 ° 53' west longitude. These beds are mapped out in Appendix IV. The northwest bed was found to contain relatively old scallops, many empty shells and the meats obtained there were watery, stringy and small. The northeast bed contained better quality scallops which were cleaner, larger and firmer. The _ northeast bed showed a lower catch ratio, 3.1 bushels per tow, as compared to 9.3 bushels per tow on the northwest bank. It was concluded that the northeast bed was more commercially feasible on account of better yield and quality, despite the higher catch rate on the Northwest bank. It was concluded that a vessel 50 to 60 feet in length would need a skipper and 3 crew members to handle the harvesting activities. It was stated that onboard shucking would require an additional four crew members or an automated shucking device, the latter being preferred if cost were to be reduced. On the basis of the two vessels chartered it was concluded that for a 150 day season a net revenue of approximately $48,500 can be realized (Barney, 1987). This figure can not be directly compared to that of the experiment in 1989 due to smaller - 12 - vessels, lower overhead and the landing of a round as opposed to a shucked product. However, it does illustrate that there is some potential for scallop fishing on the St. Pierre Bank. - 13 -

SCALLOP MARKET ASSESSMENT

Consumer Markets Canadian scallop are sold almost exclusively in North America; only 2% of the landings find their way overseas. 80% of the Canadian scallop landings are exported to the U.S. This U.S. import market, however, has shown decline in the past few years due to increased U.S. landings. Despite this decline Canada has remained relatively stable while cuts have been taken mostly by Japan, Panama and Iceland. Presently Canada accounts for 60% of all U.S. scallop imports (Handrigan, 1990) Within the North American scope of the Canadian scallop market Iceland scallop in particular fit into the lower to medium market niche. This slightly lower classification of Iceland scallop as opposed to the Sea scallop is attributed to its smaller size and off-white colour. As a result market price for Iceland scallop is lower than the Sea scallop. Although prices vary between the two scallop species they usually follow the same trends. Sea scallop is the trend setter for the entire scallop market thus Iceland scallop fall in line, increasing and decreasing in price usually at $1.00 to $1.50 per pound below the Sea scallop. Price of Iceland scallop is also affected by the abundance of similar small scallop such as the Calico, in the market place. The lower to medium market niche of Iceland scallop often requires the product to be further processed for use in chowder, soups or as a breaded and battered product. Due to this characteristic most Iceland scallop would be sold in the - 14 -

food service industry. It is unlikely that Iceland scallop would be sold in the supermarket for home use as consumers consider it a high priced food item in comparison to something such as chicken. As a result a high quality product such as the Sea scallop is more suited to that market.

Market Threats Two recent developments pose threats to the market for Canadian scallop. The first is farmed scallop from Japan. With use of aquaculture techniques Japan has grown to be the world's largest scallop producer. These farmed scallop are expected to dominate the global supply of scallop in the future. Japan produces Japanese scallop which is comparable to the Sea scallop and thus Iceland scallop should not be directly affected by this _ development except for the filter down of pricing trends from Sea scallop to other species. The second and probably more pressing threat to Iceland scallop markets is the introduction of imitation scallop made from surimi. With Iceland scallop being in the lower market niche imitation scallop could easily be substituted.

Market Opportunities The market for Iceland scallop open to processors would be mainly in the food service industry. Recent trends of dual career families have maintained a strong food service industry. Continued strength in this industry will provide solid markets for Iceland scallop. - 15 -

Sea scallop prices have fluctuated between $5.00 and $6.00 U.S. for the past 4 years. Michael Handrigan stated the price for scallop will most likely continue to fluctuate due to short term market conditions. However, the price should remain in the $5.00 to $6.00 range (Handrigan, 1990). This long term stability of Sea scallop price filters down to give a Iceland scallop price in the range of $3.50 to $4.50. Market opportunities exist for Iceland scallop in the food service industry. Recent trends would suggest the price offered in this market to be relatively stable. The key to maintaining this market is consistent quality. Michael Handrigan, Marketing Information Manager of the Fishing Industry Advisory Board stated that the key to overcoming these market threats is quality (Handrigan, 1990). Consistent good quality Iceland scallop should guarantee consistent sales. High quality, he added, will not increase price but it will help maintain stable markets for the product.

Processing Operations Until 1989 no Newfoundland based vessels had commercially harvested scallop on the St. Pierre Bank and therefore there were no scallop processors in the area. For the 1989 scallop project a processor in Grand Bank set up to handle the scallop the two vessels would be harvesting. The processor, G&F Seafoods was assisted by NIFDA to set up for scallop processing and also by the Canada Employment Centre, Marystown, to hire 30 workers to shuck scallops. - 16 -

With 1989 being the processor's first time processing scallop there were some problems which can be easily resolved in the second year of operation. For example shucking tables were at uncomfortable heights for the shuckers. This problem is presently being addressed by Mr. Bungay, the owner of G&F Seafoods. Also scallop were very small and hard to shuck. Mr. Bungay stated in an interview January 31, 1990 (Bungay, 1990) he hopes that two things will be possible in the future to solve the shucking problems. Firstly the enforcement of a maximum meat count regulation requiring fishermen to land a slightly larger scallop. Secondly he is hoping to implement a means of relaxing the muscle of the scallop. Hot water, steam and ultralights are some methods presently used to relax the muscle of scallop to increase shucking rates.

Processing Potential During last year's three month season G&F Seafoods decreased its production costs from $5.50 per pound at the beginning of the season to $4.10 per pound at the end of the season. These improvements can be attributed to faster shucking rates as the workers became more experienced. With the improvements discussed earlier and with the workers shucking full-time, shucking rates should decrease significantly in 1990 leading to a further fall in production costs. With costs falling while prices are rising, approaching $4.00, it is conceivable that G&F Seafoods Ltd. will be able to turn a profit in 1990. A number of conditions must be met for this statement to prove correct but it certainly appears - 17 -

that the St. Pierre Bank fishery will provide sufficient production for G&F Seafoods Ltd. Mr. Bungay feels confident that the plant will be profitable in years to come if enough harvesting is done to maintain a consistent supply of scallop. Mr. Bungay feels there is an excellent market for Iceland scallop produced at Grand Bank. He has contacted several buyers in the U.S. that have stated they will purchase in 1990. These buyers have stated they will purchase up to 7 million pounds of scallop from Grand Bank. Thus all production possible at the G & F Seafoods plant could be sold to the U.S. Eight to ten full-time scallop boats are needed to allow G & F Seafoods to operate full time. At capacity expected in 1990 the plant should be able to produce approximately 40,000 pounds of scallop meat per day. Mr. Bungay stated that at this rate of - production assuming scallop prices remain in the range of $3.50 to $4.00 he plans to pay $0.25 per pound to fishermen for round scallop. Mr. Bungay stated the $0.25 per pound offered in the 1989 season most likely will not be increased despite increasing prices. He reasoned, maintaining a price of $0.25 per pound will allow him to make a profit in the second year of operation. - 18 -

ANALYSIS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SCALLOP FISHERY Two vessels were assisted by NIFDA from September 18 to November 2 of 1989 to harvest Iceland scallop on the St. Pierre Bank; the Kealy Agnes and the Beulah & Patricia. These two vessels were lured to the scallop fishery in light of poor cod stocks in the area. The fishermen involved hoped to use scallop fishing to supplement their normal operations and possibly turn to the fishery full-time in the future should it seem profitable. Appendix V gives a description of the two vessels and how they were equipped to harvest scallop.

Area Of Operation The vessels in the 1989 experiment were directed to potentially abundant areas of the bank. The 1985 experiment (Barney, 1986) was used to give the fishermen an idea of where to fish scallops on the St. Pierre Bank. Appendix VI is a map of where the two vessels operated. As can be observed by comparing the maps in appendices IV and VI the Kealy Agnes and the Beulah & Patricia both fished on the two beds found in the 1985 experiment. The vessels logs contained in appendix VIII show that tows in the area of the beds specified by the 1985 experiment were successful. Thus this experiment proves, as did the 1985 experiment, the commercial potential of the two scallop beds outlined in appendix IV. - 19 -

Landing And Catch Rates The Kealy Agnes landed 570 lbs. of scallop meats and 41,550 lbs. of round scallop in 23 fishing days with an average catch rate of approximately 134.2 lbs. per tow. The Beulah & Patricia landed 542 lbs. of scallop meats and 18,300 lbs. of round scallop in 23 fishing days with an average catch rate of approximately 95.5 lbs. per tow. Appendix VII gives a summary of the scallop landings for the Kealy Agnes and the Beulah & Patricia. More detailed logs of the vessels landings can be found in Appendix VIII.

Costs Of Operation In order to determine the operating costs of scallop fishing on the St. Pierre Bank the two fishermen involved in the 1989 experiment were interviewed (Perrot, 1990 & Pitcher, 1990). The costs reported by these two fishermen will be used to determine average costs that any other fishermen could expect if they were to enter the fishery. These costs will be used to assess the future of fishing on the St. Pierre Bank. Care must be taken however in utilizing these costs; vessel size, engine power, number of crew members, age and condition of vessel, experience in scallop fishing, etc. may make these costs differ from fisherman to fisherman. The intent is for fishermen to compare these costs to what they could expect and determine if this fishery would be feasible in each particular situation. The fishermen questioned indicated that there were five major operating costs; fuel, provisions, gear repairs, gear acquisitions and labour. - 20 -

Calculation of both fishermen's fuel costs for the three month experiment revealed an approximate cost of $85.00 per day of fishing. Crew share for the Kealy Agnes was paid at 15% per person for 4 crew members. The Beulah & Patricia paid crew share at 20%, 18% and 2 x 14%. The costs of provisions and gear repairs for the purposes of this analysis will be determined more subjectively. Since exact costs of provisions were not available the fishermen were asked what their costs were; both stated an approximate cost of $40.00 per day. Gear repairs for Jacques Perrot amounted to $530.00 for three months and he expects that figure would probably double if he were to fish scallop for a full season. Winston Pitcher on the other hand had no repairs to his gear. He stated however, that he would expect with older gear in the year to come his costs will be in the area of $1,000.00 to $1,500.00. Due to a large difference in the costs of gear repairs by these two fishermen the 1988 Cost and Earnings Survey conducted by the Economics Branch of Department of Fisheries and Oceans was consulted (Department, 1989). The average cost reported for 35' to 44' vessels in NAFO Division 3Ps was $1,369.00; however, this figure is not calculated from vessels that use scallop gear. Considering this an average of $1,250.00 was used. The cost of gear acquisitions is taken from the 1988 Cost and Earnings Survey (Department, 1982). The average cost for vessels 35' - 44' in Division 3Ps is $880.00. To test the validity of this average the costs of this experiment were consulted. As can be seen in appendix V the total cost of an Alberton scallop drag is $4,427.30. With a life of approximately five years the cost - 21 - is $885.46 per annum. Thus the average used is applicable to this particular situation. In order to maintain confidentiality and also to give an accurate estimate of costs for vessels in this area fixed costs will be taken from the 1988 Cost and Earnings Survey. Figure 2 presents average annual fixed costs for vessels 35' to 44' in length in Division 3Ps. An additional fixed cost should be added in this case to allow for the cost of upgrading of the vessel for scallop fishing. The vessels involved in this experiment had the necessary vessel and deck changes made (See appendix V for detailed costs to equip a vessel for scallop fishing). The total cost of the upgrading is $26,438.00. This cost amortized over fifteen years would give an annual fixed cost of $1,762.00.

Operating Revenues Most of the scallop harvested during this project was sold to G&F Seafoods. Thus revenues will be calculated using prices offered by G&F Seafoods in 1989. G&F Seafoods offered $0.25 per pound for round scallop and $4.00 per pound for shucked scallop. Thus the revenues of the two vessels were as follows; the Kealy Agnes, (41,550 x $0.25) + (570 x $4.00) = $12,667.50 and the Beulah & Patricia (18,300 x $0.25) + (1,359 x $4.00) $10,011.00. Using these revenues and the operating costs discussed earlier, net operating revenues for each vessel were - 22 -

FIGURE 2

Average selected costs for 35' to 44' vessels in division 3PS. Insurance $ 722.00 Interest Due $ 741.00 Storage $ 28.00 Fees $ 374.00 Wharfage $ 15.00 Other $ 5.00 Repairs & Maintenance $1,838.00 Depreciation $3,705.00 - 23 - calculated. Figure 3 gives the net operating revenue of each vessel.

Net Revenues In order to assess the feasibility of full time scallop fishing an attempt will be made to calculate an expected net revenue for a full season given the catch rates, costs, etc. of the three month experiment. To give a more accurate picture of the potential of this fishery the performance of the Kealy Agnes, the more successful vessel, will be used when there is question which to utilize. A number of assumptions must be made in order to finally arrive at this expected revenue. The first assumption to be made is the number of fishing days each vessel would have per season. 80 days per season will be used as that is the average for vessels 35' to 44' in length in 3Ps (Department, 1989). Catch rate of the Kealy Agnes, 135 lbs. per tow, will be used along with an average of 15 tows per day to yield a daily catch of 2025 lbs. Finally we will assume a labour cost of 60% of fish sales. Figure 4 presents an estimate of net revenue for a vessel 35' to 44' in length for an entire season based on the three month fishing experiment which took place from September to November in 1989.

Breakeven Analysis A breakeven analysis will be used to determine the quantity of scallop needed to breakeven at various prices. The breakeven model assumes that all of the operating costs are dependent on

- 24 -

FIGURE 3 Net Operating revenues for the 1989 scallop fishing experiment For the period September 18 to December 2.

KEALY AGNES BEULAH & PATRICIA Revenue: $12,667.50 $10,011.00 Operating Costs: 1 Fuel 1,955.00 1,955.00 Provisions 920.00 920.00 Gear Repairs 0 530.00 Gear Acquisitions 880.00 880.00 Crew Share 2 7,600.50 10,591.93

Total Operating Cost 11,355.50 9,711.93

Net Operating Revenue $ 1,312.00 $ (580.93)

(1) Operating cost calculated using average figures assuming 23 fishing days per vessel. (2) Crew Share: Kealy Agnes 15% x 4 = 60% Beulah & Patricia 20% + 15% + (14% x 2) = 63% - 25 - FIGURE 4 Estimated net revenue from scallop fishing. REVENUE Fish Sales $40,500.00 $40,500.00 EXPENSES: Operating Costs: Fuel 6,800.00 Provisions 3,200.00 Gear Maintenance 1,250.00 Gear Acquisitions 880.00 Crew Share 24,300.00 TOTAL OPERATING $36,430.00 Fixed Costs: Insurance 722.00 Interest Due 741.00 Storage 28.00 Fees 374.00 Warfage 15.00 Repairs Maintenance 1,838.00 Depreciation 3,705.00 Vessel Upgrading 1,763.00 TOTAL FIXED $ 9,186.00 NET LOSS ($ 5,115.53) - 26 - days fished, with the exception of crew share, which is a function of quantity landed. The analysis assumes that crew share is 60% of total revenue and total days fished remain fixed at 80 days per season. Figure 5 illustrates the breakeven model to be used. The costs utilized in this analysis are taken from the estimated net revenue calculation, Figure 4. The breakeven analysis was completed for prices of $0.20/lb. to $0.50/lb. at $0.05 intervals, Figure 6. The price received by the two fishermen in this experiment was $0.25 per pound. Thus breakeven landings for them would be 213,160 lbs. or 2665 lbs. per day. The more successful of the two vessels, the Kealy Agnes, had landings of approximately 2013 lbs. per day which is 652 lbs. per day below the breakeven point. This low catch rate explains why the net revenue calculation, Figure 5, showed a net loss. It is worthwhile to note that the Kealy Agnes landed as much as 7,000 lbs. in one day, well over the breakeven point. Mr. Pitcher, the skipper of the Kealy Agnes, predicts he will be able to consistently land 5,000 lbs. per day during the summer of 1990 due to the experience he gained last year and better weather conditions (Pitcher, 1990). We can see from this analysis that with a small rise in price this fishery could be feasible. A rise in price to $0.35 per pound would allow fishermen to make a profit. A rise in price to 0.30e per pound could be profitable with an increase in landings of only 200 lbs. per day. These two situations look promising in light of increasing market prices for Iceland - 27 - FIGURE 5 Breakeven Model

(1) TR = TC (2) TR = P(Q) (3) TC = AbD + STR + F Where TR = Total Revenue TC = Total Cost P = Price Q = Quantity D = # Of - Days Fished Ab = Operating Costs Per Day Fished S = Crew F = Fixed Costs

NOTE: This model is similar to those used in other DFO reports (Department, 1984).

FIGURE 6 Breakeven Analysis

Given: AbD = 12,130 F = 9,186 S = 0.60 (TR)

DAILY PRICE Q (BREAKEVEN BREAKEVEN $/lb TR = TC LANDINGS,LBS 1 ) LANDINGS, LBS 1 0.20 0.20(Q) = 21,316 + 0.60(TR) 266,450 3331 0.25 2 0.25(Q) = 21,316 + 0.60(TR) 213,160 2665

0.30 0.30(Q) = 21,316 + 0.60(TR) 177,653 2220 0.35 0.35(Q) = 21,316 + 0.60(TR) 152,257 1903 0.40 0.40(Q) = 21,316 + 0.60(TR) 133,225 1665

0.45 0.45(Q) = 21,316 + 0.60(TR) 118,422 1480

0.50 0.50(Q) = 21,316 + 0.60(TR) 106,580 1332

(1) Rounded to the nearest pound. (2) Price offered by G&F Seafoods. - 28 - scallop and the possibility of higher landings in the summer months. Both fishermen interviewed felt their catch rate would be much higher in the summer due to better weather conditions. During the three month experiment, they stated that landings were doubled on a calm day in comparison to a day with winds of 25 miles per hour. Also more experience with scallop fishing may increase catch rates. Thus if landings are to increase in the summer and price is to rise a breakeven season could be possible.

Future Projections The two fishermen involved in the 1989 scallop fishing experiment stated that they will fish for scallop again in the 1990 season. The fishermen did not feel there was enough profit in the fishery to harvest scallop for an entire season but rather they intend to utilize scallop as a supplementary fishery. The fishermen also noted that there was much interest in the scallop fishery in the Burin Peninsula area. It looks as though others may enter this new fishery especially if they are funded through NIFDA. Ultimately the hope is that the fishery will be profitable and attract fishermen on their own accord. This may be possible if NIFDA funds projects such as the one in 1989 until the fishery gets underway and becomes profitable. The question remains, will this fishery be able to stand on its own.

Supplementary Fishery In terms of a supplementary fishery most of a vessel's fixed costs would be covered through normal operation and scallop - 29 - fishing would have to make a operating profit and contribute only a share to fixed costs. As can be seen in figure 4 one vessel made an operating profit. The Kealy Agnes made an operating profit whereas the Beulah & Patricia did not. This can be attributed to the Kealy Agnes being a newer boat and being able to fish in rougher water with more success due to greater stability. Vessel stability is of great importance in this fishery as nearshore vessels (35' to 64') are going offshore and often meet with rough weather. Thus it can be concluded that scallop fishing on the St. Pierre Bank can provide a supplementary fishery with more success possible for newer, more stable vessels.

Full-time Fishery A viable full time scallop fishery on the St. Pierre Bank would require some changes from the 1989 season. The catch rate of the Kealy Agnes and the Beulah & Patricia would not support a vessel for a full season. However, an expected increase in catch during summer months along with more experience in the area may increase the catch rates. Also the price received for scallop would not allow fishermen to break even this season if scallop were a full time fishery. In light of increasing prices G&F Seafoods may be able to increase their price. The introduction of more vessels in the area and thus more production for the Grand Bank plant may also increase price. A combination of increased catch and price could make the St. Pierre Bank scallop - 30 - fishery a full time operation. In order to make an accurate statement on the viability of a full time fishery a vessel must be observed for a full season. Many factors may alter the conclusions made here if a vessel were to fish scallop for a full season. It is accurate, however, to conclude that scallop fishing on St. Pierre Bank can be a good supplementary fishery. If the supplementary fishery continues and more vessels enter the scallop fishery some of the changes necessary for full time viability may take place. The supplementary fishery can be seen as the first step towards a full time scallop fishery on the St. Pierre Bank. - 31 -

RECOMMENDATIONS Since the calculations of revenues and profitability are based on a number of assumptions these results are not to be taken as a definitive statement on the profitability of harvesting scallop on the St. Pierre Bank. Thus a fisherman considering entry to this fishery should compare the costs, vessels, finances, etc. presented here to his own to determine the viability in his particular situation. In order to assess the possibility of scallop fishing becoming a full time fishery on the St. Pierre Bank further research is needed. The changes that will occur when fishing in summer as opposed to the fall are too numerous to consider and anticipate. Thus calculations of a full year of operations are bound to be somewhat in error. Fishing by a vessel for an entire season and a detailed analysis is needed. Research is also needed to determine the number of fishermen intending to enter the fishery. With costs of a full season's operations and an estimate of the number of vessels that will be operating an accurate assessment of a long term, full-time fishery would be possible. - 32 -

CONCLUSIONS It has become evident that utilization of the Iceland scallop resource is essential to the future of a full-time scallop fishery on the St. Pierre Bank. That fact along with declining cod stocks in Division 3Ps justified NIFDA to assist two fishermen and a processor to undertake a scallop fishing experiment on the St. Pierre Bank in 1989. In completing this analysis the question arose as to markets for the Iceland scallop. Through discussion with Micheal Handrigan (Handrigan, 1990) and Fen Bungay (Bungay, 1990) it was discovered that a market for Iceland scallop exists in the food service industry in the United States. There is a market demand for Iceland scallop and there are two fishermen and one processor involved in the fishery. Thus the question remaining is will the fishery be economically feasible. The purpose of this report is to address the feasibility of commercially harvesting Iceland scallop on the St. Pierre Bank. Firstly, the availability of the resource was considered. In 1985 a similar scallop fishing experiment found two commercially potential scallop beds. The experiment in 1989 fished in the same general area and found these beds to still be abundant in Iceland scallop. The average catch rates observed on these scallop beds were found to be 95.5 lbs. per tow for the Beulah & Patricia and 134.2

lbs. per tow for the Kealy Agnes. These catch rates were combined with average costs derived from the experiment to - 33 - calculate operating revenues of the experiment. The Kealy Agnes showed an operating revenue of $1,312.00 and the Beulah & Patricia showed an operating loss of $580.93. These results suggest that the St. Pierre Bank can support a supplementary scallop fishery, with more favorable results for newer more stable vessels such as the Kealy Agnes. Care must be taken however, in interpreting these results. Attempts were made to derive average costs for vessels approximately 40' in length but those costs may differ in each individual situation. Each fisherman should consider the possibility of realizing an operating revenue (i.e. a successful supplementary fishery) by comparing his situation to the ones presented in this analysis. Many assumptions had to be made in order to derive a net revenue for a full-time scallop fishery. The vessels had only 23 fishing days all of which were in the fall. As a result the use of the catch rates found may be in error; better weather in the summer and more scallop fishing experience may make a full season's operations differ from the estimate presented here. On the basis of the results of this experiment a net loss of $5,115.53 would be realized if scallop fishing was pursued for a full season. The breakeven point was found to be 213,160 lbs. per season or 2,665 lbs. per day at the price received ($0.25). The breakeven analysis showed that at the catch rate of the Kealy Agnes, 135 lbs. per tow, the price would have to increase to $0.35 per pound in order for the vessel to breakeven over a full season. On the basis of these results the present situation of - 34 - the St. Pierre Bank Iceland scallop fishery will not support full-time operations. However, with an increase in supplementary operations, catch rates may increase due to more experienced fishermen and production costs may fall due to more production by G&F Seafoods Ltd. With these changes a full time fishery may be viable in the future. Thus a supplementary Iceland scallop fishery on the St. Pierre Bank may be seen as a first step towards a full-time fishery. - 35 -

WORKS CITED (1) Barney, W.G. Carberry, 1987. Offshore Scallop Fishing Experiment St. Pierre Bank, 1985. Cat. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquatic Sciences, 1548: vi + 43p. (2) Bungay, F., 1990. President - G&F Seafoods Ltd., Personal Interview. (3) Department of Fisheries & Oceans, 1984. Report on the Middle Distance Longline Fishing Project Using the Norwegian Longliner "M.V. Keltic" 1983-1984, Fisheries Development Branch, Newfoundland Region. (4) Department of Fisheries & Oceans, February 1988. Canada/Newfoundland Inshore Fisheries Development Agreement.

( 5 ) Department of Fisheries & Oceans, 1989. Costs and earnings of selected inshore and nearshore fishing enterprises in the Newfoundland Region, 1988. Economic and commercial Analysis Report 36:105p. (6) Handrigan, Micheal, 1990. Market Information Manager - Fishing Industry Advisory Board, Personal Interview.

(7) Naidu, K.S., 1984A. Offshore Fleet Directs Fishing Effort on the Iceland Scallop. CAFSAC Res. Doc. 85/20. (8) Naidu, K.S., Anderson, J.T., 1984B. Aspects Of Scallop Recruitment On St. Pierre Bank In Relation To Oceanography And Implications For Resource Management. CAFSAC Res. Doc. 84/69. (9) Naidu, K.S., Cahill, F.M., 1984C. Status and Assessment of St. Pierre Bank Scallop Stocks 1982-83. CAFSAC Res. Doc. 84/69. (10) Naidu, K.S., F.M. Cahill and D.B. Lewis, 1983A. Scallop Survey in NAFO Division 3PS. CAFSAC Res. Doc. 83/04.

(11) Naidu, K.S., D.B. Lewis and F.M. Cahill, 1983B. St. Pierre Bank: An Offshore Scallop Buffer Zone. CAFSAC Res. Doc. 83/16. (12) Perrot, Jacques, 1990. Fisherman, Personal Interview. (13) Pitcher, Winston, 1990. Fisherman, Personal Interview. APPENDIX I GLOSSARY

(1) Scallop bed - an area where scallop are in large enough abundance to support commercial fishing.

(2) Meat count regulation - A regulation to control the size of scallops harvested to protect them from growth overfishing. Meat count is administered as a maximum number of scallop to make up one pound in weight. of removing the shell and guts from the (3) Shucking - Process scallop. When shucked the only portion of the scallop remaining is the meat, which is the only portion eaten in North America.

(4) Recruitment - The number of scallop born each year. Unit of volume equal to 2,150.42 cubic inches. (5) Bushel - (6) Round scallop - The scallop before shucking has taken place. (7) Fishing Day - Day in which tows were made and scallop were caught. (8) NAFO Division 3Ps - Sub-Division of Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization Convention areas. 3PS in particular refers to the area from Burgeo to Cape St. Mary's which includes the entire St. Pierre Bank.

(9) Nearshore Vessels - Vessels 35' to 64' in length. APPENDIX II 58" 57 0 0 5

O 0

0 0

0

47. 0

A A 0 a A A A 0 0 A AA

O A 0 a 60 a A A A 0 0 0 $1. 0 a AU • A O 413 0 0

A A 'A A 0 SHIN MI WEIGHT ( lbs.) O - 0 A

- 1-49 A o - 50-99 A 100-149 • - 150-199 • - > 200 0 A 0

45°

Iceland Scallop Distribution APPENDIX III DISTRIBUTION OF AGE GROUPS OF SEA AND ICELAND SCALLOP ON ST. PIERRE BANK.

38 28 SEA SCALLOP ICELAND SCALLOP 26 24 22 28 18 16 14 12 18 8 6 4 2 IIMM 8 + I I 4 til l I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >le

AGE ( YEARS ) APPENDIX IV SCALLOP BEDS

NEW fOUNDIANO

NORTHWEST BED

7 NORTHEAST BED

GREAT MIOLIEUN 47* 001'

UTILE MICOELON a ST. PiERRE

57°00 APPENDIX V DESCRIPTION OF VESSELS INVOLVED IN THE 1989 SCALLOP EXPERIMENT AND HOW THEY WERE EQUIPPED TO HARVEST SCALLOP

Kealy Agnes: Built in 1983; length 41'; powered by a 236 horse power G'M' diesel engine; navigation gear includes two radars and a loran-c; fish finding equipment includes one paper sounder and one color sounder. Gear used for scallop fishing listed in detail below.

Beulah & Built in 1967; length 44'; powered by a 165 horse Patricia: power perking diesel engine; navigation gear includes one radar and two loran-c; fish finding equipment includes one paper sounder and one color sounder; single side band and V.H.F. radios. Gear used for scallop fishing listed in detail below. DECK EQUIPMENT REQUIRED TO RIG A 55' TO 65' VESSEL FOR OFFSHORE SCALLOP FISHING

ITEMS: - DUMPING TABLE - 15' x 5' - IRON PLATE $ 3,500.00 - SHUCKING HOUSE - 16' x 8' x 4' $ 1,000.00 (12 pcs 3/4" PLYWOOD, 50 pcs 2" x 4") - SHUCKING BOX - 16'L x 15"H x 18"W $ 200.00 (MATERIAL 2" x 8") - SINGLE DRUM WINCH $10,000.00 (CAPACITY 300 FATHOMS 5/8" DIA. WIRE) - HYDRAULIC SYSTEM $ 5,000.00 (INCLUDING 35 GAL/MIN PUMP) - 300 FATHOMS 5/8" DIA. WIRE $ 1,700.00 - GALLOWS $ 1,000.00 - GALLOWS BLOCK 4" x 12" $ 750.00 - DECK BLOCKS, TWO $ 1,500.00 - SCALLOP RAKE STOP $ 300.00 - STAINLESS STEEL WASH BOX $ 1,000.00 - 6--2 1/2 GAL. PLASTIC BUCKETS $ 25.00 - 100 SCALLOP BAGS AND TIES $ 100.00 - 2 TIE TWISTERS $ 20.00 - 6 ONE BUSHEL PLASTIC FISH BASKETS $ 60.00 - 6 SHUCKING KNIVES $ 20.00 - KNOCK OUT BLOCK $ 85.00 - 2 KNOCK OUT HAMMER $ 40.00 - 6 KNOCK OUT KEYS $ 18.00 - 2 STAINLESS STEEL SCALLOP SCOOPS $ 120.00 $26,438.00 MATERIALS REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT A 18' ALBERTON OR MIRACLE DRAG

- 9 2' ALBERTON BUCKETS WITH DIGBY FEET $ 945.00 - 1 18' DRAG BAR $ 900.00 - 1 SET OF CHAINS AND SWIVELS $ 500.00 - 9 NETS (100.00 ea) $ 900.00 - 9 TAIL POLE RINGS (50.00 ea) $ 450.00 - 1 18' WOODEN TAIL POLE $ 100.00 - 18 1' x 1/2" CHAINS (2.50 ea) $ 45.00 - 72 5/8" D-SHACKLES (.80 ea) $ 57.60 - 18 3/8" D-SHACKLES (0.60 ea) $ 10.80 - 9 TAIL CHAINS (3.50 ea) $ 31.50 - 396 3/8" x 2" LINKS (.15 ea) $ 59.40 - ASSEMBLY $ 150.00 - SPARE PARTS (RINGS, RUBBERS, LINKERS) $ 278.00 $4,427.30 APPENDIX VI •-

SI APPENDIX VII SUMMARY OF SCALLOP LANDINGS

KEALY AGNES

TRIP # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

SEPT. SEPT. OCT. OCT. OCT. OCT. OCT. NOV. NOV. NOV. NOV. DATE 18-19 25-26 4-6 16-17 18-19 23-25 30-31 8-9 14-15 25 27-28 TOTALS

# OF TOWS 42 12 45 29 55 49 33 34 22 10 14 345

ROUND SCALLOP LANDED (LBS.) 0 0 0 5,550 12,000 9,000 5,500 7,500 1,700 100 200 41,550

SCALLOP MEATS LANDED (LBS.) 110 120 340 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 570 CATCH RATE* LBS./TOW 21.8 83.3 63.0 191.4 218.2 183.7 166.7 220.6 77.3 10 14.3 134.2

*IN ORDER TO CALCULATE CATCH RATE SCALLOP MEATS LANDED HAD TO BE CONVERTED BACK TO ROUND WEIGHT. ASSUMING A 12% YIELD RATE FROM SHUCKING. THIS WAS CALCULATED USING THIS FORMULA: MEAT WEIGHT S., 0.12 = ROUND WEIGHT. 12% YIELD WAS USED AS THAT WAS THE RATE FOUND AT THE GRAND BANK PLANT. SUMMARY OF SCALLOP LANDINGS

BEULAH & PATRICIA TRIP # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DATE OCT.5-7 OCT.16-19 OCT.20 OCT.24-25 OCT.31-NOV.1 NOV.6-8 DEC.2 TOTALS # OF TOWS 43 55 16 23 36 57 9 239 ROUND SCALLOP LANDED (LBS.) 3160 4720 1110 2110 2760 3640 800 18,300 SCALLOP MEATS LANDED (LBS.) 274 268 542 CATCH RATE* LBS./TOW 73.5 127.3 209.0 91.7 76.7 63.9 88.9 95.5

*IN ORDER TO CALCULATE CATCH RATE SCALLOP MEATS LANDED HAD TO BE CONVERTED BACK TO ROUND WEIGHT. ASSUMING A 12% YIELD RATE FROM SHUCKING. THIS WAS CALCULATED USING THIS FORMULA: MEAT WEIGHT y 0.12 = ROUND WEIGHT. 12% YIELD WAS USED AS THAT WAS THE RATE FOUND AT THE GRAND BANK PLANT. NOTE: 817 LBS. OF SCALLOP WAS LANDED BY BEULAH & PATRICIA IN SPETEMBER WHICH IS NOT TABULATED AS TOWS AND CATCH RATES WERE NOT AVAILABLE. APPENDIX VIII

WEEKLY FISHING LOG I 401p (Or tc : :: ED IT Go (0) U Vc Ai :1, 11:f NT CFV NUMBER 1 4 FISHERIES OCHE s NAME OF VESSEL: ''...4-..614 617"14... TOTAL CREW: 9 AND OCEANS F T OCEANS V c< 9 /- TIME TYPE NUMBER of HOURS ,- LATITUDF/LONCITuDE, DECCA/ ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT PLACE LANDED AND DATE LEFT/ OF Towv.Eys HOURS DEPTH SEARCHED CRAB MAIN ILB) CRA8 LoKAN, UKAT AREA NAME OF BUYER IsioNTH/ RETURN GE AR DREDGES GEAR FISHED ( PELAGIC MGT. SPECIES Irtg SOK DISTANCE 8 DIRECTION TROIA SCALLOPS WEIGH DETAILS OF FISH GIVEN DAY/ YEAR) pogr USED FISHED I TAIHON51 ONLY) AREA SOUGHT COO CRAB BACK .Auao NEAREST LANDON OHO NuiatiER MEAT IN SHELL TO OTHER ■ESSEL9

KEPT 14/ - _---- _------__ __- -- - -__ __ - ____ /0 /10 Adt"" ', ED LET GO 9 KEPT /q/ 41' /LET GO KEPT 5,- 8, ------LET 2 gr) ------t ■ f ■ _,I -

■ KEPT - ■ k ,. 6‘

-' ---_

, 40 --.------. — - °WO 7/ KEPT ,7, iLis .

/LET GO V t. ,., . . 06 00 ,

1.Z KEPT

.I Alto 104 "%ge.4,. • t c . ' /1Q _ (2 / _; 7 06 ' 0 4 2 en.52-4-TA.A.A • i AI KEPT / "er44,L.4.90%. 1-

0 a30° ottor . f. ,..,...A.)./ ,1 /41 04.elf REMARKS: (GEAR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING GE AR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/QUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME. ( or Acting Captoia) / 4*-0/ ^'?`:114e41 .46 '4651-14P 7-4°1 04 114 • _-/ 44.4~2' ‘ CAPTAIN'S SyNATURE:

Act .1...." cle... a .....1...n - . .1i- L.o, ..4.... 1 AZ As.e...,... _ -___ -7- (Ao Lte.gaGnoo 1 .4:-::."6- :7(4.164 L--9(4 -LT 1p1 21-P-39 NG L FOP GOVERNMENT CFV NUMBER Goilullnr" eteetsd.. TOTAL CREW: • .1 FISHERIES Ptcuts NAME OF VESSEL: PALA, 5/ 11 17 AND OCEANS El OCEANS • PLACE LANDED AND TIME TYPE wawa OF HOURS I. AnT tan / tONGiTu0E, OECCa / ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT I LB/ LEFT/ OF tosimETS HOURS DEPTH SEARCHED CRAB MAIN ' CRAB NAME OF sou DATE LORAN, waT AN A GEAR oKEDG(s GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC MGT. SPEO ES SCALLOPS WEIGH DETAILS OF FISH GIVEr Wang RETURN DISTANCEs DIRECT 10•1 FROM CRAB 0 0/XEMO PORT /RAPS OR FISHED IFAENOIAS) AREA SOUGHT COO BACK TO OTHER VESSELS USED ONLY) KARST LANDON 6110 NUllafa MEAT INSHB.L HAULED r . KEPT _--- -_--- _— -- — -- — --- Iait It ---_ DinT GOD ~~ KEPT ------Maio ET) i _

/LET GO 4) "6'4 KEPT t 1 1 14.:1 ------_--- -- 69 VW KEPT ------74f. 1, \ %re KEPT il ------__------$9 I I fOb • P/ KEPT Irk /4 _ ~`i~

~ KEPT Q T Y i

~ ,• Y • •

%V— REMARKS: (GEAR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING GEAR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/ OUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME: (or Acli riPloIA/ • II/ iA,57opt, . ito 1,44A. CAPTAIN'S SIGNATUR • .., .. .-..•

I ,././.-..7Z1 I 4,

A 4 4 A • A CFV NUMBER GOVERNMENT GOUvERNEMENT OF CANADA DU CANADA *44, . 111+ TOTAL CREW: FISNE RIES PtCNES NAME OF VESSEL: 1-€41-6,' V AND OCEANS Li ocE.Ns 0 HOURS ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT PLACE LANDED AND TIME TYPE NUIllefli OF L ATITUDE / LOKITUDE, DUCA / (LB) CRAB DATE LEFT/ OF NETS HOURS DEPTH SEARCHED CRAB MAIN NAME OF BUYER rows LORAN, UNIT AREA SCALLOPS wear( / RETURN GEAR oiitims GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC MGT SPECIES WEIGH DETAILS OF FISH GIVEN TrtasOR DISTANCE A DIRECTION FRO* CRAB 8ACK DAY/ TEAR) FISHED iFATN0u5) AREA SOuGHT COD TO OTHER VESSEL9 1 PORT USED ONLY) NEAREST LAND OR GAO ROARER MEAT SHELL HAUL E 0 I

-L KEPT ______—______—______— 4+ • ROED O /LET GO KEPT ,,4•14fr g h 3 6 it/ 4° /5(/ 6/401: ?. 0 .> ' f' / OtSCARDE D a 4 6 ° k"' /LET GO Iti: 6.1 A, ~ y ivi. //6 ° ) 0 //11 KEPT

3 P- 3 i V ff 6-6 (214-1 Vi. jeat.....:„._. It. KEFT /to Jell

KEPT )1/ If /LET GO ttTTTT ~\~ KEPT

116 /AA' ILET GO

K KEPT ---

IE MARKS (GEAR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING GEAR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/ OUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME ( or Acting Captain) /go ii∎fiv (-A4Ac.f CAPTAIN'S SI T

2118-41

WEEKLY FISHING LOG CFV NUMBER I 4IP t','"1:".VD:r ViuvciARN:O:ENT FISHERIES ► EcHEs NAME OF VESSEL: TOTAL CREW: AND OCEANS ET OCEANS 0 RENEE TIME TYPE NUMBER OF HOURS SEARCHED LATiTUOE/LOKITUOE, DECCA / ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT PLACE LANDED AND DATE LEFT/ OF TOMFS,NE TS HOURS DEPTH CRAB MAIN I LB / CRAB LORAN, UNIT AREA NAME OF BUYER iiitotani RETURN GEAR DREDGES GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC MGT. SPECIES / WEIGH DISTANCE II DIRECTION FROM SCALLOPS DETAILS OF FISH GIVEN OAT/YEAR) PORT T R FISHED CRAB USED ,MO iFnneousi ONLY) AREA SOUGHT / COD BACK TO OTHER VESSELS HAULED NEAREST LAND OR WO NUMBER 7,. MEAT IN SHELL KEPT

LET GO KEPT ______/ig")1100 DtSCARDED ------/LET GO v . / - / ■ I/6 //7 /4" KEPT .1,- pe...stA.R._ , -#114) I / ______go _ _ _ __ o _ o — _ ------:Al ARDED b 4 A, - V &I LET GO /to 14/ KEPT a- ______( b.~ KEPT AO 1,4.1.A /LET GO r _ WO Rbat"g1 14r KEPT V gratl';‘0, it blf/( I it)P'r--1 6. I-SET GO ' KEPT 0/ /to / / 6,,,.,1 oTs EA ro -- 0 /LET w REMARKS: (GEAR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING GEAR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/ OUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME (or Acting Captain)

■ ft Tr -5' T UR •

/, ''I--7----i.9 2118-42

WEEKLY FISHING LOG CFV NUMBER II* trinror GoVCEARKIAK"NT f OP ‘7 FISHERIES PtCHES NAME OF VESSEL: / / TOTAL CREW: 1/ y 9 17 AND OCEANS E T OCEANS

TIME TYPE NUMBER of s EHAORUcRHSE D ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT ILB) PLACE LANDED AND DATE LEFT/ OF rows,ftis HOURS DEPTH i AT I r uot / LO TUCIE , DUCA / CRAB MAIN ''/ CRAB LORAN, UNIT AREA NAME OF BUYER wooirmi RETURN GEAR ofifocfs GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC MGT. SPECIES SCALLOPS WEIGH DETAILS OF FISH GIVEN TmI DISTANCE N DIRECTION FROM DAY/YEAR( pow USED FISHED (FATHOMS) ONLONLY) AREA SOUGHT COD BACK HOOKS NEAREST LAND OR GAO NUMBER MEAT IN SHELL TO OTHER VESSELS _ I HAUL ED i T KEPT ' t WARDED 41 1 /LET GO /41 ►41,/ KEPT N /i7 'Ol.g. ie...., -/ s . /LET GO I KEPT

3.30 Cli LET GO u6 -l ' 1 7:/ lele ,o' ,V K EFT lal'irliM 2itidd /a- 30 la° a d //v law KEPT 70 0 Itot4-'- 1 41". dAll 64 /LET GO 43,...-. • % ., c4 0 3 ...,, ,., (iv* KEPT id 1.) j e -",&4# / h 3 d , 0 ATA P „ 4 1700 $9 0 A )- I ) 4) B (.4...

szs- iI LLETLE GO ..- -;4,„ 44-_. 1 . 41 KEPT i

: /10 /11,21e) DIK T REMARKS: (GEAR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING G AR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS / OUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIII'S NA MI V c 1/ •C410 k. . a "....

CAPTAIN'S SI A TDX2

2118-43 WEEKLY FISHING LOG If 613 1rM AIAED ITA T GoiDI UVC IA RNAI AMENT CFV NUMBER

FISHERIES PtCHES NAME OF VESSEL: .--‘„,/, TOTAL CREW: 6,- ..,, Y AND OCEANS E OCEANS , 0 9 Li 4/ 7 TIME TYPE V NUMBER Or sEARcHEDHOURS L. nriruor /Loncoruor, our*/ ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT (LB) PLACE LANDED AND DATE LEFT/ OF rowsmus HOURS DEPTH CRAB MAIN ' CRAB NAME OF BUYER (MONTH/ RETURN GEAR DREDGES GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC LORAN, UNIT AREA MGT. SPECIES DISTANCE II DIRECTION FROM SCALLOPS wEIGH DETAILS OF FISH GIVEN DAY/ TEARI PORT T RAPS O R 5 FISHED COD CRAB USED (rononsi ONLY) AREA SOUGHT / BACK TO OTHER VESSELS HA ULE D NEAREST LAND OR GRID NUMBER MEAT IINalELL 1 --- ./d 1 0/4. ,r KEPT / ------7:40 /4 6§CAFroio ------— --- - 41 y /LET GO (t' KEPT /10 itir„.r,:

/LET GO

A il KEPT

------fim /4/"1 74/ 1 CliNrcl°

KEPT 171

KEPT //. 40 /LET GO ,y, KEPT / f r / II-0 iv -)-----1 . fki /LET GO

i, /14/ KEPT AO ,A4/ZI LET * REMARKS: (GEAR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING GEAR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/ QUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME. (or Ac tong. Coploin) bii,57041 Ki reft.e4 CAPTAIN'S SIGNATURE:

Z/retn..,* 48)1t4 2118-44

L

WEEKLY FISHING LOG CFV NUMBER If Gor tc:VA EDI T GotYVA PNAN OA"Nr A ND pEctics NAME OF VESSEL: TOTAL CREW: AND OCEANS E T OCtANS / 9 4.7 (/' 9 7 ,7 TIME TYPE ROARER OF HOURS PLACE LANDED AND L AT IT UDE /LONGITUDE, DECCA / ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT (LB) DATE LEFT/ OF TONS, NETS HOURS DEPTH SEARCHED CRAB MAIN CRAB NAME OF BUYER LORAN, UNIT AREA weal,/ RETURN GEAR DREDGES GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC MGT. SPECIES SCALLOPS WEIGH DETAILS OF FISH GIVEN m sOR DISTANCE S DIRECTION FROM CRAB OAT/ TEAM PORT USED Tri FISHED (FATtiousi AREA SOUGHT COD BACK TO OTHER ONLY) NEAREST LAND OR GRO NUMBER MEAT iNSFELL VESSELS AUL ED 7"

lyr KEPT /1// ,' - 2/17 ) I i /LET GO

rj ,/e oc( 0 , A/ KEPT 2 .c co 3 6 DISCARDED 4 4—O 64) /LET GO 1.2 0 ft‘', KEPT )3L/-riasf***4 S O/1 .1 -30 Ci 6 e/ _ _ i cr,_ _ •.p 06,3o,.toi 1.--' — —AWDE5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1'4 .1.1.... 1311”, /si A. 6 ,..› A 141 LET GO KEPT — ,i'DIO • 3 0 3 0 y 4u Lia IV /4p/Plio \. ) \rid. 30 9 KEPT .0t: a" 7,, I/ 6 // 4. fi b'-°.49 i 14; 4 0 _ / „ , li9 r Ai 0 Pv /LET GO KEPT SC) A,,,,,,z,..., 73r /LET GO jfit•A eree,"„ir. 1,e' 9 K EPT g - ---/14 .

"2:7 w:)204.2 5e-/ 118-45 WEEKLY FISHING LOG GOVERNMENT GOUVERNEMENT C F V NUMBER OF CANADA DU CANADA

FISHERIES PtCHES NAME OF VESSEL. Ilt TOTAL CREW: AND OCEANS E OCEANS

TIME TYPE NUMBER OF HOURS PLACE LANDED AND L ATIT UDE / LONGITUDE, DECCA ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT ( LB) DATE LEFT/ OF TOWS,NE TS HOURS DEPTH SEARCHED CRAB CRAB LORAN, OMIT AREA NAME OF BUYER ilooram/ RETURN GEAR DREDGES GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC MGT SCALLOPS D ISTANCE DIRECTION PROM WEIGH DETAILS OF FISH GIVEN OAF, 111110 TRAPS OR FISHED a COD CRAB PORT USED HOOKS FATHOMS) ONLY) AREA BACK TO OTHER VF_SSEL9 HAULED NEAREST LAND OR GRIZI NUMBER MEAT IN SHELL

KEPT ki f 0 OISaFTDED /LET GO

%lc/ Ai KEPT /7fr 30 DISCARDED - 6 ° W /LET GO

c 3 0

1 ,d04-tt KEFT 4, 3 0 56 "CY5P h70

KEPT DISCARDED /LET 60

KEPT 77/ 5-pita LET GO

KEPT

°VW Ent! A REMARKS' (GEAR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING GEAR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/ QUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME (or Acting Captain)

afit*ISItrteN7A T Ufeei 7 r

21.18-46 WEEKLY FISHING LOG II* GOVERNMENT Co oj usclnat) :ENT CFV NUMBER OF CANADA fiSkiE RTES PtCHES NAME OF VESSEL: ii:/:) ,4 ,/ 1 /26 PLC g TOTAL CREW:1/ AND OCEANS ET OCEANS 0 9 . v 9 7 2// TIME TYPE Nu4REKOf HOURS LATiTuDE/LOWITUDE, DECCA / ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT (LB) PLACE LANDED AND DATE LEFT/ OF TI S,NErs HOURS DEPTH SEARCHED CRAB MAIN CRAB LORAN, UNIT AREA I MONTU/ RETURN GEAR DREDGES GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC MGT. SPECIES WEIGH DISTANCE II DIRECTION TROY SCALLOPS DETAILS OF FISH GIVE , DAY/YEAR) poRE FISHED lEATINDEAS) ONLY) AREA SOUGHT / COD CRAB BACK NAUiEO KARES i L A NO OR ORO NuNEIER MEAT IN SHELL TO OTHER VESSELS rl KEPT 17'; yt 10 TrGEOD i3O' /1(50"1/..f ' fte KEPT 508C/ 4 ° r 0; 1.;ii t4) ...g1- I /LET GO 1 l , ,,- //ii KEPT 30 (1 4- t/ ?soy o14,L.1 gva 4 /1 i ly h b# . ~\\~ g k ° w l KEFT V~ / — --- —- ---- — -- — — -- — ------/t4 /1..,., VFW j KEPT iys9 Z. .

/4-* k —NI /LET GO

Ph/ KEPT 1.0 .

/ki KEPT /4f/' 1 — _— H ii() "MS'C K AR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING G R, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/ QUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME (or Actiag Co►tsia)

WEEKLY FISHING LOG C F V NUMBER I+ Or Ec::: EDNT CANADA OrCCANADAE 1NT :42 :az iiSmERIES PtCHESEl NAME OF VESSEL: TOTALTOT CREW: AND OCEANS OCEANS ti cr 9 2 TIME TYPE Numocp of HOURS , L AT I 1 UDE /LOTIGITuDE, DECCA / ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT ( LB) PLACE LANDED AND DA TE LEFT/ OF TowS,INETS HOURS DEPTH SEARCHED CRAB MAIN CRAB LORAN, UNIT AREA NAMEME OF BUYER lidoNTN/ RE T URN GE AR DREDGES GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC MGT. SPECIES SCALLOPS WEIGH DETAILS OF FISH GIVEN OAT/ TENNI FISHED ■ DISTANCE S DIRECTION FROIL CRAB porn' USED 7:M OR FATI4oms ONLY) AREA SOUGHT COD BACK TO OTHER W_SSEL9 HAUL E 0 NEAREST L APO ON GITIO NumBER MEAT INSHELL

irl KEPT t) AO 1C;06-4 OTSCTiorD - - (61 /LOET G KEPT / iftv / -4q- .7 ,711 DISCARDED /LET GO KEPT IIi( DISCARDED 7/4 /LET GO 0 .., iii/ /4!, kii, II/ KEPT . 1 NIPD " iff .?? ..„, 0 _. / id y/ - c„- ,AVAI ,IA 6 / gi L b" JUL, • i 1 i / o 0 i '.. IV )71 n I‘idf KEPT 3S.0° 444d &toot, 0 - sol OISCARDED 6.‘ 1C 1 A 0 h h 60 W /LET GO

KEPT

TAWo€15 , /249 cli LET GO KEPT ip//, .r.-- ,...,: DISCABQED -,4 , 29 /LET GO REM RKS (GEAR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING GEAR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/QUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME: (or Athol Cutelsi,

, . ■ • TA N'S A T11 4.7004

i 4..P • n. 4i

NG L C F V NUMBER r co pv VgliED NA T 6D 0J uVc EA RN AItiENT Fo t":/- 6 iti /:: S' f:-/-- TOTAL CREW: 7 FISHERIES FICHES NAME OF VESSEL ..- 1411-ty '""gl 0 ? ANO OCEANS ET OCEANS Le y r/ (LB) PLACE LA ICED AND TIME TYPE NumBER of HOURS L *Yam / LONGiTua, DECCA / ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT CRAB HOURS DEPTH SEARCHED CRAB MAIN NAME OF BUYER DATE LEFT/ OF TOMS, NETS LORAN, UNIT AREA WEIGH DREDGES GEAR FISHED PELAGIC MGT. SPECIES SCALLOPS DETAILS OF FISH GIVEN to:Ham/ RETURN GEAR DISTANCE II DIRECTION FROM CRAB TI,:tnsOR FISHED (mitsoms, AREA SOUGHT , COD BACK TO OTHER ASSEL9 "Y in") PORT USED ONLY) NEAREST LAM) OR GRID NUMBER MEAT IN SHELL HAUL E 0 A 4 )/ A KEPT nO)/ ______— ______. ‘.4..4.1 OtSCARDED itC1 AO /LET GO KEPT I// II/ /IV 7 i •/ /4 /0 /LET GO it 416 t/h 'Ai i KEPT /' OP" pg/ li i /I /// 3 0 Po dt/IA /0 1 6-6-6 n llo („,,,-,,,,,, ,e KEFT il) fti/ 40 ,., ,friclK i ild 4441-. fr9 Oh i) 0 14) r Dim ii.).., I i, y ,,. 4,/,,A, KEPT 41/5,-.0 /4-0A •

- 30 , likw is' i i) f'i ibci ao ' 61) 6-07: Jed-X-Frir i /LET GO ii , KEPT i '7/ LI 4? 4 ik. LET GO

iy KEPT ' / --- iff 00 A 44.,, oTsCAF — — ------LET GOD REMARKS: (GEAR LOSSES, TAG NUMBERS TAKEN, WEATHER, MOVING GEAR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/QUANTITIES LET GO, ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME (o r tins; Captain) ,..,F: 4> ll/ ./1.1 5 7-0 t i - I. T r h.' SR- '. eAPTAIN'S SIGNATURE: 4409 liZii . 2118-49

WEEKLY FISHING LOG II* GO FETNEc noAA ED NA T GDLOuVC AE RNANt ANENT CFV NUMBE R .i:- /-- ; FISHE RIES PtCHES NAME OF VESSEL: i ir /'1,1% S. TOTAL CREW: i. AND " ONSCEA Et OCFOCEANS ? Al 7 1 7 TIME TYPE NUMBER OF HOURS SE ARCHED I AT I T uDE / LONGITUDE, DECCA F ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT PLACE LADED AN( DATE LEFT/ OF Tows,mos HOURS DEPTH CRAB MAIN (LB) CRAB LORAN, UNIT AREA or NAME OF BUYER MONTH/ RETURN GE AR ()RE ous GEAR FISHED (PELAGIC MGT. SPECIES SCALLOPS OAT/TEAR( pp T,Ita FISHED DISTANCE 6 DIRECT IO F11041 WEIGH DETAILS Of FISH GIV PORT USED OUR S (Fellows) ONLY) AREA SOUGHT COD CRAB BACK HAULED MEANESTN T( LANG O R GAIO MUMMA N MEAT W4 91E1 TO OTHER VESSELSELS -- —...... /.. KEPT ------AZI if4-4A—ki ED LET GO --, I KEPT 44 A, — — — — /A.,-, 7 I 'OED /LET GO I 1 7 . KEPT ld+ 10 (I I LET 2,8b

) / KEFT ■i ki ,f. ii••-9 A_ •------CI 4 - ,;• 0 1) )ii

.c../s- -'6 20-744/ 1---10--' Pd •

"‘d KEPT /W/3 ., 3 30 /1.0,,,,vrt ,,,to te., ,4111?ro .1.i /OOPS.' ------I uK E T:T 561 114)/ .t, /1.0 7.., i.-- LI ______P tvritrR - ■ 1,.. 0 )b i an) *pro 0 / , 4, -ft . ' • .4. ' '-' KEPT 00144: /d i 1 --.6 t- , /./., oi,1 • - 1' 11.....;22 41.1. ' /4 ad, ....--— ______...... _... e00 Pi 6-0 0 41e...-d . itf% • I DC1,AR K •' S . LOSSES , TAG NUMBERS WEATHER, MOVING GEAR, REASONS FOR DISCARDS/ OUANTITI LET GO ETC.) CAPTAIN'S NAME: or Acijpg Cootele)

pliAl 7niv - frt re/41: -/e • C P TAIN'S SIG N A JUR i441, eitevwf Zu,

WEEKLY FISHING LOG (GirgrAEDNAT 60 0) 11 uC EA MOAIEN T 11. r_ TOTAL CREW: 3 FISHERIES PECHES NAME OF VESSEL: ir & A A- y /9 44 )4/4.5 9 i V VI 9 17 AND OCEANS ET OCEANS

No. OF LATITUDE/LONITUDE , DECCA ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF FISH CAUGHT (L8) TY PE HOURS DEPTH , MAIN DATE TIME TIME TOWS,NETS / LORAN, UNIT AREA OR SCAL LOPS PLACE LANDED RETURNED OF GEAR DREDGES GEAR FISHED SPECIES AMERICAN SHRIMP AND NAME (Month/WA/ LEFT DISTANCE & DIRECTION FROM sown. COO TURBOT GREYSOLE REDFISH PORT PORT USED OR FISHED (Fathoms) r PLAICE NEAT IN SHELL OF DOVER 000/Teo')) HOOKS HAULED NEAREST L AND

l itt KEPT 0 M' /A4 DISCARDED : )1 \/if, ... • KEPT 61 06.i) 4 - ' — — --..------?").,___ ii(el l' i / 7 16L""", __ _ —/7 AA 1 di- 4-,o DISCARDED ad' F KEPT ) ,8 god WO L'illi / h ,aii A AO 40. 4. %I . ce di efZei4; i DISCARDED rio Pil Ili y KEPT / N. ______- 4/ 4 DISCARDED 11 ) KEPT \t. \I\ DISCARDED 4, KEPT q --....------4 i DISCARDED • Li‘ $ KEPT _ 4(1f \ DISCARDED

REMARKS: CAPTAIN'S NAME:(or Acting Ceptele) II/ 1 rt• S 7 ,,t, A.r ,,, A-4 CAPTAIN'S SI AT` R 72, . ■ . ■ .. a■ Aft a ■ .1111 am 1

LmOUL DOM, D.O.E. zi Scallop Set Details

Dr Trip Set / Date I V=1•441.•■•••■••••••■•■••TY ar Liner .. ------....— .i Hook u, Start back Duration Start back Renge pth Eook up ...--•

:•ttoin type ,- 1 SCa. Wind

. Decca Ks .Deem- 11, '

4- Lat.

• 111 Or or old • 48 Loran Long. Loran 1 -ng. ,- 0 ,J . I. 1 . tion of gear -peed a 1004 Direetionho • , °neva._

Lab Iv servers Bridge RP ARKS SPECIE:3 No. Wt. dead • • - Chi 5 :CC I to I 7,_:i t/c.- t -/ $r.14 /1' )1.-1 ,, PlaCODeetet1 1 4. '‘-rsli y e 17,- c. H 1 :ie 5 • -yr 4S rer 0,4- , Mc` g. —' LIP1-4 -4 Ce_Lt I c ,e 1( 3 0 c%

i -) • • , '-'-' ha- , c , 1 _, - 1 •e-i 1 . -,..; `-' ''- IIIIINMIIIIVIIIIIIIIIIIMII /L. r(9 ti;fi

• 1111111=111111111111

I I C Li '_ tI . 4 ,- - ^4 y(4 ;' ,r 7,-

r ,.- (.1 y ?- 2- _ I

Q _ c—l- ;t

o• ., - IL' - ` —/ '4/ . r - (I 't ■ ? _ c -2 G". 4- I _•- q _ 51Sp

1 : to .7 c. a .s. 1 0 7- f I t_. • :::i "J 5 . ),0 .05 4. • to . 1 r 1 Jlft.$1 ts 444 liiKAI'41) UUZ

Scallop Set Details nap _1,‘ L., cc, j.„ Le Trip 14.1_22:tiL Date 6, //2(.1_

-wea --r _____ ii re 9 '.3 rime Hook up Start back Duration ,

Depth Eook up Start beak Range .

Bottom type Sea Wind

RI x+ Lat . Decca Lat . Li I Decca 11_‘ 37 ci o • 111 q 2 92 or or • 45 "-C. Liq 7s'. -17 IZ q7 1 . 74 Long. Loran Long. Loran I ° -•eed Direction Operation of sear . • • servers Bridge Lab 1 SPECIES No. Wt. •e ,•14.4.•••4..7=1* Chi s 0 '7 6, 1- ion c 1 L C.1 Z g Ci (.1" - P a opecte,Ill 3-7c/2 :i (le 44 n I ; C 5 G ,c aor, ,...... e_, e I,/ t . 4 'lliniMMIENZI PPZWAI - - 3e, /6-s .--0. . e 4 rie,..,0 0 1 ,1-- 4 ?Cl --7;-_ s'-1:41 29 C7-0.0 i n y .1 ii,..s c1 -- 3.9 "F”.7.) 4,„. % ).2 Al.-,a1-1-d-r-Pc' INIIMIPANSINIMIEI

BINIMIIMINEIMICI WM= J.-- g° 0 IMIMI • /- 0 -.0 3 Min • 1 Jr '0 v Mill

Migirillialli

IM rlimillinn11101111 pa 1111111.1=111

IIMMIRISIMIIIMIEI. kv. s LI k. 4f 7n _S----? 1 1 / 14 -,-YI 4/ LI t.: az i_l 5-7/1 c i'6 -, /i,s s- . _ ci 1,- i.z . '1' 5 , ( ri,-, k - ? aa - 7 26 ci 15 7 ,, .1b •

act Details

Liner

rime Hook up Start back Duration

Depth Hook up Start back Runge . Bottom type Sea Wind .

llg • , 4xo Lat. . Dacca Lat. Dacca Tu t Li; f,f 1-(29 41 '2, or il., or . 7 u q , Imran g IAng. Loran Long. S-703 2 0 speed Direction Operation of gear .

Dbservers 1 Bridge Lab SPECIES No. Wt. MARES • live dead ;4,4. ,.:.,..: c, . L ; -Le ailamys 6-cod (-- t- .5 i 4 C^,-) ..5 7 'a c.

P1econecten' .4.1 4, q ‘0 44 (.4 o 2_. I I 1 I r7 fib, 4! LI ,-( ci r? -- I c / .2 o

b . Li 4 23 - 7 ? 0 7 ?a, le;") cts• 1 4 C7 . 0 ( ) • I 7_1) 1 b 0 113, u L • (-4 ? 1 1 10 0 . I '1' ...41- g U3 2c ---7 c,L.1 30 !L4.) ' • i ti L . 4 7J Q . ‘2 )-- c t_ 1 .Z4.) 16-c

- 16, Cr -: r? 3 t-f c 6 0 6_,/ - 4

c1 1-S

1

Trip Set La Dam z Gear Liner

rime Hook 1.1:9 Start bank Duration

Depth Hook up Start back Range

Bottom type /1 Sea Wind . I

Ail - VA t . Decca ig Lat. ,. 1-rv Lat. • Deoca Tu 444 ), ji. 2'5 7 F or or

q Loran kI Long. Loren g Iig. , S6 9 . 1 -peed Direction Operation of gear

••servers Bridge Lab ...... ----„,------. SPECIMS No. Wt. MARLS live dead

ChI u s < ;,,,c3 cc - 1.; -I- — Ple.copecten11.1 all 3 R _ q _5- F''''s • 430 i4c 1.,-, fr; - 5- 5 h . MOMMOINIMINNINS- . INEEMINIMINNINEE11 MISM11111.0111=11 MIIIMMINIONINIEMIS 111111111111PANNIIIMMI 01/1111111011.111/1151111 • IIMIM IN1111110111 • i

MEMINIMIMMIIIIIIIIIII . 4L: _3 7 ; c4 (L• (42. -Pi 1 ' ' c, c 3 3-

Li . 7 4c y 3 5c 7v 4 L • Z2 ,7L ..r: 4z S-2 be ' ' 12,‘V; •

.

' I

Sat Date bc I, RAL,..rr Trip 1:1-1, • Liner - * , .. Hook u Start back Duration

pth Hook up Start back Range

- : • ttoni type , Sea. Wind 1 .._,. 5,1 t tg Lat . - 3? ?J- c“ r ° -1 or Decca 4-n Lat . • . Decca

- Tw or 1 46 i Long. Loran Long. Loran ll _ .. -I k 4" 2L-) :peed Direction Operation of gear

Dbservere Bridge Lab

SPECIES. No. Wt. MARKS live dead . ::;,,,,, ,::.,7- ----r,,,,.....;.., s ex f- /. 1 /1.4 eti_l itrr .cl O •-••-, ; .4 • Chl - "A • 'Lc Li 2 fr;" 1 . ,'4.11 _ D4 ? / 4 /--r,...-, 3,-. Ple.conecten II, / .d a,,iI4 skeiiji II,,, D ot-lcc - “"-"- - __Qc.s...221:".cAL__(is.j.l1(2____. 6o I..:. 4 t." __,31 13 „CC ci 1 - _44),Iiisl-‘:q22,L, j2_,LL,

t.{6 • 3/ u7 •1-6 u 7_ '

ui. .•35 o-z_ I.S. VI 11 1 7 L2

. • 3 4 Le t.. 3 7 33 a. 47 744 7c .• (.41: 1; 'Li .4.(C..• ql lc 6

Le (..__3 ( ' e./ c Z7 /-c0 .. , . -, 0

7 cf c-i 7

cl , 7 7 2 9 ,5--L Q 1 ?/ Li c: Set Trip Date 10-n.21Q°, 0 Ervrr, %.,i ‘ta r- v Gear Liner

rime Hook up Start back Duration ! Depth Hook up Start back Range . .

1.4 Wind Bottom type c;,i7 ;.;‘ ,,ii sea -____------N

0 Decca Lat. Decca Lat.°q(:, . . 39 7 or " `"7 or Loran Long. e Loran Long. i-4 c (/,..) f(-, 4( 6Z 1 . Speed Direction Operation of gear

Observers I Bridge Lab

SPECIES No. . MUMS . dead 4,/ c, . si D,r71 4 13 L t ..„,,e„, ti , ke ::4‘ . - Ctrl cr, . /- - P aconecten .111

q 7 11111111111111,1111111 r,•i, Cot- 4-fo 0( Ili 70 ,• MAILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIID cry' _3 q c 1 (6 . 47 qt /C2 i ' ‘• ,_.,..9L * ...,1,`9 r 9 L ,1 j ; t_ /Or, . 9 — 0 C i i.

1' lq Ir. t'L' 4 1 I '4 t"

14 (aL-'-':). — , - KM . (.1 LC .fi...... z 4r - 1,2,-, " ■ Lt L ' - __i ,-t . I-, 1.- zi - ; - 1 Vj -c ‘, ii_( ;%2 1 Li

- (J 4; q 1 CI 44' Li 7

, Li 4 '' "? c f - ' ,./ i 4 L 1 r' .

i Ship Trip i Set Date • . Gear Liner ------.-..------time Hook up Start back Duration

Depth Hook up Start back Range

Bottom type Sea Wind ------,

..,at.,, . Decca .0 Lat. Decca Li I. 3c/ ,:-/ 7 el y 6: 3/ 37 or .H or Long. Loran -.-+ Long. Loran co L/ _ (-J.?. Z (2_ Speed Direction Operation of gear

laservers I Bridge Lab __ MARLS SPECIES No. Wv. . va dead .7.....c.c .z Cal... S 0,z-f) (n (•,._t ,,,e,. .7 3 9 P-0 L tl ( -- - ,., _i • PlaCODeCten 11111 I - cr., I. ll. s i-,.: f, S CO( / 1 ,_, f.) t_...1 km." f C •

. z BRIER11.1011 S •1 n 0 , P11 4 lwatiiwit ,,,,) e ,d.1 /7 .?,

d

(“1: ..Yi o3 (L.: 4 ( c., / .r:2," 2'7 ‘- ) bs ° f r.---a-°%jh 4)•*;1416' _,- 4._, e i-42_ cti S t6 .. 1 - MINIMINEll , 1 -,)

■-•

Trip Set

-•-"P , I ev ti --..„ Date - ....4.4cadd.-_------i Liuer

. Hook ,. Start back Duration

pth Hook up Start bank ;mange . .

:•ttom type Sea Wind _ •

,•,, Decca h Lat. - Decca VI/ Lat. . 4,) 77 or is or • 4S Loran Long. Loran

Long. o Fin _ _ 1 Speed Direction Operation of gear

3bservers I Bridge 1,10,

SPECIES No. Wt. MARNE live dead I V . n. :..: c I a A cl ,,,, - 41 4:26C., , se c 4 L o (4,2.1/c.: Chi-mss .. 'IA . s I. cd- , ,- -v't C o ,) .-) i- Lre• 3 " " Placouecten 5 i e a v,..-, - , c, t , ,,e, Z4 - e' v , ,_--; _ . MI ) ;r-/S i. _, .ICI • -. . MIMMI VIEHM I I e . ecc i 4. / i r o ,,y, E: 5/

tworiminwoMILIIININIMI 6,: 1- ..2,/,'?7 s I ea rv? r /75 4C.CC 4/ civi . 9 - ' --- -4 C-y- a ,.., .-10 L. cc f-liebi

(,/ i- ,7 I 5 /-,-,,,, c /3 ei,,, -,....; ,J , 4CiecrS, .- 16..$ )-6, G-v-e: vIc/ c-C (4 2 -0 -ie., II i. 1 4: 39 47 . , - ‘,„5 a Carer .7/ C 5Ia ji ,-) 91:7; i5 1lo " La c. _q I 1, G Li 1 . , i t; - l A

g - I MINNMENI or /.c) a° if's e '..:

,—..,,,,,_ %.,—.--84- 5 / C" '44 , /4,S ' c 17 2 fL: '-1 I g L 1 (4 / ' -2-C/ 4 y k _..a -;,i'' 1 .,'

k 9

bcallop Set Details

Ku, ,7111 'Ship Trip Se Date

Sear Liner , 4 , . rime Hook up Start back Duration Depth Hook up Start bark Range

Bottom type Sea Wind

h Lat. . Deena

lxt ,, Dacca Lat. . z-l4 z.i /0 '14 4-1-`1 D'' or is or M Long. _ Loran

g Long. Loran Fin

• peed Direction Operation of gear

observers Bridge Lab SPECIES No. Wt. MARKS live dead

Cal 3 Placonectee 11111 PAIMPMINEMIEWMI 11111MIIMMIIIIMIS MIIMIIIIMMAIIIMM MIPIRIKIIMIIIIM PIIIIIMIKEEMIllnal PINIMPIIIIIIMNMIIIIPAI IMMIIIMENIMIll

111.11E1011 1.11MINIMIIIMIll

s

I

• Trip Set Date Ari Lley h 4 cc. Liner

Hook up Start back Duration .••••■••■" Rook up Start back Range

Wind : • ttom type Sea

Lat. • Decca. Lat. ' Decca G, 4E7 7 or Li Lt 3 V or Loran Long. Loran g long. co o 7

peed Direction Operation of gear

servers Bridge Lab

SPECIES wt. 'lead OtOvrcci ;ct4 ,91 C---42. 5 l o cis S-0( kg / 0-4,0 4,-/ Lkie VI sic/ I C-rvoci , . 4,02°Liz oc 4 57ro scc, !lops •=t re )). ffier

7c, h ey I lie ► a rea St, 4 , D, r 1- 14111'S toss 0 peva rie-v) D,,i1;et.i /I-

So L4, "fele hibe_ C C CA/ Ada I e

a- I ryi o-re / 6 %1 • <-7 6.` cf 3 7 cr /4a Se /ne-- .14:2 C t 3773 - 2 .1- 9 Data :cam, D.O.F. 4/ • - • Scallop Set Details

Trip Set Date • -hip 0-)Pri IC? A ri It ;CIO I (% iv • Gear Liner e , ' rime. Hook up Start back Duration

Depth Hook up Start back Range

Sotto typ a2rkrgya._.Tgind._.__h__a /7 _ _ s_ 44 i It 9 44 Lat. L i, 0 g. Deana Let. Decca 11, 9- 0 Fl T e-(Lu.3cz_ Or u or T .:1 5 Long. 0 Loran 'Long, _ Loran • _1 G q - _(_-f2 `./ -peed Direction Operation of gear •

observers Bridge Lab i :. - SPECIES No. ,.. REMARKS live dead :.-k•r_•-..1.-:. .' 7' -J. 01- i ' '-: ' '-'r (. / fi; ,- t- /01,,, i - Placopecter, (...":A,,, S‘... L, / ' / li .- e I I-4 r r; c..e c ,-, s l- 4 7 ; e ► , c 0.) ,) -1 2, (-A- It Pilarlini - 'L --) . I i ; /-1— ;11 c cIle 1' / */ IIIIIIIIIIMI -- _. , - - M t • r SI-AJ- ii s l,,,,s s -(..,,, . ( r 1., 4 c ■(9(2 :f . V r 0 ( 1 Z O , / /•' •.z , if t.-1 0 CC- - o r• l) 1 ;= 0-1 -1 r/ kyl , 1,1 , -,--) / L., , t) , u-t / err. - --..._ c____i 1 (' INIIMMIREMIEN -,-- ,

CI ■ 1 r) \ "2 ( 7- Li LI c/ -7 odop. i - ° ''''''' f A n ., i- ,..) I. . . _ — 6"-, -k.1 ‘,.-, JC4, Li Li 5, 1 , .50 cf,d.,

7 / . -I '

r . _(.., 7,- q cl i <4 (../ 3 1--- • -,,- - ,

,,

....._ i at LOrm, L.U.E. Zi

Sce-Llop Set Details

Ship Trip Sete t x ^r0,1 Date L.-;..e_A, t 1. r t . e• i Ge ar Liuer 0-X.S.1 rime- Hook up Start back Duration

Depth Hook up Start back Range

Bottom type 5 $ Sea Wind - --___.../....c...a.a.....112,—....----.., 749 4 Lat. ti Decca "at. Decca

.re e-e LI / /, . Tu II . ii , or or

q T

Long. Loran L tur, - s Loran

5-1, c-t Z _c- 0 . , I _C. s: (-4 y 7Z Speed Direction Operation of gear -

Dbservers J Bridge Lab .../ c>7.-7.c, SPECIES No. Wt. MARKS ( 02 Ciri4s ) . live dead 0 I -77., ,..‘....•.s c., r ( / — / '

• VZ . t, 1.-/° Irk ,7 7 • ' ' 1/ i '1Ar' • td-ai ' ^ 41 1.2; r e e i r_ v f 'I ,1` S ^ i) I Al. (/ .1,1 7-, 1 / -c (,— 1 ' LI 1 / ' / c Is' ' Ti'. -:-- /. , 1 J..: /0. 4,1_ , .., 7 ;/,..; (.7-4, //,‘,

0 ( f- .A - . =-', ;• s(- 4 Li ? 7 r.... / 7 (', ' - ---1 Cc( cil ( (,-.< eic,,..) /ere •74e_ / l :'., :.) ,se, ,/: ;-,,., .., ... el ez, .--- _i. ( ' '-c7 )?? ('-/p ti-, 9? c 1.' . / , _. 7 --:.- ..- e „i ..1.- ,.r.,--) , e./..,...' .,:.. ' ..- s v, LA..., .... " .6 0 -.,,.:, .., ...., (.:. , c. ' =-1 (7_ L/ ? Li / -7 , . . -.:, ;'..., . r / in 1 / " ' 4/ :' ,--' -' ,r• /., . ,- .-., _, A - ( ' 1 1 _7 <- 7: L-I I i o ' ' o :) I- %,,.., - ,' / / (-'-',' 4.c,:czt/.s< _f.-r-cee/ht-, ..r/-, ,,1 tir,s,,, 7 1 ' / ' t-/ 2 ..C:/. I I t., " LI l, j ------_ '12t;" -2 z; . r •- o " ‘,C 4.;-1 • ._re,. `R,'27 / de "J - -i-• — '-/ . C /4 V 9 In

,Data form, D.O.F. 27

Scallop Set Details —...... ___,,.....-----

. Trip y Set ,,,,,s -hip , • .Date a • . - if. _ L A P_2

-ar . Liner / •me Hook ut Start back Duration

pth Hook up Start back Range

:•ttom type Sea Wind - $ -I .S- 4-7 .1.... , 1 0 -- l ig 4x17 Lat. Decca -t. Decca 4(G c (4 o :1—o. or Tu or • 4 T .ng, S Long. v Loran el Loran 5 6 414/ 7- • °• ...... --.--.—...... -Deed Direction Operation of gear

observers Bridge Lab

SPECIES No. Wt. REMARKS live.. — dead / • Ch...:(„c. ....,..: ,7„( .. )1..1 PlecoDecten / 3 / 9,1/4/ a I 1/ : 45— . • -;,,, e 4' .,-,1 ^„ in„7 .

ai /0 • uG 5/4./ /;sh;-; . (.• •"1";- ;s 1, sa wle ei re k '''t 3 e' ✓/ /4' d.d I da.,7 "fieft s 1.- ; , 4, 0 LI 4 i I ' 43 : 3 0 / 4,f / iel ‘ to ( LI ,t8 4-40 v e_i .!Y 4.4.-r 441 t 70 ./1_,

tA., ,1/4 „cif r3 r e e -7., vp ir Cr•---% Sou 04" r t '11

,... .." - ..:2 ..:.- lii,el..., L e...... 4_,.....,; .... c5 lu-, : L. ti i •

ay) FO S • c-I (, ' 3 .7 4 3 64-1" -1-4 ' Li 3 0 ?_ L.

et,..„....„. I - el, 5 I. i),:t, 0-1 .. 1-1 ; •s ) t ,,,, Z. L L..,_ 4-/e

(,vii A C( i_ti a t) I o/ e1 I r‘ol- l‘ieel-:-. e^ ".) .r1 4 - 0m...,/ r,„ I° 1 4 „I ,' ,,r ef ,/, , 0-5 ,i,t

fr

..‹.- ., / 5 fry% uy ..$ ; , c - 0 L, -, , d Sew./ ■t.e...el-,

_ 3.. cr. - 1-... :.-- kl... ,r14 •

C\-tr,,, .-. F.p-vrk...___ r e P• v• ,-,-• C, i . '

f

Scallop Set Details

.111.1•1■■••■■■• Trip Set Date .) hip .L / ■ ■■■•■■■■■■■■■■■■ ar Liner

AMINMI• , II Hook up Start back Duration

pth Hook up Start back Range

:.ttom type , Sea S'IN WLt!--,LL."../...1:-..-(4.4----L-----.;

0 .. Decca Lat. - Decca Lat. -.-±j" 1:,‘, Lc.' q 7 o )1 0 <.) or - or Long. , . Loran Long. Loren , ....n, ._ 5' 471 ____,______,...... a.:Ir.-2..i :---.-1 9 r° --Y------C" • Speed Direction Operation of gear

Observers 1 Bridge Lab . SPECIES Teo . Wt.. __ _REMARKS (2.4/5 ) live dead

:.-.c4...:-1. , - -- ID L.e_. tir-c L.L, i .7 c (i-1 I r 0 0 ) t C ai Ch— Placorecten k..k.c it ; h 2- 74 --), t I, -N . t-,-, e .s /- 0 i

S e-cu- (-') qc ti(5' 1.)-1*€ S I- o f ,--,-), ei uz /,,, ,

J- Let.ici

h c, j c„,2I I- 0 ,., ; ex,,e ..ret ,,; -, 3 f0 /i_;

19-t r o-ti) ( / r?,,, c, . e j. f r./ z )

---

--- (1-v" `-' ' A ei (2, .a '7 // 1 2 f.) f - 9 a rr i ._/<..

(."---t ce 01 0 m1 /7/ 42 / J2 : /-s.-

Ct etc"; 4 L i -2 0 0 I e"/ S C' /I e r-s 1' il ---. /IS I ni .:.•,7 ,'" ' _S il l # 4 ‘t" P;)( ' ""( ''.2.-r° ' - 4 , ∎7 (C/ p1 ; t_' do // •

-4..0

. Data form, D.O.E. 27 Scallop Set Details

Ship iu 4,4.....;;L,ir

3ear Liuer ______Time Hook up Start back Duration

Depth Hook un Start back Range

Bottom type Sea .. Wind , ' lig I C 4.n Lat. , - ' ! Decca Lat. " - • - - Decca L ttc --7 Tt

m or or . ± ; g Long. _ c , - .- Irora.n Long. loran S (-- C, '. ...,.." • Speed Direction Operation of gear '

Observers I Bridge Lab • . .._ SPECIES No. Wt. IMMARKS . live dead ::„...c. ....::..- ■ ( Leci .k.) -4 c%) r-ry -r- .,.!, ( j:" c: ..': '' hlays -.-- ■ i )1,1 (-:! .. 0 PleCOIDeCterl .....ot_i 0 c pq0,_/../ C.4,- ..„4., . i

11'1 ri ' I it 1.., ; • •'1' 1 / s•1 ' ', ' • • • % ; k f? ; 1/ v. 1--) e f 1 L., 0 ''';

*-- : / — .1_:: c .> .."; f --T , r 7 - ...' . • 6 1 , u .i..j.... i 1 'Ir . z..) r.,, / I. :fr. e ■ ,f2. r •

(1 -Ct. C ; C,A)4 'C (>1 t - 1 / 1 - , . , . .-, „i- = • - ! .,1 LI e? r / 1/ c- .1 i 1--.:'• c-.1 '''' - i

)- , r ,..-, .._. .- - --:''' -_. - ..' ,.: .1 ( ' ,.---i ,, 1 r r ,-, ( .--., c ; ,, ' _

.. ._. :

/ :: 1 11(- % -I , .-- -7 1 . ,._—, - 1.z:(1.. ,r. 14, / c , - / n ■- i.., , 7.%"-/ . . _ . :-..--, ,_,. ,....._. ,_./ 1 ,-.1 ,-..- c - 7 I- - - ' ' APPENDIX IX A FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL HARVESTING OF ICELAND SCALLOP ON THE ST. PIERRE BANK

WORK REPORT PROPOSAL

SUBMITTED TO: Mr. ANDREW CRICHTON CO-ORDINATOR FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND

BY:

SCOTT ANTLE WORK TERM I

JANUARY 19, 1990 125 Pennywell Road, St. John's, Nfld. A1C 2L3

Mr. Andrew Crichton, Division of Co-ordination, Faculty of Business Administration, Memorial University of Newfoundland. January 12, 1990

Dear Mr. Crichton:

I am pleased to submit my work report proposal for approval. For my first work term, I am employed with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans as Development Analyst for the Newfoundland Inshore Fisheries Development Agreement (NIFDA), under the direction of Mr. Alvin Rose. My work report topic is "A Feasibility Assessment of the Commercial Harvesting of Iceland Scallop on the St. Pierre Bank". Completion of the report is one of the duties required in my position and thus I will be permitted a certain number of office hours for that purpose. Through completing this report I will gain exposure to several aspects of the Newfoundland Fishery while contributing to NIFDA's development of our most essential resource. Sincerely,

-cv Scott Antle. PURPOSE To assess the economic feasibility of commercially harvesting Iceland Scallop on the St. Pierre Bank.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION The St. Pierre Bank is a westward extension of the shelf extending off the Avalon and Burin Penninsulas commonly called the Grand Banks. Scallop beds are located throughout the St. Pierre Bank containing both Sea and Iceland Scallops. The Sea Scallop is the most widely sought after by commercial fishermen. This resource has been commercially harvested since 1953. Recently, the Sea Scallop stocks have been reducing and thus limits have been enforced on the harvesting of that resource. Presently, the Iceland Scallop resource in the St. Pierre area is underutilized but has been getting increased attention as the depletion of Sea Scallop stocks continues. Attempts are now being made to utilize the Iceland Scallop resource and make its harvesting a viable operation for Newfoundland fishermen. For example, the Newfoundland Inshore Fisheries Development Agreement (NIFDA) provided assistance to two fishermen and a processor to take part in an experimental Iceland Scallop fishery on the St. Pierre Bank in 1989. NIFDA is a $60 million Agreement funded jointly by the Federal and Provincial governments under the Economic Regional Development Agreement. The Agreement provides funding in three main areas; harvesting, processing and resource development.

SCOPE In order to assess the economic feasibility of harvesting Iceland Scallop on the St. Pierre Bank, two projects funded by NIFDA, will be extensively studied. To supplement those findings previous studies on Iceland Scallop and the St. Pierre area will be referred to in order to give an accurate picture of the potential for that area and the resource. Revenues, costs, break even points and future projections will be extensively covered in the economic assessment as well as comments on vessel and equipment and areas of operation. The processing of Iceland Scallop will be addressed, but with much less detail than the harvesting. The developments in the processing area in terms of manual and mechanical methods could constitute an entire report in itself. Thus due to time constraints and in order to give adequate coverage of harvesting the processing section will be limited to a discussion of quality and feasibility in the processors opinion. PROPOSED METHODOLOGY Secondary sources include literature on the Iceland Scallop, previous reports on the St. Pierre Bank and Iceland Scallops, and vessel logs provided by the fisherman funded through NIFDA. Primary sources include personal (or telephone) interviews with the two fishermen and the processor who participated in the experimental fishery and employees of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Science Branch. Discussions with NIFDA employees will provide familiarity with the topic as well as useful insight and information.

WORK SCHEDULE Activity Week # Submit Proposal 3 Secondary Research 4,5 Primary Research 6,7,8 Analyze Data 9,10,11 Prepare Draft 12 Submit Draft To Supervisor 13 Revisions To Draft 14,15 Final Submission 16

LIMITATIONS Due to the lack of attention paid to Iceland Scallops in the past a vast amount of time is needed to adequately prepare a complete assessment of an Icelandic Scallop Fishery. Therefore, only one side of the fishery, namely harvesting, can be dealt with in adequate depth. Another report dealing with the processing aspect would be desirable in the future to complete this analysis. The analysis will be based mostly on two vessels thus requiring generalizations and assumptions to be made. Therefore, the report will serve as a basis for comparison to a fisherman's own individual situation. Certain financial information, regarding the two participating fishermen, will have to be withheld due to confidentiality. Attempts will be made to substitute average figures, obtained from the Fisheries and Oceans Economic Branch, where possible. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE REPORT This report will assist in determining if a commercial Iceland Scallop fishery will be a viable operation in the long term. That determination is of great significance to NIFDA in deciding the amount of funding to be provided in the future to the St. Pierre Bank fishery and Iceland Scallops in general. The report will also be beneficial to fisherman in determining the feasibility of entering the Iceland Scallop fishery. TENTATIVE WORKS CITED Barney, W., G. Carberry, 1987. "Offshore Scallop Fishing Experiment St. Pierre Bank, 1985", Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries Aquatic Sciences No. 1548.

Fisheries and Oceans. February 1988. Canada/Newfoundland Inshore Fisheries Development Agreement.

Grandy, Max. 1990. Program Manager - Resource Development Sector, NIFDA, Discussions.

Naidu, K.S. 1990. Biologist, Fisheries Research Branch, Fisheries and Oceans, Personal Interview.

Perrot, Lionel. 1990. Fisherman, Personal Interview.

Pitcher, Winston. 1990. Fisherman, Personal Interview.

Bungay, F. 1990. President - G & F Seafoods Ltd., Personal Interview.

TENTATIVE TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. ABSTRACT

II. INTRODUCTION (a) Purpose (b) Background Information (c) Scope (d) Methodology (e) Limitations (f) Significance of the Report

III. ANALYSIS OF THE ST. PIERRE BANK SCALLOP FISHERY (a) History of the Fishery (b) Resource Availability 1. Sea Scallop 2. Iceland Scallop (c) Previous Report Findings

IV. ANALYSIS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SCALLOP FISHERY (a) Market Assessment 1. Consumer 2. Processor (b) Economic Assessment 1. Cost of Operation 2. Revenues from Operation 3. Break Even Analysis 4. Projections for the Future

V. RECOMMENDATIONS

VI. CONCLUSIONS

VII. WORKS CITED

VIII. APPENDICES (a) Vessel And Equipment (b) Area Of Operation SAMPLE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

1. In your opinion is the harvesting if Iceland Scallop on the St. Pierre Bank a viable operation?

2. Do you think other fishermen and processors will enter the Iceland Scallop Fishery as a result of this experiment?

3. What major problems did you encounter during the scallop fishing experiment?

4. What were your operating costs and would you expect them to increase or decrease if you continue harvesting/processing Iceland Scallop?

5. What changes could you have made in order to increase the success of your operations? Memorial University of Newfoundland

Division of Co-ordination

94 I 5 ' 1990 TO: DATE:

CLASS OF 1992 STUDENT: AC-h-i WORK TERM I,

Please retu , to the Division of Co-operative Education by 1990. Would you please be the evaluator of the above student's work report? Please indicate the-approval status below. When you have evaluated the proposal,' please make your comments on a separate sheet and keep a copy for your records. Keep the proposal and return this sheet and your comments to us. We would appreciate as quick a turnaround as possible - no longer than 3 working days - in order to give the students as much time as possible to work on the report. If we can be of any assistance to you in grading the work report proposal please contact either Tyrone Lester, Lisa Hurd or Andy Crichton. Thank you for your cooperation. Please answer as appropriate: A. Topic and Proposal approved B. Topic and Proposal approved conditionally (conditions attached) FIG 1 V C. Topic only approved. RESUBMIT PROPOSAL (comments attached) D. Neither Topic nor Proposal approved (comments attached) RESUBMIT PROPOSAL

Signed Date 7q9a Phone 7.7'F "Toy Eval ator

, 1' c

S. Johns. Newfoundland. Canada A1B 3X5 • Telex: 016-4101 • Tel.: (709) 737-8816 (Engineering) • (709) 737-8820 (Business) • Fax: (7091 737-4042 (Engineering) • (709) 737-4051 (Business) 'd re0Lir080e 'ON / 08:El 06,6n (NOW) G ROO IVIEOEW WOIE -17 Fe) 0144,a4., ....--....- .

46'.?--*1.4Ast_ 74,14(A) (11-114- Ma,(14.4A- 2 Ole 74.9-lad i/ Vitt.

ci,*t mAA44:441,414- 9_e:K4--fiff___4(±, _

341-4-•ef", Arc_ frUk4 -0 4_

/

iiZ•08 CIE 'ON ./---.. -• 1•E-:•i,' •-• • G. d00•9-1Y+11G1/2K-C+.1--- (Ae tor. *C-.11er Feb. 2/10.

S a VA H.—, 1, pia re S 1 6.4 es t e co, -I try

tkeV A-s se. s 4' •

*ere Soyrd•s4-)" ,.) 1•••' 4 p k dor s .s e L 76rc

P (-0 b S 0' SS #4.—• e%/4. •

-kei as r re* ile a 4. ea •-•1 fr'S wos rw-o c.dr-r1 oes+ et p ros a l 4--•40-a A ef roaes,.