No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Economic Problem of the Newfoundland Fisheries
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
Extract
Adequate descriptive accounts of the Newfoundland fisheries have more than once been given, and it would be superfluous to attempt another within the limits of this note. Only a few of the essential features of the industry need be called to mind as background to a more analytical discussion of its problems and prospects.
Newfoundland and codfish have been almost synonymous terms for 450 years, ever since John Cabot brought back to Europe his reports of the teeming fish in the vicinity of the island. Although with the passing years other fisheries have been developed, especially herring, lobster, salmon, seal, and whale, the cod fishery remains by far the most important branch. The other fisheries, although in the aggregate important, are still subsidiary and for the most part are followed by men who are cod fishermen as well.
The economic importance of the fisheries derives chiefly from the fact that together they form an industry which easily takes the lead in giving employment. It may even now be true that a majority (although not a large one) of the population depends either directly or indirectly upon the fisheries for its main source of livelihood. Over the long run, the number of fishermen seems to be decreasing. In 1935 the number was about the same as in 1891, and shows a considerable decline from the numbers engaged in the intervening census years. During and since the recent war there has been considerable fluctuation in the numbers of fishermen, but there appear to be somewhat fewer today than in 1935.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/Revue canadienne de economiques et science politique , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , November 1951 , pp. 482 - 493
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1951
References
1 The term “fisheries” in Newfoundland covers all marine products, including molluscs, mammals, crustaceans, and by-products, and this usage is retained here.
2 1891=36,694, 1901=41,231, 1911=43,795, 1921=40,511, 1935=35,018, 1945=28,160 (source: Newfoundland census returns). Because of the complex nature of the industry, and the somewhat inadequate statistics, all figures must be handled with caution. Fishing may be given as an occupation by people who in fact earn part of their living at other jobs, or are unemployed. The Commission of Government believed that 25,000 would have been a more accurate figure for the number of cod fishermen in 1935. It was estimated that 150,000 out of a total 1935 population of 290,000 depended for the main part of their livelihood on the fisheries. Papers Relating to a Long Range Reconstruction Policy in Newfoundland (St. John's, 1938), II, 3.Google Scholar The Report of the Fisheries Committee of the National Convention, 1947, 67 Google Scholar, estimated 32 to 33 per cent of the population directly dependent on fishing.
3 Review of the Financial and Economic Position of Newfoundland, June, 1946, Cmd. 6849, 24, 26. Figures from the 1935 census returns, II, 120-1, show that, of males reporting earnings, 25.8 per cent reported less than $100 a year, 33 per cent reported from $101 to $200 a year, and 23.4 per cent from $201 to $500 a year.
4 Review of the Financial and Economic Position of Newfoundland, 24. Report of the Newfoundland Fisheries Board and General Review of the Fisheries for the year 1942 (Ottawa, 1943), 28.Google Scholar
5 Three-fifths of herring sales were to UNRRA in 1945-6. A contract from UNRRA for 50,000 barrels of split herring at 6 cents per pound was obtained as late as January, 1947. During 1948 contracts for herring were entered into with American authorities on behalf of the American Occupied Zone of Germany. Report of the Newfoundland Fisheries Board, 1948, 11.
6 Report of the Newfoundland Fisheries Board, 1948, 5, 7. Gushue, R., “Newfoundland Fisheries in 1950,” Newfoundland Journal of Commerce, 01, 1951, 69, 71-2.Google Scholar
7 Moreover, as the standard of living rises, the per capita consumption of cheap staples tends to fall. Cf. Benham, F., in Economica, 02, 1945, 1–9.Google Scholar
8 Fisheries Post-War Planning Committee (St. John's, Feb., 1946).
9 Fisheries Re-organisation in Newfoundland; an Address by the Commissioner for Natural Resources (St. John's, 01 21, 1944).Google Scholar It was estimated that $20,000,000 would be required to rehabilitate the fisheries of Eastern Canada; but this figure is based on considerations which make it incommensurable with the Newfoundland estimate. Scotia, Nova Report of the Royal Commission on Provincial Development and Rehabilitation (Halifax, 1944)Google Scholar, hereafter referred to as the Dawson Report, II, 129.Google Scholar
10 Cf. Department of Natural Resources, Division of Fishery Research, Fishery Research Laboratory, Annual Report (St. John's, 1935), 7 Google Scholar, in which the point is made that lack of regular supplies has ruined many fine fishery schemes in Newfoundland.
11 National Convention Fisheries Committee, Report, 23–36.Google Scholar
12 Bates, S., in the Dawson Report, II, 64.Google Scholar Rates on fish were changed four times between 1932 and 1939. In the 1920's the duty was equivalent to 20 per cent, and in the 1930's to 35 per cent.
13 The Treaty Shore is that part of the Newfoundland coast on which, by the “Convention” of 1818, Americans have the right to fish. It was thought that fish caught on this shore would not be liable to American duties, but events proved the theory wrong and a large-scale project of General Seafoods, a subsidiary of General Foods, Inc., was abandoned in the 1930's because of the pressure put on Washington by the American fishing interests. Ewbank, R., Public Affairs in Newfoundland (Cardiff, 1939), 41–50.Google Scholar The text of the agreement is given in General Seafoods Corporation Act, Acts of the Commission of Government, no. 49. of 1939.
14 S. Bates, in the Dawson Report. The imposition of a tariff on processed products of the fisheries is said virtually to have banned Newfoundland seal oil from the United States. Proceedings of the National Convention, Evening Telegram, 10 11, 1946.Google Scholar
15 E.g., annual per capita production in a Nova Scotia schooner (newer type) is about 100,000 pounds, for a trawler (even of the old type) it is 200,000 pounds, but for a shore fisherman it is only 13,000 pounds. Bates, S., in the Dawson Report, 8.Google Scholar
16 Surplus and inferior cod, diverted by freezing and processing plants into the dried cure, might well counterbalance any tendency for the production of the dried cure to fall because of a withdrawal of manpower from the shore fishery. But even if the production of dried cure fell, there is nothing to show that a fall in the Newfoundland output would stiffen world prices.
17 Selling the catch fresh has one advantage however: it more easily leads to cash payments to the fishermen, a great gain to a class which usually lives on credit or in debt.
18 In 1947, 80 per cent of the men were in the shore fishery; in 1948, 81 per cent. (calculated from figures in Report of the Newfoundland Fisheries Board, 1948, 5, 6). The precise figures for 1949 and 1950 are not available, but for 1949 the percentage was about 80 and for 1950 was appreciably higher, because that year's decrease in number of fishermen–5,450–was largely in the deep sea and Labrador fisheries.
19 Review of the Financial and Economic Position of Newfoundland, 42. Possibly 10 per cent of the relief recipients might be classed as unemployable.
20 Newfoundland Royal Commission, 1933, Report, Cmd. 4480 (the Amulree Report), 50. The cost and “demoralizing effect” of poor relief (and road work for relief purposes) is frequently mentioned in the Colonial Reports of the 1860's. In some years a quarter of the revenue was spent on relief. See Colonial Reports, 1865; Parliamentary Papers, XLIX, 1866, 399. Governor Musgrave remarked (Colonial Reports, 1864) that Newfoundland suffered badly from political troubles, despite the fact that the country enjoyed low taxes, religious freedom, and a wide franchise–which many people regarded as all the ingredients for a millennium.
21 Some $2,000,000 a year (borrowed from abroad) were spent on public works in the 1920's. Two fortuitous sources of income were “rum running” to the United States and construction of the Corner Brook paper mill.
22 Amulree Report, 104, says “a good catch is about 40 quintals.” The Report of the Commission of Enquiry Investigating the Seafisheries (St. John's, 1937)Google Scholar, puts a good catch at 50 quintals. The average actually caught, between 1933 and 1944 varied from 41 to 47 quintals, but this includes the more productive deep sea and Labrador fisheries, and so exaggerates the shore catch (Review of the Financial and Economic Position of Newfoundland, 24). The Report of the Fisheries Committee of the National Convention, 5, puts the catch per man, for the shore fishery from 1938 to 1945 at 26.66 to 35.44 quintals. My own calculations for the last four years place the inshore average at 38, 27, 30, and 33 quintals respectively.
23 The Commission Investigating the Seafisheries put the average income for 1937 at $137. Another estimate states that the income of the Newfoundland fisherman is never much more than $150 a year. The Times, London, 06 12, 1943.Google Scholar
24 The Dawson Report, II, 30.Google Scholar Cf. Report of the Nova Scotia Economic Council, II, No. 6, 1937 (Halifax, 1938), and Bates, S., Competition of the Canadian and Newfoundland Fisheries (Halifax, 1941).Google Scholar
25 E.g., in the deep sea fishery the catch per man, in boats of small size in 1947 and 1948 was 61.3 quintals and 54.5 quintals; for boats of the largest size it was 134.1 quintals and 128.8 quintals. Report of the Newfoundland Fisheries Board, 1948, 23. The deep sea fishing season is of course much longer. On the other hand a Bank fisherman cannot exploit the minor fisheries; while the Labrador cure brings the lowest prices, and has the most depressed market prospects. The difference between earnings of shore fishermen and men on large vessels is apparent also in Nova Scotia, the former earning $300, the latter $1,000. MacKinnon, F. B., “What Family Allowances Mean to the Maritimes,” Public Affairs, winter, 1945, 106.Google Scholar
26 The only official inquiry which came near to seeing the problem was the Amulree Report, although even this concentrated mainly on secondary problems. It did however recommend concentration into fewer ports and off-shore fishing in larger vessels but without explaining why off-shore schooner fishing had steadily declined. Canadian investigations too have seldom given due attention to the low catch per man, e.g., the Report of the Royal Commission Investigating the Fisheries of the Maritime Provinces and the Magdalen Islands (Ottawa, 1928)Google Scholar, (the Maclean Report).
27 Fisheries Re-organisation in Newfoundland, 11. The problem was seen by Lodge, T., Dictatorship in Newfoundland (London, 1939)Google Scholar, who used the point to support an argument for the extension of land settlements.
28 There is some evidence, obtained by relating quantity of exports to the rough figures for the number of fishermen, for believing that there has been some rise in the per capita catch since the nineteenth century, probably owing to the use of marine engines and cod traps.
29 These figures are conveniently summarized in MacKay, R. A., ed., Newfoundland: Economic, Diplomatic, and Strategic Studies (Toronto, 1946)Google Scholar, Statistical Appendix, Table 12. The total catch may be about 200,000 quintals more than exports, the difference being accounted for by home consumption. Report of Commission Investigating the Seafisheries, 1937.
30 The problem of jobs or emigration was very clearly put by the Newfoundland Premier, Hon. J. R. Smallwood, in his speech to the Federal-Provincial Conference, Ottawa, Dec. 4-7, 1950. Proceedings, pp. 55-62.