^y y - -^^•^^r' SURVEY OF THE UNITED STATES Marine Biological Laboratory! WOODS HOLE, MASS. SHRIMP INDUSTRY VOLUME I SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT- FISHERIES No. 277 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE EXPLANATORY NOTE The series embodies results of investigations, usually of restricted scope, intended to aid or direct management or utilization practices and as guides for administrative or legislative action. It is issued in limited quantities for official use of Federal, State or cooperating agencies and in processed form for economy and to avoid delay in publication . United States Department of the Interior, Fred A, Seaton, Secretary Fish and Wildlife Service, Arnie J. Suomela, ComniisEioner SURVEY OF THE UNITED STATES SHRIMP INDUSTRY VOLUME I Prepared in Branch of Economics Bureau of Commercial Fisheries United States Fish and t.'ildlife Service Special Scientific Report— Fisheries No. 277 Washington, D. C. November 1958 The Library of Congress has cataloged this publication as follows: U. S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. Survey of tlie United States shrimp industry. Prepared in Branch of Economics, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. Washington, 1958- V. illus. 27 cm. (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Special scientific report : fisheries, no. 277, Includes bibliography. 1. Shrimps. (Series) SH11.A335 no. 277, etc. 639.5 59-60018 Library of Congress The Fish and Vildlife :3ervice series, Special Scientific Report — Fisheries, is cataloged as follows: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Special scientific report : fisheries, no. 1- (Washingtonj 1949- no. illus., maps, diagrs. 27 cm. Supersedes in part the Service's Special scientific report. 1. Fisheries — Research. SH11.A335 639.2072 59-60217 Library of Congress ii ABSTRACT This report published in two volvunes provides a oomprehensive exaiidJiation of the shrimping grounds, vessel coubtruction, fishing operations, fishing costs, processing plant efficiency, pix>cessing costs, ti*ends in distribution, packaging, storing, shipping, per capita consumption, prices, wholesaling, retailing, merchandising, and consumer preferences, A chapter on conclusions and recomraendationa finds that the shrii!:y industry's welfare can be safeguarded best (1) by increasing the efficiency of operations at all levels and thu3 effecting cost savings in shi-iinp production, proc- essing and diatribution and (2) by stabilizing markets. Specific suggestions to impivve current pi-actices are made thi'ouyhout. For exan^)le, the chapter on processing contains the reaultd of engineering surveys which provide plans for modal layouts for freezing and breading plants and canneries. An eco.somc analysis is made of the problems of marketing and price stability. The pix>ject was financed with funds made available by the Saltons tall -Kennedy Act, approved July 1, 195U (68 Stat. 376). iil ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Survey of the United States Shrimp Industry was compiled by staff members of the Branch of Economics, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries from sources of information and technical advice available, for the most part, from within the Bureau. The results of special research projects undertaken under contract arrangements with private firms, universities, and other government agencies to supplement these sources of infonnation are incorporated in this report. The survey originated under the direction and supervision of the late Dr. Richard A. Kahn, Chief, Economics and Cooperative Marketing Section, Walter H. Stolting, Assistant Chief, and Otto Rauchschwalbe, Economist. The economic analysis and the text are largely the work of Robert Hamlisch, Economist. The report was prepared for publication under the direction of Alton T. Murray, Economist. Charles A. Carter, Commodity Analyst, provided the references to the historical develop- ment of shrimp fishing and processing industries. Donald S. FitzGibbon prepared the graphs and charts; Evelyn H. Kramer and Saralyn V. Wolff assisted in the preparation of statistical tables. Stewart Springer, Chief, Branch of Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research, and James B. Higman of that Branch gave technical advice for the development of the chapters on fishing vessel construction 8uid fishing operations. Charles Butler, Chief, Branch of Technology; William H. Dumont, Assistant Chief, Branch of Statistics; and Stacey C. Denham, Fishery Marketing Specialist, were consulted on technical subjects. The A. C. Nielsen Company contracted for a sub-project on distribution, merchandising and consumer preference; the University of Miami, at Coral Gables, Florida, for primary marketing; Harwell, Knowles and Associates, for vessel efficiency; the Federal Trade Commission, for fishing vessel and processing plant costs; First Research Corporation of Florida, for processing plant efficiency and for time and motion studies of fishing operations. Lawrence W. Strasburger, Consultant, reviewed the manuscript, particularly the chapters concerned with processing. All figures were prepared by United States Fish and Wildlife Service personnel, except those specifically credited. iv PREFACE Discovery of new fishing grounds, e:q3anding markets, and the increase in the size of the fleet have contributed to the drainatic grovrth of the shrimp industry within the past decade. Currently, the shrimp fishery is the most important in the United States measured by the value of landings. Moreover, the shrirrp processing industries and distributive channels have also greatly expanded their facilities and the volume and variety of shrimp products reaching the national market during the past decade. The period of growth and expansion of the shrimp industry v;as marked by occasional setbacks and periods of marketing doldrums. It was during these periods that some of the basic problems of this industry were revealed as pitfalls to be avoided in the future. Fortu- nately, none of these basic problems appear insoluble. Rather the shrimp industry's general welfare is related mainly to the solutions of a lot of little problems — all of them concerned with increasing the efficiency of operations at all levels and thus effecting cost savings in shrimp production, processing, and distribution. Survey of the United States Shrimp Industry examines all phases of the fishery, vessel construction, operation, and gear used in fishing, production costs, the physical layout and efficiency of processing plants, packaging, distribution, and marketing. Every effort has been made throughout the survey to provide specific suggestions and recommendations for improving current practices. Volume I of this repor-t contains the first five chapters which deal with production and processing, Volurae II contains the last four chapters, three of which deal with marketing and the last chapter contains a summary of conclusions and recommendations. Survey of the Shrimp Fisheries of Central and South America and Foreign" Shrimp Fisheries other than Central and South America referi'ed bo in the text have been published as Special Scientific Report—Fisheries No. 235 and No. 25I4, respectively. VI VOLUME I TABLE OF CONTEMTS Par^e CI-IAPTER I - THE DOMESTIC SUPPLY 1 The Geographic Location of the Industry - General Characteristics 2 The shrimp fishery in the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico areas 2 Domestic shrimp fisheries outside the South Atlantic and Gulf areas I4, Species Representing the Commercial Catch 8 Distribution of the Commercially Important Species of Shrimp in the Coastal Waters of the South Atlantic States and the Gulf 15 Species taken on South Atlantic fishing grounds l5 V/hite shrimp I6 Royal Red shrimp I7 Species taken on Gulf of Mexico fishing grounds 17 Bottom conditions of fishing grounds 17 History of explorations and development of fishing grounds I9 I-Jhite shrimp 22 Brox-jn shrimp 25 Pink shrimp 33 Royal Red shrimp 3I4. Factors Determining the Availability of Supply 38 The Impact of the Extension of the Fishing Area in Recent Years 111 Supply Outlook 1^3 Management of Supply 1(8 State regulatory poijers 1x9 Effect of state regulations 50 Selected References 53 CHAPTER II - AGEMTS OF PRODUCTION 61 The VJherewithal of Producing 62 Equipment 63 Fishing craft 63 Types of craft employed 63 Wood versus steel construction 67 Shortcomings in design and construction of craft currently employed 68 vii Page CIL\PTER II - AGEMTS OF PRODUCTION - Continued Equipment - Continued Fishing craft - Continued Specific recommendations on vessel desi;- FISHING 177 Introductoiy Comments — ■ ■ 178 Results of Fishing Operations — - — — — ■ 179 Comparisons betvjeen different regions and different years — -— •- — 179 Vessels — ~— 179 Motor boats ■— — 19^ Comparison between iced and freezer vessels 206 Individual Elements of Fishing Costs 206 Trip expense ■ >-■ 207 Heading 207 Crew wages ■ 207 Fuel, ice and groceries 207 Packing and unloading ■ • • 2lU ix Page CHAPTER IV - PRODUCTION COSTS IN SHRIMP FISHING - Continued Individual Elements of Fishing Costs - Continued Boat expense 215 Repair and maintenance — 21? Fishing gear 217 Boat supplies ~ — - — — — 21? Depreciation 218 Interest — boat financing 218 Insurance 7 222 Mscellaneous — 225 Cost Comparison I9ii2-19ii3 and 1952-195U 225 Break-Even Analysis 226 Selected References 236 CHAPTER V - UTILIZATION AND PROCESSING 23? Introductory Comments 238 Supply and Utilization in 1956 238 Trends in Utilization 21^0 Processing for Human Consumption 2ltO Product yields 2ltO Geographic location of processing facilities 21^2 Value of manufactured products 2)4.2 Processing facilities and operations 2Uh Fresh shrimp, whole or headless 21+5 Frozen headless shrimp 250 Frozen peeled and deveined shrimp 262 Frozen cooked and peeled shrimp 261; Statistics on frozen packaged shrimp production (other than breaded) • 269 Charges for freezer services 271 Costs of operations — frozen packaged shrimp (other than breaded) 27I; Breaded cooked and uncooked shrimp 276 Canned shrimp 281; Dried shrimp 298 Shrimp specialties 300 Smoked shrimp 301 Pickled shrimp 301 Utilization of Shrimp for Non-Edible Purposes 301 Bait shrimp 301 Handling of live shrimp 302 Shrimp by-products 303 Selected References 307 CHAPTER I THE DOMESTIC SUPPLY ABSTRACT ONLY THREE OF THE MANY SPECIES OF SHRIMP FOUND IN WATERS ADJACENT TO THE COASTLINE OF THE UNITED STATES ARE CURRENTLY OF SUB- STANTIAL COMMERCIAL IMPORTANCE, WHITE SHRIMP PENAEUS SETIFERUS. BRO'WN SHRIMP PENAEUS AZTECUS. AND PINK SHRIMP PENAEUS DUORARUM. ALL THREE ARE TAKEN IN ABUNDANCE IN THE SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULF AREA, EACH OF THEM HAVING ITS OWN HABITAT PREFERENCE WITHIN THIS AREA. THERE IS, HOWEVER, SOME OVERLAP OF GEOGRAPHIC RANGES. IN THE FUTURE, THE SUPPLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE DOMESTIC FLEET WILL BE INCREASED BY THE ROYAL RED SHRIMP HYMENOPENAEUS ROBUSTUS RESOURCES RECENTLY DISCOVERED IN THE DEEP WATERS OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULF. COMMERCIAL FISHING FOR ROYAL RED SHRIMP ON A MODEST SCALE WAS INITIATED IN SOUTH ATLANTIC WATERS IN THE FALL OF 1956. OUTSIDE THE SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULF AREA, SHRIMP FISHERIES EXIST IN THE MIDDLE AND NORTH ATLANTIC COAST , THE PACIFIC COAST, AND SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA AREAS. THESE FISHERIES ARE NOT OF SUBSTANTIAL SIZE. THE ATLANTIC COAST SHRIMP ARE UTILIZED MAINLY FOR BAIT PURPOSES. THE WEST COAST FISHERIES, FOR THE MOST PART, SUPPLY SPECIAL MARKETS FOR DRIED AND FROZEN COOKED SHRIMP BUT MAY IN THE FUTURE BECOME IMPORTANT IN THE CANNING INDUSTRY. THE EXPANSION OF THE GULF COAST FISHERY IN RECENT YEARS, AS THE RESULT OF THE DISCOVERY OF THE GROOVED (BROWN AND PINK) SHRIMP GROUNDS IN THE GULF OF CAMPECHE AND OFF THE DRY TORTUGAS, HAS WROUGHT MANY CHANGES IN SHRIMP PRODUCTION AND MARKETING. ONE CONSEQUENCE OF THE EXPLOITATION OF THE NEW GROUNDS HAS BEEN A SMOOTHING OUT OF THE SEASONAL DISTRIBUTION OF CATCH. THE INCREASE IN FREEZINGS, IN SIMILAR FASHION, HAS CONTRIBUTED TO STABILIZING SUPPLY ON THE MARKETING SIDE. AMONG OTHER CONSEQUENCES OF THE OPENING UP OF NEW FISHING GROUNDS HAS BEEN A SHIFT IN THE CENTER OF GRAVITY OF THE FISHERY TO THE WEST AND TO WATERS FARTHER OFFSHORE. THE CHANGING GEOGRAPHY OF THE FISHERY HAS AFFECTED THE SCALE OF OPERATIONS. THE GREATER DIS- TANCE FROM SHORE OF SOME OF THE NEW SHRIMP GROUNDS HAS BROUGHT ABOUT THE ADDITION OF LARGER AND STURDIER VESSELS TO THE FLEET. THIS IN TURN HAS INFLUENCED COSTS OF OPERATION. SINCE THE EXPLOITATION OF THE DOMESTIC SUPPLIES OF SHRIMP HAS REACHED A LEVEL CLOSE TO ITS ESTIMATED MAXIMUM POTENTIAL, SATIS- FACTION OF DEMAND IN THE FUTURE WILL LARGELY DEPEND ON THE SUCCESS IN (a) the MANAGEMENT OF DOMESTIC SUPPLIES, (b) DISCOVERY OF NEW GROUNDS ACCESSIBLE TO THE DOMESTIC FLEET, AND (C ) MEETING DOMESTIC SUPPLY DEFICITS BY IMPORTS. THE GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF THE INDUSTRY - GEIIERAL CHARACTERISTICS Geographic factors have had a large part in shaping the shrimp fishery. In all probabilitj', they \d.ll play an important rolo, too, in the futtire development of the industry. The forni and geologic structure of the coast line have deter- mined the sites of ports. Distances from newly discovered shrimp beds have influenced the location and, in many cases, the relocation of fish- ing activities. Weather conditions prevailing in specific areas are responsible for the peculiar seasonal pattern of the fishery, Corunerclal, industrial, and to soma extent agricultural conditions, too, have affected the growth and character of the fishing segment, its organization, and its labor force. In general, the location of the shrimp industry is closely tied in with the geography of fisliing grounds. This is true not only of the fishery but also of the processing segment of the industry* In recent years only, a number of processors have located at some distance from shrimp ports as the result of the growing importance of such considerations as nearness to markets, strategic distance to several home ports, and availability of marine and transport facilities. The coastal waters off the South Atlantic States and the Gulf of Mexico coast contain the bxilk of the domestic shrimp resources. The industry, therefore, is concentrated in the eight states bordering on these waters starting with North Carolina on the Atlantic and ending with Texas on the western side of the Gulf, The Shriinp Fishery in the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Areas The shrimp fishery of the South Atlantic States extends approx- imately from Beaufort, North Carolina, to Fort Pierce, Florida. Fishing is conducted within ten miles of the shore and in the sounds and estuaries, Most of the ocean fishery, however, is conducted between the shoreline and about sia miles offshore. The fishery is almost continuous from about Bull Bay, South Carolina, to the St. Johns River, Florida, while in the northern and southern extremes of the range, the fishing grounds are scattered, (see figure I - 1) In an attempt to extend the area of operations of the south Atlantic shrimp fishery, the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service initiated exploratory fishing operations in offshore waters from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina to Cape Canaveral, Florida, in March 1956. Until about 19^0, the domestic shrimp fishery in the Gulf of Mexico embraced an area from Apalachicola, Florida, to the Mexican border in Texas, and included sounds, bay, bayous, and coastal waters ei BC 79 • 7« • 77« 76 i_il-ii-ii-ii-ij-1l.ji-ii-ii-ii-iU • ^ \ n^> [ [ 0 ^ 0 •«. ^^f f J^/^ CAPJt LOOKS / ^^ .•••■ '\y' / u y' X / * 11/ * / ^ SOWTKIJO^ ^° ./ ^ / -"■ ■'"■"•■^r":- y UOHCCTOWN W'/ o ^ ,; /' v- J^ / ^ ■*< V ■■••T- , ^ % , J^>u LI Bay y •11 yfy - j' ...» / / T ?^ ^ ■Jr' SMAMI AH ^ W^ c.--*' ( ■^ > .-' X '' O ,-.' / ] A ./•'' / 1 O J '.;, J lu ^ amiumcn. \-(C/ o ^Sb / rcRMAMOiNA H ■; ( 1 1 _ "'"JMlft St . Johiis JACRSoWlLLtn ^:^^ '"... River ; ■«\ u y t — . — ST Mteu3T«ai| t r I o \.'\ 2 9- ^ \V ' ij * J \ / J CA^t CAMA1 ■.lAl. 1 ^ Vi .' fl ; 1 1 r \"— ' ! 1 1 T c ; i i 1 MAP OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC STATES SHOWING i: ; MAIN FISHING PORTS AND SHRIMP FISHING GROUNDS 1 M M r-t >-■ — F=r-^=r-=^— e^-F=rVi ; 1 (STIPPL ED AREAS) ! FIGURE I - 1 3 out to a dlatanco in a fow areaa of approximately 50 milea. In ovory stato, oxcopt Louisiana, the coa.-=;tal fishery did not ozctend much boyond ton milo3 from shoro, Tho croundy t;ora not cotitlnuoua over this entire soction, but tendod to bo scatturod ut th'i tv;o uxtx-cnioj ond r.oro con- centratod iii tho central area, witli Louisiana tho center of production. (so'3 figure 1-2) Tho year 19^0 ropraaont s a miloatono in tho hi3toi*y of tho Gulf coast shrimp fiahory. In thtit year the Dry Tortu/^cs f ishary to tho vjoat of tho Florida Keys was intensively iiorkod for thn firut time, and nc'.jly-dsvelopod shrimp fishing grounds in tho Gulf of CaMpeche were beginning to contribute heavily to the landings at Gulf fishing ports. The conveniently accessible Dry Tortugas grounds, \jhich uoro discovered by fishermen at a time vrfien a strong market for shrirfip pre- vailed, vjere e:q3loitcd at once, lilrcploratory infonaation rou'jhly out- lining tho fishing grounds for pink shriinp in the Gull" of Coxipocho, on tho other hand, had been obtained as early as 1936 and 1937 by Japanese fishing vessels working under the auspices of the Mexican Govorii.iont, No attciapt to fish these grounds was made until after the terniination of World VJar II hostilities. Prior to that tiitie there was no iKU'ket for the pink species of shrimpj neither were there vessels cctpablo of under- talcing fishing operations in this area. At the same time, and partly because of exploratory fishing operations undci'taken by tho Bureau of Coiiiiftercial Fisheries of tho United States Fish and VJildlife Service, extensive nevr fishing areas for bro\m slo-irup in tho Gulf were dio covered. Figui'Q 1-3 shoi/s the Gulf area sliriiup grouiids that had been cliartod by 19^0 ^ri.th the predominating species. Additional exploratoxy activities by the Bureau of Go.iunGi'cial Fisheries conducted in the years from 1950 through 19514 have revealed nou shrimp resoui'ces in the Gulf of Mexico, The most iiiportant discov- eries during that period are tho deep-water resources of Royal Red shrivip. This species was aluo I'ound in the Atlantic off Florida during 1956 and 1957. Doiaostic Shrjjiip Firjhcries Outsido the South Atlnntic and Gulf Areas Slu'iinp fisheries of coi.iparatively modest proportions exist in the Middle ami North Atlantic Areas as well as in southeastern Alaska, Washuigton, Oregon, and Califoi'nia. The shrimp taken off the coasts of the States of Maine, New York, and Nou Jersey are used chiefly for bait purposes. The Pacific coast catch, for tho most part, is mai'keted pri- marily on the west coast as frozen cooked shrimp. In the three West Coast s^^ates of California, Oi-egon, and Washington, shrimping has been of importance in some localities since shortly after the Civil War, In the San Francisco area three species of small shrimp, the beat knovm of which is Cr^go franciscorurn, coiii- monly knovm as "San Francisco Bay shrimp", taken in the Bay were dided and exported to the Orient for many years. The inside waters of Puget Sound have in the past also yielded considerable quantities of shrimp. m O o Q. 0. I (/) UJ D CC Z O 3 I O CO a: u. 0 It o o z < — z 1 < w — - tn u. — Q. O Z -J a. ui X I Q >- z m < C\J a (/) u 1 H I q: ui 0. u. O H Z -I S I > *" » (/) < LJ O — UJ M u. I Q. fe z ►- — in < o X i: 3 < o o O (/) — UI Z Q- o: a. kJ — I I- I- to oc o z > _) o < in z uj o - tc O b- UJ Q- < 10 1- < lil Q S. O 2 lO O Q- ■ o z < < UJ z a o z s: < z cr o to O I- o a. X — 3 cc o X cc CO X 3 K 0 cc 1 o (/) CL UJ — to K O CiJ — or o CO cij q: O S =3 Q. Z O S O CO o u O CiJ Q -1 Z CD < < I M !=> M It was not until 1952, hovnever, that offshore fishing for shrimp on a conmercial scale was first undertaken on the Pacific coast. Exploratory operations conducted by State and Federal government agencies in the years since 1950 have laid the groundwork for the development of the ocean fishery. Figure I - U shows the areas where the principal concentrations of shrimp discovered in the course of these explorations are located. The dates refer to the time the explorations in the specific area were conducted. The State of Washington accounted for the greatest part of the production of deep-water shrimp taken off the Pacific Coast States in 1958. The Grays Harbor area is the principal place where these shrimp axe landed in that State. The potential of the shrimp fishery off the coast of Alaska, where considerable exploratory work has been done, appears to be even greater than the shrimp fisheries off the Pacific Coast States. o o H O 1955-56 1952 Puget Sound ",\Grays Harbor WASHINGTON "iCstorla OREGON 19U9-51 19li9-53 1953 CALIFORNIA San Francisco Los Angeles San Diego FIQURE I - l;.~Kap of Exploratory Fishing Results Pacific Coast Area. SPECIES KEPRESEIfriMG THE COIIMERCIAL CATCH The nuriiber of cpccies of dirimp identified in watci's fichcd by the domestic fishing fleet runa into dozens, but the specien talcen by corranorcial fishermen probably do not exceed 20. At least 90 per- cent of the total catch consists of only three species. These are white shrijnp Penaeus setiferus, pinlc shrimp Penaeus duorarum, and brovjn shrimp jPonaeus a2;tccus . (see figures I - 5a, 5b and ^c") The last txjo are soinetiLvs referHcTTo as grooved shrimp. Of lesser importance is the sea bob Xiphopencus lo-oy eri . Among the species contributing to the coiamercial catch, thera are distinct differences in size, variations in color, and anatomical sti-ucture. The species of sea shrirnp listed above have the first three pairs of thoracic (walking) legs of which there are fiva pairs in all, fitted with chelae (pincers). The white shrimp and the grooved slirliqj have teeth above and below on the rostrum (hea'd spine), whereas the sea bob has rostral teeth only on the upper surface. The grooved shrimp can be distinguished from the white shrimp (which it closely rosombles at first glance) by the presence on the former of grooves on either side of the rostrum which extend to the back laargin of the carapace (head shell) and grooves on the last segment of the tail. In the sea bob the last two pairs of walking legs are slender and much elongated. It was from those four elongated legs and the two antennae or feelers that the designation sea bob was derived. The naine is a corruption of the French "sis barbes" which maans six beards - the naiTiQ given to this shrimp by Louisiana fishermen of French extraction. Broadly spealcing, the larger slurimp come from the vrarmer waters of the south Atlantic and Gulf area. In Alaska and in the Pacific Coast States large shi-imp constitute relatively smjai proportions of the catch. In the North Atlantic Coast States pink shrimp Pandalns borealis was the only specios talcen in Maine and Massacliusetts, whou tliese ITatos had a commercial shrirup fishery. In New York and New Jersey, where the fishery is almost entirely for bait shriiup, sand shriiap Cran-ion vul<7aris and grass shrimp Palac-iuonetes yuljraris and Palaomonetes caroiinus con'-^ stitute the entire catch. " The coiiunercial catch of shriiip in Alaska and in the Pacific Coast States consists of the genera, Crago and Pandalus. The former, coiraaonly called Bay shriii.p, are taken only in San Francisco Bay. The specios landed there are for the most part Craj?o franciscorum, Crar^o nigricauda, and Crago nigroiiiaculata, the first naiaad being the mosF" ir.iportant. Up to 19?ky Bay slirimp account for about 75 percent of the total California catch of shriaap. In 1956, hoiraver, the catch from the new shrimping grounds off the northern coast of California exceeded the Bay stiriiap catch. u o 3 •a to 3 V t« c 0) 1^ 10 (0 u a as 3 V (0 c o ■LA I M 11 Among the species belonging to the genus Pandalua taken on the Pacific coast, pink shrimp Pandalus box'ealis are landed in all three Pacific Coast States and in Alaska, Alaska appears to be the only area where side-stripe shrimp Pandalus dis£ar, coon-stripe shrjjnp Pandalus hypsinotus, and hximpy shrimp Pandalus goniiiinis are included in the com- mercial catch. Until the late 19iiO's, the bulk of the catch of shrimp in the South Atlantic and Gu]_f Coast States consisted of white shrimp Penaeus s^etiferus with sea bobs Xiphopeneus kroyeri making up the remainder. Mith the extension of the fishery in 19^0, tvro species of Peneidea were added to the commercial catch. These species were pink shrimp Penaeus duorarum, and brown shrimp Penaeus aztecus. Catches landed on the south Atlantic coast (including the Florida east coast) consist predominantly of white shrimp Penaeus setiferus and brown shrimp Penaeus aztecus* Pink shrimp Penaeus duorarum and brown shrimp in recent years have accounted for well over half of the landings in the Gulf Coast States (including the Florida west coast), most of the remainder consisting of white shrimp. Sea bobs Xiphopeneus kroyeri vihich account for not more than tvro percent of the total catch are caught exclusively in inshore waters. The sea bob which does not attain the slae of either the white or grooved shrimp, deteriorates rapidly after landing* It is used for drying and canaaiiig. Table I - 1 lists the common and scientific names of the different species of shrimp contributing to the commercial catch, and the areas where the different species are caught or landed. Another species recently discovered in deeper and hitherto unfished vjaters of the the Gulf and south Atlantic is Royal Red shrimp H:yTaenopenaeu3 robuatus. (see figure 1-6) Commercial production on a limited scale of this species was started in August 19^6. TABLE I - 1,— COMMON AND SCIMTIFIC NAMES OF SHRIMP CONSTITUTING THE UNITED STATES COMMERCIAL CATCH, AND AREAS, STATES, OR TERRITORIES WHERE THE VARIOUS SPECIES ARE LANDED Coiniiion names Scientific names VJhere landed 1-Jhite Penaeus setiferus South Atlantic and Gulf States Pink, grooved, or Penaeus duorarum South Atlantic and broxm-spotted Gulf States Brown, grooved, or Penaeus aztecus South Atlantic and brown-grooved Gulf States 12 TABLE I -1.— COMMON AND SCIMTIFIC NAMES OF SHRIMP CONSTITUTING THE UNITED STATES COMMERCIAL CATCH, AND AREAS, STATES, OR TERRITORIES WHERE THE VARIOUS SPECIES ARE LANDED - Continued Common names Scientific names Where landed Brazilian or brown Penaeus brasiliensis South Atlantic and Gulf States Sea bob Xiphopenexis kroyeri Gulf States Pink Pandalus borealis Maine, Massachusetts, Alaska and Pacific Coast States Pink Pandalopsis jordani Pacific Coast States Spot Psmdalus platyceros Pacific Coast States and Alaska Side -stripe Pandalus dispar Alaska Coon-stripe Pandalus hypsinotus Alaska Huiiipy Pandalus goniurua Alaska Bay- Crago franciscorum, Crago nigricauda and Crago nigromaculata California Sand Crangon vulgaris New York and New Jersey Grass Palaeomonetes vulgaris and Palaeomonetes csrolinus New York and New Jersey Many different names are applied to shrimp in different local- ities. In order to avoid confusion in identifying the various species of shrimp standardization of these names appears desirable. The common names currently encountered, and the localities in which these names are used, are shown below together vrith the scientific names of the species which they represent. Penaeus setiferus White shrimp Green shriinp (Southport, North Carolina) Green-tailed shrimp (Pamlico Sound) Blue-tailed shiirap (Ocracoke, North Carolina) Common shrimp Lake shrimp (Louisiana) Penaeus aztecus: Brovm shrirap (Southport, North Carolina) Grooved shrimp Brazilian shriinp 13 I H g H lii Penacus aztocus! Golden shriitip (Texas) "Brovjnies" Red shrink (Texas) Penaeus duorarum; Pink shi'imp (Key West, Florida) Brown-spotted shrimp Grooved shrimp Blue-tailed shriinp (Carteret County, North Carolina) Channel shriinp (Carteret County, North Carolina) "Red-legged shrimp" may belong to any species of shrimp if its legs are red. Any species of shrimp may turn blxiish and its meat may become soft and vjhite. It is then known as a "blue shrimp", "cotton shrimp" or "king shrimp". These names may be said to describe a physio- logical condition rather than a species. DISTRIBUTION OF THE COMMERCIALLY IMPORTANT SPECIES OF SHRIMP IN THE COASTAL WATERS OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC STATES AND THE GULF Since the bulk of the resources of the domestic fishery is located in the waters of the South Atlantic States and the Gulf of Mexico, more attention has been devoted to the study of this area than to any other. The ranges of the three species of shrimp of primary commercial impoi'tance overlap to some extent, but each has its own habitat preference. In the Gulf of Mexico there are areas where one species exclusively is talctm, others where more than one species may be fished. The two species of grooved shrimp, the brown and the pink, rarely are taken in large nuiaboi'3 at the same time and place. Royal Red shrimp, still of limited coiuiriarcial importance, does not, as far as is known, ever appear within the range of the other species taken in the south Atlantic and Gulf waters. Species Taken on South Atlantic Fishing Grounds Commercial production of shrimp in the south Atlantic until recently was confined to shallow waters along a relatively narrow strip of the coast. The latest development in the fishery is the start of deep-ijrater operations for Royal Red shrimp Hymenopenaeus robustus. The shrimp fishery In some states along the south Atlantic coast, e.g.. North Carolina and Florida, is centered in the waters around the mouths of inlets. 15 Elsewhere, as in Georgia, production is fairly unifoiin along the entire coastline of the State. IJliite Shr3jnp_ Joluison and Lindner make the following suiraiiary comments on the geonraphic concentration of the south Atlantic coast white shrimp fish- ery in 193 14 i/* North Carolina - The principal fishing areas are at the mouths of the Neuce and Noxrport Rivers, Core Sound j the coastal iraters approx- imately 10 miles offshore from Cape Lookout north to a point about op- posite Atlantic, North Carolina; coastal waters a similar distance off- shore from about Little River Inlet to Fort Caswell j and coastal waters on the eastern side of South Island. South Carolina - In South Carolina there is a small fishery in the vicinity of Georn;otown, but the major portion of the fishing is done in the southern half of the State from Bull Island to Tybae Roads. The areas most productive are off Johns, St, Helena, and Hilton iload Islands and in St, Hulena, Port Royal, and Calibogue Sounds. Georgia - The Georgia shrimp fishery is carried on throughout the entire extent of the inside and littoral offshore waters of the State from the Savannah River In the north to the St. Marys River in the south. This coast is fairly imifonu in its production of shrimp, Florida - On the east coast of Florida the fishery is more scattered thtin in Georgia and vrLth the exception of the Cape Canaveral fishery is conterod around the mouths of the various inlets of the central and nortliem coast. Other than a fexj shriiap taken near the mouth of the St, Jolins Rivor, pracbically the entire catch of shrimp on this coast of Florida is frora the Atlantic Ocean i/ithin 10 miles of shore. The prin- cipal Florida east coast shrimping grounds are in the vicinity of Fornandajia, the mouth of the St. Jolms River, St, Augustine, Neii Smyrna, and Cape Canaveral, South of the Cape Canaveral grounds, which extend to Mell50Ui-ne, there is no fishei'y of major importance although shrimp ai'o occarjlonally t;ilcon off Vero Boach and Fort Pierce, Fi>5m Fort Piei'ce south therj is no fishery as the coral bottoms make it impossible to opex'ats the otter trawl successfully. 1/ Fred F. Johnson and Milton J. Lindner, Shrimp Industry of the South Atlantic and Gulf States , United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of l^'isheries , Investigational Report 21. 16 Royal Rod Shriwp Tho discoveiy of Royal Red shrimp in the deop iratoi's of tho Gulf in tha course of its oxplorc\tiona proMptud tho United Stato;3 Fiah and V/ildlifo Scrvico to extend its inveatigations to South Atlantic waters. Tho follovring paragraphs contain excorpts from the reportts on thj results of the first four cruises made by the Service's exploratory vossela* In a series of 1$ deepwater trawling stations off Fort Pierce and Cape Canaveral, Florida, using UO-foot flat shriiiip trawls and a 10- foot beam trawl, large deepwater Royal Red shrimp H-y^inanopenaous robiistus wore caucht in all drags between 180 and 235 fathoms. Catcher of sin-imp ~ ran from 5 to 20 pounds per 2-hour drag. A [i-l/2-hoiu: drag off Cape Canaveral using an 80-foot balloon trax^l caught 12^ potuids of Royal Rod shririp of mixed sizes averaging 26-30 count, heads- off. Fixcellont t raiding bottom was found betv/oon Foi't Pierce and Capo Canaveral* Between Cape Canaveral and St. Augustine seven l;-hour drags in depths of 1^0 to 212 fathoms caught 20/30-count rod shrimp at rates of about IjO pounds per drag. The largest catch (70 pounds) was made in 1?0 to I5J6 fathoms off False Cape, Florida. Twenty-five Ii- to 5-hour drags between Cape Canaveral and St. Auguatino produced 2,700 pounds of Royal Rod sliriiup during tho period. The most productive drags were made in the 175-212 fathom range south- east of St, Augustine ufiing a IjO-foot trawl. Three tovia in this area produced 1,020 pounds at a rate of 85 pounds per hour. Round-the-clock trawling by tho M/V Cotibat off St. Augustine in depths of 175 to 210 fathoi.is yielded excellent catches of deep-\iatr{r;oes of 120 barrels each. The socrot of the new grounds bocaino coinmon Imovrledgc, and a large munber of fisheriiien started maJcing the trip across the Gulf to new fishinc grounds. The discovery and development of the Carnpoche fishery was at first entirely a Texas operation. The first Florida-based fishermen apparently arrived on the grounds during January 1951 but by April 1951 the majority of the boats were based in Florida, However, sorae of the boats fishing the grounds were transients from New England. A record breaking run of brovm shrimp during the fall of 1951 kept most Texas fishermen away from Campeche Bank, and the Florida fishermen have pro- duced over 90 percent of the shrimp from the banks since that time, Campeche catches fell off sharply in 195U, It is not knoim, whether this decline is an indication of decreased abundance of pink shrimp since brown and white shrimp are included in the catches of the Florida boats fishing the Campeche waters. Recent infonmation on the status of explorations in the Gulf of Mexico is available from the publications of Hildebrand previously cited as vrall as from the cruise reports of the "Oregon", the exploratory vessel of the Bureau of Cormnarcial Fisheries of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, From the above sources the following observations have been excerpted, VJhite Shrimp 2/ Although white shrimp have been recorded in water as deep as k3 fathoms off Loiiisiana, commercial trawling is concentrated inside 20 fathoms; the bulk of the catch is made inside lU fathoms. There are seasonal variations in the depths where white slirimp occur and the tagging of shrimp has shown that in Louisiana they move offshore in the •winter. There are indications that the species is restricted to a narrower vertical range on the south Texas coast and off Tamaulipas than in Louisiana. Production varies greatly from year to year and seasonally! often most of the shiimp are caught in very small areas. There are indications that the catch of this species shows a long-terra tendency to decline in some areas* The 195l State of Texas landings of white slirimp, for instance, ware only about 30 percent of the 19l43 landings. The largest single fishing ground for vriiite shriiip is the territory from the mouth of the Mississippi River to Freeport, Texas, 2/ Source: Hildebrand, H. H,, Fauna of the Brovm Shrimia Grounds in the Woster'n Gulf, Institute of Marine Science, The University of Texas, Port Aransas, Texas, November 195U, v. III, No, 2, p. 21;0. 22 Almost all tho bottom insido lli fathoms is cloai' and suitable for trawl- ing excopt foi' Sabino and Heald Bank and the vicinity' of t'n:*ecks and snapper banks. There are also ref^ions of soft mud, such as off Timbaliar Pass and tho Atchafalaya Rivor, and extensive amounts of shell in 8 to iJi fathoms off Sabine, but either these hasixrds are not extensive, or they do not hinder fishing \d.th nodorn gear. Between nine fathoms and tho shoro there are numerous obstacles to trawling in the region from Freoport to tha Colorado River. Numerous snags and largo amounts of soft mud ("suck sand") iiialce fishing virtually impossible except in small prescribed areas. These small pockets are very productive at times, but even the most ex- perienced local fishermen sometimes lose gear. Presumably the Colorado and the Brasos Rivers deposit logs and mud isjhich roake this locality un- suitable for travdingt, Paralleling the coast from the Colorado River to about 27°N. is a belt of bottom inside Ik fathoms that is suitable for trawling. There are very few hazards to tra\ding in this region. From about 27°M. to ten miles south of the Rio Grande there is an area that is vuisuitable fox* trawling because of soft inud, coral, shell and topogi^aphic ii'rogularities » At 26° {48' N, ai'e found the small finger- like ridges ajid valleys discussod by Mattison (I9ii8), Some of these ridges are reputedly topped by dead coral. Much of the ground off Port Isabel, according to the fishormon, is covered with prickly conch, Murex fulvescens, and other shell. Shell bottom can be tra^/led, but net damage is much greater than on mud or sand bottoriis. A few patches of clear bottom are present, such as around the whistling buoy and a small ti-act along the beach about l5 miles north of Port Isabel. Fishermen with small boats aid small nets fi;;hed much more of the inshore area in former years than is now fished by the large trawlers. The grounds along the oast coast of Mexico suitable for white shrimp trawling are equcil to about one-tenth of tho white shrimp grounds in the Louisiana-Texas area. In part this is due to the much narrower continental shelf, but there are also large areas of coral, volcanic rocks and soft mud. Generally the production of white shrimp along the northern coast of Taraaulipas is very small, although fishermen in the Port Isabel area report that a run of white slirhnp occurs about once every ten years. Presujiably these fluctuations are caused by changes in the hydrographic condition of Laguna Madro del San Antonio, the only extensive nux'sery ground along the coast. There is a small stretch of trawlable bottom that begins about ton miles south of the Rio Grande and extends about 70 miles down tha coast. From this ground to Tampico tha bottom is mai'ked as hard on the tiydrographic charts. According to Texas fisher- men it is rough and covered vdth prickly conclis. Presumably "pockets" could be traxjled, and iiideed an extensive area near the Tairipico Light produces shrimp. From Taiapico to Tuxpan there is very little trawling groimd. Near Cabo Rojo a few white shrimp are caught» 23 In the Stats of Vera Grxia there is a small area of good bottom knotm to the Texas fisherraan as the Hautla grounda. As far as is knOTm on]y the immediate surroiindings of the estuaries of the Tuxpan, Tecolutla and Nautla Rivers are suitablo for trawling. A little trawl- ing is done off Alvarado, Vera Cruz. No other offshore white shrimp fishery has been developed along the Mexican coast this side of Obregon although a small area can bo trawled near Laguna Cannen. The most ii^iportant white shrimp fishing ground in Mexico lies off the coast of the States of Tabasco and Carapecha. Only the area of highest production is delineated in figure 1-7. Addi- tional gro\ind is trai/lable, but production is usually low, although oc- casionally large concentrations of white shrimp are encovmtered on the pink shrimp grounds to the east. Production is reported to be very slight in the area west of Funta Buey, where the hydrographic charts show a shell bottom. EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 1-7 This map is based on data supplied to Hildebrand by Mr. John Wiech, an experienced navigator and shrimp fishennan in the Gulf of Gampeche, It shows the fishing grounds and principal areas of production of shrimp in the Gulf of Gampeche from August, 1950 to August, 195l» Area 1. Pink shrimp; size 21/25 count; abundant during' hurricane season (August to November, 1950). Area 2. Pink shrimp; size 15/20; total fishing area small and consisting of small holes arnong the big logger-head sponges; areas buoyed when fishing. Area 3. Pinlc shrimp; big producing area from November 1, 1950, to January 1, 1951; bottom with occasional flat rocks, washboard topography but with fewer conchs than Area k» Area U. Pinlc shrimp abundant; also the area with the greatest concentration of conchs. Area 5» "Quick sand" and mud lumps; not fished. Area 6. Pinlc shrimp; size mostly 25/30 count; most of pink shrimp pro- duced hero from January to Juno, 195l» Area 7, V/hite shrirr^); during February and March, 1951 enormous quantities of \jhite shrimp vjare encountered here; some boats produced 60 to 70 barrels a day and production was slowed by inability to handle the shrimp faster. Area 8, VJhite shrimp; a few scattered boats found large concentrations of white shrimp during February and March, 1951. Area 9. Brotm shrimp; heavy concentration of large brown shrimp. Area 10. Brown shrimp; smaller than Area 9; most shrimp 20/30 count. Area 11. White shrimp; mixed sizes but mostly 20/25 count during Augiist, 1951. Area 12. Pinks merge with brown shrimp, but production soaLight dxiring 1950-51 that no boats fished the ground. Bottom veiy good. Area 13 -lU. Pear and New Bank, l8 fathoms; rough bottom but plenty of shrimp. Some fishing by a few boats, 2U White Shri mp Penaeus setiferus Brown Shrimr Penaeus aztecus Pl^4K Shrimp Pe naeus duoraru Not Suitable for trawling Dividing line between good trawling grounds to the south and west and the rough and difficult trawling to the north and. east FIGURE I - 7. —Major shrimping grounds in the Gulf of Campeche. (August, 1950 to August, 1951) Institute of Marine Science, Volume IV, No. 1. Brown Shrinp3/ Mr. Springer and Mr. Bullis, in charge of the exploratory ex- peditions of the "Oregon", the vessel of the United States Fish and Wild- life Service, conclude that the brown shrin^j have a wider depth range than white shrlj^. Although there are many instances, particularly at y Source: Hildebrand, H. H., Fauna of the Brown Shrijnp Grounds in the Western Gulf . Institute of Ilarine Science, the University of Texas, Port Aransas, Texas, November 1951*, v. III. No, 2. p. 2liO i > » da^m and at dusk, or in muddy water, when both species may bo taken in a single drag, brown shrimp are usustlly caught in night drags while white shrimp are talcon in the daytime. A fevi pinlc shri-np are found in the west- ern Gulf of Mexico, amd the range of the brcm shrimp may extend into the eastern Gulf, but the commercial importance of these out~of -range shrimp is not known, perhaps because of the limited observations of fluctuating availability. Broim shrimp have been taken in 8^ percent of all exploratory drags made by the "Oregon" in depths of 10 to 70 fathoms between Cape San Bias, Florida, westward and southward on the continental shelf to Carmen, Mexico. The area that has repeatedly yielded the highest catch rate of broim shrimp lies in the 30-to U5-fathom depth range between 88° and 90° west longitude on both sides of the Mississippi Delta. Until 1952 some sections in this area were only partly fished becaxise the soft mud bottom bogged trawling gear. After the introduction of the "mud rope", however, the entire area was being fished. Eastvmrd from 88° west longitude (east of Mobile) catch rates diminish rapidly. No catches of brown shrimp were made east of Cape San Bias, Florida. Westward from the Delta, all grounds that seasonally have com- mercially valuable stocks are being worked by the Texas and Louisiana fleets. Beyond the present depth range of this fishery, in 35 to 50 fathoms, there are extensive areas of good trawling bottom. Catches of the "Oregon" in this area averaged only 20 to 50 pounds per hour, a quantity which is considered below the present minimtun catch rate for offshore shrimp vessels. Off the Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas coasts the steep slope of the continental shelf beUreen 70 and 100 fathoms makes trawling difficult or impractical. Beyond 50 fathoms out to the edge of the continental shelf poor trawling bottom was encountered by the "Oregon" in its latest trips. Hildebrand goes into considerable detail in outlining the expanse of the fishing grounds for broxm shrimp in the Gulf. His descrip- tion of the fishing grounds is based on the results of his oim explora- tions and on information supplied to him by commercial fishermen in the area. The maps prepared by him do not show the fishery for small brovm shrimp in the protected waters of the bays and in depths of less than twelve fathoms since no separate statistics on this part of the fishery exist. He emphasizes, though, that at times large landings of small, UO- 65 count, shrimp are made in Louisiana and East Texas ports, (see figure 1-8) 26 ■'.'■• ■ . .'.'■;■ •'•.■- ;■.■.. ... 1 . ^V'] ■m v^-::;^^!v- •ii^SA J ■■.•;•. • • c . •. ' •::Wv^;^: ■•'■•^'v.iA Ry •a . • ■ . v/Z^-^vV 10 3 10 be c "i <4 3 in o I o lU >~ |5 10 3 U « ■♦-• M (0 •H :=> -p C'l L'J M c: tin M 21 There is an important ground for brown shrimp, in Hildebrand's words, off Southwest Pass at the mouth of the Mississippi River. However, traveling conditions are for the most part difficult and the returns are small compared with the rich "2U-10" beds so that many fishermen have emigrated with their large trawlers to Port Isabel, New interest was sho^m in the Southwest Pass ground when the fleet became so large in Port Isabel that the catch per boat became less than catches off Southwest Pass. However, not all this bottom is trawlable and much gear has been lost in soft mud and "mud lumps". Shaw (I9lij) described mud lumps as domes of fine, tough, structureless clay rising two to ten feet in height usually within a mile or two of the end of the passes of the Mississippi River. Fenneraan (1938) favored the theory that thin layers of highly mobile clay under the pressure of accumulating sediments on the delta are caused to flow later- ally and break through to the surface at favorable points. Whether the mud Ixjmps, as used in the Gulf fishermen's vocabulary, are the same type as the ones studied by Shaw, is not known. Fishermen have used this term to describe trawling conditions 60 to 70 miles from land. Springer (1952) identifies "mud lumps" as soft mud bottom. Another bottom type is the very soft mud of the Delta region and offshore in east Texas. Possibly this condition is synonymous with the so-called "suck sand" found off the Colorado River and on Campeche Bank. Often an entire rig is lost when such trawling conditions are encoimtered. From Southirest Pass to the submarine canyon, a distance of approximately 20 nautical miles, there is considerable trawling in depths of I4O to $$ fathoms. All other major brown shrimp grounds in the western Gulf of Mexico are in shallovjer water. The Southvest Pass grounds continue westward from the submarine canyon in depths of 12 to 29 fathoms to the shell ridge off Big Constance Bayou. In this part of the Southwest Pass groxmds there are obstacles to traveling such as dy- namited wrecks south of Ship Shoal and the extensive area of soft mud south of Trinity Shoal. Some of the soft mud bottom off Trinity Shoal is fished by wrapping the footrope of the trawl until it is a foot or more in diameter. Many places on the Southv/est Pass grounds in former years were seasonally fished for large white shrimp, and it is probably on these grounds that there is the greatest interspecific competition be- tween the adult white and brown shrimp. Prior to the summer of 19^3 the vast area from Big Constance Bayou to the Colorado River was not fished for brovm shrimp. It was deemed that there was very little bottom suitable for traveling because of an extensive shell ridge, snapper banks and soft mud, A few bro\m shrimp vjere caught off Freeport in lU to 17 fathoms, and small brown shrimp were caught inshore of the 12-fathom contour. Most of the land- ings of bro\m shrimp at Freeport, Texas, were caught off Pass Cavallo or off Obrogon, Mexico, Active exploration in the area east of the Colorado River was carried out by the shrimping fleet during the summer 28 of 19I?3, and the largest catches per vmit of effort vrere inado in that area. Most of tho fishing uas dono in depths of lii to 17 fathoms from Fi'eopoi't to Sabine. Some fishing was dono in 19 fathons southeast of Frooport, and some bottopi vms reported in deeper water. One of the big disadvantages of this area is the great distance from shore; consequently, there is veiy little v/intor fishing in tho area. The bottom types off Sabine are described as follo;rss 1, Beach to 8 fathoms. Sand, mud and some shell, but tho bottom is clear and suitable for trawling except for Sabine Banlc, a rocl-cy area* 2« Eight to 18 fathoms. Shell, mostly prickly conchs, Mm* ex fulvescena and Stroiiibus alatwi. 3. Kighteon to 20 fathoms. I'fud bottom (some trawling can be done hero but it is 6 to 9 hours riinning time from Sabine), U. Twenty fathoms and beyond. Too many mud lumps for trawl- ing. Fishermen have lost nets in 27 fathoms off Sabine, where bottom looked clear on the depth recorder but the nets sank into the soft mud. Hildobriind calls the largest single ai'ea of trawlable bottom for broxm shrimp the "Texas" ground. This fishing ground extends from the Colorado Rivor to Sobreo Bank about 30 miles north of Port Isabel, Although the entire region from 12 to 50 fathoms is suitable for trawl- ing, it has been divided into two parts wJ.th the 28 fathom contour as the dividing line because this contour marks the seaward limit of the most profitable fishing,, (see figure 1-9) Bettj^eon 12 and 2^ fathoms on the Texas grounds there is an estimated 2,700,000 acres suitable for trawling. The bottom type is pre- dominantly mud, and only a few snapper banks and wrecks hinder trawling. Possibly tho most extensive area of bad bottom is in the 17-1/2 -to 20- fathom zone off Pass Gavallo. At its northeastern edge tho mud bottom is replaced by shell and the fishery is relatively unproductive in thia region. The southern edge is highly irregular and narrow belts of trawl- able bottom link it vrith tho "2ii«lO" grounds to the south. Snapper banks and shell occur along the south edge of the Texas grounds. As previously mentioned, the present seavrard limit is prescribed by the productivity of the grounds, i,e., the trawrlable bottom beyond 29 fathoms produces loss shrimp par hour of trawling than the inshore grounds. Nevertheless, there is some trawling in 29 to 50 fathoms, but the ai'ea is not vjoll knovm to most Texas fishermen, and gear is lost because of the ignorance of trawling hazards. There are a number of snapper banks in thia district, notably the ones in Ul fathoms off Aransas Pass* Although the extent of trawlable bottom is undoubtedly large, no estiinates of the area involved were iiiade because little is known about the bottom. 29 i w^. M^ WHITE SHRIMP (Penaeus setlferus) Shore to IZ fathoms except area between Colorado R. and &raxos R. BROWN SHRIMP (Penaeus aitecusl 12. to 2& -fathonns, major shrirnping g rou nd s . BROWN SHRIMP (Penaeus axtecus) 28 to 50 -fa-thoms, suitable trawling ground but very little exploitation. -2fe°- N *, O T I C Jk I _1^__10_1S 10 ba.se.-. usctGS lin FIGURE I - 9. — Texas shrimping grounds. Institute of Marine Science, Volune IV, No. 1. 30 From Sebroo Bank to about 20 miles below tho Rio Grando, thore is an area tliat is not fishad regularly. The bottom is rouph and thore are locally largo concentrations of shell and sand dollars. Thoae obstacles plna the snapper brinks discourage most fishermen from travrling here. Some tratiling is done at deptlis of 2li, 32-33, and 35 fathoms. The next importcuit grovuid, called by Hildobrojid the "2U-10" ground after its most productive portion, extends southward from about 20 miles below the Rio Grando to northeast of Sugarloaf Mountain at approximately 23° 15' N. From Sucarloaf Mountaiji southward to Punta Jerea, there are small "pockets" of trawlable ground that should bo in- cluded. There axe an estimated 2,300,000 acres of trawlable bottom in the "2lt-10" ground, Tho fishery is concentrated between 12 and hO fathoms, except in the region of 2l4° 10' N, whore rocks (probably igneous in origin) extend out to 27 fathoms. The depth of the fishery varies seasonally, and the bulk of the xrinter and spring catches ai'e made in depths of 30 to UO fathoi;i3. A nuinber of trawling conditions are encoimtered in tho area. Moot of tho bottom is mud, some of it is soft mud and a small part is shell, (see figure I - 10) Bottreen Punta Jerea and Lobos Island the bottom is roclcy. Coral and volccriic necks hinder trawling. The knoim shrimp grounds con- sist of "pockets" of trawlable bottom. Occasionally, a few large catches from this area are unloaded in Port Isabel, The next locality of importance is tho Lobos Island ground, •where a small fishery has been developed about 10 miles south of the islcmd, Tho chief pockets of travjlable bottom are in 16-17, 2^-26 and 3U-36 fathoms, and most of tho trawlable bottom, according to the fishermen, is reddish mud. Although this fishing ground has been kno\m to Texas fisherii;on since the days of extensive e:>q3loration along the Mexican coast dxuring 19U7-50, it was not intensively fished until the spring of 1953* Perhaps the heavy run daring 1953 uas, indeed, greater than in previous years as somo fiyhcridon thinlc, and it may well have boon related to the decreased run- off and rainfall on the nurseiy grovmdis in Laguna Tamiahuao Between the Lobos Island ground and Obregon, no important brown slirliiip grounds exist, altliough there are pockets of tra^/lable bottoiii at least as far as Alvarado, One of tho largest of these pockets is in 22- 35 fathoms east of Alvarado. Tho Obregon gi-ound is dolinoatod in figm-a 1-7, It consists of about 800,000 acres of productive bottom. Mud is tho predominant type of bottom and the grounds were found to be surprisingly free of shell during tho investigations conductv^d by Hildebrand in 195l, The limits of this fishei'y are proscribed by sm;xll populations of shrimp on tho neighboring grounds leather than traxjlabla bottoms. Some brown slirimp are caught as far east as Chanpoton, the viost boundai-y of tho pinlc shrimp grounds, but this fishery developed after catches fell on neighboring pink and brown shriiap grounds. The wrest boundary is a shell ridge that run;! offshore from Chiltepoc, At times, a few shriiap are caught in 23- 26 fathoms in the area batvieen tho Chiltepec shell ridge and Laguna Carmen. 31 z^^ o o ^ ^ ^ White. Sh ri m p Penaeus setiferus -y^^x Brown Shrimp O S 10 10 )0 40 base-, use 1 G S 1001 0) 26' 24* FIGURE I - 10.— "2li-10" Shrimping grounds. Institute of Marine Science, Vol\iine IV, No. 1, Tho main bro>m shi'intp grouiuli a3 deacribdd :Ln tho prooading paragraphs ai-a as follows: Grouvulj Estxwab3d Trawlablo Area Acras So\-ithwG3t Pa33 Ground . 1,8CX),000 Toxas Qroi-md (main rogioa) 2,700,000 "2li-10" Grouud 2,300,000 Lobos I^la'.ul Ground 23', 000 Obregon Ground 800,000 P.inJc ShriTiip ■ I ■ II . I rip PioJc shirlTiip In the Gulf are talcon primarily in the e-astem part of tho conbinontal sholf • Tho oaatora Gulf continental shelf zono extends from Pensacola south along tho Florida coast and includoa thti CawpechG BanJc doim to Carr.ion, Hoxico, Thoso two aoctiona ajj'o characterised by sand, shell, and coral gravely and by livo coral overlying white, gritty, calcareous mud. In tho woatern Gulf pinlt ghrl'iip occur aa juveniles in tlia bay3 of '£oxn3 and a fow adulta, leay thcin one percent of the total catch, aro captui"od along tho cocuib, Hildebrand (3.955) says that rjoiiietJJiiOii in tho spring of tho ytiar a large nuiuber of sinall spotted (pinlc) shrimp are cnptui'ed, according to fishorinen's I'oporta, in depths of less than 20 fathoiuji along tho Texas coast. This mm especially ti'ae diur-ing the spring of 1937j„ Tho only pink shriiup ground of ijiiportanco in the -western Gulf is off tho const of CcuupochoB NuMorous conchs, largo loggerhead sponges, coral and rough bottom plague tho sJirimp fishermen in this region, but rudch of thvi ;u.ua outLbiud in fi;^ui'0 I - 7 cmi be trui/led. Tho pi;ik sluriiup has ixn ecological pi*ofei-ence for shell sand rather than tho mud bottom on which tho bvoun shrL.ip tlu'ive. Most of tho pinl: shriinp fishox-y is con- centrated in depths of k to 2$ fathoiii3» Spririgor reporting on his explorations states thab coimaercial concontrationij of pink-gx'ooved slirijup \-i^re found to extend beyond tho heavily ijox-ked ai'ons on both the Diy Tortugtis and Gulf of Caiapocho groui'ids. In August 195l the "Oregon" ran a series of drags a\fay from tlio i'o].ativvj]y confijiGd Ui-fathow fishing ai-ea off Cjufipoche and dewon- stratod that equally high catches could be wfiinbainod out to 2$ fathoios at di.r.tancos of 20 to 25 lidloa at/ciy from the area of intensive fishing » In Jime 1950, Januaiy and Februeuy 1951, July and December 1952, and in Juno 1953, o^rploratory aoundintjs nore mado in 10 to 25 fathoina 33 between Apalachea Bay and tho Dry Tortugas grovinds in search of level bottom sufficiently clear of coral and loggerhead sponge to permit trawl- ing with conventional type trawling gear. The few drags made in leaa hazardous-appearing areas off Cedar Keys, Tanpa, and Boca Grande generally resulted in severe gear damage. Owing to the time-consuiaing nature of developing trai^ling gear suited to this type of bottom, experiments were limited in favor of ex- plorations in areas suitable to existing gear. However, some progress has been made in combating certain trawling hazards. Several types of bottomless trawls were used successfully in loggerhead-sponge areas. They were designed to brealc the sponge ax/ay from the bottom and permit it to pass between stringers running from the tickler chain back to the unweighted lead line. Subsequent comparison drags mth standard com- mercial trawls shovjed an average reduction of 75 percent of trash and scrap fish and a reduction of the shrimp catch by about 30 percent. Extensive areas along the wast coast of Florida and on the Carapeche Bank within the depth range of pinlc-grooved shrimp Penaeus duorarum received scanty exploratory trawling prior to 19$h-~~^hS~~' possible development of confined liraited production areas was indicated by the occasional good catches in small isolated gulleys of clear mud bottom; the presence of pink shrimp in Boca Grande Harbor, Tampa Bay, Cedar Keys, and off Apalachicolaj and scattered pink slirimp caught in exploratory drags throughout the 10-to 25-fathora depth range on bad bottom. However, either clear bottom should be located or gear devel- oped to overcome the natural trawling hazards. Royal Red Shrimp Beyond the edges of the continental shelf there has been no commarcial shrimp fishing in the Gulf of Mexico. Snapper fishermen have extended the range of their fishing from about 80 fathoms to about 150 fathoms within the past few years. This has been possible because of ne\r developments In fishing gear, such as power reels, stainless steel wire lines, and electronic aids for finding position, depth, and good fishing places. Deep-water fishing for snappers has not been better than fishing in shallower water, but it has made it possible for snapper fishermen to move offshore during periods of teinporaiy poor fish- ing on the shallow banks. The net result has not been larger daily catches but better trips and greater seasonal earnings for well-equifjped and well-managed vessels. In the opinion of the exploratory fishing and gear research specialists of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the devel- opment of a deep-water fishery for Royal Red shrimp Hyinanopenaeus robustus may eventually create a supplement to the inshore fisheiy :ija~the~GuiF'of — Mexico. Preliminary explorations of the "Oregon" indicate that the pros- pects for coijiiuarcial exploitation of Royal Red shrimp are good. 3I4 Bullis (1956) described the results of these explorations aa follows : "The first catches of Royal Red slirijiip in tha Gulf were made while the "Oregon" vjas priiaarily engaged in explorations for brovm-grooved shrimp, Penaeus aztecus. In July 1950, a series of trawling stations was made off the Mississippi Delta, in increasing depth inter- vals beyond the limits of the continental shelf. At that time, small numbers of Royal Red shrimp ware taken in depths of 190 to 232 fathoms. During the follo\/ing four years, which were primarily devoted to exploration for shallower-water shrin^p and for tuna, a short period of each traxjling cruise was spent on ad- ditional deep-water dragging. By the end of 195U, ex- ploratory coverage of the 100-to 300-fathom range in the eastern Gulf between the Mississippi Delta and Key VJest, and along the Texas Coast vias extensive, viith limited vjork carried out to depths of ^00 fathoms. Only scattered drags were made off Louisiana, the Gampeche Banks, and in the Gulf of Campeche. "In 19^5... a series of cinu-ses were programmed for the "Oregon" to provide a more comprehensive picture of the commercial potentialities of Royal Red shrimp.... In March 19^5, a series of 3k trawling stations were made in depths of I60 to 270 fathoms between the Mississippi Delta and Cape San Bias, Florida. In July, roxind-tho-clock trawling v/as attempted in depths of 190 to 300 fathoms south and southeast of Dry Tortugas.... Follov7ing this work, some exploration of the 200-fathan depth range was carried out on the eastern end of Nicolas Channel along the north coast of Cuba, and in the Straits of Florida off Key Largo, In September, exploratory coverage was extended along the Louisiana Coast.... Dviring the last half of the cruise, the Delta to Cape San Bias area vfas revrorked using 80-foot balloon trawls .... "The distributional picture that emerged from this work showed Royal Red shrimp to be present throughout the Gulf of Mexico on all types of bottom in a depth range of 190 to 270 fathoms, with a maximum range of 1^0 to liOO fathoms," Comraercial operations for Royal Red shrinip in the Gulf of Mexico on an experimental basis vjere conducted in September 19^2 and throughout most of 1956. Royal Red shrimp catches of commercial significance, according to Bullis (19^6), wore restricted, for the most part, to two well-defined areas: off Dry Tortugas and east of the Mississippi Delta (see figures I - 11 and I - 12). 35 Bad bottom. Fishing area. Low concentration 24-S: sT^ sr FIGURE I - 11.— Dry Tortugas Royal Red shrijup grounds showing areas of fishing concentrations and bad trav;ling bottom. 36 e CO o T) -p G ■p B W) bn c f^ •H •^ Vi at XI ^H CO +i -a t3 S 5 ■^ ^ !>. rt o « CO C 0) n •♦-» •H rH -p 0) (C) Q U •P •H ct a 0) p< o •H c CO o w t) •H CO tin CO •S =f •s 1 •H • however, the best catches of Royal Red shrimp v/ere all made off the east coast of Florida between Cape Canaveral and Saint Augustine , FACTORS DETERMINING THE AVAILABILITY OF SUPPLY Production planning and budget preparation are a lot more difficult for the fishermen than for the averajre enterpreneur. Success in fishing operations depends largely on fisherman's luck and the skill of captain and crew. Yet, the fisherman cannot afford to ignore bio- logical considorations relating to the nature of the fish supply nor conditions attendant to the marketing of his product. His study of these factors is complicated by the fact that changes in fishing grounds from year to year are not uncommon. Not only does the volume of catch change but also the types of species talcen, Nevertheless, some gener- alizations about supply can safely be made. The variety and size, as well as the quantity of shrimp land- ed during a given period, will depend basically upon the availability of the species and fishing intensity or effort. The availability of shrimp in turn, is governed by (1) the inherent life cycle of shrimp and (2) the influence of environmental factors on reproduction, growth, and migration vihile the fishing effort is dependent principally upon (1) prices and market conditions, (2) weather conditions, (3) conservation lavrs aid the extent of their enforcement, and (i;) the economic status of the fish- ermen. The composition of shrimp landings during any given time is the result of the inter relationship of all of these factors uith certain factors predominating at different times. The life cycle of shriji.p is primarily responsible for the seasonal chaj^acter of the fishery. It accounts for the presence or absence of the stu-imp in certain vraters at a given time and has an influence on the conservation laijs of the various states. Inclement weather will hranper fishing operations regionally at certain times and thus further reinforce the seasonal characteristics of the fishery. As an example of the life cycle of shrimp, and the seasonality of the fishery, the biological development of white shriifip Penaeus setiferus talcen in the shalloi/ waters of the south Atlantic and Gulf is described below, 38 The shrimp cpr-m during the spring and summer in the open vators of tho occ:ai. In the L-.irval stage tho shrimp float freely in the vrater and arc moro or loss at the mercy of tho currents. Tho young shrijiip then oiove to tho ijisido lyatoro wliere they can bo taken in great abundance in the sounds, bays, rivers, and bayous throughout the spring and suraaer. The inside uaters apparently servo as nursery grounds for tho youn;^ shrimp. As tho shrimp grow they tend to seek larger bodies of water and by Juno, July or Auf^ust, depending upon the locality, some of them attain sufficient size (about U inches) to enter the commercial fishery. By September practically the entire fishery is composed of young shrimp derived from the spaiming of the preceding spring and suiruner. With the oncoming of vdnter and the resultant cooling of the waters tho larger shrimp move to deeper and more stabilized bodies of water such as the sounds and the open waters of the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico. Dui'ing the v/inter, at times of extremely cold weather, the shallow in- side waters xrhich are readily affected by changes in tenperature are frequently entirely depopulated of shriji^p. Throughout the winter the groxHih rate of the shrJJiip is lessened but with the coming of spring and the warmer waters thoy again start groi/ing rapidly. At this time their sex products begin to mature and spasming follovjs. The disappearance of tho mature shrimp is associated with spasming. From the evidence gathered the cor.mion shrimp apparently dies after spawning ojid must, therefore, be * considered an annual. (Lindner and Anderson 1956) In conformity with this biological pattern, the fishing season starts along the Atlantic coast in spring and moves steadily southward, ending in Doccinber or later in the Mexican grounds. Shrimping in the Carolinas and Georgia begins in May, reaches a poalc in midsTimmer, and drops off until the close of the season in November. On the Florida east coast thci season starts in June and continues through December, In the northern Gulf coast area, vjhite shrimp is landed from Augoist through January and periodicaUy through the remaining months. There are two seasons for white shrimp in Texas— one in the spring and one in the fall. The spring season is of minor importance, Brotm shrimp follows a similar seasonal pattern in that heaviest runs begin in northern areas and progress steadily soxithward as the season groxjs oldor. Heavy brown shrimp runs start in July and last through Jan- uaiy. Pink shrimp, found principally in the Dry Tortugas, has few season- al limitations. To protect the growing shrimp the various states have enacted statutes establishing or authorizing regiaations prohibiting or restric- ting activities seasonally. The pink shrimp fishery on the Dry Tortugas and Campeche grounds is seasonally affected by the hurricanes which greatly increase the haz- ardj to boats during the months from July to September, 39 Orlti;-; to tho r'>aoon:'.l char.-.'ctc):'iGtn.c;! of ;L;upply tlio oxtuiujlon o.r ttio f lyhinp ai'or.3 in thu Gulf in recent yoo.vo has had a marked influ- CTico on tbo I'larkctinn pattern of t^hririp. At one timo, hc"a\ry landings of ahrinp ■v.'are nonnally mado only in the late af^i.nncr and fall rioiitliri, excopt for ? winter fishery off Cape Co.navcral in Florida. Ay other fiahinf; pround?) uere opened up tho avail- ability of froL:;h clu'l'ip has spread throughout the year. When the llorf';on City, Louisiana, fishery bcfjan, fishinn: in that area u.'ug Tnorc ovenly dis- tributed d'.u'in'T the cntiro yoar. Tho porccntarre of the total catch taken in these uaters, houcver, was not lirge onouf'h to even out the total <.;unply. As othor new grounds vj-jro opened, the trend toi/ard stabilization of iiionthly catches incrcagcd. The fishery in the Dry Tortu;^as augmented the supply durin^^ the winter and early spring months, while that of Pasca^oula and Bayou La Batro brought in lar^or supplies during tho lato spring and early suwrner months. The leveling out of supply vrill tend to reduce the fluctuations in price. Fries, in turn, ajid marlcet conditions will inflaenoo fishing effort, othor thinj^s renaining equal. A higher price, .and more attractive profit-';Tr;ild.n_'!; opportunities, nox'mally Tjill spiu* tho fishermen on to giroator ezortion. Doclminfj profit -male in p opportunities may produce the saino result when under {generally depressed conditions a greater effort on tho fisherman's part may be required to assure him at least of a subsistence st?jidard of living. In the Alaska fishery, tha only restriction on fisliing opera- tions is a clOGod fseauon in specified areas which extends from February 15 to April 30* 1'li<3 number of fisherinen participatin;^ in tho slirimp finhory during; th^ opan season, varies from yoar to yoar depending upon the profitability of thu slirimp fichary as compared T.dth other fisheries of the territory. Most of the veissels used in the shrimp fishery are designed primarily for other fisheries. In th^; Nortli Atlantic Stat 5:;, the fisheries of Maine and MasMachu^jirl.-. I.;-; are rjoasonal due to i'.ho summar mi.f'rations of tho slirimp. Most of th'! catch is i:iada in tho lat.j winter months and tho season usually end.':5 early in Ajjril, Most of the vessels used in the shriiup f 1 .Iiory nvo d 'sifnod a.s drafjr3 and traul^irs, and normally tr^url for bottoiii fiiili, principally ocean porcli. These viijsels seldom f^o after sliriinp unle.;s thr.t fishery appears to offer eraator financial returns for their fishiiit^; efforts! than tho fisheries they ai'o normally engaged in« In tlie Now York and How Jersey fishery, shrimp may be taken the yoar - round, but tho petiJc f it;hing poriod is during tho suribuer months* Substantially the entire catch of these two States is used aa bait for sport fishing, and the graatest dci.iand for bait shrimp is during tho late spring, sur.aner, and early fall months. The California fishei^ in San Francisco Bay is a year-round oporatioa, but tViore is a closed season in the ocean fishery, \rtiich Uo usually extends from October 16 to April 30, The fishinc croXt and gear u:s-cd in tlie ocean fi!5b.ery are ear^ily adiipted to other fichciriea, Thore- foro, the intensity with which thy slirimp fishery is purauod during the opon cc;i-jon often hxpj-os on tho profitability of fishing for shrjjnp as against fishing for other specios. In the Washington fishei^, the open seanon In certain areaa extenda from April 1 to November 30 for the trap fishery and froia July 1 to November 30 for the trawl fishery. But even during the open season the mviiber of crai't and fishermen engaged in the shrimp fishery is contjjiront upon the profitability of such ventures as compared with other fisheries. As is true of many of the other areas discussed, the VGDselD employed in the shrL^np fishery were primarily designed for other fisheries . The fisherman are equally as proficient in the one as in the other; and whether or not they engage in the shrimp fishery or in soma other fiyhei-y is dependent upon which pursuit appears to offer the greater financial return. In the eight States comprising the South Atlantic and Gulf Area, the inshore or coastal fisheries are seasonal due to the migrations of the Ghrimpj and these vary slightly from one State to the other. In the South Atlantic States the migrations are along the coast, but in the Gulf States they are seauord-shoreward. Some of the States have closed seasons which coincide more or less irxth these migrations. In the offshore fisheries, particularly in the Gulf Area, the slirimp fishery is a year-round operation,, and many fishermen and vessels are engaged exclusively in this fishery. This is particularly true of the larger vessels, most of the newer ones having been designed and built solely for operation in the shrimp fishery. The smaller vessels and boats, whose shrimping operations are confined almost entirely to the inshore or coastal fisheiy, frequently change to other fisheries during the closed seasons for shriinp and x^rh3n other seasonal fisheries (crabs, oysters, etc.) appeal- to offer greater financial return. THE II4PACT OF THE i;;XTENSlON OF TliE. FISHING AREA IN RECENT YMRS The discoveiT of new fishing grounds in the Gulf Area has wrought important changes in the shrimp industry. The greater distance from shore of the new shrimp beds has necessitated the building of larger, more sturdily constructed vessels. To prevent deterioration, better methods of handling, storing and transporting shrimp had to be developed. The rich beds of the Dry Tortugas and of the Gulf of Carapeche, at the same time, produced a shift in the center of production in the fishory to the west. Lured by the success of fishing the new grounds, some fishermen transferred their activities from the Atlantic coast to southuost Florida. Simultaneously, the operations out of ports located in the southern portion of Texas mushroomed. Other fishermen, reluctant kl to abandon the Atlantic fishery altogether, started to fish part-time in the nexjly discovered grounds while continuing to take advantage of the fishing season for white shrimp on the Atlantic coast. Since a fishing craft is highly mobile, boat owners are in a position to "follow the crop" . Domicile for these fishermen, consequently, has become a mere formality of registration. The migratory character of a section of the industry has left its imprint on shriniping as an occupation. Shrimping was at one time very seasonal and often v/as combined with agricultural pursuits. While in the northern extremity of the south Atlantic coast shrimping and farming may still be combined by some seasonal fishermen, shrimping more recently has become for most a fvill-time occupation. To be able to work the year around the fishermen has to change residence with changing em- ployment opportunities. The readiness of the shrimp fisherman to follow the job, in turn, has solved many problems of labor recruitment and has made possible the establishment of new shrimp bases without regard to existence of a local labor supply. Aside from a relocation of existing shrimping activities the discovery of the nev; grounds led to an influx of fishermen who traditionally fished for other fish; and of even more significance, the influx of people formerly not connected iri.th the fishing industry. The changing geography of the fishery has affected the size of enterprise. The need to obtain financing for the larger boats re- quired for the Dry Tortugas and Campoche fisheries has forced the fish- erman to turn to processors, and interests outside the industry, for funds. There also has been a tendency on the part of boat ovmers to associate with fleets operated by processors j in some instances, resulting in vertical integration of fishing with processing operations. The geographic distribution of shrimping activities influence the economic life of various areas of the coxmtry to different degrees. Outside the Atlantic and Gulf coast regions shrimping is of relatively small economic significance. Even in the two principal regions of pro- duction, however, the industry is of varying importance locally. Shrimp fishing and processing, thus, may be a major econoiaic factor in smaller communities in this area while in the larger cities it may be of minor significance as a source of income. There are a few cities such as Brosmsville, Texas, and Tanqpa, Florida, which may be called specialized shrimp ports. In most ports in the area, however, other marine pursuits are carried on in addition to shrimping. Due to differences in its geographic complexion, the shrimp industry in the South may be classified into four major sub-areas; the Atlantic Coast Area comprising the States of North and South Carolina, Georgia, and northeastern Florida; southviestern Florida with the prin- cipal ports of Key West, Tampa, and Fort Myers; the north Gulf region which includes the coastal areas of Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana; and, finally, Texas with its more than i;00 miles of coastline. il2 Each region has doveloped individually and has adapted itself to meet its ovm particular needs, to maximize the advantages and to minimize the disadvantages of its location. All of the areas are affected, hov/ever, by geographi.cal forces that stem from the distributional pattern of the national market for shrimp and the distributional channels which this market has developed. The Atlantic coastal area is favorably situated in relation to the nation's most concentrated consumer market — the industrial north- east. On the other hand, the discovery of more productive grounds else- where has placed it at a comparative disadvantage in respect to supply. The Florida Gulf coast is in close proximity to valuable shrinp resources off the Dry Tortugas and Sanibol Island. The industry hero also draws a large portion o f its resources from the waters 6f the Gulf of Campeche. Although farther aviay from the Neivlfork market than are the Carolinas and Georgia, Florida is stili close enough to be able to ship fresh shriiTip there in refrigerated trucks. The north Gulf coastline is crowded with many small inlets, bayous, and canals that provide suitable conditions for shrimp propa- gation. Shrimp caught here are generally small and lend themselves to the needs of the canning industry; and historically Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama have been important producers of the canned product. The discovery and development of important shrimping grounds in Gulf xiraters off the Texas and northern Mexican coasts have prompted the remarkable expansion of the industry in Texas, Production has in- creased rapidly in recent years and several Texas ports have risen to dominance. Because of the r elatively great distances from Texas to large consumer markets, the freezing and breading processes are of paramount importance, and Texas leads the industry in these linos, Figiire 1-13 shovrs the principal shrimp landing and pro- cessing areas of the South Atlantic and Gulf regions. Since shrimping is of such relatively small importance elsewhere, this map, for all practical pvirposes, presents a panorama of the domestic industry, SUPPLY OUTLOOK Speciilation about the future of the shrimp industry revolves around the possibilities of expanding supply. On the demand side, a principal problem is the maintenance of prices at levels which will not frighten potential consumers out of the market. VJith the notable exception of a period of high prices in 1953 which acted as a temporary deterrent to sales, consumers have shown generally a willingness to absorb vjhatevor quantities of shirimp are channeled to them. Consumption, in a period of tvro decades, has in- creased three-fold. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that demand may continue to respond favorably provided prices of shrimp remain com- petitive v;ith other protein foods, k3 n 4 u Id bO ta n 0) o P. a •H cd I-l (a « 01 ■p CO ■p I i UJ _J g _l M < z ^ (/5 > UJ CD o z z y- 5 (T o IJ O (t q: CL 1 m 1 < hh Flexibility of .supply in tho shrirnp industry is largely con- trolled by nature. IVhen demand increases, supply cannot be ac^usted easily. The increased demand can only be met by intensified, and some- times more costly, efforts. liihen shrimping was on a small scale, and the industry was more local in character, the fisherman .'idapted his operations to tho nm of the s hrimp on the grounds he custoinarily fished. More recently, the fisherman has striven to overcome limitations of supply by following the shTimp nins. Thus, by shifting from one base to another, he has tried to evade the lox^js of seasonal fluctuations. Similarly, he has taken advantage of tho nei;ly discovered beds in the Gulf of Mexico to extend his operations to off-shore waters. In some vrays, the attempts to overcorae shortages of supply have added to, rather than subtracted from, the problems of the fisherman. The introduction of larger boats has increased the cost of production as well as the investment in vessel and gear. Specialized equipment of trawler boats has enhanced the efficiency of the vessels. On the other hand, it has aJ-so decreased the potential use of the vessels for other operations and thus added to the risks the boat ovmer has to assume. More labor is needed to man the boats vjhich sometimes operates to re- duce the share of earnings to the individual fishennan. The shift from a fixed domicile to a migratory existence has frequently disrupted the ties of the fisherman iri.th his local environment and thus reduced his economic and social stability. On the whole, however, the fisherman has profited from the expansion of supply. A distinction must be made between an extension of fishing to newly discovered areas and increased operations due to accentuated competition for already exploited resources. The later may result in "over-shrimping" wl:iich more often is an economic, rather than a bio- logical, phenomenon. Characteristically, in over-shrimping, more boats are added to the fishing fleets, the number of trips is increased, and idle time in the harbors is shortened. Thus, more boats, fishing with increased intensity, compete for the available supply at any given point. The stepped-up fishing activities may not lead to a permanent reduction in the total stock of shrimp in the sea; but the productivity of individual vessels is adversely affected. The tendency to overfish frequently is characteristic of periods of adverse market conditions. It then becomes evident that the shriirper has little cominand over the marketable supply. Instead of adjusting their catches to the shrinking demand, the fishermen as a group tend to intensify their fishing effort and increase their catches to compensate for the lower prices and declining revenue, thus adding to the surplus and aggravating the market depression. In recent years this tendency has been reinforced by the change in the scale of opera- tions in the shrijiip fishery. Production on a larger scale has in- creMsed fixed costs of oparation and is encouraging a pattern under which the operator is forced to continue fishing as long as out-of- pocket expenses are recovered. With the inception of year-round ll? operations, secondary pursuits durinr; off-seasons have been abandoned; the fishennen now contijiuo fishing regardless of tho vagaries of the market. A vicious circle is set in motion where a high demand and high prices encourage an infliix of newcomers into the industry which because of the natural limitations of supply leads to over-shrimping. A weaken- ing of the market at such times, rather than rectifying the situation, may only serve to accentuate the tendency to overshrimp. Ultimately, large losses suffered by the fishermen over a period of time lead to the withdrawal of some operciting units from the fishery. This process of attrition in accordance ifith the principle of the survival of the fit- test, or in this instance, of the best-financed, generates instability and benefits neither fisherman nor consumer. The answer to these prob- lems lies in the intelligent management and control of the fishery with the tvon goals of giving the full-time shrimp fisherman an opportunity to remain in the industry and of attempting to expand the fishery tlirough addition of heretofore untapped resources. Overfishing of a different sort which may have serious con- sequences of a biological nature, in addition to detrimental effects on the fisherman's welfare, may be connected indirectly with technological developments in the processing of shrimp. The introduction of mechani- cal peeling and deveining devices in canning operations permits the use of smaller shrimp. If, as the result of this irjiovation, a larger pro- portion of small shrimp is taken, the species may sustain some damage. Evidence of rising demand is fui-nished in table 1-2, which shovjs imports as a percentage of total annual market supply for selected years fron 1931 to 1955. Imports jumped from 6.5 percent of total supply in 19h^ to 26,1 percent in 19^0; preliminary data for 1957 indicate imports were 36.0 percent of the total supply, TABLE I - 2.— SHRIMP IMPORTS AS PERCENT OF TOTAL UNITED STATES SHRIMP SUPPLT, SPECIFIED YEARS (Heads -off weight) Year Total Imports Imports as supply percentage of supply Thous and Thousand pounds pounds 1931 60,2liO 1,078 1.8 1936 73,138 809 1.1 19U0 95,951 5,02U 5.2 19U5 121,726 7,876 6.5 1950 15)4,125 ii0,l98 26.1 1951 175,292 i4l,82U 23.9 1952 173,667 38,U71 22.2 1953 198,006 U3,09U 21.8 195ii 201,178 Ul,5l9 20.6 1955 199,151 53,772 27.0 1956 202,001 68,618 3U.0 1957 191,350 69,732 36.0 k6 As long ar;o as 1931> concern ijas expressed ovor thc5 possibility of doplotioTi of slirimp supplinrs. In r^isponne to rerjucsta from tho industry and State conservation fi[^oncict;, the United States Biireau of Fisheries established the Shrimp Invastigations (later on called Gulf Investigations) whose prajicipal taislc iras tho onalysis of tho siirinip supply. Several times since the start of these invostipationo people familiar with the Industry hav« expressed fears tliat production was at or po.st its peak. Each tine the.'je pesj;imists have been wong, Oaly throe yoara before tho opening up of the Dry Tortagas and Cojiipeche i^rounds one authority in the field ques- tioned tho probability of the discovery of new grounds accessible to the domestic fleet. The experiences of recent years tend to discoura^je tho makins of any catej;oric predictions reg:irding the liiJcelihood of discovering new grounds. Tho consensus of the people in the fishery is that it would bo impractical to increase pi-oduction of the fishery on grounds novr fished. From the standpoint of the domestic fishcnnan the best solution to the supply problem consists in adding to currently utilized resources through discovei-y of net; grounds accessible to the fleet or through ex- ploitation of already discovered grounds which heretofore have not yet been fished. The discovery of new grounds D-jithin tho operating range of tho domestic fleet is still within the realm of possibility as the success of the recent explorations for Royal Red shrimp indicates. Future exploi- tation of the Royal Red shrimp resources may not only supplement existing supplies of shrimp btit give the fishing fleet emploiTnent during the off- season. Potentially, however, the Ini'gest increase in the supply available for domestic consumption may come from foreign sources* Some of the fishing groiuids off the Central and South American shores may become accessible to the nevj big, long-range tra\;lers of tho domestic fleet. The major part of the supply from these grounds, however, will come into this country in the form of imports. Shi'imp prodviction in gome of the countries south of the border has increased considerably in recent years. In the last fifteen years, the Mexican shrimp industry has risen from modest proportions to a thriving multi-million dollar business. In the same period, there has been a more than tenfold increase in United States imports of fresh and frozen sl'irimp from Mexico. As pointed out by Lindner (19^7), the Mexican shrimp fishery may cui'rently be operating close to the liidits of its potential. Other countries south of the border may be able in the future to increase their shrimp production, and exports to this country. The countries of i-atin America are not the only sources of shrimp Imports, Recently, shipments of modest size have been received from Green- land, Argentina, and India. It is significant that foreign countries ex- porting shrimp to this country increased from ten in I9I4O to over thirty in 1957. There is some question of v;hat will be the attitude of tho fish- erman and prlraary wholesaler concerning the rising tide of imports » As long as demand remains high, the fisherman has little reason to be alarmed over the trend in imports* To the extent that imports contribute to a stabilization of prices and prevent the precipitous influx of casual hi fishermen into the industry durinr; mrirket boom;?, he has reason to wel- come the trend. In a declining market, the fisherman's attitude can be expected to be substantially different, an foreign producers favored by lo\;or costs may offer a corioua threat to his market. More than likely efforts vrill be made at such times to combat imports and complaints against dumpin July, Washington, D. C. (Also Separate 207) Gulf states production of fishery products. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Fishery Market News Service, New Orleans, 1951, 1952, 1953, and 1954 issues ^h Denham, S. C. I9U8 Gulf coast shrimp fisheries, Jannaxy-June, 19'»3. United States Depai'tment of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Sejrvlce, CcKEmercieLL Fisheries Review, vol. 10, no. 10, October, Washington, D. C. (Also Separate 219) Ellson, J. G., Powell, D. E., and Hildebrand, H. J. 1950 Exploratory fishing expeditions in the northern Bering Sea in June and July, 19^*9 • United States Department of the Interior, Pish and Wildlife Service, March, Washington, D. C. (Fishery Leaflet 369) Fenneman, N. M. 1938 Physiography of the eastern United States. McGraw Hill, New York smd London Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Department of the Interior, 19lf6 The shrimp and the shrimp Indus tzy of the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, September, Washington, D. C. (Fishery Leaflet 319) Pishing Gazette 1938 Investigating shriiap. Vol. 55, no. 8 Galtsoff, P. S., et al 195V Gulf of Mexico, its origin, waters and marine life. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Fishery Bulletin 89, vol. 55* Washington, D. C. Goode, George Brown 1903 i\merican food fishes. D. Estes and Ccn^any, Boston Goode, George Brown and Associates 1887 The fishery industries of the United States . United States Coamnission of Fish and Fisheries Section V, History and Methods Text, vol. 2, Washington, D. C. Gunter, G. 1950 Seasonal population changes and distributions as related to salinity, of certain Invertebrates of the Texas Coast, including the commercial shrimp. Publications of the Institute of Marine Science, vol. 1, no. 2 Haines, William B. 190l^ Shrimp need protection. Pacific Fisherman, vol. II, no« 9 ss Haines, Willleun B. 1905 The shrimp Industry, Pacific Fisherman, vol. HI, no. 6 Hardee, W. L. 1952 The development of the Brovnsvllle shrimp Industry. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries, Institute, 4th Annual Session, April, Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida Hlldebrand, H. H. 1954 A study of the fauna of the brovn shrimp (Penaeus aztecus Ives) grounds In the western Gulf of Mexico. Publications of the Institute of Marine Science, vol. Ill, no. 2, the University of Texas, Port Aransas, Texas 1955 A study of the fauna of the pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum Burkenroad) grounds In the Gulf of Canpeche. Publications of the Institute of Marine Science, vol IV, no. 1, The University of Texas, Port Aransas, Texas Hlldebrand, H. H. and Gunter, G. 1953 Correlation of rainfall with the Texas catch of vhlte shrli^. Transactions of American Fisheries Society, 82 Idyll, C. P. 1950 A new fishery for grooved shrimp in southern Florida. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Commercial Fisheries Review, vol. 12, no. 3, March, Washington, D. C. (Also Separate 21*7) Johnson, F. F. and Lindner, M. J. 1931* Shrinq? industry of the South Atlantic emd Gulf States. United States Bureau of Fisheries, Investigational Report No. 21, pp. I-83, Washington, D. C. Lindner, M. J. 1955 Some problems concerning the management of the shrimp fisheries. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, Tth Annual Session, September, Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables Florida 1957 Survey of shrimp fisheries of Central and South America. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. (Special Scientific Report— Fisheries No. 235) ^6 Liiicbior, II. J. ;ind AndorGon, \J, \I, 19$o Groirbh, mio;rations, q^a-.ming and size distribution of the sliri:rpT, pcnaous ' setif e].T,i3 (Linn). United States Department oi' the Interior, Fish and 'Jildliro Service, Fishoi-y ijulletin, vol. !^', no. 106, '.Jashin£ton, D. C. Look 19^1 Nev; red shrimp. Vol. 15, no. 20, pp. 130-131, September 2^ Lj'-les, C. H. 1951 The developraent of the broim shrirrp fishery in Texas. Froceedin{jS of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 3rd Annual Session, Juiie, Marine Laboratory, University of Iliajni, Coral Gables, Florida Ilattison, Georco C. I9I4C Bottom configuration in Gulf of llexico. Journal of the Coast and Geodetic Survey IIcKeavy, II. E. 190ii Sliriirp situation, pacific Fisherman, vol. II, no. 2 Heusol, R, VJinston 19^!^ Marking of slirimp. Science 121, no. 31U3, p. I4l;6, March 2^ Pearson, J, G. 1939 The early life histories of some American Penaeidae, chiefl;^ tlio coLUiiercial shrirp, penaeus setiferus (Liim) . United States Department of the Interior, Fish 'and UilcLlife Service, Fisheiy Bulletin 30, vol. Ii9, Uashington, D. C. Peterson, C. E. 19lt3 Seasons, sources, .ind sizes ox Gulf slirinip. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and iJildlife Service, Fisheries Market Nevrs, vol. 5, no. 2, February, Washington, U. C. (Also Separate 10) I95I; 3hrii:p, a changing inlustry. Southern Fisherman, 19 5U Yearbook Issue Rathburn, R. 1''93 Nntur.il Ivifitnry of economic crustacea^is of the United States. Govoriijiient Printing Office, IJashington, D. C. Shai'j, E. '/. 191^1 llud liir.ps at the mouth of the irissi3sii:p/i. Prof. Paper, United States Geological Survey 85) ^7 Gprincerj S. 1951 The OrG;;on'q fisheiy o^q-jlorations in tho Gulf of Mexico (a ])i'Gli;iiinary rc|,^ort) . United States Dopartnont of the Interior, ?ish and 'Jildlife Service, Coiiunorcial Fisheries Review, vol. 13, no. I4, April, Wasliington, D. C. (Also Separate 27?) 1951 Ercpansion of Gulf of Mexico ohrifip fisherj'-, 19l45-50. United States Dopartnent of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Commercial Fisheries Revicu, vol. 13, no. 9, Septeraber, Uashin^ton, D. G. (Also Separate 209) 19^1 Ei^Toansion of the shrirp fisheiy in the Gulf since 19U5» United States Department of the Interior, Fish and 'Jildlife Service, CommarciJil Fisheries Review, vol. 13, no. 9* pp. 1-6, September, Uashington, D. C. 1955 Exploration of deep-water slirinp of the Gulf of Mexico, proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 7th Annual Session, September, Marino Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida Springer, S. and Bullis, H. R. 1952 Exploratory shriup fishing in the Gulf of Mexico. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, September, './ashinj^ton, D. C. Fishery Leaflet U06 195U Eiqr'loratorj'- sliri'.rjT fishing in the Gulf of Mexico, summary report for 19^2- 5U» United States Department of tho Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Conuaercial Fisheries Review, vol. I6, no. 10, October, Washington, D. C. (Also Separate 3'.J0) Squire, James L. Jr. 1956 Development of the Pacific Coast ocefin slxrinp fishery. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Commercial Fisheries Reviev;, September, Washington, D. C. Stolting, W. II. I9I47 Fluctuations in fish production in tho United States and Alaska. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Coininercial Fisheries Reviexj, July, Washington, D. C« 1951 Social Security for self-employed persons in fishery industries. United States Department of tlie Interior, Fish and V/ildlife Service, Coiiraercial Fisheries Revievx, October, ^,/ashington, D. C. 58 otoltinc, V:. 11. 191? 2 Goiuo Gconoiaic aspects of blie southern slirinf) fishery, rroceodiiifjs oi the Gulx nnd Cai'ibbean Fisheries Institute, l[th Annual Session, April, llarine Laboratory, University of Iliarai, Coral Gables, Florida Southeni Fisherman 19U8 Let's popularize Braailian sliriuBp. Vol. VIII, no. 10, pp. 120-121, Auoist Tresslor, D. K. ond Lemon, J. IIc'.J. 1951 llarine products of commerce. Rainhold Fublishiug Coi'^joration, New York United States Fish and Wildlife Service 1956 Ejcploratory Repoi'ts (South Atlantic Fisheries Exploration) . "Jashington, D. C« ■'ieymouth, F. W., Lindner, M. J. and Anderson, IT. W. 1933 preliminary re] ort on the life history of t he coniaon sliriiip, I'enaeus setifenis (Linn) . Bulletin of the United States Department of tlie Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Fisheries Bulletin lU, vol, U8, Washington, D. C« Williams, A. B. 1955 A contribution to the life histories of comnercial slirir;p penaeidae in North Carolina. Bulletin of Marine Science, February 59 60 CHAPTER E AGENTS OF PRODUCTION ABSTRACT DURING 1955 THERE WERE ABOUT 3,715 VESSELS AND 3,818 MOTOR BOATS ENGAGED IN TRAWLING FOR SHRIMP IN THE SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULF AREA. THE AVERAGE CAPACITY OF CRAFT IN THE VESSEL CATEGORY IS APPROXI- MATELY 18 NET TONS, A MODERN AND WELL-EQUIPPED SHRIMP VESSEL COSTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF $70,000, IF OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION. AND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF $45,000 - $50,000, IF OF WOODEN CONSTRUCTION. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE AVERAGE VESSEL AS WELL AS LAY. OUT ON BOARD HAVE SUBSTANTIAL SHORTCOMINGS. THE URGER VESSELS IN PARTICULAR THOSE FISHING THE CAMPECHE GROUNDS. SHOULD BE OF STURDY CONSTRUCTION. FORETIMBERS, KEELS. KEELSONS. DECK-BEAMS AND FRAMES SHOULD BE STRENGTHENED AND TREATED WITH COPPER PRESERVATIVE FASTEN- NGS SHOULD BE IMPROVED AND HIGH QUALITY STAINLESS STEEL BO^TS USED WED^E^TYPE NAILs''^^"'^^^^ GALVANIZED NAILS SHOULD BE USED IN PLACE OF "'^'-'- DEITER I ORATION CAN BE COMBATTED WITH COPPER AND CHROMATE PAINTS WHICH RETARD SHIPWORM PENETRATION AND THE EFFECTS OF DRY ROT DRYDOCKING AT THREE- OR FOUR-MONTH INTERVALS I S RECOMMENDED . ^^„„^^ """"^ SHRIMP TRAWL, WHICH IS THE PRINCIPAL GEAR IN THE FISHERY CORRESPONDS TO THE OTTER TRAWL. OTHER TYPES OF TRAWLS SUCH AS THE BEAM TRAWL, AS WELL AS DIP AND CAST NETS AND HAUL SEINES, ARE USED PRIMARILY IN THE SMALLER FISHERIES OUTSIDE THE SOUTH ATUNTIC AND GULF AREA. THE USE OF SYNTHETIC MATERIAL MAY EXTEND THE SERVICE LI FE OF NETTING IN SOME FISHERIES. HYDRAUL ICALLY DRIVEN WINCHES ARE CONSIDERED SUPERIOR TO WINCHES ACTIVATED BY THE MAIN ENGINE. t-ONSIDERED IN THE OFFSHORE FISHERY, AND TO AN INCREASING MFASIIRF IM Tur INSHORE FISHERY ALSO, DIESEL MOTORS ARE USED. SINCE THE oStUY fSr ^N ENGINE MAY REPRESENT A CONSIDERABLE PORTION 6f THE BOAT OWNER'S INVF^T MENT. CARE SHOULD BE EXERCISED IN THE SELECTION OF THE mS?? EF? I C I e" jR^A^^^S^^SL^r^E^^Oli^D:'"^'^^^*^' ''' ^^^^^*^'°^ ^° O.Sl.¥/^VsZo BOTH BLAST:^^^^'?SE^;YD^^5-^^E^^riN^^T;^L:?Ss";^E^ l^cZjlT.r 'tH"'''' usEV'iHi's'EimS'' " ™' °''' "'"^'"^'^ ^° eveTSore'w?S£spread „^^^^, """"^ PRINCIPAL ITEMS OF ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT FOUND ON SHRIMP nPru^f/^Loi^^^'^'''^ ''"-°^S, DEPTH RECORDERS. AND RADIO TELEPHONES OF THESE, DEPTH RECORDERS ARE CONSIDERED AS POSSIBLY THE MOST VALUABLE FISHING AND NAVIGATING AIDS. PROVIDED CREWS ARE NSTRUCTED IN THE PROPER USE AND MAINTENANCE OF THIS EQUIPMENT. MNorKuuiLU IN THE PROPER OWNERSHIP OF SHRIMP VESSELS IS DIVIDED BETWEEN INnFPFNnrMT FISHERMEN. PROCESSORS AND DISTRIBUTORS CONNECTED WITH THE M SHI NG INDUSTRY, AND OUTSIDE INTERESTS. THE PRODUCT VI TY OF OWErIqPERATED VESSELS. AS INDICATED BY DATA FOR A SAMPLE OF VESSEL OPERATIONS? IS SAME Waters' '"*' °' ''"'''' skippered by hired captaTns fIsSin^ ?he A SHORTAGE OF QUALIFIED PERSONNEL IN THE FISHERY HAS INSPlRFn PROPOSALS FOR THE LAUNCHING OF A COMPREHENSIVE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM WITH INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT SUPPORT. A RESERVE OF TRAINED AND SMLuS FISHERMEN IS OF VITAL IMPORTANCE TO THE INDUSTRY ^'KILLED .^^„^ """^^ INTERESTS OF THE FISHERMEN ARE REPRESENTED BY TRADE ASSOCIATIONS, FISHERMEN'S COOPERATIVES, AND FISHERMEN'S UNIONS THF FUNCTIONS OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS VARY TO A GREAT EXTEN^ N tAe I R EFFORTS TO PARE DOWN COSTS OF DISTRIBUTION, COOPERATIVES N SOME INSTANCES. HAVE EFFECTED INTEGRATION OF FUNCTIONS FROM M SHI NG THROUGH To^^M v'?^ T ^^^OLESALE DISTRIBUTION. UNIONS ARE OF IMPOrIanCE LOCALLY IN THE WESTERN GULF AREA WHERE THEY PARTICIPATE IN NEGOTl AT mr MINIMUM EX-VESSEL SHARING PRICES. THESE PRICES FORM THE BASIS FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE LAY. THE LAY SYSTEM IS THE PREDOMINANT METHOD OF SHARING PROCEEDS FROM THE CATCH PREDOMINANT 61 THE V/HERHiOiTHAL OF PRODUCING Management of shrimp boat operations is vested either in the hands of the boat owner himself or else is delegated by the latter to a boat management fii-in which operates his boats on a fee basis. By principal occupational activity the o^mer may either be a fisherman who captains his own vessel, a processor, wholesaler, or 'absentee owner' who engages in fishing operations only on a sideline boiiis. Efficiency of production in the shrimp fishery, as in any othef industry, depends on the successful assembly of the agents of production. To survive, the businessman has to bring together the best organization with the most economical type of equipment at the most favorable location. Depending on the scale of operations and the location of the fishing grounds the fixed investment for fishing will include some, or all, of the follovjing: hull, engine, special equipment (e.g. a freezer installation), spars and rigging, fishing gear, and navigational aids. In addition, the fisherman must be assured of access to adequate dock- ing and repair facilities. The questions which have to be considered in connection with the utilisation of equipment are design and construc- tion, layout, mainteiiance, repairs, cost, and service life. The complement of the vessels should be both good seamen and good fisheiiiien. The captain, in addition, must have initiative, be familiar with the location of the best shrimp grounds, know something about the seasonal characteristics of the fishery, the weather and topographical conditions likely to be encountered, and finally, he must be a leader of men. Ultimately, a lot depends upon the nature of the resource and the access to it. The fisherman must accept as immutable facts linked to the task of gaining a livelihood from the sea, the uncer- tainties of the weather, oceanographic conditions, and the risks of fishing itself. Yot, he must make an effort to cope with these hazards. Migration may be the answer to seasonality, the use of special goer to rough bottoms, and the heeding of weather warnings to reducing storm losses. Shriiiiping, as conducted today, is predominantly a trawling opei'ation. This applies regardless of the size of boat or type of shrimp landed. The boats are equipped with nets the size of which is dependant upon the size of the boat. The operating characteristics of boats currently employed in the fisheiy are geared to the trawling process. This makes shrimp boats mainly one-purpose boats which cannot be easily converted for other 62 fishing processes. The risk connected vith an investment in a shrimp trawler, as a result, is considerably heightened. The same does not necessarily hold true of the smaller motor- boat operations (craft with a capacity of less than five tons) vhere the investment specifically required for shrimping is not large enough to impede conversion to other activities. Because of the relatively greater significance of vessel operations, the subsequent discussion will deal, except uhere othen^ise specified, with vessel rather than boat operations, EQUIPMENT Fishing Craft Types of Craft Employed For a great many years in the shrimp fishery sailing vessels and small non-powered boats, principally row boats, were used for fishing operations. Substantially all shrimp fishing was carried on in shallow water from 6 inches to 6 feet deep. Some of the fishermen even operated without floating equipment, using cast nets or dip nets and haul seines. The original inshore and offshore shrimpers were not designed, in the true sense of the word, but were developed from types already in use along the Florida and Gulf coasts. Their hull forms were developed by rule of thumb and fishing experience. The basic design was derived from the forms of Mediterranean work-boat types adapted to the conditions peculiar to Atlantic and Gulf coast operation. The vast majority of ves- sels are still built with crude plans, without the aid of scientific knovjledge, and without much regard for their specialized use. There are two types of vessels which can be said to have been developed especially for the shrimp industry. The type most comiaonly employed in the Atlantic and Gulf coast offshore fishery is the so-called Florida -type vessel, named for the state where the design originally was developed . The other type of boat widely used in the shrimp fishery is the bow dragger or Blloxi-type vessel. The most important difference in design between the two vessel types is the location of the X'jheel house, which on the Florida -type vessel is foi'ward and on the bow dragger, aft. Wliile the Florida-type vessel is distinguished by greater raaneuverability and makes it possible for the fisherman to haul the nets more quickly, the bow dragger is considered to be more seat^orthy and is capable of towing under greater strain. The proximity of the engine to the propeller in the latter type reduces shaft troubles . The Florida-type hull usually has a round bottom, flared bow, and a broad square transom stem. The deckhouse is forward and the clear fishing deck, aft. Nets are towed from booms. The engine room is under 63 the decichouse and fish holds oro aft. The majority of tno voacels ranco from 55 to 70 foot in Icngtn, \iith a fou as long as 75 to 80 feet or more. Typically, tho vessels aro dicsel pouored and u3Q cable rigs i^ith drum hoists pouored from tho vtiixn engine, A good ii:any of tna vgssoIc are equipped iiith electronic navigational aids and possess mechanical refrigeration equipmont or insulated holds for ctoulng tne catch in ice, Thoy are capable of a ■viido range of activ- ity, and commonly make trips of long duration. I'btherships operate occasionally in the offshore fishery. The motherships are vessels of 100 to 150 feet in lengtn, equipped vatn tno necescary machinery and crew for neading and freezing tha catch. The large vessel may do soma trawling on her oxm but, in gen- eral, depends on tho catch of the smaller feeder-boats, A major problem in tho operation of motherships is the retention of crews •willing to accept long voyages on a regiiLar basis. Tho Biloxi-type vessels usually have a V-type bottom and tnere is less freeboard than on the Florida-type. The declchouse and engine room ai'o aft, the fishing dock is amidships, and tne fish hold fon;ard. Nets are toued from a gallows arrangement on the outboard side near the deckhouse. The box7 draggers are popular in much of the Louisiana area, in Biloxi, Mississippi, and in the vicinity of More- head City, North Carolina. In the inshore fishery of the south Atlantic and Gulf coasts vessels not excoeding 30 to kS feet in lengtn are used. Depending on fishing capacity those craft arc referred to as shrimp vessels or snririp motor boats, tho latter having a capacity of less than five net tons. In general, the gi'oup of smaller vessels presents a vjiried array of designs since local tendencies and individual ideas enter into tnair construction. They are powered, as a rule, witn gasoline or distillate burning engines, although there has been a tendency for some time to use more diesel engines. The boats usually are equipped witn poller winches and rope toulineo. When the Gulf coast f isheiy was still primarily an inshore operation tne type of vessel in general use in the area was the lugger. Today, tne lugger has been replaced to a large extent by the Florida- type trawler, its use being confined more or less to the Louisiana insnore fishery. The vessel, xjhich may range from 25 to 50 feet in length, is of snallOTj di-aft and is designed for the shallow inside waters. Consequently, it is not well suited for the open Gulf, particularly vjhon the weather is bad. In contrast to the vessels of the south Atlantic coast and Texas, in which the engines are forviard and the ficn nold is in the stern, the lugger has tne engine in the stern and tne fisn hold forward. The early luggers were adapted for trawl- ing by tne simple expedient of adding a set of towlines and a trawl. Soiiietiiiies, a platforin ijas extended off tne stern to provide room for 6U SHRIMP TRAWLER BEAM TRAWLER {Shrimp] FIGUPffi II - lU 65 SHRIMP TRAWLER Medium FIGURE II - 15 66 pulling in tne not. Up until tho late 1930's, few of those vessels cniTied poijer-driven iiiichlneiy for talcing in the trails . At present, Ttnny of the better equipped and mora recently built luggers employ a hoist, but on a number of the older boats, the gear is still operated entirely by hand. Ice or freight boats fori-nei-ly were used in conjunction viith email luggers in the Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama fisheries. These ice boats vere large luggers used for picking up shrimp on the the fishing grounds, icing, and transporting them to ths cannery or otiier unloading station. The small vessels, as a rule, did not carry ice, but Tihen they caught shrimp pulled alongside the ice boat , unloaded and retvtrnGd to the fishing grounds. When a fleet of luggers ira,3 operating seme distance frcia port, the ice boat ■\;ouia also supply the fleet with fuel, water and provisions. There were advantages to tne ice boat system in the circamstances under which it was employed, Quite often the luggers operated at considerable distances from the port xjhere their shrimp would be landed, and for each vessel to obtain ice and bring in its catch would have forced it to spend much of its time in traveling to and from the fishing grounds. Today freight or ice boats have almost disappeared from the scene and are used only to a nominal extent in Louisiana. The use of slciff-type vessels operated by one man is a rela- tively recent development in the Louisiana and Mississippi inshore fisheries. The skiffs are about 30 feat in length or less, have a 6-foot beaau and are powered by gasoline marine motors. They work pri- marily out or the Louisiana ports of Gi'and Isle, Barataria, and Lafitte, and certain Mississippi ports. They make short trips of six or seven homes' duration and nonnally land about two barrels of shrimp. They carry no ice and the only protection for the shrijrap is an awning which is stretched across the forward deck. The canneries utilize a large proportion of the catch from this type of vessel. In Alaska and on tha Pacific coast the beam trawler is common. Wood Versus Steel Construction In recent years steel has been gaining popularity in the industry as building material. It is estimated that until recently not moro tnan one percent of all the shrimp vessels in the South Atlantic and Gulf Areas were constructed of steel. Because of the general rusty appearance of the hull and the suporstructiu'a of the steel vessels on returning from fishing.many vessel otjners and captains harbor a prejudice against steel. Steel is stronger than xiood and problems of hogging and sagging are reduced. Fuel storage is bstween the double bottoms of tha hull, which greatly increases the below docks space. Watertight bulkheads add to the safety of tno vessel. The fish holds require careful insulation because of heat conductivity of the metal, Qceater povjer is required 67 because of the added veight of the vessel. Some of the steel hull vessels have been overcoming this problem with the installation of twin diesels, usually mounted in line on the same shaft. This adds to fuel and overhaul bills, although costs are not doubled o\djig to the lighter load per engine in this type of arrangement. The electrol- ysis problem, cominon to both steel and wooden vessels, is accentuated in tne case of steel. Few provisions are made by the builders to reduce this menace. Some owners, in addition, have ejcpressed concern tnat repair services for the steel vessels are not as accessible as for wooden vessels. Wood has several advantages over steel. It is nonmagnetic and has a high modulus of elasticity. On the other hand, timbers which ramin damp over long periods of time are subject to decay. Modern wood presei^atives can be chemically fixed in the wood and cannot be wasned out. Fire retardants in combination \jith preservatives are also available and used. In general, to avoid sJirinkage in wooden construction, tim- ber used in shipbuilding should be well seasoned. Boat planking belovj the vjater line should be dried so that when put into the water there is a slight swelling and the joints become tighter. Decking tiriibar should contain at all times 15-18 percent moisture in order to prevent shrinkage and consequent opening of the seams. Shortcoming^ in Design and Construction of Craft Currently Eatployed Design and construction of shrimp vessels frequontly are subjected to sorious criticism. Tvjo studies on vessel ofl'iciency conducted by Florida research consultants vmder contract with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service commented as follovis on ves- sel doaign and construction: V Until the start of the utilization of the grooved shrimp grounds off the Dry Tortugas and in the Gulf of Caiapeche, construction of siii'iiiip vessels \7as carried on by various shipwrights scattered along the coast lina. Construction x^as slovi but apparently quite thorough. The sudden deiiiand for more and larger vessels, requiring increased financing, developed a new trend in the industry. The atternpts to meet this demand as rapidly as possible had their effect V The comments were combined from the following studies: Harwell, Knoxjles and Associates, Suryoy of Domes tic Shr jjiip VeasGl Ei'f iclcncy ^ ?-2^^r* ^"*^ FirsT"K6search Cor'poration of t'iorida, l.oilc irxuctices on Shrimp Fishing Crart, 195_5« 68 on tne quality or design and conatruction. The yards simply took the smaller vessels which they vere producing at the time and "blew them up", increasing both length and beam. In general, the same scantlings verc used as in the smaller vessels and the sarae method of framing and construction prevailed. The result was a 70-foot vessel built to the specifications of the 50-footer vhich was lacking in the necessary heavy lateral and longitudinal framing. In ordering a vessel the fishermen gave foremost consider- ation to the delivery date, finance, and pries of vessel. To meet tne problem of rapid delivery and 1o;j construction cost a number of yards started to mass-produce vessels. The number of skilled shipwrights was limited and some builders were forced to recruit inadequately trained labor. The attempt by the builders to cut construction costs and the increasing shortage of the proper kinds and grades of lumber soon resulted in the use of undersized, substandard, and improperly cured materials. General observations with respect to shortcomings of design and construction in the shrimp vessel fleet were made in the course or the vessel efficiency studies. The midship sections of the vessels have very slack bilges resembling the barrel -like midship sections of the smaller and older vessels and results in excessive rolling. The forward sections are full and there is little flair or reserve buoyance to be found in the bow. The run aft is steep, leading to a transom form and stern sections wliich are inefficient. The high sheer forvjard of the Florida-type vessel, which owes its origin to efforts to make planking easier, does not produce an effi- cient or dry hull form and actually hampers visibility, Th3 Biloxi-type bow dragger is superior for fish-dragging because of its more rugged touing arrangement, but it is less desir- able for shrimp dragging because of poorer maneuverability. Conversion to deep-water shrtiTiping appears feasible for the larger, lighter-powered vessels if the eaten per day warrants the additional expense. The materials used in construction quite frequently are those which gain easy acceptance with the operators. Although keels, deadwood and stem posts are coiu'donly constructed of pine or fir, stems are constructed of oak, a wood %)liich is notably perishable in tropical climate. The use of long-leaf yellow pine, in this instance, might well result in substantial savings for the operator. Another example of tradition and habit in the use of materials is the use of bent oak frames by most of the builders along the Florida Gulf Coast. The builders have had little, or no, experience with sawn frame construction. Consequently all the wooden shrimp vessels are framed vjith steam bent oak which not only limits the size of the frames themselves but affects the actual form of the hull as well. In addition. 69 It is customary to ceil the vessels throughout, and the fish holds are not only ceiled but insulated. The framing of the vessels, con- sequently, is very poorly ventilated, causing the oak friimes to deteriorate very quickly. As a consequence, a shrimp vessel is fre- quently considered old in five years. Design and construction are of minor importance as far as motor boats are concerned since motor boats are operated on a 'hnaka- do" basis in protected waters where almost any small work boat is able to live up to requirements. Among specific shortcomings of vessel construction encoun- tered were the following: (1) Frames were frequently not steamed long enough, and they sometimes cracked upon bending. (2) Planking was nailed in many cases directly to the frames without counter-sinking and plugging of holes, or the nails used were too long and nail ends, con- sequently, protruded and rusted on the inside of the vesselj in both instances the nails gradually worked loose under normal stress and planking pulled away from the ribs. (3) Caulking of the planking was not always done, and the planking usually butted on the frames. (U) Fastenings were often inadequate. (5) The keel and keelson were drifted together rather than bolted, (6) (Sreen lumber was frequently used for engine beds. On drying, these beds shrink and twist, thus causing alignment problems between the engine and the shaft. (7) Short engine beds were installed, giving improper \?elght distribution in the vessel and little flexi- bility in the positioning and type of engine used. (Good practice requires the placing of an L-shaped steel shoe on the engine beds to reduce alignment problems . ) (8) The dackhouss was seldom adequately secured to the cross tiiibers, and nails were again substituted for the more secure bolts. (9) Masts were fastened inadequately. In lieu of the mast baing stepped down into the vessel, as good practice requires, it is frequently secured to the deck. 70 Spccil'lc Recommendations on Vessel Dosipin and Construction Oi'l'icials of the major boat building and repair yards iriter- vicxjcd ooe'a to bo aereod that the larger vessels now being launched are constructed too lightly and have inadequate fastenings. Ihny builders produce tzio versions, a standard and do luxe, of tno same hall. The latter usually costs oonsidci'ably more but the stress is nrtinly on additional aesthetic features, such as the super- structure. Only a sinall portion of the extra cost is applied to devices doiiigned to strengthen the hull structure. The larger (67- to 70-foot) vessels dosigned for the distant Campeche grounds should be built of sturdier material than the 55-foot vessels. In actuality, tho structural differences beti/een the tvo in the past have been f e^; tjhich has accounted for the smaller boat being as rigid as tho larger one. Tho forotirabers, keels, keelsons, dcck- buoms, and fraincs should be strengthened and treated \jith cuprinol. All fastenings should ba improved and Monel bolts used in tho keel. Sci'ovj-type galvanized nails should be used in place of the xjadge-type nails. All of these improvements in construction, of course, \Jould add to tho initial cost of the vessel, but would undoubtedly pay off in the long run. Builders, otinors, and repair personnel have suggested that the folloviing features be stressed. TJTil5c^ng.~All timbers used ehould be free of knots and properly cm^ed. 'ilTo keel should be cLqug 12" x 12»';kaGl„c.ii 10" x 12"; fi.iuiai 3" X I;" or 1;" x li", dreoLod and on 12" or 13" ctiitors; planlcing I-3/I4" to 2", dressed; deck beams V x I4", on 13" centers. FaGtcninrca . — Tho keel must be bolted xdth high quality otain- Itss steel or gulvi'niaod bolts to the frauies. All laiesj and for;itiiiibers must ba SGCui'ely bolt:;d. Hull plrnlcing tiLould bo fastoncd vith £;civij- typa nails cud the holes plugged iJxth i.'ood. IJails should not protruda tla-ough the ribs. Butt blocI:3 are preferable and should be staggciied and bolted through to the planlcs. Somiiing. — ^Ail seams in the planlcing should be properly caulked. Tiis t;eatiier (i^cka ahould tevo adoquats cainber and should be caulked and pitched, rVawa. — Sa\<3d or stoaniDd rib construction is satisfactory, bub boiiding oi'^tho stoaiiied riba should not be hux-riod and tiiose ribs that crack dulling the binding process should be discarded. Eyi"inni Bed.-" -The engine bod should be r.iado of dried timber and of a lung oh not less than tvso-thirds of the boat lengtli. A metal eliuu over tno engiiie bod mHI reduce shaft aligiiing problems. 71 I..->yout and Arranpemont Aboavd Ship In;prop&r layout may bo recponsiblo for hav^ardoun operations tvhcii it reaidts in overloading, disregard of proper trim, and inado- quato moans of conin\u2-iication fore and aft, Tlie layout and arrangement of the typical Florida shrimper is standardised. All vork is dona on the afterdeck , Tha deckhouse varies from 15 to 30 feet in length, depending upon tho sise of the vessel, and is placed ;joll foniard. It generally contains the pilot house, a captain's stateroom, and a galley. On the larger vessels it imy also Incliido tho cre^j's quarters and toilet facilities. Water tanlcs and auxiliary gasoline tanks are frequently mountod along the cabin sida on the main dock. The mast is stepped on the centerline as close to the deckhouse as possible, «ith a uinch either alongside of it or Just aft. This arrangemsnt leaves a largo vioi'king deck aft to tha transom. Below is a large forepeak used for cre.j's quarters and toilet facilities on the SKialler vessels, and for additional tank capacity on tho larger vessels. This ia generally followed by the engine room i^hich extends aft of the center section. The fish hold is located aft of tha engine room and extends as far toini'ds the stei'n as is practical. The remainder of the space to the transom is used either as a laaaretto or for additional tanlc space. The main fual tanlcs are located in the engine room alongaida tha engine , Engine roorus are generally cramped for space and poorly ventilated. As fishing trips became more extended, additional fuel and tjater tarJ:3 -were installed in nexi vessels without rog-ard to the vessel's design. Tho hold capacity, too, xjas increased and the ves- sois X'ji'e icv.vil to th;j lliult, soiiietimjs far beyond originally intondad «::v'iViacity, Equiix.,nt \^j.s add^d and installed vaici-e tlvt'o was rooiri "Without regaiT.1 to tha effect on trim and stability. Th3 pilot house is of lainimum size and craraaed with luhatever navigational and electronic oquipriient uuy be on board. OixLy on a few of thj netjer vessels is a separate room provided for the radio and othi^r electronic gear. Facilities for th3 crcij are kept to a itdjilmum. Little or no coiafort is provid..d for living in tropical weather. The captain's stateroom is usually large enough to be coiiif or table and is located on the lunin dock. On Kost vei^sels the crew's quarters are below in the forecastle and consist of 2 to l). berths and small hanging lockers. For tha most part, they are veiy cramped and the only ventilation is affoi'dod by the foi'ecastle hatch, Lavatoiy and toilet facilities are not providod on some ves- sels and the oxily fresh water in those inc;fenoas is found in tlia galley. As a rule, galley and mossing facilities are good. Most vessels are equipped t/ith eithor bottled g:is or oil stoves and \jith 72 riuminc rater. A rcfricorator ia a nccecsity ontree7.er veoacls as tne noid temperatures are too low to pcri:dt tlio stouago of many Itcns sucn as I'resli vocotablec, eggs, and other perishables. The deck layout of some vessels disregards safety during the fishing operation. The long deckhouse, with the pilot house for- ijara prohibits adequate coimiiunicatlonG bstTJoen the pilot house and the iJinch aft. Electronic public-address cystcis xiliich miy bo found now and tlicn are not aixjays in operating condition. The exhausts from tne engines are dry xiith a niininium of muffling, adding to cor.uaunication difficulties. The fact that communication bctueen fore and aft, except by snouting, is often impossible coupled with the factHiat only open winches are used on the vessels, creates a dangoTouo situation ^jhich raaices th3 layout of the Florida -tjrpo vessel unsafe and impractical. Hull iriintonance Rapid hull depreciation, in addition to basic xjeaknesses in vessel design and construction, can be traced also in many inabances to improper and inadequate maintenance practices. To protect the hull against deterioration, measures mu3t ba taken against tha two principal encjnies of wooden construction e: maintenance problem is increased by the shortage of con- scientious crci/a. Th3 standard of matntomace of tlio vessels ovned by intiiipondont owu&r-ijklppcrs and sijall fisliing companios, fui-thernoro, is influoncod by the size of the shriirip catch and the price range dua'lng th3 year. Dui'lng the 1953-5U i.nrket decline, for instiaaco, hauling of shriiup vecisots and Ecncrol r-Liintonance vaa noticeably reduced. Con- struction prauticos appear to have a definite boaring on the amount of r...iintonanoe iroik reqalrod during tho life of a vessel. Most owners inteiviewed r."i>orlad tliat woll-constructod vessels ivoquirod loss i.iain- tijnnnca tl.\n pooi-ly built vessels, particularly after the first season or so of fishing. Vessel Accidents Sins of omission and coivaiiission in the construction and maintcnanco of vessels are reflected not only in the rapid depreciation of thoi fi:cod invostiiicut but alijo, to a rolativuly higli dogi-ee, in the 73 frequency of occurrence of accidents aboard j;hlp. This is borno out by ix campio study of damaco and ciaiia records for shi'iiTip vessels incJ.uded in tne report of Harvjell, Knoulos and Associates on tho efficiency of domestic shrinip vessels from insurance company files for the years from 1^52 to 1955. On the basis of these records the accidents for which par- ticulars veve made available were classed into two general categories : (i) Those due to the negligence and error in judgment of the captain or crei?. (2) Those due to mechejiical failure of the vessel equipment. (Some of the latter tyi^e of accidents may be atti'ibutable to ji'oor maintenance of tfio equipment by the crew or by shore personnel.) TABLE II -3. —FREQUENCY OF OCCURRiiMCE OF V.'ffilOUS TYfiJS OF SHBB!? VESSEL ACCIDENTS, VESSEL SAMPLE FOR PERIOD 1952 - 1955 (SEI^CTED FROM REPORTS OF MARINE SURVEYORS) Human error Frequency Mechanical failure Frequency Poor vessel handling 6 Clutch and gears 7 General negligence k Rudder or steering 6 C-3ar entangleraent 3 Iraproper anchorage h Fire, exhaust 3 Fire /.liring 2 Vibration 2 Xfeter in fuel and oil 2 Engine overhc-ating 3 Shaft brs-kaga 2 Propeller loss 1 OtVier 2 Total 13 3U About 28 percent of the accidents reported in the files made available xjero the direct result of hii^ian cri\>r. Many of tne luechanical failui'os lidght have been avoided if propor preventive maintananca had been observ-ed. About 13 percent of all the above-listed accidents resulted from careless or incxporienccd vessel handling and were avoid- able. A proper crci'} training program probably could have reduced the incidence of this type of accident. Vessel ownership is an important factor to be considered in this connection. Captain ovmership plays an important part in the Ih amount of attention paid to measures designed to forestall accidantc, A disproportionate number of the insurance claims analyzed were filed for company-ouncd vessels. Of the 3U mechanical failures, 7 vere attributed to reduction gear and clutch mechanism failures. Ifydraulic clutches appeared to be lees vulnerable. The weakening of rudder fastenings, perhaps by elec- trolysis and the disablement of the steering mechanism, resulted in 6 other accidents. Of the 5 fires, 3 were caused by inadoqxxately pro- tected exhausts and 2 by faulty wiring. Four accidents wore associated with inadequate anchorage. Two breakdowns were caused by water in the fuel. Systematic inspection and maintenance of equipment might have prevented many or the accidents included in the sample which was analyzed. It has been suggested that a check list for captains and shore mechanics be established as an aid in accident prevention. Statistics on Fishing Craft Shrimp fishing as a full-time occupation is of importance only in the South Atlantic and Gulf Area. The statistics on fishing craft cited in the following paragraphs, therefore, relate to opera- tions in this area only. The growth in the number of vessels, motor boats, and shrinp trawls engaged in the shrimp fishery in the gouth Atlantic and Gulf Area over the quarter century from 1930 to 19% is illustrated by figure II - 16« In 1930 the fleet consisted of 283 vessels and 2,ll4U motor boats. Estimates for 19% indicate that the number of vessels and boats by that year had grown to 3,71^ and 3»818, respectively. The total number of shrimp trawls in the shrimp fishery in the area in both years corresponded roughly to the combined nuirdser of vessels and motor boats <, Some vessels have recently started operating with two trawls at a time. In the decade 19ii5-1955 the number of shrimp vessels fishing in south Atlantic and Gulf waters has more than doubled, whereas the number of motor boats has increased by approxiriiately 30 percent. In 1930, of the total number of motor vessels five net tons and over in the United States fishing fleet, 6.5 percent engaged in snrimping. Twenty-five years later three out of everj"- ten vessels were so engaged. In spite or the absence of complete statistics on the distribution of the United States motor vessel fishing fleet over the individual fisheries, it appears that today more vessels are engaged in shrlmpijig than in fishing for any other variety of fish or shellfish. Tne isolated statistics that are available reveal that in 1951 some 1,^10 vessels, or about 15 percent of the total number of vessels in tne domestic fleet, were fishing for tuna and/or other species on the 75 § M Eh a> o S J3 d IS (H s £-• P g N -aj y to pj El to << ^ ^ « fH O '^ Fh $ CO «« h J3 s M CO to i g < C3 Ix, M o g s :3 Ph n g o; ^<4 S3 1 1 g ^O j ^ < ^ r^ CVI CM < o O O oo rH OO JO \A O NO UV- (^ (/» CO O eo •3 c <« 9 o OO CM C>\ o 0\ o JO ^>1 o Os o i-il -p \Ar5l rt 0\ o 0\ o CJs vO VN r^ 76 west coast, 5/ The inland fisheries accounted for approximately 6 per- cent, and the Pacific coast halibut fishery for somev;hat less tlian h per- cent of all motor vessels in 1953. 6/ The full growth of the shrimp fleet in the last twenty-five years is not shown by a comparison between the number of vessels, motor boats, and shrimp trawls engaged in the fishery in 1930 and in 19^6. To gain proper perspective of the increase in fishing activity a comparison of vessel and boat capacity in net tons is needed. Figure 11-17 shows that the increase in vessel tonnage tram less than 2,500 net tons in 1930 to about 80,0C0 net tons in 1956 has been the most significant development in the period studied in the Dutn Atlantic and Gulf Area shrimp fleet. Since the average motor boat tonnage is small, the contribution of this type of craft to total tonnage is relatively modest. Total fishing capacity increased from 6,7iU net tons in 1930 to 88,370 net tons in 1956. Average capacity of snrijnp vessels, figure II-18 reveals, went up from 8,6 to 21.7 net tons over the period. The fishing capacity of a shrimp vessel is considerably smaller ttian the average tuna vessel. The suirvey of the tuna industry completed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service in 1953 indicates that in 1951 the average capacity of a vessel fishing ex- clusively for tuna on the west coast approximated 50 net tons. Pacific coast vessels fishing for tuna and other species in that year averaged about 35 net tons. Typical Vessel Prices Recent vessel price quotations ranged from a few thousand dollars for Biiiall inshore travjlers to as much as 170,000 or f 80, 000 for fully equipped Florida -type vessels. Steel hulls are appreciably more expensive than wooden hulls; the cost of a 70-foot steel vessel is approximately |;70,000 compared with ^5,000 to ^50,000 for a simi- lar size vessel of vjooden construction. Steel vessel builders claim that vessels constructed with the two raaterials would differ little in price if tlie same standard ijore adhered to by all shipbuilders. Dataware gathered on the cost of the boatowner's fixed investment at the time of acquisition in connection with a study of £/ See A. ¥. Anderson, W. H. Stolting, et. al.. Survey of the Domestic Tuna Industry, 1953. 6/ The data on the inland fisheries are talcen from Fisheries of the United States and Alaskayl9S3} Si/Prelpainaiiy'Reylev} the data on tho nalibut Tisliery areiaken from Flshety Statistics of the United States, 1953 1 Statistical Digest No, 3^ 77 n ■p « o § a 1-1 0) m a > : n : ::cO : ■ ■ ■ -■ ^J XA ::0O : vO n ■ ■CM • r-- NO : :;r-: s On ; r- : •:>H ::: ::0O::: ^ •s ; •• •i--; oT O : ::C>-::: vO c— . >l On rrrcr r-1 f^ ':■.'■. tH NO t~- ::; on t— •* •« •% Nf) ::;vO: On ■LA -:? ??' : h;;: 61 o : : r^::■. 03 : n:: •s ^ :; OO:;: % i < a. < O z X to o ::C\J OO 1— 1 :\A \A NO ..fw CO * ^ •\ r—i ■.-=1 vO -^ poo] ra f-l •on c\ r- : ft w o o EH CO C5 Eh as Eh i=> O CO t~- • I-l OJ rr\ • CN H f-l • CO to <-i .^ UJ wo CO > a. t^ « s Of X t^ (/> • OO Ik O vO UJ • N OO 1 1 1 1 1 O •p ^>\ OS r-t • C O ^^^1 •H \A ■Hi -P 0\ «} rH O •H H ^rHl y- On X> f-l (U ■P {;^>i S OS E 1-1 *r4 rH O O va a\ O H +* •o o 0) -3 ■p OS 3 •' J Tf O Ctf c^ Os « iH P & ■LA o ■LA H O lA 79 operational costs or shrimp vessels undertaken by the Federal Trade Commission. Wlaere vessels had changed hands since launching those cost figures did not represent cost of construction. The data collect- ed reveal (1) substantial dil'ferences in cost between different-size vessels, (2) marked variations in costs betijeen vessels of sitailar lengtn and capacity acquired in the same year, and (3) the high per- centage, in some instances more than 50 percent, of total investment represented by cost of engine and electronic and freezing equipoient. The following examples illustrating these points may be cited: (a) Cost of acquisition in 195U of a fully equipped 31- foot vessel with a 6-ton capacity vas ^11,000 compared to a 62- foot vessel with a 25 -ton capacity whicn vas acquired equipped with engine and special apparatus for $35,330. (b) Fully equipped vessels of like capacity and length, i.e.,U0-foot, 38-foot and l43-foot, acquired in 1953 varied in cost from $3,000 up to $13,000. (c) Cost of hull acquisition in 195U in the case of one vessel was tl6,000j witn |10,000 spent for tne engine and $9,330 for special equipment. Fishing Gear The types of gear described below relate to the equipiiient used in the South Atlantic and Gulf Area« Although several types of gear have been used in the commercial slirimp fishery of this area since 1880, only two may be regarded as standard equipment. These are haul seines, introduced about 1872, and shrimp travils (otter trawls), intro- duced about 1912. Haul soincs had become standard gear by 1880, but were almost completely replaced by slirlmp trawls by 1930. Other types of gear used on a minor scale wore skijn nets, cast nets, push nets, and dip nets. Cast nets, push nets, and dip nets are used almost entirely to eaten slirimp for bait purposes. Cast Nets There is considerable variation in the size of cast nets. They are circular, usually from 10 to 15 feet in diameter and have a lead line running around the outside edge. A cord line extends tlirough a metal ring in the center of the net, and from this end there radiate nuiiinrous smaller cords which are fastened at regular intervals to the lead linej the other end of the cord is held by the fisherman. The net ia cast in such manner that it falls flat on the water in the shape of a disk. Wnen the weighted edges of the net have settled to the bottom, the fisherman draws in tne cord attached to the net which pulls the edges to the center, thus foriaing a circular bag to hold the captured Bhrlinp, The net is then hauled up and emptied and another cast made. 80 When haul seines were standard gear fishonnon froquontly "tested" shallow vater areas vith cast nets to detarraine if shriiap vero present in sufficient abundance tu Justify setting and hauling the seine. Haul Seines Haul seines were introduced about lb72 and by 18bO had become the most important type of gear in the commercial shrimp fishery. Basi- cally, a haul seine consists of netting with a stretched mesh of 1/2 to 1-1/2 inches rectangular in shape; it varies in length and depth, with a lead line running along the bottom, and a cork or float line running along the top. During the years haul seines were used there iias little change in the overall design. As the fishery progressed and lo potior boats came into general use, larger seines were used in the fishery. Originally the seines were made of half -inch stretched mash netting and were up to 120 feet long and 10 feet deep. The smaller seines could be handled by two men in a row boat. Gradually, however, the net mesh was made larger and the seines increased in size, some of them reaching l,bOO feet in length with l!| feet depth at the center, graduated to about 7 feet at each end. With seines of this size pow- ered boats VQve necessary and crews of as many as 20 man were required to handle them. As long as shrimping V7as coniinod to shalloxj waters the boat was run close to shore t?here one end of the net was dropped and held by about tuilf of the cn-.n. The boat then laid out the not in a large circle surrounding the shri-ap and returned to shore with the remainder of the crow and the other end of the seine. The seine was then pulled in . After the net had been hauled in uufficitntly for the catch to be enclosed in a small area, the boat was brought alongside and the shrimp brailed into it. During the heyday of seining operations various seines ware designed for use in water as deep as 20 feet. As hiul seines gradually gave \?ay to shrimp trawls, the seines roriiaining in operation were rarely used in water more than 6 feet deep. Shrii-jp Trawls The slirimp travjl basically corresponds to the otter trawl which was first introduced in the New England fislierles in the early 1900' s. CoDstructed along the same lines, differences are confined almost eiitii-ely to size, weight, and mush size of the netting. It is today the ri.ost Important gear in the shrimp i'ishary. (i^oe figur-o II - 19) The shrimp trawl consists of a cone-shapod bag in which tiio catch is gathered in the tail or cod end, a wing on either side of the bag for "herding" the shrimp into it, a trawl door or otter board at the extreme end of each wing for holding the wings apart and holding 81 i CL en the mouth of tne net open in a somewhat rectangular shape when in oper- ation, and two lines attached to the trawl doors are made fast to the vessel. A lead or ground line extends froim door to door on the bottom of tne wings and moutn of tne net; and a float or cork line is similarly extended at the top of the wings and mouth of the net. The size of the net is measured by the width of the mouth, ij The steel trawling or towing cable extending from the vessel to tne trawl door varies in size from a quarter to a half inch, depend- ing upon tne size of tne vessel, the size of the trawl, and tne depths fished. The ratio commonly used for determining the required lengtn of caole is 5 or 6 fathoms of line to 1 fatnom of t^ater, although occa- sionally in deeper water the ratio may be reduced to 3 to 1 or less. In tne earlier days or the trawl fishery the towing cable consisted of 1/2- to 1-inch manila rope, and the line was seldom extended more tnan UO fatnoms, which was sufficient for the depths then being fished. The tow lines are secured to the two trawl doors by means of bridles (consisting of four chains) fastened to the doors somewhat like tne bridle of a kite. The chains fastened to the net end of the trawl door are somewhat longer than the front chains and the top chains are somewhat longer than the bottow chains. Set thus, the doors have an outward, downward thrust while being tewed through the water. The wings are the sides of the net and are tapered along the top seam but straight along the bottom seam. They are attached directly to tne trawl doors and extend to the mouth of the net, which varies in width. Most trawls are shaped so that the lead line of the mouth rides behind the float or cork line. This is referred to as the overhang, setback, undercut, or cutback. A good many trawls use a tickler chain of adequate length between the trawl doors to drag behind the float line and scare the shrimp off the bottom in advance of the lead line. The net is tapered from the moutn to the throat, which is about 6 feet in diameter. Attached to the throat is the tail, bag, or cod end, an untapered cylinder of heavy webbing "Hhich holds the catch. The end of the tail is closed with a slip-knotted tie rope. To prevent chafing while being dragged on rough bottoms, various types of gear are used, the most common being unraveled manila strands. In addition to the chafing gear, and when fishing in shark and porpoise infested waters, some trawls use covers of heavier, large-stretched mesh that completely encircle the tail to protect the net from sharks and porpoises which bite at fish gilled by the net. The shark covers are also used for attaching the chafing gear to the bottom of the tail. 7/ For a detailed description see Fishery Leaflet 39U, entitled Gulf of Mexico Shrimp Trawl Design, and Fishery Leaflet li70, entitled Double-Rig Shrjjip Trawling In the Gulf of Mexico . copies of which may be obtained on request to the Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Department of the Interior, Washington 2^, D. C. 83 Until comparatively recent years the mouths of all shrimp trawls vera rGctangular, the load or bottcm lino and tno float or corK line boing more or loss straight horizontally, A new design, however, has the float lino fointiing a pronounced arc when the trawl Is in operation. The former is known as a flat trawl and tlie latter as abriloon trawl. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service has made experiments designed to compare the efficiency of the two trawls. Tho results of these experiments indicated that under similar conditions the catches per hour of the 7li-f oot balloon and the 100-foot flat trawl were abuut the same. The balloon not contained less bottom trash (shells and sponges) and the catch was landed in a better condition. The length of the drag and the speed of tho tow vary with depths, bottom conditions, and the speed with which the tail of the net is filled. Generally speaicing, drags in deep waters usually take from 1-1/2 to 3 hours. In the inshore and shallow water fishery, how- ever, drags are sometimes of much shorter duration. Gear Preferences Preferences for types of gear in the south Atlantic and Gulf shrimp fishery ascertained by Harwell, Knowles and Associates in 1955 in connection with a study of vessel efficiency are stated below. Balloon and Flat Nets on Shrimp Trawls.— The number of nets fishermen Tind necessary to keep aboard, ship is a function primarily of length of trip and t3rpe of bottoms encountered. In North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia 1 or 2 trawls are carried; in Florida, Louis- iana and Texas, 2 or 3; and in Mississippi, 2 to 5 nets. In tho Carolinas and Mississippi, 2-inch stretch mesh is used, while in Florida, Louisiana and Texas the 2-lA-inch stretch mesh is most coimon. The nets are inada of 15- to 18- thread cotton twine and are usually tarred. The cod end or bag is made up of heavier, 1-to 1-1/2- Inch netting. Every fisherman has his o^m preference for net size* The sizes most couiraonly encountered ranf^^d from 90 feat to 110 feat in flat nets and from 65 feet to 85 feet in balloon nets. In Louisiana the 30- foot to U2~foot vessels are equipped with li5-foot to 55-foot flat trawls. The nata used in the Carolinas are also small and are usually about 55 feet to 60 feet. In addition to vessel length, vessel power has a bear- ing on the choice of net size. In considering the efficiency of a fishing net an investigation cannot be limited to operational efficiency but must include a study of "net use-life". Inquiries have been made to detennine the causes of net losses in various areas. In North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Texas, the general opinion of fishermen, net dealers, and 81; FIGURE II - 20. — Shrimp entangled by their numerous spines in the iinproved tail bag net invented by Guthrie. Ordinarily the meshes are not open when the net is in operation as shown here, but are in a stretched position. Aycook Brown, Assignment Photographer, New Bern, North Carolina. 85 vocsel ovjncrs ims that nets in these fisiiurios were lost priiaarlly duo to roGiilar vcar and tear and secondarily as a result of entanglement uitli oDa tractions. The vear and tear is mainly due to the chafing of tiio £;car on the shell and gravel seabeds. The other factor is the reduction of tensile strength caused by microbiological deterioration of tne ttjine. An average of three to four nets are vorn out annually by vessels fishing in these regions. From two to five nets are used annually by vessels fishing in Mississippi and Louisiana. Boat ouners there claim that nets saidom •wear out when their vessels fish in the delta area. Nets are lost niainly as a result of bogging. A secondary factor is the sharks which tear groat portions of the cod end section. Tests by Robas (195^4 ) have shovm that in southern -waters menhaden nets treated with copper napthonate and seine tar retained ac inucn as 82 percent of their tensile strength after tliroe months' exposure. After a similar period of exposure untreated twine or pine tar-treated nets retained no tensile strength. It is believed that considerable savxngs in net costs in the shrimp fishery, especially on the Atlantic coast, can be made by treating nets in copper based solutions. Nylon trawls which have a reputation for being more durable tttin cotton have been tried in various areas. In South Carolina one experienced fisherman reported that the not spread well if the size of tiiG doors was reduced. A dii'ficulty apparently arose whenever the nylon not had to bo mended which prompted this particular fisherman to abandon its U33, In Texas, a net maker reported that cod ends made of mylon lastod throe times as long as those made of cotton. The cost is about 35 percent tiigher than regular twine. Thirty- thread nylon or combina- tion nylon netting was recommended. One shrimp vessel captain from Broxmsville reported excellent results with nylon netting. He stated that despite the higher initial cost, n-st expenses for a year's operation xrore roducod from :ii>3,000 in 19I>3 to '>;ll;.500 in 19Sh by the saitch-ovcr from cotton to r^ylon xiebbing. Tnis vessel operator also used nylon in place of manila rope in the rigging. Ho reported that if a net became hung during traxjling, he ueuaily liianaged to save the nylon net whereas the cotton not often ripped and poi'tions of it wero lost. Perhaps this vjas due to the greater strength of tne nylon xjebbing. He reported no problems as a result of webbing bslng cut on rough surfaces, Louisiana vessel owners felt that, since in their particular area the nets and cod ends were being destroyed usually early in thy uoa-lii'e of the gear*, there vjas no real economy in equipping boats with tne more expensive nylon nets which were vulnerable to bogging. An increase in tlie use-life of the gear in the Mississippi dolta area depends on reducing the losses caused by bogging down in the 86 mild. One solution vas olTorcd by a captain-ovner vho clairaod considpr- able uucces^ wltn hla ti5-foot flat net in which the lead and head lines vjcro similar. One float was attached to tne center of the lead line. The lead lines x^ere attached to the trawl door bracket which was raiced auout 9 incnes above the shoe. United States Fish and Wildlife Service specialists nave described curved doors and more recently doors with wider runners wliich reduce the hazards of bogcing down. 4.^ ^ . ^^® efficiency of shrliap trawls depends on the extent to which the net is spread. The spreading of the net is controlled larrely by tne attachnent of the various lines to the trawl doors. Carlson (1952) using a 100-foot flat net with doors 9 feet long by 1;0 inches hipil re- ported that the attachn>ent of these lines to pad eyes on the back side of the board, opposite the after or long pair of chains, was found to increase the spread of the boards from 15 feet 3 inches to 53 feet 6 inches or by more than IB percent. To obtain maxmura vertical spread of the net and its tending bottom, the pad eyes should be as near the top and bottom of the trawl boards as possible. Further Increases in the spread of the net up to 30 percent over the conventional method of operating a shrijnp trawl were mdo luTl; tt ^^ ^^'"^ "^T f ^^""^ ^""^^^ ''''^ ^ experiiTiental winch (Carlson). fZti£z.:i:zitTr '''^'"'"' ''°'"' ^^^^^ '°^'^ ^"^ ^^^ ^-^^^-^ w>... h.. , ^^°^'^^^^^f»^"tly a «ew type of a flat trawl known as the "I^estcrn Jib has been developed in Frceport, Texas. Experiments have shown that ttn.? Vf ^M r^-*? ^^-'"°"* ™°^^^ ^^^ P^l ^^«i^^ ^^^^ the conven- tional 90-loot ilat net and will give more spread. ^■,-,in r,. . ^^^.I'^y ^ "^^^ ^^^^^ is in the jibs, i.e. the fon.'ard top- side pieces which are hung so that, in use, the strain is with the weobing and the jibs do not pull out of shape. .^ ^ ^, Mi^^l-iJ^^aT^.— i/hite shi-iinp are usually available only in P^tn^'^T' '"'t^f Pi»k shriiap are restricted to the hours of darkness. Reseax^ch has not been able to show the pattern of the vertical migration ?tpn .^f ^•'^•■4 'T""' ^* ^^' ^^^" established that other r,m-ino Crus- tacea are sensitive to sunlight. Some respond to light by „ioving upi °h^n T^^ T-7 ^^°'" ^^^ sunlight. The pink P. duorarum and white shrir,ip P. setiferus inove at tiiaes upward from the"i^-b3d. So-called l?fff, T- ^^^''^ I'''''' developed for other fisheries vhere the species ery 8/ ^^^'^^"^^^y* ^"^^ ^^^^ "'^y be of g^-eat value in the shrimp fish- _/ A detailed report on this gear is available from the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Pacific Experimental Station. 87 A standard model of a midwater trav/l — sometimes called "Phantom" trawl — ^^-rith vertical and horizontel spreads of I48 to 52 feet, and a smaller net with a 36-to 38-fcot opening were tested by the United States Fish and U'ildlife Service M/V Oregon (Springer and Bullis, 19^2), The standard size net was too large to maneuver properly with the poxjer availiable. Better results, because of higher trawling speeds and better maneuverability, v:ere attained vjith a smaller model. During these tests no indication of the effectiveness of the midwater trawl fishing for shrimp was obtained. Trawl Doors. — ^The trawling doors are constructed of wood, us- ually hard pine, •with iron fittings. The bottom of the doors are equipped with iron runners. Their size varies in accordance with tne towing pow- er of tne vessel, the depth of the water and the size of the net. The doors serve to hold the mouth of the net open when towing and are fas- tened to the four corners of the mouth with manila-clad cable. The proper rigging of the doors and net leads involves careful adjustment, and the success of the fishing operation is largely dependent upon the experience of the captain in making these settings. A mistaJce in rig- ging the doors can result in collapsing the spread of the net and in towing it too low or too high. Trawling doors of I4. to 5 feet in length are nsed on travjls up to 5^ feet in width, 6-to 8-foot doors on trawls up to 80 feet, and 9-to iU-foot doors on nets up to 120 feet wide. The doors are set ac- cording to individual preference. They can be purchased completely rigged. \jaters a 2:1 ratio has been employed successfully. (Bullis, 1951) Cables must be replaced about twice a year. Springer (1955) recommends tne use of galvanized preformed cable, which e:cperience aDoard the M/V Oregon has shown to be superior. Hanging Line,— An experienced net maker in Texas recommends the use of a stainless steel manila-clad line for the hanging of the net. Such a line apparently lasts twice as long and costs only 50 per- cent more than regular manila-clad steel cable. An additional advantage is that the stainless steel cable can be spliced if a break occurs in the leadline section. This, reportedly, cannot be easily done with the regular manila-clad steel cable, which corrodes. 88 Tickler Chain. —Some boats customarily tow a tickler chain. Formerly, the chain vas secured to the bottom of the net and on many vessels this procedure is followed today. However, greater success wltn tne tickler chain has resulted from towing it ahead of the net and separate from it. The chain is towed along the bottom to stir up tne shrimp so that the net, which is carried 1 foot to iiJ Inches above tne bo t ton, will pick up the shrimp after they have been stirred up. The Chain serves a dual purpose inasmuch as it tends to level off the irregularities on the bottom and destroy growths which otherwise mlgnt be caught in the net. By towing the tickler chain ahead of the net, it is possible to tow the net without touching the bottom. This results in cleaner catches as far as mud and debris are concerned, and in many instances this practice is believed to minimize the amount of trash rish caught. In addition to the tickler chain, short lengths of chain are secured to the bottom of the net and allowed to hang down towards the bottom. The latter are from 12 to 21; inches in lengtn and are used to measure the distance between the bottom of the net and the ocean floor. The depth is ascertained by the length of chain which becomes shiny as the result of being dragged on the bottom. FIGURE II - 21.— Florida shrimp boats with nets and outriggers at bow for sports fishermen. Fishing Gazette. Gear Used in tne Bait Fishery Several types of gear are used by bait snrimp fishermen throughout tne United States, but the bulk of the catch is taken by trawl nets. In certain areas other types of gear may account for the total catch or aay be predominant in the fishery. These types of gear are pusn nets, cast nets, channel or lift nets, dip nets, and bridge nets. 89 Trawls. — The bait chriinp fishermen use both a small and modi- fied version of the standard otter trav;l and a beam traul. The latter is the predominant tra\jl gear. The bean travjls encountered in the bait fisheiy are variously referred to as frame travels and pipe trawls because, instead of the traditional beam, the mouth of the net is held open by a rectangular pipe frame of varying width and depth. Various devices are attached to the lower part of the frame in order to prevent the traxjl from bogging in soft mud and to prevent clogging by vegetation and debris. Among such devices are sled runners made of galvanized pipej iron \jheels, and a cylindrical roller made of wood laths. The iron wheels work well only en relatively clean, firm bottoms but perform less satisfactorily wnen bottom conditions are muddy or grassy. The roller works satisfac- torily on soft muddy bottoms, but becomes entangled on grassy bottoms which stop its forward roiling action. The sled runners work well on muddy bottoms and also slide through grass patches without picking up large quantities of grass j however, considerable quantities of brown algae are sometimes caught in the net when they are used. The trawls are towed by small power boats in comparatively shallow water. The length of the tow varies depending on the quantity of shrimp available, the depths fished, and the amount of vegetation, debris, etc., taken in the tow. Channel or Lift Nets.— -Channel or lift nets are shaped some- what like a trawl net and are hung on rectangular pipe frames of various widtns and deptns. They are used only in a running tide or current with each boat fishing with one or t'.-io nets. When put into operation, the boat is anchored heading upstream and the nets are lowered at right angles from the sides of the boat so that the current sweeps into tne mouth of the net. The nets are lifted from the water at intervals and the eaten emptied. The net may be lifted without removing the frame from the x^ater by having a line attached a few feet from the end of the bag for the purpose of hauling the bag to the boat. To dump the catch a trip line on the end of the bag is loosened. Push Nets. — A push net consists of a rectangular frame up to 10 feet wide and U feet long covered with fabric netting to form a bag. A handle which has a cross brace at the other end to rest against the fisherman as he wades through the water pushing the net is attached to the frame. Push nets are used over grass and mud flats in water 6 inches to 3 feet deep. A fisherman may work by himself, pushing the net with one hand and towing his boat with the other hand, or he may have assist- ants to row the boat and sort the catch as the contents of the net are emptied into the boat. Dip Nets. — A dip net consists of a large hoop, up to 3-1/2 feet in diameter, to which a cone-shaped net is attached. A handle 6 to b feet long extends from the hoop. Fishing with dip nets is usually dona at night from a small boat anchored in water up to 20 feet daep. A lighted lantern is fastened to the prow of the boat to attract the shrimp. As the shrimp swim to the light, they are scooped up in the net. 90 Some dip net fishing is carried on from bridges and piers whero there is a current. Bridge Nets . — Bridp:e nets are used almost exclusively on bridges connecting the numerous Florida Keys. They consist of cotton webbing hung on a lozenge-shaped frame. The frame is attached by a bridle to a long line tied to the bridge railing. The net is held in the outgoing tide with up to 6 inches of the frame above the water sur- face. Fishing with bridge nets is confined to the outgoing night tides. Bait Fishing Methods \men shrtop are fished for bait puiposes in small quantity. It is recommended that the shrmp be attracted to a chosen fishing sjot by means of minced clams or, as is sometimes done in New Orleans, Louis- iana, by paste-lLke dog food which is packed in empty clam shells. After allowing the shrimp time to congregate, a oast net is used for fishing. +4*4 4 f" excellent method of catching live shrimp in larger quan- tities is to drag slowly a snail otter trawl of about 10-foot spread at the mouth, or a small beam trawl of about 6-foot spread, behind a powered boat or skiff for about 15 minutes. Spars and Rigging A4. . X. ^"^^^^ ^"^ rigging on a sample of shrimp vessels in the south Atlantic and Gulf srea were studied by First Research Corporation of i-lorida. The following practices were observed: rr^. ^1 • -'^^side from minor variations, the rigging on all of the fishing vessels included in the survey was standardized. Innovations were en- countered nere and there j no single improvement, however, had been accepted by a majority of the vessels. The mst was generally stepped on the centerline close to amidsnip or slightly aft. Until recently wooden masts were used but at present all of the newer vessels are equipped with masts constructed oi steel pipe. «h^.,-h K e '^i^ 1°"^ T^ ^^^'^^d *° ^hQ "^5t by a goose neck at a point about 5 feet above deck. It was of sufficient length to bring its outDoard end over the afterdeck several feet forward of the transom and was steadied in position by fixed or adjustable topping lifts ana preventers leading to the port and starboard bulwark. On recently built vessels, the booms were made of iron pipe. Outriggers, port and starboard, extended athwartship from the mast and were of sufficient length to make sure that their outboard ends 91 vjcre well clear of the side of the snip. They wore equipped with ad- justaDle topping lifts so that thoy could bo raised and lo-wcrod. The inboard end vjas secured at tho mast at about the sane height as the boom. The large net and doors i7ere handled on the starboard outrigger and the trynct vas handled on the port outrigger. Some of tho new ves- sels studied had no port outrigger, the trynet being handled by a fixture secured to the overhang of the cabin top. VJhen in port, the outriggers were raised so tnat their ends -were inboard. Outriggers were constructed of steel pipe. A davit, constructed of steel pipe, vas set outside of the port bulwark aft, within about 10 feet of the transom. The towing line for the trynet -was led through a block at tna end of this davit. Standing rigging was constructed either of cable or steel rod. As a rule, there were two forestays leading to the stem. There were Shrouds to port and to starboard athwartship of the mast with pin rails between them. Preventers for the outriggers led forward and were se- cured to chain plates located opposite the pilot house. The size of tna standing rigging varied but slightly and appeared to have little connection witn tne size of the vessel. With the exception of the towing lines for the nets, manlia rope was used for the running rigging. Wire cable was used for tne two toxjing lines, for the main net and tho single bridled towline for the trynet. A four-p'orchase block and fall was fixed to the end of the boom and used for heavy hauling, such as bringing tho loaded neck of the bag on board. The lower block was equipped with a hook and a ma- nila gripe. A fixed single-purchase whip ran through a fixed block near tne top of tho boom. Another whip was led through a running snatch- block Which was free to slide up and down a starboard boom preventer. Both whip lines were equipped with hooks. The fixed whip was used for general hauling and the running whip vas used to haul in the lazy line Which was secured around the mouth of the net bag. This lazy line was loosely secured around the mouth of the bag while towing, the bitter end being usually secured to the inboard door, \toen the net is hauled, the lazy line is led throu^ the snatch-block of the running xihip which is then hoisted to the end of the boom. As it is heaved in by the vjinch, it closes the mouth of the bag preventing the escape of any fish. Fre- quently, tnare were additional halyards leading from the crosstrees which were used for hoisting the not for drying. The itHJority of the winches encountered in the survey were open with two or three drums, depending on the model. As a rule, they are dri-ven from a power take-off on the main engine through a chain and sprocket drive, with a clutch control convenient to the winch-man. The main drums handle the wire towing cable, the manila lines being handled by a built-in "nlggerhead" or gipsey. On one vessel the win- cnes "ijere driven by a diesel engine located on deck next to tne winch and the trynet was operated by a separate winch, also driven from this 92 small engine. Tne winches are located in the open, Just aft or along- side the mast. The current power take-off arrangement aboard shrimp boats often includes various undesirable mechanical features and safety Mechanical transmd-ssion from the main engine is undesirable for winch motivation since the speed of the winch can be controlled only by regulating the speed of the main engine. Since the speed of the engine in turn affects the propeller speed, it is impossible to reduce the speed of the boat and accelerate the winding rate of the winch at tne same time. In addition, this system has no provision for absorbing sudden changes in the load on the winch such as occur when the vessel is rolling. Hydraulically driven winches are more desirable because tney (1) are more efficient] (2) offer quicker acceleration} (3) have higher torque J (U) are easier to control and to handle in rough weather; and (5) are safer. Recent Improvements in Rigging Some new methods in rigging have been introduced in recent vears. At present, however, these methods are not yet in common use and have still to be accepted throughout the fleet. The most unpor- tant of innovations is concerned with the method of securing the main net towing lines on the centerline of the vessel. The common method of doing this is to so maneuver the vessel with a port helm that the taut towing lines cross the transom and can be manually secured to a chain dovmfall fastened to the deck and equipped with a hook, ihe block and fall at tne end of the boom is also hooked around tne cables and is used to hoist them about eight to nine feet above the deck. The towing cables remain in this position throughout the trawling per- iod. This system has been the cause of many serious accidents on shrlji?) boats. If the fall parts while the vessel is towing, the bottom block is jerked dovm by the towing cables, often with enough force to go through the deck. The possibility of this occurrence makes the common practice of working on the afterdeck near or under the two lines ex- tremely hazardous. A small number of vessels have been equipped with a steel rod with a hook at its lower end, which is secured at the end of tne boom. After the towing cables have been hoisted in place by means of the block and fall, the rod and hook are substituted for this run- ning gear, which is then released, and the cables are then held in place by the steal rod and hook. The towing strain is then taken by the steel rod and hook and the rig is not dependent upon the strength of a piece of manila line. This operation has been further refined by tne use of a yoke which is slotted at the centerline. As the cables cross the stem of the vessel, they slide up this yoke and settle in tne slot. They are then locked in place by a steal finger which covers tne top of the slot. This yoke, or gallows, is generally 93 located at tlio forviard end of the fish hold hatch, between it and the vjinoh. This arrangeiaent has three main advantacos: the crcvj does not have to handle the cables other than to guide them up the yoke into the Giotj the cables are led through a strong and permanent frameworkj and the towing point is moved foxnjard, making the vessel more mancuverablo. To release the cables the locking finger is roleased, and the cables are lifted out of the slot by a member of the crev/. This is an adap- tation of a method used in other fisheries and has been adopted by several Texas operators. Equipment Requirements for Deep Water Shrimp Fishing Springer (1955) suggests that a number of gear modifications are required to convert a regular shrimp vessel for the deep >jater shrimp fisnery. A long torque spool able to take 800 fathoms of half- inch pre- formed cable must replace the regular winch drum. The usual two cables to the net are unnecessary, as a bridle not less than 25 fathoms in length may be substituted. The two sides of the bridle must be of iden- tical length, quality, age and make because of the possibility of dif- ferential stretching. The vessel requires a depth recorder with a range of 300 fath- oms or greater. At these depths the captain will not be able to orientate his movements by the type of bottom, and accurate navigational equipment such as loran should be installed. Large anchors with adequate cable ana a winch should be aboard. The use of echo-ranging devices would assist by scanning the bottom ahead of the trawl for obstacles likely to tear the net. Coi'relation of bottom temperatures and highest shrimp catches have shown that a reversing thermometer would be required to attain the greatest measuve of efficien.^y in slirlraping. A small povjer-driven winch would be needed for operating thi^ equipment. 9/ Engines The expansion of the present day stu-imp finhei'j is undoubtedly due, in large measure, to the acceptance and use of diesel motor power. In a sample of vessels studied by the First Research Corpora- tion of Florida, all but the motor boats fishing the inland waters ware equipped with diesels ranging in power from Qk to 230 horse power. Ail of the vessels in tne sample wore equipped with reduction gears. The main engines, in most instances, were equipped with power take-offs to run tne uinch through a system of chains, shafts, and sprockets. A tvjin-screw vessel wliich was included in tne sample was slower, less maneuverable, and not as efficient as the other vessels in towing. 9/ Sec Dullls, H. R., Preliminary Results of Deep-Uater lilxpl orations for Shrimp in the Gulf oT Mexico by the M/V Oregon (1950-56), Commercial Fisheries Review, December 1956, 9h 'J'ii.» r..u.!iiL-ipe of inci'eaiied hoy';-a ijouor, in tliirj inntabco, ijac; ic.o,re tl)o.n ciTuLiO by Lliu cuiiilxa'LJOincuofltJ ol Uxo •L;;iii--;cro\j JiLAiilalviion. Thin cnjilno in;3tallation in xaost ui." tna vost;ai.T iiar; pood and tharu • Tiero coniparativoiy fe\j brcal:do;,'na. Maintcnanoo van kapfc as aijiipla i\'j poiioible. Ihny of the luoi'-e expei-'ionced cru;/ mc.iibors aro c::pabie of i.;alsinj niinor rcprirs at cea. If a breakdo;m cannot be i'cpair--'d, otlicr voj,-j.i.L:j fiGhing in the vicinity cooperatG either by supplyinr; j'^par^s part;; and tochnical knoijledgo or by touing the dicablcd vessel into port. Aj thoce vessels usually fish in groups of 10 to 100 boats, aa- sist.iiico its noarly always at hand. According to a recent article by Mr. Jan-Olof Traun^^ in Fi:;h- ! i . ; Piiii.tr-I Ml, cngino efficiency is dii'ectly rolatod to the Icn^ibh of thi; IlULI. i:iy Mr. Traung cites several examples in support of his find- ing;.; that additional hull len^^bh decreases the required horae pov.'or per ton of hull xjolglit. It is claijtied that tank toota iiavj pro>r^d that a 65.1!>-'foot and a 105-foot boat can both be driven at 9 knota by a 200 h.p. main cniino, altnou^h tho bigner boat has a beam of 2li fc.-'t 2 inches oof,ip:irod uitn 19 feet 7 inchoG of tno smaller boat and a dicplaceracnt of 320 tons coiiipared tiith 110 tons, Mr. Traung is of the opinion that there is a tendency to ovji-- pow'ur fi.'Jhiiig craft. The tiastefulnoss of this practice is demonatratcd ]>/ t;;.:pci-i(uoat;j uhlch Ivavo shown tlmt a 69-foot boat can bo di-ivon at 10 laicjtj t>y a 200 h.p, engine, and that doubling the engine horso power to I4OO \iLLl only add 1 knot to the speed. Engine costs vary %jlth make and poxjor. Tj-pical cnidnes of veaseia in the 60- to 65-foot class (25-30 net tons) acquired in the yv.aj,'a 1953-511 More carried on the books at l!l'.y,000 to si'J-OjUOO, accord.lai;'; to atatistics on vessel costs colloctod by the Federal Trade Co/m:iissiuii. Tliia amount, in many instances, represented a substantial part of total fiiLud investiuont of the boat ovnier. FrC; ^'-:ing Enuipment The practice of froeaing shrimp at sea is expanding. TIa-ee frecaing methods are used in the slu-inp fleet; (l) alielf or plate freeain^', (2) blast fx-jioslng, and (3) iraiaersion freezing. Shelf or plate freezers require substantial aiiiomits of space aud involve considerable invontnient in equipiuent. In this process tno ^juriuip are pi\jpackod in ^-pound cartons and placed on refrif/o rated, tiiiiij coi'rosion-resistant luetal plates. The chilling is effected maiLniy tui'ouih the bottom of the cnrtoii, and since paper cartons are poor con- du.itors of heat, freoiiing is relatively slov). Because of their thickness, ToT Ai- tide by Jan-Olof Ti'aung, Chief of tV:e Fishing Boat Sectioii of tiie Fisheries Division, Food and Agriculture OrganiEabion, in F.A .0 .. FiL'i3rios_Bulletln, Cat. -Dec. 1955, as conden-ed in the L-irch 195^ is.jue of Fisi^erio3._N£LTsletter, publii.hed by the Coniiiionucalth Director of Fislierles, Dspartiucnt of Priiiiary Industiy, Sydney, Australia. 95 tno u;;e of 25- or 50-pouiid cartons is prec.Ludod. V/oin:hliif5 and packafjinc of tho ^-pi^i-ind carton.'j requires a f^reat deal of hand labor vnich ifj not alvjays available nb sea. Blast freeaing requires less space for I'roeainc compartments. Tlie method, hovjover, has the potential disadvantage that snrimp m-uy b3 cjvibjuctod to deliydration, a condition cominonly referred to as 'freaaer bm-ii ' . Where blast freezers are used, the freezing process is accumplisned by exposure of the shrimp to x'apidly rroving, intensely cold air ^jnicn is usually obtained from a bloxjer tiirough coils chilled by a rofripei-ant such as armnonia or "Freon". The sl'iriinp ordimirily are packan;ed in 5'Pound cartons placed on racks below deck and frozen. In one instance a blast freezer installed in the fall of IS^Sli on board a shrimp vessel cost approximately iii;20,000. Amortization of investmeiit, cost of upkeep, and life of equipment must be considered in determining the economic advantage to be obtained from an Installation of this sort. The approximate savings by the equipment ajnountecl to (1) ^1-2,500 annually on ice otherwise required for chilling, (2) an additional incCiiio of approximately five cents per pound (seven cents premium price loss two cents additional packaging and handling charges) for the siu'imp fivjaen on board vessel. Additional economies resulted from the avoidance of downgrading often applied to fresh shrimp, lower freight costs, and the eliriiination of time normally lost in running to the transport vessel for ti'ansfer of the shrimp at sea, A furtlier advantage TJas tne length- ening of the trips. Trips of the vessel prior to the installation ordinarily xjoro of IS to 50 days' duration. The first two trips after conversion were 88 and 89 days respectively. In addition, tne vessel 1,'as able to freese the catch of its sister ship and thorcby increase tiio length of tlia trips of ttot vessel from about h5 to 79 days. In the immersion pi*ocos3 the tinriiup are neaded, ^JashGd, and individually frozen in a sugar-salt solution in a deck tanlc, then pack- aged in 2$'or 50-pound cartons, and stored in a holding room boloxj dock. This system has the same Inherent savings as the blast and plate freei^e systems: the problem of quality deterioration of iced slirimp is elxmi- natud, proaact can be sold at a premium price, and longer more efficient trips can bo made. In 1955 the equipment for an limnersion freezer in- stallation sold for $9,5O0 f .o.b. Savannan, Georgia; the installed price vjas in the neighborhood of .Iflli^OOO. The system, because of its cuiapact- neiij and fiuor pi-oblems oncDuntcred in iiiaintenrinca, \na judgod aa probably thcj bost yot devdiloped for sioall vessels, (see figure II - 22) Navi?yttioail and Fi5hln;< Aids Electronic in3trimi£.its aboard fishing vessels usually serve botn as navigational and as flslilng aids. Thoy guide the fisncmian 96 FIGURE II - 22.— The first floating shrimp packing and freezing vessel, the "Betty Jean". Fishing Gazette, 97 to the ri.shing rrounds and, once there, provide him v;lth InTormation about tno bottom he I'ishes. The principal items of electronic equipment found on shrimp vessels are automatic pilots, depth recorders, and radio telephones. Tiio only navigational instrument, however, common to all craft vjith the exception of motor boats, is the conpass. A fev vessels are equipped vith radio direction finders, loran devices, and "Fischlupes". Automatic Pilot Automatic pilots vjere introduced in the shrimp fleet to relieve tne crew from the chore of steering which, on lon^ runs, presents a considerable fatigue problem. Since a course steered electronically is more accurate than one steered by hand, both run- nxng time and fuel consumption are reduced by the use of automatic pilots. Unless equipped with remote control, however, the instrument's use is confined to maintaining a heading. Some caution must be exercised in tho use of automatic pilots. Errors in course may result from tixe circumstance that Lhe pilot ini- tially was set on the basis of an inaccurate compass .ij Exclusive reliance on the automatic pilot by crews who left the iiheel unattended have been responsible for serious accidents at sea. Two serious stiort- comings of tne instrument are its inaccuracy in rough seas and considerable wear on the steering gear caused by bad vjeather. Depth Recorders Depth recording equipment is utilized for both navigating and fishing. \Jhen used for navigatijig, depth of water and bottom contours are determined to obtain vessel position. When used for fishing, good bottom (smootn and muddy) is distinguished from bad bottom (rock or coral) by the appearance of the graph made on the recording paper. An instrument using a flashing light instead of a pan indicator is less desirable since no permanent record is kept and tlie continuous watching for the flashes imposes a strain upon the fisherman. When properly used, depth recorders are possibly the most valuable instruments on board. A principal shortcoming of some of the depth recording equipment installed on shi'imp vessels is the Inade- quate protection from salt spray and moisture afforded to the working parts. This deficiency increases the maintenance required. The mainten- ance problem may be complicated further by the ignorance of vessel person- nel in the care and use of the device. Moreover, it is reported that some 11/ A five degree compass error in the heading from Tampa to Campeche ijxjuld result in an error of about 60 miles if no corrective action is taken. 98 captains only use the recorder intermittently to conserve recording paper. This defeats one of the main functions of the instrurient, i.e., detecting rough bottoms where gear might be lost. Radio Telephone A radio telephone is intended to function as a navigational instrument. When used in conjunction vith a searchlight or other visual aids, it enables a vessel to be "talked in" to a group of ves- sels already on tne fishing ground. In the Harvjell, Knowles and Associates sample of vessels, transmitters used in connection with radio telepnones ranged from an output of 5 watts to the maximum permissible of 150 watts, with some sets even exceeding this limit. Vessels fishing close to shore had either no radio telephone or an installation of low wattage. At the other extreme were vessels fishing in the Gulf of Campeche which had equipment capable of producing the raaxiirium permissible povjer output. Three types of aerials were in use. In tne South Atlantic and Tortugas Areas tne wire-coiled bamboo pole type was predominant. On newer vessels in the same area a metal antenna was common. In Texas, especially in the Brownsville fleet, so-called "flat top" tjrpe aerials were being used. The latter were copper wires strung from the boom via the mast to the bow of the vessel. The service life of the bamboo type of aerial v;as estimated to be about one year. By then moisture absorbed by the baraboo would reduce the signal strength transmitted. The metal type aerial was considered to be more efficient than the bamboo type and was supposed to last approximately three years. The "flat top" aerial was found to be tne most durable, efficient, and economical of the three types in i^e and was gaining steadily in popularity throughout tne fleet. Failure to adhere to the proper standards for use and upkeep of the radio equipment on the part of captain and crew diminished the banel'it derived from the installation in some instances. Sets aboard some snrirap vessels were found to be inoperative because the 32-volt bank of batteries was chargad by generators with tne voltage regulator sot to cut out at about 36 volts. The constant overload on the elec- tronic equipment shortened the life of tne tubes, resistors, condonsors, etc., in the sets. Use of improper crystals in the tuning circuits waq found to be a major cause of sipjnal output reduction in some instances. Some technicians fail to recognize the need for precise compliance witn the requirei.ients for crystals in each make and type of set. Attempts to repair sets by tecnnicians unfamiliar with a particular set, or worse even, by captain and cre^^ members themselves, were responsible for the poor condition of some sets. Inadequate 99 copper wiring, insulation, and copper grounding coupled with the other cited defects were responsible for the operation of some sets at about fifty percent of their theoretical output. Radio Direction Finding Equipment Radio direction finding equipment is considered to be of little value in the shrimp fleet at the present time. In the past, many of the larger vessels crossing the Gulf on the Campeche run had this equipment installed. It was found, however, that radio bearings were of limited accuracy at a distance, especially if the loop was an inside installation. Many captains would not turn the vessel to a position where the bearing could be taken without interference from the rigging. Few captains have been trained to make proper bearings and fewer still have been trained in tne more advanced principles of navigation; information obtained from the direction finding equipment, therefore, is seldom used. Depth Sounder with Cathode Ray Tube A depth sounder with a cathode ray tube designed to function as a fish or shrimp finder is sometimes installed in the larger vessels. Supersonic signals transmitted downward are reflected back from the bot- tom schools of fish, and a clear visual indication is obtained on the cathode ray tube. Normal maximum range is 320 fathoms. The practical value of this type of sounder from the standpoint of tne shrimp fishemian has not as yet been clearly established. Research workers associated with the northeastern trawl fishery report that it takes captains from three to four months to get the feel of the instru- ment. So far shrimp vessels have not given the sounder this type of trial. There is a possibility that the sounder might come into use once deep water fishing for Royal Red shrimp becomes more common. In deep water operations the instrument would view the bottom far enough in advance of the trawl to permit the skirting of major obstructions. Loran Loran is an electronic device which gives an accurate long range fix (750 miles by day, 1,500 miles by night, under ideal conditions). The equipment operates satisfactorily, although in the Texas Area its use is limited by low signal strength from the master and slave stations in the eastern Gulf. As with all electronic equipment, it is important that the firms installing loran provide the fisherman with adequate instruction in the use and maintenance of the device. The effective utilization of the device depends on the availability of competent repair service and trained crews. 100 Radio telejdione Direction finder Automatic pilot beneath the wheel FIGURE II - 23.— Aboard the "Miss Powerama", Southern Fisherman. 101 Depth recorder Remote control unit for the automatic pilot, visible to the ri^t of the compass and just above throttle and clutch control FIGURE II - 2li.— Aboard the"Miss Powerama" , Southern Fisherinan. 102 If the two latter conditions arc satisfied, loran may offer the most promise of all the navigational aids available to the fishing industry. Tlie equipment could substantially raise vessel efficiency by reducing travel time to and from the fishing grounds. Radar Vessels currently engaged in the shrimp fishery do not have radar installations. It is generally felt that radar is not Justified because of its cost and limited value to the vessel. Other Navigational Aids Speed indicators and logs are generally dispensed with on board shrimp trawlers. Instruments or publications for celestial navigation as well as adequate means for taking reliable visual bearings are also frequently missing. Extent of Use of Electronic Devices in the Shrimp Fleet The extent of use of electronic devices as navigational and fishing aids in the shrimp fleet is closely related to length of vessel and length of trips. Vessels under kO feet in length included in the Harvrell, Knowles and Associates survey had no electronic devices what- soever. Slightly less than half of the vessels in the 40-60-foot size class had automatic pilots, 39 percent had depth recorders, and 83 per- cent had radio telephones. All of the larger vessels, those over 60 feet in length, were equipped with automatic pilots, depth recorders and radio telephones. Around 13 percent of these vessels were also equipped with radio direction finding equipment. Shortly before the survey was made three of the larger vessels had installed loran and one a depth sounder . Typical Prices of Ele ctroni c Devices Prevailing costs of electronic equipment in shrimp vessels were surveyed in 1955 • Automatic pilots could be installed for ap- proximately $400. Depth recorder costs averaged about $1,000, although a small set which was little used by the fleet could be bought for half this price. Radio telephones were higher than $700 depending on the type and wattage of the installation desired. While the equipment could be rented and fully serviced for about $50 a month, most boat o^mers had bought the equipment outright. Aerials varied from $^5 to $90 in price depending on the type used. A depth sounder with cathode tube cost $2,500 installed or could be rented for about $70 a month. War surplus loran, originally designed for aircraft, had been installed at a cost of $750 shortly before the survey was made by a small number of vessels operating out of Tampa, Brownsville, and Port Isabel. Hovrever, the re- search firm emphasized that no moderately priced loran was available on the market at that time . 103 Docking and Repair Facilities Access to adequate docking and repair facilities is of car- dinal importance to the success of fishing operations. Where boat oimers operate independently they usually unload at the docking facilities of the raw shrimp plant which is buying their catch. Fleet affiliated boats are usually operated by processors who have docking facilities of their own. In these instances, all operations may be performed at the waterfront. Where dock space is at a premium pro- cessing facilities are usually located some distance from the place of landing. By" the nature of their operations freezers and breaders require a considerable amount of space. Tttese operations consequently are seldom integrated with raw shrimp plant operations. Concentration of shrimping activities in the area has made tne city of Brownsville, Texas, lay claim to the title of "Shrimp Capitol of tne World." Remarkable strides have been made here in establishing a port which is particularly adaptable to shrimping operations. The harbor is designed especially for shrimp boats and is built in such a x^ay as to make docking and accessibility to the fish house nearly ideal. The shrimp basin is operated by the Browns- ville Port Authority which is supported by the users of the basin. Charges of ^1.00 per day per boat are made for docking. This charge is paid by the boat owner. Fish houses pay $1.00 per foot each month for water front space. A fee of one percent of selling price is ap- plied to shrimp unloaded over the dock, and a charge is also made for fuel and ice. In spite of these added expenses, users appear to be well satisfied witn the basin. Their only complaint is that the basin is perhaps located too far from the open Gulf. Boats must travel 1$ miles from the basin to reach open water- Repairs of minor character are usually handled by the more experienced crews themselves, either while at sea or during stopovers at tne dock. The rapid expansion of slirimp production in recent years, however, has led to the employment of many inexperienced crews which has had its effect on boat and equipment maintenance. The trend towards longer trips and more expensive complicated mechanical installations has magnified the maintenance and repair problem. The surveys con- ducted by the Bureau of Business and Economic Research of the Univer- sity of Miami, by Harwell, Knowles and Associates, and by First Research Corporation of Florida, stressed the serious consequences of the incom- petence of crews. Inefficient help places additional emphasis on the availability of adequate repair facilities in port. Not all ports have been able to measure up to the demands placed upon them by the Increased activities based on their docks. FISHT5RMEM Boat Ownership Ownership control of the shrimp fleet is vested in different interest groups. Boats may either be individually owned and operated. loU individually owned but operated as part of a processor's or wholesaler's fleet, or tney may be owned and operated by a processor. Under these basic forms of contr\3l a large number of different arrangements are found. In the State of Florida there are, in addition to the indepen- dent fishennen who owns his boat and hires his crowj the fish-house whicn owns a fleet of vessels, individual OBmars vho own one or several boats, wholesalers who own boata, processors who control vessels owned by the fishermen, and processors who own the vessels in their fleet. Finally, there are absentee owners who have their boats managed by a fisn packing house, captain, wholesaler, or firm specializing in boat management. There is little basic difference between the operating pro- cedures of the individually oimed and operated boat and of the boat which is individually owned but operated as pairt of a fleet. In general, the owner of a fleet-affiliated vessel has authority over his own vessel to almost the same degree as he would were he not affiliated. The fleet operator may at times ask him to go to waters he does not particularly care for, or is not accustomed to fish, or may ask him to increase the length of his trip, or to decrease the amount of idle time at the docks. In most Instances, such requests are in the interest of both the fleet and boat owner and create antagonism only when the boat owner is less ambitious than the fleet operator feels he ought to be. In Brownsville, Texas the majority of boats are fleet affiliated, and the prevailing sentiment is that a boat is independent because of the fleet's rather than the boat owner's choosing. An affiliated boat is required to land its catch at the fish- house operated by the fleet controller. When circumstances warrant tne landing of the shrimp at a port other than the home port the boat OTmer is freed froia this obligation. The larger processing establishments, canneries, fish houses, and freezer-breaders often own and operate their own vessels as a fleet. In many instances, the processing establishments own some boats and have other boats affiliated with them. In most instances the crew complement on a processor-owned vessel snares in the receipts from the catch of the vessel in much the same manner as on an owner-operated boat with the exception that the ovmer's share accrues to the processor rather than to the owner- operator. The incentive to produce can, therefore, be likened to that motivating the piece worker in industry. In several locations, canneries employ some crews on a year-round basis at a fixed annual salary, but the motive to maximize production is far less compelling. In such circumstances the canneries are principally concerned with offering full-time employment to experienced crew members who can fish for oysters in the off-season. The desire on the part of the canners to stabilize production throughout the year may be sufficiently great to outweigh considerations of efficiency. 10^ other things being equal, highest productivity over a period of time is obtained through owner -operation of vessels. The owner- operator has to produce to survive. The greater effort expended in fisning by the owner-operator is demonstrated in comparisons made by Earvell, Knowles and Associates between the productivity of vessels captained by their owners and vessels skippered by hired captains. It was found that owner-operated vessels generally fished more days per year and had bigger catches per day than other vessels fishing tne same waters but skippered by hired captains. Two owner-operated vessels fishing out of Thunderbolt, Georgia fished on IbO and 1^2 days in 195U and caught 37,l47U and 33,127 pounds, respectively. Their catches per day were 208 and 2l8 pounds of shrimp, respectively. Corresponding statistics for 3 vessels operating with hired crews out of the same port were: 152, 108, and 136 fishing days, total catcnes of 23,110, 21,375, and 2U,665 pounds, and average daily catches of 152, 198, and l8l pounds. Similar differences between owner- and crew-operated vessels existed for vessels fishing out of Key V/est, Florida and Brownsville, Texas. The fact that neither captain nor crew have any financial interest in the vessel has serious consequences at times. Personnel Changes constantly. The crew usually has no pride in the vessel and will try to escape any maintenance work. It lacks loyalty to either vessel or owner. Little interest is shown in seamanship or vessel operation. The owner, or operator, has little regard for the crew. He is indifferent about the maintenance of safe working conditions. He is little interested in the safe operation of the vessel itself. His sole interest is in operating on the lowest cost level pos- siDie. In such circumstances, the shrimp fishery has little appeal for personnel with high standards. On the basis of observations made in the course of their survey of work practices on a sample of shrimp fishing vessels First Research Corporation commented on relations between vessel owners and operators , Conflicts between employer and employees are common in any industry, and the aL.imp fishery is no exception. At present, vessels in some instances ar-- Ovjio-d and operated by people who are not familar with boats or the sea, and are, to a large measure, ignorant of the mechanics of the fishing procedure itself. Few of these people have ever made a trip on a fishing vessel and, £.3 a rule, regard the vessel and its crew only as a profit-making combination, TLj vnsaal is re- garded as a short-tenn investment in contrast to coi.viitions found in other fisheries. In order to minimize expenses, inaintenance is ne- glected, repairs — -some necessary to the Scifety of the vessel — are delayed and the purchase of new gear to replace that worn out in service is deferred. On the other hand, taking advantage of the 106 01-nier's lack of knowledge conccrnin!;; the at-soa operation of the vessal, thoro are many lnr:tances whoro his proparty is boinc i-dllfully destroyed, his gear sold \vitliout his knowledge, and tho actual catch itself disposed of behind his back. The oimer is in constant danger of havilng a dishonest captain and crew get the better of him. This is particularly true of the Campeche operation, where vessels are away from their home ports for extended periods of time and may return to other ports for unloading. These conditions are largely responsible for the recent tendency of processors and other outside interests to divest them- selves of ovmership control of fishing operations. At the same time, pressing economic considerations have encouraged independent ovmer- operators to seek affiliation with fleets, a development which has contributed to the transformation of fishing to a large scale opera- tion. The fleet operators in these instances are content to have the fishermen ovm their vessels, finding the economic forces conducive to fishermen's loyalty just as effective as a control device as outright ownership by the fleet operator. Some boats are absentee -owned and operated by individuals or companies specializing in this type of work. One company at Key West, Florida operates 20 vessels ovnied by the company and over 30 vessels ovmed by others. The operating company is given almost com- plete control over the vessels and hires the captains. It is also responsible for the maintenance of the vessel. All costs of opera- tion are taken out of the profits, if any, and the balance is divided heti-jeon o'^^-ner and operator. If qDerations of an individual boat have resulted in a net loss, the ovmer reimburses the operator for exi^enses incurred. Boat management for absentee oimers, in some instances, is a function performed by shrimp plant operators on a fee basis. The fee usually charged for such services is one to two cents per potmd of shrimp landed. Ordinarilj'- only the captain is hired directly by the operator. The captain, in turn, hii-es the crew. The division of the proceeds of a trip is bettreen tho owner and the captain v/ho then settles with the crew. In the majority of cases the proceeds are split on a ^0-SO basis between the owner and the captain. In some instances the vessel gets a fixed price per pound for the catch. The captain divides the employee's share with the crew on a percentage basis which either depends on arrangements customary in the region or in proportion to the individual crew member's e:qoerience and efficiency. Usually, the captain keeps ^0 percent of the emploji-ees' share for himself. In general, the operator is responsible for vessel maintenance and overhead and supplies either fuel or ice or both. Stores and groceries usually are supplied by the captain and the crew and these 107 expenses are deducted fron the employee fi' share of the proceeds before division. Nets, rigsing, and gear are usually provided by the ovmer or operator of the vessel. Generally whenever creus vjork on repairs and maintenance of the vessel durirj stays in port they are paid extra compensation. More commonly such repairs are performed by shore workers. Under some arrancements crews may obtain a part interest in the fixed boat investment by helping to pay for the rig. Arrancements of this sort are usually encountered in cannery ovmership. The acquisi- tion of an ovmership interest provides the crevr an incentive for proper care of fixed equipment. As far as the boat ovmer' s relations with the fish house are concerned, tv;o types of operations have been observed: under one type of arrangement the boat cnmer stays completely independent. This has an advantage for the boat owner in that he can shift from one fishing ground to another and put into the closest harbor or whichever port appears most advantageous for his operations. Advance radio notice is given of the boat arrival so that the fish house may have workers ready to pack the catch. In another type of agreement the boat operator usually packs with one fish house. The operator gives hira dock space to unload his catch, takes care of his packing, and often disposes of his catch, either buying it outright or acting as his agent. Boat Ovmers' Organizations In the shrimp industry individual boat oraiers may be affiliated with trade associations, producers' cooperatives, or labor unions. In some instances, the character of a specific organization makes classifi- cation impossible. Activities of certain fishermen's xrnions, xjhich include boat operators among their membership at times are in the natvire of co- operatives marketing fishery products and have been considered as such by Federal courts. ^ In other instances, an organization may act as a labor union at one time, only to switch character and perform the func- tions commonly connected vrith trade association activiti.es at some other time. The types of organJ-zations encountered in the fisheries to a large extent depend on the chai-acter of the industry in specific geo- graphic markets. VJherever the interests of independent boat owners and crews coincide, i.e. v.'here their primary concern is in maximizing receipts from their catch through negotiation idth processors and dealers, they tend to band together to form unions \iiich engage in price, and under the lay system ultiiaately, therefore, wage determination. In the absence of significant numbers of independent fishermen, the cleavage between employer and labor on the producing end becomes more pronounced and or- ganizations devoid of vessel oi-mer membership are encountered that can be more properly clcissified as labor unions. V/herever boat oimers in a given market are led to believe that profits could be favorably 12/ 3li F supp. 970, 97h; 31? U. S. 1U3. 108 affected by their entering the niarketinti field, there exists a strong incentive for trie fonnation of producers' cooperative iiiarket- Iri'Z associations. Trade associations may be industrywide and have combined producer and dealer membership. Ifliere interests of producers and dealers clash they may be coxiiposed exclusively of either flshex-raen or distributors. Functionally, the distinction between the three types of organization can perhaps be dra-vm on the following basis: (1) Trade associations are organizations concerned with activities other than marketing. legislative, research, statistical and public relations woi-k affecting the entire industry or a segment thereof, is vrLthin the normal sphere of operations. (2) Labor unions in the fisheries, wherever the lay system of compensation is employed, are chiefly concerned with price negotia- tions and the specific terms of the lay. In the rarer instances, wherever the practice of compensating fishermen on a piecework (cents per pound caught) or time basis is encountered, the activities of the union are concentrated on wage negotiations, zd/ (3) The functions performed by marketing cooperatives vary a great deal from locality to locality. Originally marketing coopera- tives were organized to eliminate certain handling costs charged by middlemen. Subsequently more specialized functions as quality control and coordinated selling have been undertaken. Some cooperatives more recently have branched out into processing and have succeeded in achiev- ing integration of operations from fishing up to, but not including, retail distribution. As a result, there are today cooperatives in the fisheries which confine themselves to acting in the capacity of producers' agents in the marketing process as well as others v/hich assume title and possess up-to-date processing and primary wholesaling facilities. A listing of the principal organizations whose membership includes shrimp industry representation will be found on page 12ii. The Twin City Fishermen's Cooperative Association Cooperative marketing is an important factor in the distribu- tion of frozen shrimp in the Morgan City, Louisiana area. The Twin City Fishennen's Cooperative Association, Inc., was chartered under the provisions of the Louisiana Seafood Marketing Act and began activities in 19^6. It is a non-stock corporation with paid-in capital obtained from the payment of membership fees. 13/ See the comments about the employment of fishermen beginning on page 112. 109 The cisGOciation, a cooperativu of shrimp boat-oiming fisher- moii, handles tlie produce of its mombors throu<;h plants located in Morgan City, Louisiana and Port Isabel, Texas. Slu'iirp handltd in Morcan City are froaun in conmercial fretjiiers but those handled through the Port Isabel facility are frozen and stored in the association's own plant, which also freezes and stores shrimp for non-members. The association also carries a stock of nets and boat supplies for sale to members in both Morgan City and Port Isabel. From the Mort^an City headquarters, where the co-op ovms large installations at the dock, the shrimp are distributed in wholesale quantities thi'oughout the country \anuer the association's ovm brand names. The shrimp are landed at the dock of the co-op in the Atchafalaya River and trcxnsported by conveyor belt to the plant. After grading and packing, the shrimp are transported to the public freezer plant, a distance of about one and one-half blocks, in tinicks ovmed by the co-op. Here they are frozen and stored for mar- ket. Shipment to the northern markets is made by "exempt" motor carriers. Shrimp sales are made by the association and in the association's name. However, the association allocates directly to the member any rev- enue from the sale. Cash settlement after deduction of a handling fee is made after receipt of the money from the buyer. Members are tied to the association by an exclusive selling agreement, and are requested to make a $100 advance for each boat load of shi'imp handled over a specified minimum poundage. Net earnings (the excess of fees collected over costs) are distributable to the members on the basis of shrimp produced hy them. So far the distribution has been made in the form of non-interest-bearing patronage notes due ten years from the date of issuance. Because of the fact that members are charged fixsd fees for the processing and sel- ling of their catch, the financial position of the co-op itseljf is not dependent on market fluctuations. During the year 19i)h vjhen slu-imp prices vrere low, the association was in excellent financial oondibion. It had adequate \;iorking capital supplied by the advances for the handling of shrimp collected from its members and a high cash balance. In general, the members of the association seem to be satis- fied with the arrangements, and there has been little turnover of la^mber- ship in tlie past years. Since members have considerable funds tied up in the patronage notes (on the average over |'.1,000), they are not very anxious to leave the cooperative. Some boat ovmers are reluctant to join the cooperative because of the time lapse involved between the sale and the receipt of the proceeds. The financially stronger boat owners are batter suited for membership th^in those liho operate on a hand-to-mouth basis. The cooperative employs 9 pennanent workers in Morran City. The operation of the Marine Hardufire Supply Di\d.sion is conducted separately. Members are charged cost plus 8 percent for their purchases. The distribution of the co-op's pack, put up in the institutional 5-pound form, is under 2 brand names. 110 Operations of the Port Isabel Branch of the association can be described as follows: The Branch has about 50 members and an equal number of boats and is an importaiit factor in the Bi-ownsvllle-Port Isabel area. All sales are made by the Louisiana office. Members of the co-op must unload with the co-op unless their shrimp are landed at a port outside of the Bro-imsvi lie -Port Isabel area. Shrimp aire unloaded at the co-op's docks and stored in the boat owner's name. The boat owner is paid the Brownsville union price less processing and freezing costs. The co-op maintains its own freezing facilities and has a storage capacity of up to half a million pounds. It also does its own consumer packaging. Profits at the end of the year are redistributed in the form of patronage dividends. The co-op offers obvious advantages in the marketing process, in tliat it has facilities for holding shrimp and, because of large voliame, is in a position to save its members the broker- age fees that are normally charged the independent boatman. Other membership advantages are the availability of facilities for machinery maintenance and net repair. For these services the co-op charges cost plus 8 percent. An examination of the accounting statements of the T\,dn City Fishermen's Cooperative Association indicates that the members of the cooperative realized on the average 53*9 cents (including patronage dividend) per pound of packaged frozen shrimp sold for them by the cooperative in 195^. Fishermen not associated with this cooperative who fished from the same ports, averaged 51.3 cents per pound for such products in the same year, according to the accounting records for a small sample of these operations examined by the Federal Trade Commis- sion. The cooperative claims that the higher average prices realized by its membership can be explained by the larger size of the shrimp talien by its membership fleet than those taken by non-members. The cooperative claims its members throw undersized shrimp back into the sea. A somewhat smaller co-op, the Gulf King Shrimp Exchange, is located in Aransas Pass. It came into being as the result of a merger of the Texas Fishermen's Co-op and the Texas Gulf Trawlers' Association. Historically, the need for a cooperative in Aransas Pass arose out of the dual function of the fish houses which at one time were both title- taking dealers and agents for the boat owner. The spread between the price paid to the fisherman and that received by the fish house ranged between 10 and 20 cents per pound. The cooperative forced the fish house out of its agency position. Essentially, the cooperative acts in a manner identical with that of the other Aransas Pass fish houses, having no freezing or storage facilities and no highly developed sales organization. Profits are de- rived only from processing activities and these, rather than being re- distributed in the form of dividends, are passed on in lowered processing fees to the fisheimen. Ill Fishermen Sailing and fishing skill of captain and crew frequently spell the difference between success and failure in shrimping operations. The opinion of people familiar with the south Atlantic and Gulf shrimp fisheries is that the rapid expansion of operations in recent years, with the concommitant necessity for hiring many inexperienced crews, was only accomplished at the cost of lov;ering the general level of skill of the fishermen employed. W As a result, fishing standards in the southern shrimp fishery today are not as high as in other branches of fish or shellfish production. Tiiis generalization has to be modi- fied to the extent that quality of crew differs widely from boat to boat and that some able skippers have been attracted from other fish- eries by the eai'ning opportunities in shrimping. VJhen shrimping was a comparatively small and localized industry, labor was drawn from the immediate vicinity of the home port. Fishing was often a family occupation where a son followed in his fa- ther's footsteps as soon as he was physically able to stand the rigors of the fisherman's life. Fishing skill and a love for the trade were virtually inherited along with the fisherman's attachment to his local environment. The expansion of the industry and the shift in its geographic center has wrought considerable changes in this pattern. A portion of the industry adjusted itself to the new circum- stances by moving to permanent residences in the proximity of the new groxinds wlien it becarae apparent that the fishing grounds in the Gulf would supplant those in the south Atlantic as primary source of supply. Some of the fishermen, shrimp plant operators, and processors now re- siding in ports on the Gulf coast of Florida and in Texas, originally followed their trades in the Garolinas, Georgia, or northern Florida. Other fishermen still reside in Georgia and northern Florida, even when they fish for most of the year in the Gulf. This makes it necessary for thera to return to their homes between fishing trips and reduces the utilization of the boat. The extension of the trips to Campeche has added to the hardships. While trips foi-marly wero of 2^ days' duration, they have become considerably longer. Since crews are no longer allowed on land in Mexico they are at sea for longer periods, working under primitive conditions and are entirely dependent on their vessel's supplies. The geographic shift in a portion of the labor supply did not solve the general labor shortage problem created by the mushrooming —^ Both First Research Corporation and the Bureau of Business and Economic Research of the University of Miami commented similarly. //X of operation.-^ rjincd 1950. Li thu ab;ioace of a rjlrillod laljur x-u'jorvu inmy inoxpcrionced crcn;;; had to b? hired. Mori who had little fichijic oqr?r"ionco and \ho uoro laclcing in a thorouch knoyledco of vc:;3ol han- dling and scan:mshi;> fraqajutly ujra ci.ploycd aa captaiirj. Thu chrLnp boat skipper noxr fi:, viilcli is levied for the unemploywent compenGatlon fund, is 3 percent, and is levied from the employer. FiGhciiiien vho are covered by unoraploy- ment compensation may receive benefits varying from .')20 to rh'^ for 26 weeks depending; upon the i^rovisions of tiie individual state laws. The absence of contractual agreements between tlie hiring party and the fisheraien is evidence of the looseness of working arrangements. The labor force is almost completely mobile and free to move wherever opportunity beckons. Tliis circmistance creates a problem for the non-operating boat ovmer. For him the need for finding and retaining skilled labor in his business becomes paramount. Boat owners, therefore, try to make it economically possible for fishermen, especially skilled captains, to stay in one area throughout the year. Some canneries in the northern Gulf area, as has already been pointed out, for this reason employ a few selected crews on a year-round basis on fixed annual salaries. In other areas, where receipts are divided on a share basis, some operating boat ovmers prefer to operate their boats at a loss during the off-season rather than to tie them to the dock and free the crews to go elsewhere. In oi^der to do tliis the ovmers suspend the normal share agreem.ent during the off-season and offer the fisherman a flat salary or the total receipts of the catch (which are nominal) for this period. In the days when haul seine operations vjre predominant in the industry, vessel crews vrere made up of as ma)iy as 8 members, ''.'lie introduction of the shrimp trawl greatly reduced the need for the num- ber of men required per craft. On the smaller vessel the captain and a single crew member, knoim as the striker, constitute the entire com- plement. The larger vessels are usually manned by a captain and 2 crew members . A custom which is comparatively new, and encountered chiefly in Texas, is that of talcing on a header for the trip. Tliis man's sole fiUiCtion is to head the shrimp as they are hauled aboai'd. He is X''3'i-<^— He«dleM 9 > ^"^ .BbU. Shrimp (21-Z6-C)— HewUau 9 « Jbl». Shrimp (26-80-C)— Headleti """ 9 f .BbU. Shrimp (81-42-C)— HexDeu TOTAL 9 »- Heading/ r-^^ 0^. 9 TOTAL SHRIMP CATCH /^ 3/0 Zip ^ ^_i^ /o Jo DATE MEMORANDUH uB88 BXPBN8B: Im Net Kepain t UoloadiiiK |. TOTAL OBOU AMT. .-^i ao AL'- V3.'' %-i=^ ^tL£l LBBS OTBES CBBW BXPBN8BB: ' \ ,_j6;;£fl Groeeiiea Union Dues % ±^_1 Other I ^ TOTAL *- 7 A-^ NET AMOUNT BARNED O ,_;z.af_fi Grow Amount t- Lew S. S. Tax $_ Leai Inc. Tax |_ TOTAL $- $- TOTAL AMT OF CHECK $ Paid by Cheek No Dat«- .1941 STATEMENT OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND [NCOME TAX 1 1 1 NAME AND STATUS N3/ "^'W. . C' ,'- We, the undersigned members of the crew, certify that the above information is correct. FIDURE II - 2? 118 o o vO CN ^ -4- O in o 0\ i 3 CO o On 1^ CO 2 LU X en o OS o l-( oo o 119 TABLE II - U. --AVERAGE FISHING CAPACITY (l^T TOMAGE) PER FISHERMAN IN THE SOUra ATLANTIC AND GULF STATES SHRIMP FISHEiS, SPECIFIFD YEARS Net tons of Year Fishing PJumber of fishing capacity capacity fishermen per fisherman Net tons 1930 6,nh 4,849 1.4 19^0 11,610 6,849 1.7 1950 51,003 15,604 3.3 1953 y 56,739 y 14, 600 3.9 195^ y 70,795 y 15,500 4.6 1955 y 76,050 y 14,700 5.2 1956 y 88,370 y 16,100 5.5 1/ Data adjusted to eliminate duplication in reporting. 120 'I'AIUJ!: II - 5.— FICHl'iJillKN ON LllKBlP VKSlIICLS AMD MOTOR WATS, SOUTH ATLANTIC AMD GULF STATES, SPECIFIED YEARS otate 1930 19'^0 1950 1953 1951^ 1955 1956 Number Number fttunber Number Number Number Number North Cui'olina lOJt k51 2,201 2,136 1,963 1,766 1,82U Couth Carolina 77 m 1^53 718 575 730 826 fioorf/la 3H9 kjQ 613 502 506 587 713 Florida. 76U 539 l,k6Q 2,lf03 2,813 2,796 2,955 Alabnina 276 356 822 677 637 6k6 772 Miaolsclppi 032 1,022 1,578 1,635 1,155 1,202 1,73*^ Louiciuna 1,099 2,995 ^^975 4,U22 ^,778 i^,875 5,191 'Itoxas 5k(i O65 3,»*9'^ 3,697 h,7kk 3,738 3,8U6 Total i^,Qk9 6,8i^9 l5,6oJ^ lli,6oo 15,500 lJ+,700 l6,100 (1) (1) (1) (1) 1/ Data adjusted to eliminate duplication in reporting. 121 of the relatively short coastlines , union influence is felt in nearly all landing areas of the northern Gulf States. In Texas .unions exist only in Galveston and Brovmsville but the influence of the Broimsville union is felt in the Port Isabel ares.. The primary function of the union, regardless of location, is participation in price, hence wape, determination. The fishermen closely ;:atch the current market price of slirimp and the differential between that price and the ex-vessel price they receive. If they feel that the differential is growing too large and that they are not re- ceiving their fair share of receipts, the union committee meets with the buyers in the area, whether they be canriers, freezers, or assem- bling wholesalers, and negotiates an increase in ex-vessel prices. Conversely, when the market price is depressed, the buyers will seek a reduction in the ex -vessel price. There is no written contractual agreement between the union and the buyer nor is there an agreement between the individual fisherman and the union. The industry in gen- eral is characterized by an absence of written contracts. Because of the peculiar composition of the membership and the nature of the lay system of compensation, labor organizations in the fisheries have at times been the targets of antitrust proceedings initiated by Federal and state authorities. In the suinmer of 1955, the officers of the Gulf Coast Shriir^ers and Oystermen's Association, a union with headquarters in Biloxi, Mississippi were prosecuted Tinder United States antitrust laws. The court, in this instance, found against the union and its officers. The president, the secretary and the treasixrer of the union were convicted of price fixing under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act on June 27, 1955, and sentenced to 90 days in jail each. The case was appealed in the Federal courts in New Orleans. Prior to the court decision, the Biloxi union had been quite strong. Field reports indi- cate the conviction virtually paralyzed all union activity in the area. Officials of the union claim that shrimp prices in Biloxi have dropped considerably with the union non-functioning. They claim that there is a $25.00 a barrel differential in the price for compar- able shrimp in Pascagoula and in Biloxi. The price in Pascagoula is based on a union-management nep^otiated contract, ivhile the price in Biloxi now is determined by the canneries \iho control the majority of the boats. The actual prices quoted were $75.00 a barrel for 10-15 coiuit shrimp in Pascagoula and $50.00 per barrel for the same grade of shrimp in Biloxi at the time the Bureau of Business and Economic Re- search of the University of Miami made its survey in the area. One of the important considerations in the Biloxi case re- volved around the question as to whether the fishermen were actually ;fage earners, or tfhether they were joint venturers. The determination of viho ovms and controls the vessels is of cardinal importance for 122 decision iiiaking on this point. Vessel operations which are cannory oimod, and which aro manned by crews hired by the canneiy and arcj diroctad by the canneiy, can hardly be considered joint ventures. On the other hand, operators of ijidividually ovmed veijcols v;hich meraly soil their product to the canner;^'' cannot be considered wage earners in the same econondc sense. In Biloxi, Mississippi the union based its defense on the fact that soma 85 percent of the boats here vjerc canneiy ovmed which tended to place the majority of the fishermen in the wace-earner class. The court decision in the Biloxi case had its effect on union activities in adjoining areas. Since the verdict against the Biloxi union, the Alabama branch of the union reportedly has been rather inactive. Unions can, and do, exorcise an important role in price sta- bilisation. In non-unionized ports, price fluctuations are frequent and often severe. IJlien the union is operative, the ex-vessel price paid to the fishennen is changed only upon agreement betx/een the fish- ennon and the buyers. Generally such agreements are negotiated only in cases xrhero a substantial re-adjustment due to mai'ket changes is called for. For instance, in Broimsville, a ro-adjustment is made only wh3n the mai'ket price has fluctuated enough to wai'rant a five dollar increase per barrel (125 pounds heads-off, or 210 pounds whole). It is only under rare conditions that an adjustment of less than $5.00 per bai'rel takes place. Thus, the fishennan has a reasonable amount of assurance that the value of his catch viill not be reduced by a sudden market depression. Nor, of course, will it be enhanced by a moiurintary upward mai-ket fluriy. Should the ex-vessel price be changed vrfiile the boat is at sea, the boatman is still paid the price which was operative at the time he left the dock. The unions are active to a small extent in fields other than price negotiations. They offer burial insurance policies and many fisherman cite this as the primary inducement encouraging union affil- iation. The unions do not maintain health insurance programs. To the extent of their resources they aid fishermen in finding employment. Both Texas unions, the one located in Brownsville and the one located in Galveston, claim to embrace 85 percent of the fishermen operating out of the ports in x;hicb they aro domiciled. Fishermen land- ing shrimp in unionised ports are ':;ubject to union fees even though thoy are not meribers of the union. All fishermen receive the same price for their product regardless of whether or not they are affiliated. 123 LIST OF ORGANIZATIONS IN niE SIIRIMP INDUSTRY Producers Cooperatives Florida Tampa Slirlmp Producers Association, Inc., Post Office Box 5706, Tampa 5 United Shrimp Producers Association, Inc., Post Office Box I85O, Fort Myers Louisiana Lafitte-Barataria Fisheiroen's Corporation, Lsifitte Trico Fishermen's Cooperative Association, Post Office Box 423, Golden Meadow St. Mary Fishermen's Cooperative, Post Office Box 2Gj, Patterson Twin City Fishermen's Cooperative Association, Inc., Post Office Box 809, Morgan City — Branch at Post Office Drawer 518, Port Isabel, Texas Texas United Shrimp Marketing Association, Post Office Box I0U7, Port Isabel Fishermen's and Fish Shore Workers' Unions Mississippi Fishermen and Allied Workers Union, N.M.U., AFL-CIO, Post Office Box 315, Biloxl Seafood Workers' Association of theGulf Coast SIU - AFL-CIO, Biloxi Texas Rio Grande Shrimp Fishermen's Association (Independent), Star Route Box 12, Brownsville Texas Fishei-men's Association, 306 Haden Building, Galveston Trade Associations National National Fisheries Institute, Inc., l6l4 Twentieth Street, N.W., V/ashington 9, D. C. National Shrimp Breaders Association, Inc., i860 Broadway, New York 23, New York; and 62h South Michigan Avenue, Chicago ^, Illinois North Carolina North Carolina Fisheries Association, Inc., c/o Fred A. Vftiitaker, Kinston 12^+ Trade Associations - Continued South Carolina South Carolina Seafood Producers Association, Beaufort Florida National Shrimp Congress, Inc., Key West Southeastern Fisheries Association, Inc., Post Office Box kkQl, Jacksonville Louisiana Jefferson Parish Fishermen's Association, 89U Avenue A, Westwego National Shrimp Canners and Packers Association, c/o Torn Holcombe, Post Office Box 550, Houma Texas Brownsville Shrimp Producers Association, Inc., Post Office Box 130, Brownsville Shrimp Association of the Americas, Post Office Box 1666, Brownsville Texas Shrimp Association, Post Office Box 1666, Brownsville 125 SELECTED REFEREITCES Aiidcrson, A. U. and Pow^ir, E. A. Fiahory statistics of the United States. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, annual reviews for selected years, Washington, D. C. Anderson, A. W., Stolting, ',7. H., and Associates 1953 Survey of the domestic tuna industry. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. (Special Scientific Report — Fisheries No. 10^1 ) Bullis, Harvey R. 1951 Gulf of Mexico shrimp trav/1 designs. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, September, Washington, D. C. (Fishery Leaflet 39^) 1952 The gear development program of the M-V Oregon . Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, Uth Annual Session, April, p. 101, Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, Carlson, 1952 195*^ Denhara, 1955 C. B. Increasing the spread of shrimp trawls. United States Itepartment of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Commercial Fisheries Review, vol. 1^, no. 7> July, Washington, D. C. (Also Separate 3l6) Recent developments in fishing vessel deck gear. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Commercial Fisheries Review, vol. 16, no. 11, November, Washington, D. C. (Also Separate 383) S. C. Skiffs used for shrimp fishing in inside waters of Gulf of Mexico. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Commercial Fisheries Review, vol. 17, no. 3> March, V/ashington, D. C. Fishing Gazette 1952 A new factory ship for shrimping. p. 39. Vol. 69, no. 3, March, Larsson, K. H. 1953 Phantom trawl developed after years of trials. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Commercial Fisiieries Review, January, Washington, D. C. 126 clELCC'l'ED KEFE'.llilirailS Lawrence, LVing, Jr. 1951 The use of echo sounders in fisheries. Proceedinc;G of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, Si'd. Annual Session, June, Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, McDaniel, Ruel 1950 Slirimp association formed. Seafood Business, vol. 2, no. 11, June, pp. 8-9, I8-I9. miler, William C. 1955 Fishing boats of the v/orld - "safety at sea". Pp. 337-3^1 Fishing News - Arthur J. UeiQlm-ray Publications, Ltd., London. Mingledorff, W. L. 195^ Immersion freezing. Southern Fisherman, vol. ik, no. 12, December, pp. 38, 79. Petrich, James F. 1955 Fishing boats of the world. (Comments made during discussion), Fishing News - Arthur J. Heighway Publications, Ltd., London. Robas, J. S. 195^ Getting the most from menhaden seines. Southern Fisherman, October. Springer, Steward and Bullis, Harvey R. 1952 Exploratory shrimp fishing in the Gulf of Mexico, I95O-I95I (progress report). United States Departnient of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Commercial Fisheries Review, vol. ik, no. 7> July, pp. 1-12. Washixigton, D. C. 195^ Exploratory shrimp fishing in the Gulf of Mexico, summary report for 1952- 5^. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Commercial Fisheries Review, vol. I6, no. 10, October, Washington, D. C. Traung, Jan-Olof 1955 Fisheries and the naval architect. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO Fisheries Bulletin, vol. VIII, no. k, October-December, Rome. Tressler, D. K. and Lemon, J. McW. 1951 Marine Products of Commerce, Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York City. 127 128 CHAPTER H FISHING OPERATIONS ABSTRACT VESSELS OPERATING OUT OF PORTS ON THE SOUTH ATLANTIC COAST ARE RESTRICTED TO A SHORTER FISHING SEASON, MAKE SHORTER TRIPS, AND SPEND LESS TIME AT SEA THAN GULF COAST VESSELS. THEY ARE SMALLER IN SIZE AND LESS STURDY AND COSTLY THAN THE TAMPA-BASED VESSELS WHICH MAKE THE CAMPECHE RUN. THE OPERATION OF DUAL-PURPOSE VESSELS MAY FREQUENTLY CON- TRIBUTE TOWARD FASTER AMORTIZATION OF FIXED INVESTMENT. SINCE IT MAY BE THE ONLY MEANS OF INSURING YEAR-ROUND FISHING, IT MAY ALSO SERVE TO PROVIDE GREATER STABILITY OF EMPLOYMENT. THE DESIGN OF MANY CRAFT OPERATING IN THE SHRIMP FISHERY TODAY PLACES RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF THESE CRAFT IN OTHER FISHERIES. TIME CONSUMED IN FISHING OPERATIONS AND IN THE HANDLING OF CATCH ABOARD VESSEL IS PRIMARILY A FUNCTION OF SKILL AND EFFORT OF CREW MEMBERS. TIME VALUES COLLECTED FOR A SAMPLE OF VESSEL OPERATIONS INDICATE THAT, ON THE AVERAGE, A TOTAL OF EIGHT MINUTES AND FORTY-TWO SECONDS WAS CONSUMED IN SETTING NETS, THE RANGE OF TIME VALUES SPANNING FROM THREE MINUTES AND FORTY-FIVE SECONDS TO TWENTY-TWO MINUTES AND SEVEN SECONDS. DRAGGING CONSUMED ANYWHERE FROM ONE HOUR TWENTY-FOUR MINUTES TO FIVE HOURS AND SEVENTEEN MINUTES, THE AVERAGE WAS SLIGHTLY OVER FOUR HOURS. OPERATIONS CONNECTED WITH THE HAULING OF NETS TOOK CkEV/S FROM FIVE TO OVER 32 MINUTES. THE PRODUCTI'ITY OF INDIVIDUAL VESSELS IS INFLUENCED BY NUMEROUS FACTORS, AMONG THEM GEOGRAPHIC, METEOROLOGICAL, SEASONAL AVAILABILITY OF SHRIMP, AND SKILL OF FISHERMEN. AVERAGE ANNUAL CATCH IN 195-1 FOR A SAMPLE OF SHRIMP VESSELS STUDIED RANGED FROM 12,944 POUNDS FOR VESSELS OPERATING OUT OF MAYPOi;T, FLORIDA, TO 82,606 POUNDS FOR BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS OPERATIONS. AVERAGE CATCH PER DAY DURING THE YEAR WAS AS LOW AS 82 POUNDS, AND AS HIGH AS 372 POUNDS. 129 STATISTICS ON SHRIMP PRODUCTION FOR THE LAST QUARTCR CENTURY REVEAL THAT THE STATES OF TEXAS AND LOUISIANA HAVE BEEN THE LEADING PRODUCERS. THE RATE OF EXPANSION OF THE SHRIMP FISHERY IN TEXAS HAS BEEN GREATER IN RECENT YEARS THAN IN LOUISIANA. OTHER TRENDS INDICATE THAT THE SHRIMP TRAWL VIRTUALLY HAS DISPLACED ALL OTHER TYPES OF GEAR IN THE SOUTHERN FISHERY. CATCH PER NET TON OF FISHING CAPACITY HAS DECREASED FROM APPROXIMATELY 6-1/2 TONS OF SHRIMP IN 1930 TO ABOUT 2 TONS IN RECENT YEARS. VALUE OF CATCH PER NET TON OF FISHING CAPACITY SHOWED A STEEP RISE OVER THE PERIOD. CATCH PER FISHERMAN AVERAGED ABOUT 17,000 POUNDS OF SHRIMP IN BOTH 1930 AND 1954. VALUE OF CATCH PER FISHERMAN ROSE FROM $612 IN 1930 TO $5,215 IN 1953, BUT DIPPED TO $4,367 IN 1956. :[NTRODUGTORY COMEFTS i\n analysis of fishing operations logically follovis a study of the factors of production in the shrimp industry. A considerable amount of research was done on this subject by organizations under contract to the United States Fish and VJildliie Servit;e, viz. Harvrell, iinowles and Associates, Kirst 'iesearch Corporation of Florida, the Bureau of Busi- ness and Economic Research of the University of Miami, and the I'ederal Trade Goimnission. The individual organi;3ations were responsible for different portions of this work and no one contract covered the entire ranjc of topics. At the outset of this chapter, an analysis of vessel time vjas made to jyive some idea of the relationship between productive and unproductive time. Next, standard pi-ocedures for preparing for sea, operations at sea, and mooring and unloading of vessels are described. In conjunction vjith this phase of the v/ork, time values for the detailed operations connected xjith fishing were obtained from a sample of vessels and motor boats. Following next is a study of vessel productivity with emphasis on the effects of various technological and biological factors on vessel catch. This study leads into a discussion of costs of operations. Information for the latter purpose v;as obtained on the principal ele- ments of expense incurred in the fishing segment of the industry. In addition, regional comparisons of costs for a sample of vessels and motor boats for the years 1952-195^ were made from the books of vessel operators on the basis of operating statements supplied by them. 130 USE OF VESSEL TIME Thare are only three usual places where a fishing vessel can be encountered. The vessel is either out at sea, tied up at the dock, or temporarily out of commission at the repair yard, Time-at-sea can be divided into income -producing fishing time and non-income pro- ducing running time to and fi'om fishing grounds and time ajichored at sea. Tlme-at-dock may be spent in unloading, icing, refueling, and other functions connected with operations or may represent idleness traceable to inclement weather, or unfavorable market conditions. A vessel may be idle because repairs may have to be made on the hull, engine, gear or other eqviipment. The repairs may be necessitated by defects inherent in these items, hiunan negligence or error, or circum- stances beyond control. In summary fashion, a classification of vessel time appears as follows; Breakdown of Vessel Time Time-at-sea fishing -time) anchored ) income - producing time running -time) Time-at-dock (Other than required for repairs) Time-under-repair unloading ) refueling ) non-income - producing time icing, etc. ) idle time ) ways or engine repair Other things being equal, operating efficiency Is related directly to amount of time spent in income-producing fishing. Good fishermen endeavor to cut down as much as possible on idle time at the dock or in the repair yard and on unproductive time at sea. 131 Timo dovoted to actual fishing is to a certain extent depend- ent upon t;oo,;rapliic i'actors. The location of the shrimp grounds in re- lation to home port will determine length of trip; it will also deter- mine the size of boat required and the methods of preserving the catch. The relative abundance and availability of shrimp on different grounds may make a longer trip profitable and thus make up for a reduction in the time that can be spent fishdng. The ratios of vessel time spent in alternate uses are of in- terest for a nuiiiber of reasons. The ratio of time at sea (high risk) to time at the dock (low risk) is of direct concern to insurance companies in the wi'iting of marine insurance policies. The ratios of running time or fishing tine, respectively, to length of trip has a bearing on vessel depreciation. A high ratio of I'unning time to other time must be offset by good fishing conditions on distant grounds. To make possible an ex- tension of fishing time and to assure a payload, larger and more costly vessels have to be employed. The results of the study by Harvjell, Knowles and Associates on the use of vessel time for a sample of I4O vessels operating out of vari- ous Gulf and south Atlantic ports in 19^k are summarized in table III - 6. Vessels operating out of ports on the Atlantic coast, on the average, are smaller in size, are restricted to a shorter fishing season, make shorter trips, and spend less time at sea than Gulf coast vessels. Vessels domiciled in Rockville, South Carolina represented in the sample of vessels studied were iiO to h^ feet in length, could fish only from 10^ to 120 days during the year (193li) and made trips averaging one day. They worked approximately U8 to 5? days in actual shrimping operations. Tampa, tlorida vessels shrimping the Campeche grounds were from 65 to 72 feet or more in length, fished 225 to 263 days of the year, made trips of 32 to k^ days' duration, spent the equivalent of 91 to 105 days fishing. Shrimping out of Thiuiderbolt, Georgia, and Mayport, Florida, resembled the Rockville operations in character. Shrimping operations out of Key Uest, Florida; BiloxL, Mississippi; and Brownsville, Texas bore some similarity to those in Tampa, The Key i'est fishermen who favored the Tortugas grounds as well , as the Biloxi and Brownsville fishermen who fished off the Mississippi and Texas coasts enjoyed a longer fishing season than the Atlantic coast fishermen. They spent on the average as much time as the Tampa fishermen in actual shrimping operations, viz. the equivalent of ninety days or a fourth of the year. Because of the relative proximity of the fishing grounds, they spent less time traveling when compared to the long Campeche trip. Only some of the newer vessels equipped to undertake the Campeche trip operating out of Brownsville, were comparable in size to the Tampa boats. The ratios of t.ime-at-dock to time-at-sea and of fishing-time to unproductive time-at-sea are highly significant from an economic 132 ctnndpoint. '[lie r^roator the i'ixed Inveri.nent Ln the vuist;cly the more ox- pensive becomes all idle time. Tiu? loss time spent at sea and the short- er the trip, the smaller are expenulturcs for ice and fuel and fewer crev/ coiui.'orts are requ'.red. The lonp,-er the trip and the cheater the weather hazard, the higher tiio insurance rates. Tlie size of variable (or trip) expenses, as determined by IcHKih of trip, has its influence on the business risk involved in con- nection vjith the fishing operation. A period of declining shrimp prices or a reduction in the catch can be expected to lead to a change in the operations of a fleet accustomed to fish at a distance from homo port. In 19^U, the year of depressed prices, for example, the fleet operating out of Brov.nsville, Texas, which had been traveling to the Campeche grounds in preceding years confined its operations to the waters of the local coast. One arresting fact about Gulf coast shrimping as shown by tables III- 6 and 7 is the relatively largo amount of non-productive time at sea. From at least one viewpoint, tlio comxjarisonE of non-productive time at sea are not altogether valid. Anchorage time for Gvilf coast vessels is some- tiifies used for mending nots or making other repairs which could have been done at the docks. On the Atlantic coast, repairs of this type are nor- mally made at the dock sinco vessels go to sea for only part of the day, OPEMTTONAL PROCE^jURES Preparation for Sea Cri\.y the most general obpen'-ations can be made with respect to preparation of shrimp vessels for nja. The procedure for getting under- way, according to a study of wox-k practices on fishing craft iindertaken by First Research Corporation of Florida, varies a great deal with the types of vessels concerned, their operations, and the condition of vessel and gear. Differences in the availability of fuel, ice, and stores would ren- der meaningless any time factors obtained for these operat' ims. Many of the more success luI shrimp vessel operators keep in m.ind that a vessel does not earn any money while tied up at the dock. Prepara- tions for sea, therefore, must be completed as expeditiously as possible. Based on observation of a sample of vessels. First Reseai'ch Corporation outlines the prevailing tjrpes of procedure for getting under- way in the principal centers of the domestic fishery: (1) On the Atlantic coast, almost all fishing is done inshore „ The vessels are stocked for trips of short duration, generally not exceed- ing 12 hours. They are fueled weekly with enough fuel for six or seven days operation. Tliis is done either at the dock where the vessel is lying, or at a nearby fuel dock. T^jo vessels observed took on 600 and 300 gallons of fue], respectively. The process took less than half an hour. Very little ice xvras carried, one 3-W - pound block was used for the day's oporation. A small a.mount of provisions sufficient only for breakfast and the mid-d?y racial were carriod aboard by the cretr. 133 TABLE III - 6. —USE OF VESSEL TDffi, SAMPLE OF liO SHRIMP VESSELS OPERATING OUT OP SOUTH ATLA.NTIG AND GULF PORTS, 195ii Vessel time Rockville, South Carolina Thunderbolt, Georgia Mayport, Florida Key West, Florida Days at dock Days at sea: Fishing Traveling Anchored Total at sea Average number of days per vessel Per- cent (k vessels) 303 83.0 52i 9i 62 lh,h 2.6 Average number of days per vessel Per- cent 17.0 (5 vessels) 256 70.1 73 9 27 20.0 2.5 Average number of days per vessel Per- cent (3 vessels) 293 80.3 59 13 16.1 3.6 Average number of days per vessel Per- cent 109 29.9 72 19.7 (5 vessels) li47 liO.3 91 19 108 218 21*. 9 5.2 29.6 59.7 Total vessel time 365 100.0 365 100.0 365 100.0 365 100.0 Vessel time Tampa, Florida Biloxi, Mississippi Brownsville, Texas Average Average Average number number number of days Per- of days Per- of days Per- per cent per cent per cent vessel vessel els) vessel (8 vessels) (U vess (11 vessels) Days at dock 90i 2U.8 122j 33.6 11*1 38.7 Days at sea: Fishing 93i 25.6 93 i 23* 125i 25.6 92i 25.3 Traveling 50 13.7 6.5 8 2.2 Anchored 131 35.9 3U.3 123i 33.8 Total at sea 271*1 75.2 2U2| 66.1* 221* 61.3 Total vessel tine 365 100.0 365 100.0 365 100.0 13li 3 CO CO p CO H O o CO g CO Eh P=< ^ ° CO P pt, M O Eh CO M t=) (^ I O I I H H H 9 n 0) tu) ' & c; as o .3. (u o a CiH !> rH Id ft a» tio •H C &^ a £ iH C 0) nJ -H CO ''0 T) W CO nJ CO h ^ ft try O lA I lA t9 lA CM ^ CO lA C\) I lA o CM H O CO 1-1 1 1 g CO O H tA ^ 1 1 CO ^ iH .-^ m o to +i '^U r-t rH 0 (\) 0) O rH O W ^ iH 01 U •H x: Q) o o_ct q CO v_^ g Oi 10 bO CLi ^^ 0) tA 8 rH r-\ O fA fA 1 1 1 XA o CM ^ o H I lA iH rH O 0\ CO 2$ VA I CM rH fA CM CN iH CM tA NO XA I O CM CA vO CM I tA CM CM >1 o iH fH I lA CO -=t tA CO I MD VO CM I On CO H •> IT) •P 'O Jh .h p ts 03 fc 0) •\ Q) w ■P CO CO (0 W TJ CO QJ ^ •H Q} > •-^ >■ tA ^.HtA «.x 0) p>4 ^_^ W •H -^ ^1 CO O rH rH O pt< CO CO •« 0) cU > ^^CO ft n ftrH •H 0) Eh CO CO •rl -H 0) ><; CO > O CO 0) rH I o (A fA I tA iH rH O rH H CM On I tA • tA CN CM OS CM NO ON tA O iH CA O 1 1 1 1 1 CA CM CO iH CJn CN ^ m rH m CO 0) CO > ii rH CD iH CO rH 0) CO ra rH >l CO iH 0) CO CO > rHi 135 (2) In thj Kcry West fisheiy, two vessels v^ere prepared for sea on the day of departure. The preparations consisted of fueling icing and provisionin,";. P\iel was obtained at a dock close by tlie moor- ing dock and both vessels were fueled to capacity. One vessel vras fueled in U7 minutes. Both vessels were iced at another dock, also near the mooring dock. The ice, in block form, was transported by conveyer from the icehouse to the pier, a distance of approximately 200 feet. A power machine crushed the ice and blew it into the hold. One vessel took on 6,000 pounds of ice; the other 8,000 pounds. Neither was iced to capacity, loins took approximately one hour for each vessel. One man of the crew directed the stream of ice into the bins. Both vessels were stocked for a seven-day trip. Provisions on one vessel were very meager, and the crew subsisted chiefly on shrimp and fish. The other vessel was better provisioned with meat, fresh vegetables, bread, etc. Water was procured at the dock while fueling. Provisions were delivered to both vessels at their berths. Preparation for sea was accomplished with a minimujn of effort and time, the entire operation took less than three hours. (3) On the Texas coast, the preparations for sea are similar to those found in Key West. Tlie vessels here, however, are apt to mal:e trips lasting from 7 to 20 days. As a rule, they are fueled to capacity, although one vessel with an 8,000 gallon capacity was fueled to only 5,000 gallons. Fueling had taken place at a pier about one -half mile from her berth, the fueling time consumed about one axid one-half hours. The ports on the Texas coast often have one basin or section devoted entirely to shrimp vessels. A considerable number of vessels are con- tinually arriving or departing. Many are tied up for their lay-over. Inasmuch as they make longer trips than the Key V.'est vessels, their lay- over period is longer, lasting k to 10 days. Frequently, tlie vessels do not return to their port of departure . Fuel is taken on where available at nearby fuel dDcks and the vessels are iced by local concerns. Ice is loaded mechanically, the quality and quantity of stores taken on were observed to be superior to those put aboai-d in other areas. Refrigerated vessels are not iced and frequently carry sufficient stores to last for periods longer than the anticipated trip. (h) Vessels preparing to fish the Gulf of Campeche fuel, ice, and provision for longer voyages. Tliese vessels frequently make trips of 30 to 90 days. The preparation for sea is by necessity more thorough and tal^es a longer time than in other fisheries. For the most part, the home ports of these vessels are Tampa and Fort Myers where efficient facilities for fueling, icing, and supplying stores are available. The vessels are fueled and iced to capacity, often cajrrylng exti-a amounts of these items in order to restock vessels already on the fishing grounds. I4a.ny are equipped to perform major repairs, both for themselves and other vessels. 136 Due to the lenj^th of the trips, the lay-over period of these vessels is longer than in other fisheries. They stay in port for a period of a week to ten days after a voyage of 30 to 60 days. During this period repairs to the vessels are made by shore crews. Unless major repairs are necessary, the vessel can be prepared for sea in one day» The ship's crew, after a short vacation, returns to tlie vessel and performs necessary repairs to the rigging. (5) Fueling is the main job in preparing a motor boat for shrimping in inland waters. The two boats studied were both bait- shrimping boats and carried no ice. Sufficient stores to prepare lunch and a jug of water were the only provisions brought aboard. The opera- tion of getting underway was as simple as talking a pleasure boat out for an afternoon's sail. One boat fished out of Corpus Christi and was owner- ope rated. She was fueled with $$ gallons of gasoline from a dock next to her home berth. This was enough for a two-day operation. The other boat, fishing out of Dunedin, Florida, was not owner-operated, but was fueled at the owner's dock about 100 feet away from her berth. The tank had a capacity of about 60 gallons and hX gallons was the average consumption for a night's fishing. No set procedure for preparing these boats could be ascertained as the work was done in accordance with the custom of the individual operator. Procedure for Setting and Trawling VJhen in port, the outriggers are hoisted inboard. They are lovjered during the outbound trip and remain rigged-out unless the vessel is going alongside another boat. The doors are stowed on deck, lashed to the rigging or bulwarks. Upon arrival at the fishing grounds, the net doors are swung out to hang from the starboard outrigger by the towing cables, pre- paratory to streaming the net and lowering the gear. As this operation is being performed, the tickler chain, if not secured to the bottom of the net, is lovjered over the side. The vessel is stopped during this operation. After the doors are swung out and cleared, the vessel gets underway at her best speed, either upvrind or doimwind. The net is then streamed over the starboard quarter bulviark rail and towed until it is clear. After the net has streamed clear, the vessel's way is main- tained and the doors and nets are lowered to the proper depth. The towing lines still lead from the blocks on the starboard outrigger. In order to permit the vessel to maneuver, the towing cables must La secured on the centerline, at a point reasonably near the vessel's turning center. In general practice, the toviing cables are held together and doim by a chain and open hook secured to a deck pad. They are then hoisted up in the air by the block and fall leading from the end of the boom. During this operation, the helm is put over hard 137 to port and sp'^od is reduced to about two knots. One nio.n handles the block and fall, wliich is hool-.ed on to the towing cables in a position Just aft of the hook and chain downhaul and ri£;s the hook and ctiain. A second man mans the winch and makes the final adjustments on the length of the towing cable. The cables to the net lead through the downliaul and lifting hook on the vessel's centerllne and directly over the transom. The net is dragged directly astern except when turning. Tlie length of the drag varies with fishing conditions, most frequently ranging from one to over five hours. (see table III- 8) Long hauls are made when shrimp are scarce and there is not much possibility of catching a large quantity of trash fish. In night shrimping offshore, two to three drags are made. The amount of the catch may be judged by the lead angle of the towing cables. Tlais angle becomes more acute as the net is filled and enables the captain to judge when it is time to haul his net. Along the Atlantic coast, it is customary to ma]ce shorter drags. Motor boats used for bait fishing and inshore fishing may haul their nets as often as every five minutes. During the trawl, frequent casts are made with the trynet which is a miniature of the large net, equipped with small doors. Frequently, one or two trynet drags are made before the large net is set, in order to determine the type of bottom and to estimate the probable size of the catch when the large net is set. The trynet is carried on the davit on the port quarter and is tov;ed with a single cable leading through a sheave on this davit and the port outrigger and then to the winch. Due to the small size of the net (12 to l6 feet), setting it is an easy operation. It is swung out on the davit which is then locked in place. The doors and net are lowered and towed on the surface until the net is clear. The whole rig is then lowered to the desired depth, the towing lines being shorter than the main net towing lines so that the trynet is set slightly ahead of it. The average length of the trynet tow is about 30 minutes. ^Then hauling, the net is heaved in until the doors are hanging from the davit. The bag of the net is then brought aboard, its contents dumped on deck, and a count of the catch made. Tlie trynet is pulled in at frequent integrals. As soon as shrimp are talcen in sufficient abundance to indicate grounds worth exploiting, the large trawl is put out. The trynet continues in operation just aliead of the large trawl and is pulled in at frequent inter- vals. By this means, the fisherman can tell whether he is still trawling through a concentration of shrimp or has passed beyond. Mien he has passed the concentration, he changes course and resumes trawling tlirough the area where the trynet showed that shrimp were present. The entire trynet opera- tion is easily handled by one man. ITlien the captain thinlts that the net is ready for hauling, the speed of the vessel is decreased until there is enough slack in the towing cables to allow the crew on the stern to release the cables from the block and fall and the hook and chain on the centerllne. Wien this operation is completed, the cables are again led directly from the starboard outrigger. 138 TABLE III - 8. —TIME CONSUMED IN SHRIMP FISHING AND HANDLING OF CATCH AT SEA, SAMPLP: OF 8 SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULF SHRIMP VESSELS Operation Average Fastest Slowest Hrs . Kin. Sees. Hrs, , Kin. Sees. Hrs, . Kin. Sees. I. Net setting 1. Rig outrigger 0 Ii $9 0 0 28 0 8 33 2, Swing out doors 0 1 30 0 0 30 0 5 li 3. Stream net 0 2 23 0 0 25 0 h 30 L, Lower and set net >. Secui'e cables 0 2 12 0 0 33 0 6 9 0 1 8 0 0 36 0 2 20 6. Set cables 0 1 2 0 0 5 0 2 10 1-6 Total time to set net 0 8 U2 0 3 li5 0 22 7 II . Dragging k 0 hi 1 21; 28 5 16 50 III. Net hauling 1. Release cable 0 0 1x2 0 0 7 0 2 li 2. Two block doors 0 5 13 0 2 1 0 7 2 3. Rig tackle to net 0 1 I;9 0 0 30 0 3 $^ ii. Pull net aboard 0 3 25 0 1 35 0 9 9 5. Dump net 0 0 35 0 0 10 0 1 12 6. Clear net 0 2 25 0 0 iiO 0 9 33 IV. Trynet operations 1. Swing out trynet 0 0 29 0 0 2 0 2 23 2. Lower and set 0 1 58 0 1 15 0 5 0 3. Drag 0 2li 35 0 8 57 0 ^5 0 li. Heave in trynet 0 1 Ii8 0 0 30 0 3 30 5. Dump trynet 0 0 liO 0 0 10 0 2 10 V. Handling aboard V 1. Head 2 36 6 0 20 30 h 2li 30 2, Dump trash 0 15 26 0 1 50 0 5ii 0 3. Hose doxm 0 2 51i 0 1 12 0 5 50 Ii. Clean shrimp 0 2 Ii3 0 0 32 0 7 liO 5. Stow below 0 22 liO 0 3 36 1 0 0 1/ In man-hours. 139 As the net is nov/ clear for hauling, the cables are brought in with the winch until the two doors ai'o blocked at the outri^^ce^^* 'i'he vessel is generally stopped during this procedure, but occasionally some way is maintained to perirdt limited maneuverability. The net is hauled to windward of the vessel, lihen the doors are up, the lazy line ixihich is secured around the mouth of the bag of the net is led through the block of the running whip which is then hoisted to the boom's end. The lazy line is then led to the winch and is heaved in until the neck of the bag is above the bul- wark rail. The block and fall at the end of the boom is then secured around the neck of the bag with gripe or sling. The bitter end of this tackle is then led to the irinch and the bag of the net is raised out of the \jater and brought aboard and held suspended over the deck. One man can steady the net with a preventer while a second releases the slip- ' knotted tie rope securing the end of the bag. This dumps the catch on deck. During this operation, the vessel is stopped and the captain comes aft to assist the crew. After the net is dumped and cleared of larger, trash fish, the vessel is gotten underway, the net is streamed, and the fishing operation is repeated. After the last haul for the trip, the net is cleared of trash as far as possible by hand. It is then streamed and towed at top speed for a period of three to five minutes. The vessel is again stopped and the net is taken on board, using the winch and whip line. The whip line is then used to bring the doors on board and the doors are secured as before. The vessel novr is ready to anchor or proceed to port, 1/hile the shrimp travrl gear is operated essentially in the same manner by the inshore and offshore fleets, there are differences between the fleets in methods of locating shrimp. Use of the trynet for locating shrimp is not as X'fidespread among inshore vessels as among offshore ves- sels. Three general types of fishing methods appear to be prevalent. In the first, the fisherman uses only the main trawl to locate shrinj). The length of drag is a matter of choice of the fisherman, but generally the trawl is fished for one-half hour to tiro hours for each haul. If the catch is sufficient, the trawl is again put over; otherwise, a new area is sought and the procedure repeated. The second method, still being em- ployed in shallow water areas in Louisiana involves the use of a cast net thrown ahead of the boat as it moves slowly over the flats. I'ihen shrimp are taken in the cast net, the trawl is put out. As the trawling proceeds, the cast net is continually throvm ahead of the boat. If the boat passes into an area where shrimp can no longer be taken in the cast net, the boat is swung around to again cover the area where shrimp were found. The third, and most efficient method for locating shrimp, involves the use of the trynet before the large trawl is put into operation. lllO o s ■p o x: -p I I CM 1141 FIGURE III - 28. — Securing the otterboarda . 1U2 (a o a m la ■a 13 o •s ■p +3 o o :* §• n o OS CM o M 11;3 1 0) I o o I bO I I d g iliU In Mississippi, on occasions, fishermen have used as a trynet a conical bag of webbing attached to a serrd-circular metal frame about three feet across the base. A short three-strand bridle is fastened to the frame for towing from a single rope. It is believed that tliis tj^e of trynot has not been completely displaced by the miniatui-e trawl. Another method of locating shrimp has been observed in the shallovf inside waters around Beaufort, North Carolina, and not elsewhere in the fishery. A long oar is put out from the side while the boat is running at slow speed close to shore. IiTien shrimp are present, they can be readily seen jumping out of the water as the moving oar disturbs them. Fishermen will always try a muddy patch of water whenever one is found, as concentrations of shrimp, presumably while feeding frequently will stir up quantities of mud. This is not infallible, as schools of fish also cause muddy patches. Handling the Catch at Sea Iced Vessels After the drag has been completed the bag is pulled out on the deck and is opened at a height of no more than two feet above the deck so that its contents are not damaged during emptying. Because of the high prevailing temperatures on the decks of steel boats the deck is sometimes covered with wood or cement. Cement has proven to be much more durable and effective than wood for tliis purpose. Once the bag has been unloaded its contents are washed with salt water from a pressure hose and imnediate- ly afterward all trash fish are sorted out and thrown back into the ocean. Occasionally, edible crabs and commercially valuable fish are saved. In the operations obsei'ved during the sui"vey of First Research Corporation from ho to 80 percent of the catch consisted of trash fish, weeds, rocks, and other debris. During the sorting operation gloves are worn because of the danger of bad cuts from trash fish. In most cases cotton work gloves are usedj on board one of the vessels surveyed, rubber gloves were worn. The crew members during this operation sit on low stools and \ise small hand hoes to ralce individual piles of shrimp and trash from the main heap. Throughout the Gulf Area the general practice is to head the shrimp as they are sorted except where shrimp are caught for the canneries. In the Atlantic coast fishery in North Carolina, South Uai^oiina, and Georgia, however, the shrimp are landed with their heads on and the heading is done in the siirirap plant. In the other fisheries, because of the length of the ti'ipti, quality considerations would ordinarily make it risky to hold the shriirip heads on. Only vjhen unusually large catches are made, and no hand can be spared for the heading operation, is a part of the catch iced down with heads on. li.5 After the heading is completed, the baskets of shriir.p are washed \<±t\\ salt T^rater from the flushing pump and hoseo Tl'ie trash is shoveled overboard and the deck is hosed clean. Next the shrimp are placed in metal wire baskets of 60- or 80- poimd capacity, mixed xidth a small amount of crushed ice. On many vessels the shrimp are graded during this operation, the larger and smaller shrirap being placed in separate baskets o The procedure for stoiri.ng the catch vai^ies little from boat to boat. The baskets are lowered into the hold and dumped in a bin on a layer of ice, and shriirip and ice are thoroughly mixed together. In fill- ing the bin a layer of ice is always placed over a layer of shrimp, the bottom layer of ice is nei;er less thajn six inclies thick if the hold is well insulated. On boats with deficient insulation the bottom layer should be considerably thicker. Once the storing is completed, a thin layer of ice is spread on top, the bin-bojirds are replaced, and the hold cleaned iip and the hatch cover secured. On longer trips, especially during the last part of the journey, the bins first loaded are turned and re-iced« Turning is done id-th per- forated shovels xjhich, even if handled carefully, tend to cause some breakage of the shrimp. Freezer Vessels The handling of the catch on freezer vessels depends on the type of freezer employed. In the discussion of refrigeration installations aboard vessels (Chapter II, p. 95) it was indicated that tliree types of equipment are used in the shrimp industrjr, i.e. plate, blast, and immersion freezers. The analysts of First Research Corporation observed operations on one vessel equipped xjith a blast freezer installation and on two vessels wliich employed the inmiersion method. On the blast freezer ship the shrimp vrare handled as follows: After the shrimp \-iere landed they vrare vrashed with salt v:ater and dumped by size on a paclcing table on deck. Next the shrimp were packed in ^-pound boxes already labeled for direct marketing. The boxes were placed on a balancing scale, filled, and weighed by one man. The first box from each basket was dmnped and an actual count made» A second man took the boxes off the scale and stowed -bhem in trays holding four boxes. The filled trays were placed on deck next to the hatch leading to the blast freezer and the cold storage hold. After all the boxes were filled, the hatch was opened and one man passed the trays below to another, who loaded them into the quick- fi'eeze locker. ll;6 The freezer boat "Carol Ann" is anchored permanently and functions as a fixed plant at Port Isabel, Texas. The 138-foot vessel has a freezing capacity of U0,000 pounds daily. One of the "Carol Ann's" refrigerated compartments . FIGURE III - 31.— The "Carol Ann" Southern Fisherman. 1U7 FIGURE III - 32.— "John Cruso" unloading at Biloxi, Mississippi. Fishing Gazette. li;8 FIGURE III - 33. --The "Lois Kaye", rigged for deep-water trawling for shrimp and bottom fish, carries six separate brine tanks. Fishing Gazette. 1U9 Port engine, Diesel 6-110, air-starting Diesel, equipped with ii-l/2; 1 reverse reduction and air-corapressor. ± lit The captain at the wheel j also shown is the depth recorder and telephone , The "Lois Kaye" 3- drum hoists. FIGURE III - 3il.— Aboard the "Lois Kaye" Fishing Gazette. 150 The locker, kept at a teinporatiire of minus liO degrees F., had a freezing capacity of 6;)0 pounds of shrimp in ei(jht hours. At the end of the freezing period the boxes vore removed from the locker and placed on a wori: table adjoinin^^ the holding room. One man opened each box and turned over the contents. A second man sprayed the frozen shrimp vdth fresh water and replaced them in the same box, thereby glazing the shrimp. The S-po'JJ^d boxes were then placed in 50-pound master cartons and stowed in the holding room. This locker was kept at a temperature of 20-25 degrees below zero F. The shrimp are usually frozen during the daytime. The entire night catch is ordinarily processed at one time. As handled on the ves- sel studied, the shrimp are preserved on board in such a manner that they can be shipped directly to maricet after they are unloaded. On the two vessels equipped with immersion freezers the shrimp after washing were placed in 50-pound freezing baskets, weighed, and lowered into the brine freezer tank. This tank contained sea water in which equal parts of salt and sugar had been mixed. The tank on one ves- sel held 230 gallons of water to which i;ere added 6OO pounds of sugar and 600 pounds of salt. The solution was kept at 10 degrees below zero F. \ total of 200 pounds of shrimp could be frozen at one time in this tank. The other vessel was equipped with a larger tank that had a freezing capacity of 2'jO pounds of shrimp and was filled mth a brine solution of the same proportions as above. A full load in each tank raised the temperature about eight degrees. The loaded freezing baskets were left in the brine tanlc for periods ranging from ten minutes to one hour. The shrimp had been individually frozen and glazed when reiaoved. Afterwards they were dumped in bulk into 50-pound master cartons and stowed below in the freezer hold which was maintained at a temperature of 20-30 degrees below zero F. The virtues of the brine freezer method have been emphasized by technologists of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. Brine freezers, the technologists maintain, are adaptable to small boats, since packaged refrigeration units may easily be designed for small space. Brine-freez- ing of small and irregvil a r- shaped products such as shrimp is efficient and fast. Complete protection against dehydration (freezer burn) during the freezing cycle is provided wliich is not always possible under the air-blast freezing method, A study specifically related to the problenE encountered in connection with the brine-freezing of shrimp at sea was made on board the Oregon during March and April 19i?2. As a result of this study the follow- ing procedure for commercial brine -free zing and processing of shrimp was recoiTunended: Aboard vessel: (1) Use only fresh firm vihole or headed shrimp. 151 (2) Chill shrimp in fresh ice water. (3) Freeze shrimp in a strong (sodium chloride) brine (85-degree salinometer or 22. 1| percent salt) at 0° to 5° F. Circulate brine continously during the freezing process. (li) Remove shrimp from the refrigerated brine immediately after they are frozen, but in no case allow them to remain in the refrigerated brine longer than k hours. Rinse briefly in cold fresh water. (5) Store the brine-frozen shrijnp at temperatures no higher than $°F. preferably lower. Protect from dehydration during storage. Ashore : (6) Thaw brine-frozen shrimp in running cold water at 60 F. (About 10 to 15 minutes). (7) Remove shrimp from thawing tank. Remove heads from whole shrimp. Rinse and cull unsound shrimp. (8) Pack uniformly in waxed cardboard cartons with a minimum of head space. Overiirrap with a moisture-vapor-proof film. (9) Refreeze shrimp at 10"f. or below and store at o"f. or below. Unloading Cargo and Mooring Vessel Upon arrival in port iced vessels proceed to the raw shrimp plant dock where the catch is unloaded, either by basket and hoist or power conveyor. After unloading the bins are hosed do^m and left to air. Some boats steam or chlorinate their holds as a sanitation measure. Speed in unloading freezer vessels is not too important since there is little danger of quality deterioration. Vessels with blast freezer installations are unloaded when a refrigerated truck is available for transportation either directly to a market or to a local cold-storage locker. In immersion- type freezer vessels the shrimp are either unloaded at the raw shrimp plant (when frozen whole or unsorted) or the cartons are held aboard until a refrigerated truck is available to transpoirt them di- rectly to market. Whereas the unloading of an iced vessel is usually com- pleted in a short time, the unloading of refrigerated vessels may take several hours, depending upon the disposal of the cargo and the availa^ bility of transportation. 152 M^ter iuiloacii.n,j, the ven.'jfils proceod to tholr berthr; foi* tJieir atiy in port. Soino vork may be cloao by the crow bojVore thuy are na;i.d ox"f. Tho ,";oneral procedui^e, houevo^^, is to leave tho vensolE un- atten^v*'^ tnit loc!:od up until it is tiino to prepare i'or sea, Tllffi STUDY, lanniNG AMD MNDLIMG OPERATiaiS In ita nbudy of work practices on shrimp fishing craft First aosoarch Corporation was able to obtain time factors for various fishinj^ and handling operations aboard ship. Time values v/ere recorded separately for operations connected vdth the setting of nets, the drag.-^ing and haul- ing of nets, the handling of trynets, and the handling of shriinp aboard ship. Table III- 8 lists average, fastest, and sloT'est time values record- ed for these operational steps. (See table III - 8, page 139) On the average, setting nets took nearly nine minutes; the average drag was slightly over four hours, and hauling the nets toolc from about five to over 32 minutes. Trynet operations were less tiiiic -consuming. Swinging out, lowering and setting of trynets took from about 1-1/2 to over 6 minutes, dragging time varied from 9 to 55 minutes, and heaving and dumping of try- nets took from one to 5-1/2 minutes. Time consimied in handling shrimp on board depends on the quanti- ty of catch processed. To have any real meaning, time for such operations as heading, dumping trash, cleaning and fto ring of shrimp must be recorded in terms of niufiber of pounds of shrimp handled. The man-hour particulars collected by First Research Goiporation, consequently, are significant only as an indication of the relationship of the time values for tho in- dividual handling operations to each other. The variations in tirao required for the same operation by in- dividual vessels are due principally to difference in skill and effort of crew members and cannot be attxabuted to any significant differences in methods employed. Size of vessel and gear have a relatively small in- fluence on the tirno required to perforra vai-ious operations. In general, the sample obsei'vations appeared to indicate that the smaller boats were capable of faster operations than the larger boats* Only one vessel used tho trynet with any degree of regularity for the purpose of estimating catche:!; with tho large net. .Since the try- net operation is perforaisd during the trawling cycle and is accomplished by the utilization of othert-jiso idle time, the i<'irst Research Coi'pox-ation analysts were of the opinion that its use appeared higlily desirable from the standpoint of vessel efficiency. Concerning tho processing of slirirap aboard ship it was noted that operations consumed little, if any, more time on a freezer vessel than on an iced vessel. 153 HrPLOYI'-IfiNT OF THE Cimill? FLEET 111 OTILF.R raSILERIES A.n iiiifiortant rcaturo of tho inchorc fishin[; industry of Louisio.na, Alabama, and HiscisGippi, is its clor.o connoction \i±th oystorinr. Since the smaller shrirrip boats and oyster boats have siriiilar oquiprannt, tlifiy lend ther.isolves to intercliaiiceablo use. Tlia ssasrns of the tuo fishories are corniloraflntary and the processing of both oystors and shrimp is carried on in the same canneries. Many of the larger shriinp vessels from Beaufort and liorchead City, North Carolina, engage in a trawl fishery for fish off Cape Hattoras during tie vrinter months. The vessels fish from December until April and shrimp the remainder of the year. It is estimated that the income derived from trawling for fish accounts for nearly fifty percent of a vessel's total annual revenue. Vessel ovmers and captains believe tliat the average Florida- type vessel is too lightly constructed to vrithstand the rough weather opera- tions in this fishery. Bow draggors are preferred, because of their sturdier construction and their method of to^fing the net through stern gallox/s as distinguished from the boom arrangement on the Florida- typo vessel. Soma Florida-type trawlers have been successful in dragging for fish for catfood plants in Pascagoula, Mississippi. Conventional nets and doors are used. The Texas slirimp fishery is moi*e specialized tlian the shrimp industry in other States, Rarely is shrimj^ing coupled irLth other opera- tions. Occasionally, an operator may combine his shriiaping activities with a charter operation. One shrimp plruit in Freeport encourages boats to bring in snapper v;henever possible. Fishermen, however, reportedly are hesitant to put forth an^- extra effort to catch snapper, among other reasons because of its lu-ghly erratic market price. Few slirimp vessel captains. First Research Corporation believes, have the necessary experience to switch over to snapper fisydng. If skippers familiar vn.th both fishories were available, an ideal operation wo\i].d embody fishing for snapper during the spring when shriirrping slacks off and dragging for shrimp in the summer as snapper fishing falls off. Another reason wly snapper and shrimp are not landed together in appreciable quantity is that at present the shore plants handling snap- per and grouper discourage the production of fish on a part time basis by the slrrimp vessel. They clalra that the poor techniques Tor the haaidling of fish used by the shrimpsrs lead to an inferior product. In icing and handling, the crews naturally give first consideration to tlie more valua- ble shrimp catch and often neglect the fish that they liave tfiken. In ad- dition, any large increase in fish catches adversely affects the ex-vessel prices obtained by the regular snapper fisherman. Dealers cannot afford to jeopardize their regular source of snapper by encouraring production from slirirrip vessels which will not bother i-rith snapper when the catches of shrimp are plentillil or prices are good. 15U In the opinion of experts^ careful consideration should be given to the lony run benefit accruing to the industry from the develop- ment of a dual-purpo.se vessel capable of being used in other fisheries, as well as shrimping^ without changing crew requirements. The possibilities of employment of vessels in alternate uses uere ex]3lored. The economics of a mixed shrimp-red snapper operation based at Pensacola, Florida, surveyed by Harwell, Knowles and Associates were de- scribed as follo^rs: The vessel is a 7!? foot Florida-type shrimp travjler equipped with mechanical reels and is currently fisMng the Campeche banks for shrimp or red snapper. There are eight mechanical reels and wire lines aboard and room for a crew of eight v/hile red snapper fishing and three while shrimp- ing. Conversion from one operation to the other requires but a single day in port. The vessel fishes the Campeche snapper banks exclusively and the two trips for which data were obtained yielded 1^,007 and 19,2^0 pounds of red snapper, respectively, together with several thousand pounds of less valuable grouper. These catches were valued at $3,7^0 and !i;U,8l2, respectively (2^^ per pound for snapper) representing a gross return of ^,^62 for the period of the two trips which were of 18 and l6 days duration, respectively. This period was equivalent to one Campeche shrimp trip, allowing 3$ nights' fishing. The average catch of shrimp per night on the Campeche grounds during such a period was es- timated (from catches of U Tampa vessels of similar size) at 200 pounds per night or 7>0t)0 pounds of headless shrimp for the 31? nights. At 62^ per pound (all top grade) only •'i;3,3UO would have been realized from shrimping during this period. Diesel fuel for the 2 snapper trips would be "bunt 3,000 gallons i^lh^O) compared to 5,000 gallons ($7^0) for a com- parable shrimp trip. The additional fuel for shrimping is used during the 10 to 12 hours dragging per night, while most of the fuel used duiang snapper fishing is the running to and from the grounds. Ice expense would also be less for snapper fishing vjith 30 tons of block ice (;!180) used during the two trips com- pared to $0 tons of crushed ice (^300) for the one shrimp trip. While the net boat income from the red snapper catch and the ovjners share were higher, on this basis, the eight men individually earned less than three fishermen would have if the vessel had produced shrimp. 15? BecauEC of the amount oi" inton^Dt aroused in the industiy by the catches of yellowfin tuna in the Gulf of Mexico by the vessel Oregon of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries in the course of recent ezplora- tions, tJiought has been given to the use of shrimp vessels as tuna long- line boats. The design of the Florida- type shriinp vessels is not con- sidered favorable for this tyjje of fishing. Uheel house fon/ard and deck space aft make it difficult for the captain to guide the vessel, to loxror the gear, to pick-up, and to watch the action at the line hauler which would be mounted somevjhere near the winch installation, A lower riding vessel would be better for hauling the fish aboard. Furthermore, on vessels engaged part-time in the tiina fishery, freezer equipment would be necessary to hold the catch. One 110-foot twin-engine shrimp vessel from Brovmsville, Texas, is being fitted out for tuna long-lining. Loran and depth sounders have been installed but to date neither has been used in either fishing or shrimping operations. The ovmer-captain plans to operate the vessel for tuna or for shrimp, as conditions warrant. Brine-freezing facilities for 30 tons of tuna have been installed. The observations of First Research Corporation on the subject of dual-purpose vessels irere recorded as follows: A recently built vessel has been equipped as a refrigerated vessel with the dual-puiTDose of being employed in the menhaden fishery as well as the shrimp fisheiy. She is an 86-footer and carries a separate crew for each operation. Although she fished menhaden this past siumier (1955) it is not known how successful she has been. It is believed that the crawfish and pelagic fisheries in the GifLf along the Central American coast and in the West Indies, might offer excellent opportunities for a dual-purpose refrigerated vessel. In British Columbia, a fevj multi-purpose vessels vjhich are equipped for salmon seining, herring sein- ing, dragging, and packing have been designed in the past few years. Some of the newest boats can perform as many as five different types of fishing operations. A few multi-purpose vessels have been developed for the New England fisheries vdth some success. One vessel built in 19^1 is equipped for both trawling and scallop-dragging. VESSEL PROBUGTIVITY Vessel productivity depends on so many variables that the exact relationship between measurable statistical determinants and size of catch is difficult to ascertain. The fishing success of some shrimp- ing operations may now and then be due primarily to "fisherman's luck". In discussing the fact that white shrimp often travel in dense schools, Hildebrand states: 156 "....it munt be remembered that even the catch of tv;o boats made at the sa?ne time and in the same /general area cannot be com- pared vjith confidence for one boat may pass throu,p:h the school and the other may miss it entirely." 16/ Naturally, the largo r the amount of data that can be collected on comparable operations, the less important becomes the element of chance. Certain relationships beti;een technological, geographical and other factors and vessel productivity can be discovered if catch informa- tion from an adequate sample oC vessels fishing the same vxaters at the same time is obtained, • On the basis of limited sample obseirvations, Harwell, Knovles and Associates relate such factors as length and pouer of vessel, seasonality, geographical location of fishery, and owner-operation to vessel productivity. Table III- 9 furnishes some clues to what extent geograpliical differences between fishing grounds influence size of catch. Average annual catch for vessels in the sample ranged from 12,9J4i4 pounds for vessels operating out of Mayport, Florida, to as much as 82,6o6 pounds for Brownsville, Texas, operations. Average catch per day was as low as 82 pounds, and as high as 372 pounds. There is a clear indication that average annual catches of vessels operating out of south Atlantic ports are substantially below those made by boats fishing in the Gulf. This difference betA-ieen the two areas is in part accounted for by the shorter fishing season in the vfaters of the Atlantic. Boats out of Rockville, South Carolina, fished on the average only on lilt days as compared to vessels operating in the Gulf where the season extended anyirhere from 2l5 to 237 days, Campeche operations conducted out of Tampa, Florida, and Brovmsville, Texas, were by far the most productive. These operations ;jith few exceptions are re- stricted to the larger, more exi^ensive boats. In the case of the vessels engaged in the Campeche fishery, trips are more hazardous and running costs much higher than elsewhere. Seasonal characteristics of shrimp catches in the Thunderbolt, Georgia; Key West, Florida', Biloxi, Mississippij and Brownsville, Texas, fisheries are illustrated in table III -10. Average annual catches of boats in the Tortugas operations (operating out of Key West) were fairly 16/ Henry H. Hildebrand, A Study of the Faima of _the Brown Shrimp Grounds in the Uestern GiUf of Mexico, publTcafgons of the Institute of Marine Science, "Volume III, No. '2, November, 191?1+. 157 TABLE III - 9.— SAMPLE OF FISHING OPERATIONS FOR US VESSELS, SOUTH ATLANTIC AND OULF PORTS, 1951 Home port Number of vessels Average ^^^ff annual "^^^^ catch f r ^^y (ni^t) Average nuniber of Fishing fishing grounds days Atlantic Beach, North Carolina h Rockville, South Carolina h Thunderbolt, Georgia 5 Mayport, Florida 3 Key West, Florida 6 Tampa, norida 7 Biloxi, Mississippi h Brownsville, Texas 13 Pounds Pounds (Heads off) 36,992 20,85ii 183 27,9^0 192 12,910* 82 iil,591 1/ 193 73,87ii 1/ 312 U6,867 1/ 209 82,606 1/ 372 I. a. Local Ill; Local 11*6 Local 157 Local 215 Tortugas 237 Canpeche 225 Local 222 Campeche 1/ Vessels fished by night, n.a. - not available. 158 TABLR III - 10.— 3FAS0MAL DATA ON PR0DUGTIVI1.Y OF SOUl'H ATLANTIC AND GUIJf SHIIII-IP VESSELS, 195U A.-'AVEMGE DAILY CATCH, 195U Home port Number of vessels Jan . -Apr . May-Aug . Sept . -Dec , Pounds Pounds Povinds Thimderbolt, Georgia Key West, Florida Biloxi, Mississippi Brounsville, Tej^as 5 5 3 6 ( Heads lUl 193 161; 98 281 210 283 off) 2l;8 221 215 5U2 B.— AVERAGE NUMBER OF FISHING DAYS, 1951; Home port Number of vessels Jan. -Apr. days (nights) May-Aug. days (nights) Sept. -Dec. days (nights) Thunderbolt, Georgia Key West, Florida Biloxi, Mississippi Brovmsville, Te^ais 5 5 3 6 Number 75 86 79 Number 71; 77 7h 73 Number 71 66 92 70 C— DISTRIBUTION OF Al^R'lUAL CATCH, 1951; Home port Number of vessels Jan. -Apr. May-Aug. Sept. -Dec. Thunderbolt, Georgia Key Uoat, Florida Blloyj., Mlssisiiippi BroT/naville, Texas 5 5 3 6 Percent 31;. 7 17.5 21.6 Percent 37.1 30.1 U2.5 27.1; Percent 62.9 35.2 llO.O 51.0 159 uniformly distributed over the year. Thunderbolt boats, idle during the first four inontho of the year, took nearly two-tbirdo of their shrlmxj in the period from September throuch December. Bllojci, Mississippi, opera- tions were more productive during the sujmner months than at any other time of the year; catches were off considerably during the first four months. Fishing off Brovmsville, Texas, was much more productive during the last three months of the year; the boats accounted for over one-half of their total annual catches during this period. Fishing in the more productive year-round fisheries in the Gulf of Campeche and off the coast of Texas is conducted by larger boats. The average annual catch, average catch per day, and average nuiaber of fishing days for these vessels in the Harvjell, Knowles, and Associates sample, were greater than for vessels fishing other areas. Table III - 11 illustrates the relationship of size of vessel and the three factors aforementioned . TABLE III - 11. --SAMPLE OF AVERAGE CATCH BY VESSEL SIZE FOR 1*3 SflRBIP VESSELS OF SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULF PORTS, 1951+ Vessel Number of vessels Average catch Average length Annual Per day number of 1/ studied (night) fishing days (Feet) Pounds ( heads Pounds off ) ii-O-H h 15,533 121 128 U5-J+9 11 37,331 203 184 50- 5i^ 5 26,020 160 163 55-59 3 50,952 213 239 60-64 k 73,^62 3*^0 216 65-69 10 76,751 338 227 70-74 5 79,899 3*^7 230 110 1 150,000 725 n.a. 1/ Length of the vessels is reported as overall length, n.a. - not available. 160 Vcrsel size and power to a certain extent are related to areas fished, dejith of water fished, and size of the net and doors used. The smaller vessels (under IjO feet in length) generally restrict their ox>eration5 to the bays and shallow inshore areas and their operations ai"e seasonal in nature. For example, the smaller South Carolina vessels fish from Hay until December. The liiedium sized vessels (Uo to 60 feet in length) shrimp outside waters off North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, the east and west coasts of Florida, and in the Gulf as far west as Brownsville, Texas, Thece vessels are limited in their range by fuel and ice capacities and by the crevr comfort provided by the vessel. In many instances they move from area to area along the coast to participate in the fishing seasons for the various species of shrimp. The larger vessels (60 feet or larger) may operate in the same areas as medium sized vessels but they can also fish the Campeche banks off Mexico, These vessels have big fuel and ice capacities (or freezer equipment) and may remain at sea for periods up to three months , Harvfell, Knowles, and Associates attempted to assess the significance of oviner-operation of vessels on productivity. The data (see Chapter II, page 106) appeared to indicate that owner-operated vessels, as a rule, fished more days per year, had lower maintenance costs because of proper handling and care of equipment, and, in general, caught more shrimp than vessels opei-ated by hired crews. STATISTICS ON PRODUCTION This section contains a brief discussion of production trends in the shrimp fishery. Interspersed in the text are bar charts depict- ing particulars for selected prewar and postwar years as well as a few tables supplementing the data cited in the discussion. Landings by State and Region In 1930 Louisiana ranked first among shrimp-producing states with a catch of 38.6 million pounds, Louisiazia, table III - 12 shows, continued to hold its leadership in shrimp production until 19^h when it was displaced for the first time by Texas. Next to Louisiana and Texas, shrimping operations conducted out of ports in the States of 161 TABLE ni - 12.— UNITED STATES A^Pl ;iMSKA SHRIMP CATCH, BY STATES, SPECIFIED YEARS Slate 1930 1/ 19^0 1/2/ 1950 1953 1954 1955 1956 ( Thousands of pounds heads-i on basis ) North Carolina 1,299 4,157 8,311 14,645 9,182 10,324 6,243 South Carolina 793 1,784 7,746 5,086 6,644 6,918 5,589 Georfjia 8,853 9,336 11,157 7,535 7,742 7,161 7,991 Florida 16,848 8,368 22,906 58,471 50,878 52,734 54,810 Alabama 2,982 4,565 5,007 5,806 6,226 6,676 7,668 Mississippi 8,li89 16,732 16,665 13,869 14, 160 16,625 10,912 Louisiana 38, 66U 90,820 70,630 81,589 77,709 68,986 60,792 Texas 10,189 14,779 45,812 70,435 93,258 71,517 65,134 California 2,697 1,083 919 1,022 1,044 1,522 1,889 Oregon - - - 26 - 23 0 Washington 88 55 55 15 21 8 77 Alaska 932 921 2,158 1,734 1,452 1,828 3,044 All others 3i^6 14 107 124 18 13 18 Total 92,180 152,614 191,473 260,357 268,334 244,335 224,173 1/ Mississippi River and tributaries omitted. 2/ Sand shrjjnp omitted. 162 yiofLda, Goori^ia, North Cai-o.Lj.na, and MJ.jjsiEsippi have boon consistently the most productive. Ficure III -3!j ilLustratoG tho trend in the ruc-i-onal distribution of the catch more clearly. The decline in the relative importance oi the south Atlantic area fisheiy as well as the fisheries in tho states outside the South is sho\m by comparison of the shaded bar areas, ^/hile the South Atlantic States accoimtod for 28. U percent of total production in 1930, their share of the total catch in 19^6 had shrunk to ll»h percent. Similarly, the k-h percent share of the total catch in 1930 represented by the spates outside the South had decreased to about tvjo percent by 19'^6. The rising significance of the Gulf region must be credited to tho expansion of production by Texas and west coast of i^'lorida opera- tions. As indicated by tho chart, tho west coast of Florida had in- creased its share of the catch from 1.7 percent in 1930 to 2b. U percent xn 193'6, whereas the Texas share of the catch had risen from 11.1 to 33.6 percent during the same period. A comparison of State catch statistics on a value basis (see table 111-13) shows that the rankings of the individual states are similar to the rankings obtained on a quantity basis, with the exception that states vjhere a larger percentage of higher-count shrimp ax-a talcon tend to rank lo;jer in a value, than in a quantity, comparison. Gatc;i by lypo of Fishing Gear Table III-li4 indicates size of the catch by type of gear for specified years from 1930 to 1956. As can be seen from the tabulation, shrimp trawls accounted for all but about five percent of the total catch in 1930. This type of gear has continued to be the most important. Landings Compared to Other Varieties and to Tot;!]. Landings of Fish and Shellfish In table III-l!? quantity and value of the shrimp catch is compared to the quantity and value of the catch of all fish and shell- fish for specified years from 1930 to 1956. While the total catch of all fish and shellfish in 19:>6 i/as almost 5o percent larger than in 1930, shrimp production increased from 92.3 million pounds to approximately 22lt million pounds in 1956, with a record production of about 268 million pounds in 1951-1. 163 CO 3 Ex S3 w to CO < a Q£ O u. I— to < o -3 • I/) < Os i-l • UN On U CM X LU (^ iH i— in LU r-t • r-l z • CM CN r-l Z o t— r- o I • 5 o • 0\ -It <-l o • O • o ■p <« o r-< r-l « r-t 0\ r-t o o o o O 0\ oo ^- vO o o o \f\ ^ t<\ O O O OJ r-t d Q o o o o a> o CN 03 r- vo p o o o o o vf\ _:t ff^ c\j r^ 2-* PL. s m in Z g o LU CM a> o u [ I 5 C 03 0:r-<-PrH cO:+>.;;*H «M C\J 3T "rr* 77v ...,.^ U'. •'■"■' ■^ • ^::^ •i o: :r-l ••••: 6 t- o <: (d •H: :0\y. en rH +J: ■ r-t :•: [ V| oo 2 (*> CJ oo +j cd o:; 'i g rH-Ht)^: O -P +'::H: ■to -a; \\\ll\\\l " W I ■P c « 8 ^ Vi CO C5 vO O OO 1:5 I I -.•■.-.^ ::::::: SI -P C o:-: •:::::: O •< <« -r-t'i^oo :::::: W rH +>:;tM :::::: — •* S5 VA • 0\ 09 i-{ « •H 8. +J Os t> r-t •rl • Q cm! •H 0} § -J- n n rH HI •H n Tl n c ^ <0 «> a> T3 n 3 3 rH rH O O « On r-h 5 5 r-i ■P -P o d § n 09 0) o a> 9 s « s o O CM ■>• ^ I61j TABU'] III - ].3.--UNITli:D STATES ATID ALASKA fJKRDIP VALUE, BY STATOS, SPECIFIiiD YEJvRS State 1930 1/ 19^0 1/2/ 1950 1953 1954 1955 1956 ( T h 0 u s a n d s 0 f doll a r s ) riorth Carolina kl 125 1,999 3,623 1,836 2,369 1,594 South Carolina 32 55 2,169 1,1+82 1,661 1,591 1,393 CTeorgia 335 281 3,178 2,616 2,013 1,862 2,662 Florida 635 329 6,379 21,219 14, 537 15,441 19,738 Alabama 97 182 1,107 1,800 1,039 1,349 2,223 Mississippi 319 686 3,713 3,7i+6 2,596 3,076 2,753 Louisiana 1,159 3,6hk lU,696 16,427 15,451 13,745 16, 292 Texas 377 591 9,904 25,354 21,402 21,971 23,650 California U2 iii 61 82 81 123 155 Oregon - - - 3 - 1 1 VJashin^ton 7 5 21 5 8 3 18 Alaska k2 37 173 225 189 238 396 All others 33 - 51 59 18 13 19 Total 3,119 5,9^9 43,i^51 76,641 60,831 61,782 70,894 1/ Mississippi River and tributaries omitted. 2/ Does not include sand shrimp. 165 TABDC III - l'l.--UNITKD STATES MD ALASM SIIRH'IP CATCH BY GEAJ?, SPECIFIED YEARS Gear 1930 1/ 19^0 1/2/ 1950 1953 195^ 1955 1956 ( Shrimp trawls 8'J,50k Beam trawls 1/ 2,lH2 Thousands of pounds - heads on weight ) 150,i^26 187,816 256,965 265,^17 21^0,706 219,045 1,175 2,986 2,691 1,965 2,695 4,21^5 Bag nets 1, ,296 882 205 liavil seines 877 (3) - Drag nets 71 - - Shrimp traps 3/ 9 2 in Cast nats 6 126 7 Pound nets - 3 - Push nets - - - Dip nets 5 - - Channel nets m. _ U18 189 559 69k 19h 9 2 10 25 60 508 381 225 Total 92,180 152, 6ll^ 191,473 260,357 268,334 244,335 224,173 1/ Does not include Mssissippi River and tributaries. 2/ Dees not include sand shrimp. 3/ Small catches by shrimp traps in Alaska are included with beam trawls. 4/ Less than 500 pounds. 166 TABLE III - 15.— SHRIMP CATCH (QUANTI'IY AIID VALUE) EXPiffiSSED AS PERCENl'AGE OF ALL FISH AND SHELLFISH, SPECIFIED YEARS (Expressed (Heads- on weight) in thousands of pounds and thousands of dollars) Year Total fish and shellfish catch Shrimp catch Shrijnp as percent of all fisti and shellfish Total value Shrimp value Shrimp as percent of all fish and shellfish Quantity Quantity Percent Value Value Percent 1930 3,286,580 92,327 2.8 109,3ii9 3,13li 2.9 I9I1O hyOS9,^2k 152,819 3.8 98,957 6,006 6.1 19^0 1;,88U,909 191, U7U 3.9 3i;3, 876 k3M2 12.6 1951 h,iah,oh5 22U,316 5.1 360,996 51,862 lli.U 1952 4,lil8,Ui|2 227,221 5.1 360,135 55,103 15.3 1953 i;,U67,960 260,357 5.8 352,275 76,6Ul 21.8 l9Bh li,7l;l,8ii3 268, 33U 5.7 35$, 639 60,831 17.1 19^5 U,79U,281 2Uli,335 5.1 335,778 61,782 18.1* 19^6 5,251,686 22U,173 h.3 369,018 70,89li 19.2 167 E:q)ressed as a pei-cent of the total catch of all fish and shellfish, the shrimp fishery's share rose from 2.8 percent in 1930 to 5.8 percent in 1953. In terms of the total -alue of all fish and shellfish the shrimp catch with a value of v3-l million represented only 2.9 percent in 1930> a^s against 19.2 percent in 195*^^ when fishermen received .t'70.9 million for their catch of shrimp. !7hen compared to individual species of fish and shellfish, shriinp ranl^ed fourth in size of catch during 1953^ 195^ and 1955^ and fifth in 195*5 as against ninth in 1930. In tez-ras of dollars, the shrimp catch is more valuable today than the catch of any other species of fish and shellfish, whereas in 1930 there were nine other species which bi'ought the fisherman moi'e money than shrimp. (see figure III - 36) Quantity and Value of Catch Per Shrimp Trawl in the South Atlantic and Gulf Area Despite the fact that the total catch by shrimp trawls more than doubled over the period from 1930 to 1956, the catch per slirimp trawl today is virtually the same that it was at the beginning of the period. Value of the catch per shrimp trawl, on the other hand, has increased substantially, from about .^1,200 in I93O to $9,300 in I956. In 1953 the value of catch per trawl reached a record of almost $11,500. (see figure III - 37) Tons Caught Per Net Ton of Fishing Capacity in the South Atlantic and Gulf Area By relating catch to fishing capacity statistics, an index of fleet productivity per net ton capacity can be constructed. This index can be interpreted as measuring the average productivity of a net ton of fishing capacity in different years. In 1930 according to the data depicted in figure III - 38, 6-1/2 tons of slirimp (heads-on basis) were taken for every ton of fishing capacity available. Since fishing capacity has expanded at a faster rate than catch this ratio by 1956 had decreased to 1.3 tons of shrimp for every ton of shrimping craft. Value of catch per net ton of fishing capacity increased from $l4U6 in 1930 to a hi^ of $l,3kh in 1953 but took a sharp dip in the followiner years, (see table III - 16) Quantity and Value of Catch Per Fisherman in the South Atlantic and Gulf Area Compared to Other Fisheries The productivity oP the average shrimp fisherman fluctuated over the period for which data were computed, ranging from a high of about 22,000 pounds per fisherman in 19l)0 to a low of 12,000 poiinds per fisherman in 1950, In recent years, the average catch per fishei-man was about what it had been in 19J0, viz. in excess of 17,000 pounds. Com- pared vjith the shrimp fishery the catch per fisherman in the fisheries 168 a CO I CO U a I 8J8').8JC0 duTfjqs ^ s s CO u a r UOUIXBS Bimj, duTfotis XA 0\ O o ^ I I • NO g CO M s u o CO •H <4 S 4> 2^ o o « a ;< ^ Q> as t ^ 25 e &5 I o aouiXBS duTfjiis mmx dnrfaqg saa^SifO o Huni rH UOIUXHS B anj, 5100PPHH o uouixirs saa^s/b 5 ^ o o o CM o 169 o M fe < a. < O z I z o »— oe. IXI o. X u < o El • 1-3 0\ • • IS • •UN • • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \A^^ o VAr-( •H CN ■P r-l 4 O •H ^K>1 S" Os SJ r-l T) VAr-O 0\ S o 0\ o 0\ o 0\ O •P XI T3 5 :^ vO \r\ r^ CM CO I S3 c5 m Kst O M fe 5 I I r^ M £5 Kg gfe Q W M M O CO Os « oo CM OO < KTk Of < -J o o u\ o o. ^s 35 CM NO CTv 0\ Ov 0\ 0\ o o CO Os r-l 170 TABLE III - 16.— VALUE OF SHRIMP CATCH PER NET TON IN THE SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULF STATES, , SPECIFIED TEARS Year Value of catch (South Atlantic and Gulf) Total tonnage of fishing capacity Value of catch per ton of capacity Thousand dollars Net tons 6,711; 1930 2,995 $l;li6 I9i;0 5,893 11,610 508 1950 1^3, 11*5 51,003 8li6 1953 76,267 56,739 l,3hh 195k 60,535 70,795 855 1955 6l,i;0ii 76,050 807 1956 70,891; 88,370 802 171 for other fish and shellfish vas hicher in every year for which data have been computed. The differences would be much less pronounced if menhaden were eliminated from the comparison since the huge catch for this species is accounted for by a comparatively small number of fishermen. A comparison on a value basis shows the reverse relationship, (see figure III - 39) With the exception of 1930 the average shrimp fisheraan's catch has been consistently moi-e valuable than the catch of the fishennen in other fisheries. Value of catch per fisherman in the shrimp fishery increased from $6l2 in 1930 to ;iA-,367 in 1956 ^7ith a record figure of $5,215 in 1953- During the same period, the value of catch per fisherman in the remainder of the industry rose from ^.926 to $2,381- 172 H CO 0\ i o o H CO ft! o Eh fe CO o o 2: 0-3 M w a: o o I OS § C5 H CO Eh CO O Q S ^^^^^^^. KNOWLES AND ASSOCIATES RANGED FROM 169.5 TONS FOR ONE VESSEL WITH A 7-TON HOLD CAPACITY OPERATING OUT OF riD^^lTv^^n^n?^""^'' ™ ^^^-^ "^°^2 ^OR ^ VESSEL WITH A 37-TON HOLD nmm/ Tur'^^AMniov ?^ °^ BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS. CONSUMPTION WAS LOWEST Sav Tu Jn^ JANUARY-APRIL PERIOD AND WAS HIGHEST DURING THE MONTHS OF MAY THROUGH AUGUST. IN TERMS OF POUNDS OF SHRIMP CAUGHT. HOWEVER 177 ICE CONSUMPTION OF BILOXI, MISSISSIPPI, VESSELS (WHICH RANGED FROM 6.4 TO 7.9 POUNDS OF ICE PER POUND OF SHRIMPI WAS LOWEST DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS BECAUSE OF THE LARGE QUANTITY OF SHRIMP LANDED THEN. IN THE SAME PERIOD KEY WEST, FLORIDA, VESSELS AND VESSELS OPERATING OUT OF TEXAS PORTS USED FROM 10.5 TO 18.0 POUNDS OF ICE PER POUND OF SHRIMP CAUGHT. VESSELS HAVING INSULATED HOLDS WERE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE ECONOMICAL IN THEIR CONSUMPTION OF ICE THAN VESSELS NOT INSULATED. BJTROrUCTORY COISffilSTS Cost factors in shrinrp production and processing were studied by several of the organizations under contract to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. VJorking from the books of vessel ovraers and shrimp processors. Federal Trade Ccsamission accountants obtained cost information for a sample of operations for the 3-year period 1952 to 195^. Harwell, ICnowles and Associates accorded special emphasis to such important elements of coot as fuel and ice in their study of vessel efficiency. The Bureau of Easiness and Economic Research of the University of l-ttsinl noted the customary charges made by vessel suppliers, shrimp plants, and processors for specific services or items needed on board ship describing the character of the industry on a local basis. The smiple of creif t for which data were collected by the Federal Trade ComiuisDion Included 8l vessels and 2? motor boats. Because of the relative liapoirtance of the industry doaiciled along the isouth Atlantic and Gulf coaats compared to elsewhere, operations were surveyed in this area only. Collection of data on costs was complicated by the difficulties encoimtered in tracing o^mers of vessels included in the original prob- ability stjiiple, by refusals to cooperate, and by inadequate or inaccurate methods of record keeping. In order to obtain a sufficient number of reeponces the Federal Trade Commission accovmtants, where necessary, were obliged to substitute operations for which pai'ticviiars ^rere readily avail- able. Tha data collected by these accountants are considered generally representative of the Industry. Because of the marked regional differences in the character of the shrlHp fishery the data collected are sui^iiarized sepai-ately for four areas, vis. (l) the South Atlantic, (2) the vest coast of Florida, (3) the noi'thcrn Golf i*egion couprlslng Alabcima, Mssissippi, and Louisiana, and (4) the State of Texas. With feu exceptions, the vessels for which data \jere obtained ranged frca kO to 6o feet in length and had rated capacities from 7 to kO net tons. Vessels, In most Instances, were acquired by present oimers since the end of VJorld T7ar II and the total original inveetiiont in hull, engine, and cpecial ectuip-isnt varied froai $600 to $50,000. Motor boat oper'ationa uere carried on In craft usually measuring less than 30 feet In length. By this definition, the capacity of these craft is less than 5 net tons. A miiiiber of the aaaller vessels and many of the motor boats were operated by their o\mers. 178 RESULTS OF FISHING OPERATIONS Most of the vessels located on the Atlantic coast ranged from medium to small in size. The vessels for vhich particulars were obtained in the field study had hold capacities from 5 to 29 net tons. The fish- ery in this region is primarily inshore. Occasionally, some of the lai'ger vessels fish the Tortugas grounds daring a part of the year. According to information furnished the Federal Trade Commission account- ants, these operations have not been profitable. Cost of vessel and equipment to the current owner averaged about $13^000 and ranged from as low as $600 to as high as $^2,000. For the most part, vessels based at Tampa and other southern Florida ports (Region II), take approximately three days to reach the Campeche fishing grounds. These vessels usually remain at sea for at least a month and send into port via Incoaaiing vessels the shrimp taken during each three or four day period. Fishing at such distances from houe port naturally involves many hazards and requires larger and better eg.uippcd vescels. The few vessels for which data could be obtained in ttiie region had capacities from 13 to 30 net tons. The original invest- ment in vessel and equipment by the owner averaged $33*000, the range extending from $17,000 to over $1*9,000. Operations along the Gulf coast in the States of Alabeuaa, Miaciisoippi, and Louiclana (Region III), are both inshore and offshore. Tiie vescels contacted had net tonnages ranging from 6 to 36 net tons. Cost of vessels and equiraent to the current owner averaged about $15,000 for thece vessels, the range extending from $3,000 to $36,000. State of Texas (Region IV) producers depend mostly on offshore grounds for their supply of shrinp. Their vessels, consequently, are largsr in sire, especially those built in recent years. The majority of vessels for vjhich data were obtained were in the 20 to 35 net ton category. Coat of vessel and equipL^ant to the current owner ranged fran a low of $S,550 for a 7- ton, to nearly $1*7,000 for a 33 -ton vessel, averaging about $23*000. Coarparisons E3t%reen Different Regions and Different Years Vessels In order to make possible comparisons for different years simultaneously with comparisons for different regions, only vessels for which complete data for 19^2, 19^3, and I9^k are available have been included in the presentation below, except for Region I where no data is shown for 1952. Tables IV - 1? through IV - 2? show gross receipts, cost of production, and operating profit (loss) for these vessels in dollars for each region and year. Table IV - 28 summarizes the data and presents gross receipts, cost of production, and operating profit (loss) of operations for each region and year in cents per pound of shrimp taken. 179 o Yi S o Eh b g < H E-l g § & Eh 8 o OS ^ g t^ EQ T3 x: ^1 c 4) =1 ™ o A ■3 o E-l >1 0\ .:* r^ O <^ O XA CM O r-l r^ W OvcM CVJ ^0 • •> , -OS oo vr\vo -3 r^so OO Vn Os pQ O, GO uSao ^ lA • •^ -.04 C\J OsO -3 noO O 03 0 r^ OsU\cg-3 O -3 ^ rH OO r-tU\ri-> f^OO SO '•^OO 0\ « « I •« CM H V\CM H CM tn so lA C^CO C^-3 r^lA Vr\ Os f- O CO c^ (^ o C^XACO i-l -3s0 rH CO lA OS SO XA CM O 0-3 lAiH C\?r-I P^CO l^ Os O f^co CO Osr-I CM O CM O r^CO OS SO CM I^sO Os r^ Os t--OOs rH SO so C^r^r^r^(n r-l -^ r-l •. — — an I m CM rH r-l r-l C- COCOSOIAOO -3 O Os r^HXA(»^A_3 r- O O CM Q ro CM-3 0D O -3 r-l rH ^ ■>A( -3 ( rH so OO O ,0 rH CO t— C^sJA OsS H rHlA ■LA "5 I-l C^ SO CM O -3 s O -H CO O ■CO 0) n rH «) -H CO) of O* bo 0 CN CM O \A • CO • .—3 .00 SO lA sO r-l^ r-rr> OO rr\ f.-\A -3 • O ,• .r^ .VA ■IA.3 ■LArH C- r- SO rH rHsO sO f- (n • \A • 00 CM OMD lAeO -3U\ ^ • OS • •^-3 •'OO so J so r-> CO O -3 • .CO C-rH OO OS Q O CMC IAS 0\ lAOO UN • .tA rH CM a I o o B ll> > "Ti II •h -p o d O o •> ■H <0 •p tl a a •> T3 u e a o M o 4IC0I 180 •a (i> m bO in += ol +5 J3 U a V> a) 4) •H t» o 4) S :s ■3 o Eh CQ > m d o » » >1 B 0) •p CO •a m «H *H O O « o n t3 •S 9 -SvO rH O CM O O O I I c~\0 r^vo vO O O O r-CM rr, o •t •% «t »t I CO H pH OO rHOO XA XA CM OO I I I CM I o • rrJl m ■o o §S a C (D (« •rl (D (S rH J4 O O _ - > vO CN C— 0\ c»\ CM r- vO •> •V ^ CM-^ CJ rH -31 (A O XA OO CJ CJ lA C- Os so so 8C0 CM rA OsXA -itXA Os OvO OS J rH O _:» • I "x I •% •» *^r-( XA H CO OsXA r-t ^ OO O OO Os C- • •vCK ^fA rH OS CM i-l •.CO rAXA 2i3 XA(»s rH lA •\co XArA •»Os -3 (A (A CO-^ vO Os XA -:* t~rd (A o OsvO CJ _:* • 1 CM t-- t-rH XA • -VO rH I I so o rA ' •vOO rA OO XA t~ Ov Os • "SO XA K(P •^ CK I CO IS t i) o 2 ^ ^ "^ SCSJ g « (h t! rH O I -H ■P •o a o u -p ^S^i 181 TABLE IV - 19.— 1952 COST OF PRODUCTION AND PROFIT AND LOSS - FLORIDA WEST COAST SHRIl^ VESSEI5, REGION II Vessels Item B 1/ Total 2 vessels Weighted average (cents per pound) Pounds of shrimp caught (heads-off weight) Gross receipts Cents per poxuid Trip expenses: Crew wages 2/ Ice Fuel Packing and ujiloading Groceries Miscellaneous Total trip expenses Boat expenses: Repairs and maintenance Boat supplies Fishing gear Insui'ance Depreciation Interest License and tax Miscellaneous Total boat expenses Total expense Cents per pound Net profit or loss Cents per pound 73,359 $UO,659 55.U2 12,961; 1,08U 2,125 2,826 18,999 93,2U3 $63,970 68.61 18,686 981 2,656 3,1+95 25,818 166,602 $1014,629 31,650 2,065 it, 781 6,321 hh,Sn 2,1*56 2,620 5,076 2,219 l,61tl 3,860 922 1,U26 2,3l;8 5I4 1,581; 1,638 2,iia 3,5L2 5,653 - 1,001 1,001 535 76 611 627 2,013 2,61;0 8,95U 13,873 22,827 27,953 39,691 67,61;!; 38.10 I;2.57 12,706 21;, 279 36,985 17.32 26.01; 22.20 62.80 19.00 1.21; 2.87 3.79 26.90 3.05 2.32 i.ia .98 3.39 .60 .37 1.58 13.70 I;0.60 22.20 1/ Operations ending June 30, 1953. 2/ Cre^^^s paid on a per pound basis according to size and quality of shrimp and f\u*nish own groceries. 182 TABLE IV - 20.— 1953 COST OF PfiODUCTION AND PROFIT AND LOSS - FLOllIDA V;KST COAST SHim^P VESSELS, REGION II Vessels Item A Bi 1/ Total 2 vessels V/eighted average ( cents per pound) Pounds of shrimp caught (heads -off weight) Gross receipts Cents per pound Trip expenses: Crew wages 2/ Ice Fuel Packing and unloading Groceries Miscellaneous Total trip expenses Boat expenses: Repairs and maintenance Boat supplies Fishing gear Insurance Depreciation Interest License and tax Miscellaneous Total boat expenses Total expense Cents per pound Net profit or loss Cents per pound 102,628 $69,113 67.3it 19,719 1,601 it,l61i 30,oi;9 80,919 $it$,363 56.06 17,167 1,230 2,915 3,512 2ii,82U 183, 5U7 $m,l476 36,886 2,831 7,U80 7,676 5i;,873 62.37 20.10 1.51; 1;.08 it. 18 29.90 h,h3Q 3,757 8,195 i;.l;6 5,91ii 1,821 7,735 1;.21 1,596 1,979 3,575 1.95 2,110 2,223 li,333 2.36 2,liil 3,523 5,661; 3.09 - 9h7 9U7 .52 759 25 781; .1;3 1,013 l,0ij8 2,061 1.12 17,971 15,323 33,291; 16.11; U8,020 Ii0,m7 88,167 U6.79 li9.6l l;8.0l; 21,093 5,216 26,309 20.55 6.1i5 II4.33 1/ Operation for year ending June 30, 1951;. 2/ Crews paid on a per pound basis according to size and quality of shrimp and furnish own groceries. 183 TABLE IV - 21.— 195U COST OF PRODUCTION AND PROFIT AND LOSS - FLOIHUA ^iTEST COAST SHRIMP VESSELS, REGION II Vessels 1 Total 2 Weighted average Item ( cents A Bl/ vessels per pound) Pounds of shrimp cauglit (heads-off weight) 63, Uo? 38,500 101,907 Gross receipts $31,085 $L5,95L $ii7,036 Cents per pound 1*9.03 Ul.ii3 I16.I6 Trip expenses: Crew wages 2/ 10, 9i;3 6,U23 17,366 17. Oil Ice 1,832 707 2,539 2.li9 Fuel 14,212 1,881 6,093 5.98 Packing and unloading 3,392 1,583 i;,975 li.88 Groceries - - - - Miscellaneous •• - - - Total trip expenses 20,379 10,59l4 30,973 30.39 Boat expenses; Repairs and maintenance 2,09li 1,309 3,U03 3.3U Boat supplies li,872 285 5,157 5.06 Fishing gear 1,637 Ul6 2,053 2.01 Insurance 2,216 1,059 3,275 3.21 Depreciation 2,lUl 1,767 3,908 3.8lt Interest - 705 705 .69 License and tax 775 - 775 .76 Miscellaneous 885 831 1,716 1.69 Total boat expenses 111, 620 6,372 20,992 20.60 Total expense 3U,999 16.966 Ui.07 51,965 Cents per pound 55.20 50.99 Net profit or loss -3,9lit -1,015 -1;,929 Cents per pound -6.17 -2.6U -i;.83 1/ Operations for six months ending December 31, 195U. £/ Crews paid on a per pound basis according to size and quality of " shrimp and furnish own groceries. I8I4 -»> Id -P ^ ^< C ui t) 0) •H ► O 0-3 C^ r-l CM -3 r-l so • p- C^_3 •* •»r— •t at s o o CJ\r^ M3 O O \o r^ ^Os O^OIA r-l -3 oo • 0\ f*N r^ vO •» ^CO I 1 1 O r-l n-\ CM rH -3 CO ^ UN CO [^ -3ao c?s t-i CM CM .3rH ^ CO -3 o\ CN r-l CM • 0-3r-l On M3 -»CM - 1 •1 y^ r^^ oo rH rr, H -3 XA u r-l O so O rH O CM 3c>j C- -3 i>- 00 S "^ 8 r^ o -P E -rl 1 1 (Q ^ |S 2a n T3 3 t p. Q) (Q C n ch ■H f^ 0) a> CO a> c ho cd 0) s +:> ^ SR O CM -3vO lA . •^ a> 1 h t a ^1 ■p ® (U ■0 0 C 0) 0 0 0 "5 Eh Eh CM O Ov r-l Ov • -U\ CN r-l &8 CM • - O vO rH O O CM • ■ \r\ ' c*- V.3 vO • - CM <^ rH VO rrv r-l to rH C- -3 .• 185 03 6h O g S I s CO FH i 1 •« (k. ^ Cc s O a 3 •< o f^ •lA 0\ T 1 • a M n T) ■P (0 4J 0) 3 -a U c d) 01 *a •H l> t> 0> S ^ 3 OJ CO o fH CO tH ^C- OO OOUN rH vn 0\f^ CM t^t^H so •I * "s I * I O CM-3 f-4 i-l CM Q r-l r^ O On UN'O O -. « I NO rH CK OsCO CO Os On CM CKr- v\c^u^ oo QOIAC^ VN p-f^CM _ZT •> « « I .1 r-< I-l CM ,-1 \/N t-X/N rr\ VNCM rH OO O-Vr-I OO O « « - I « I OsiH r-l iH :3 to _ 3 ■a o g I •. I Csi Q f^UN f*N 3 o o r- o C?N-3 ^-rn l*N •I •» I iH CM UN I -g o iH I 2 C r-l s. to 5 b +» ■rt rt O Tl Q r-l a) -H CO 1 O, be 0) -p 10 C a o a +3 n t su hing reoi eres ense cell rH o ss^sadi E-i Si4 (0 2 r" o -3 _3 OS oo On UN CM O C- r3 rH Os O SO CM _:! Os CM NO CM sO f*>rr\COCMOsOO O t^ -3 Mn*k««as •! * •» OsCMr-l.3rH CM CM OO r-l r^ r-i r-l SQ CO t-- r- goo UN .3 CNJ 3c3 O i-l SO .3 CO OO s« lAr-l ^O 8« CO CM OO 8 0\fn CM <^ r-l U\H r- CO OO o 1 1 * •\ On CM CSI UN o r-l CM 5 O (M CM^ Os CJs CO OnO UNrH C^ i»N t~ 1A1A C*- . rH Os UN rH cr, SO rH •.CM «U\ -3rH r-i CM -3 • . CD OO rr, COCO rH 3 •H t> O P« 3: ft HI .-^ o -P Q.'Si •3 a> 0) Vl •»•> •» rn r- r* ^rH OJ r-i rH «» i-H 0 rar-o rA -=J CM rH OJ t-vO S; •SCO 1 1 S~ rH -^ f^ ON 0 <^ Os v5 cn,\0 -3 in m3 i8^ -CO CM CM 5& a. •H u U\rH CM rH \r» c^ C~- r^ r-00 1- i r-t _3 CM CM vO r^ rr\ CM r^u% CNJ CM H • GO P^ 00 0 r- *CO » 1 C^" XArH >-i •-i 0 UN _3 {KS 0\ CM r-t • ^O \o ^ C— . •»r- - •» 1 -3 n~i rn CM (H \ri e^^ ^ o\ \A 0 0 rH CM !X> t- CVJ iH CO CO -^ 0 -3 t^ . ^-^CM CM V\ rH -SO i~t '^ •• •s 1 CJ i-l rrs ^'rH rH i-H J 1*^ 4 CVJ CO 0 vO OS CM fn s S On r- 0\i-i r- CO • OMD CM J -3- •>s •> 1 "^ J rH CM t» vO t~ OS r-rH r- po i-H .3vO OvCO CM \A K f-i • CM C»s 0 r-t •1 -On •S •! •* 0 CM CM \A CM rH J 4 Q rH < ■3 O t CM CM rH 0\0O ■2 o C o CO 01 C a> a 5 (D (U O O Q O. t« u ^ cd (^ •H ^ O M fc (1. O E s a a (U O CO O C*-CVJ rH n^ t*- (-1 CK »-t O r^«-l CM -=f r^r^.J'cNj 00 u^ o -500 sO 0 fn r-4 rH o-a m\o CM ----•Hi rH CM rH iH rH \0 ^ \0 rH^^ § CM VA r^ CM vO CM lACM O Ov O ro r^ vrs -iH ^O CO O •> * I I lAXr\CM CM ^O O XA-UOO lAfn rH CM CNO rA <^ n-\ O "^00 - - I rH CM 01-f\r^ _=J rH-:t r-O o r— fn fn r^ 0) DO (D a (D 0) u c ;3 U ■H CD 0 2 c rH 4) ■H s ae bo 0 -P 0 (0 -P s a) :i bo q -H to (U r-i +:» a 5 3 0 CO rH c: c ID •H -p J2 01 0 g q) U9 0 P.4>> 0 CO S S fl (D d MOM id s UN CM -3 0 rH CO 0 rn ^ C^ n^ CJn 0 0 U\ r- — M -3 i-i CM M UN 0 CN r^ 8 CO M • CM 0 vO f^ v^ r-i ■^ S3 rH f^ t— -3 rH CN UN t~i 0 03 f- -3 t^ <\ 0 r- ^J cs" •> r^ .3 -3 n-v rH NO Q -^ d g XA •• CO NO ^- CM n « at > 187 £! i^ c V a •H > o o. « S^ \A CM CM H <^ o o > CO s UN o 3 ■-( t^ VN • •> t~ \0 UN UN •«» UN XTl r- c- lA • r~ UN r-v VO CD ^^ CNJ -3 <«■ CSJ Ov «°: •> t*N p-\ UN O f- °.U^ CO UN CN Ov UN C— XA . •>0O On -^ OJ ss CNJ O UN 5 "> o Ov UN C— • « o rH t—rH UN rH O UN CO r--:f p- o r- -d' C0UNC^r^-30\ r<-\ o \0 iH t^ UN O t^ NO -^ O c^OJ 1-1-3 vO CO OnO OCO rM C— ■S w •% av •« «i rW CNl r^ H rH O r-< CNJ CM OvUNr-(UN_a O CO CM CM 1-1 -3 CO CONO f-1 oo r^ ^-CQ CJ UN vO OO^ CM P- vO vO vO CNJ CM r-1 CO vO UNi-1 "nCM r-1 CM C-- M CM •V *v *v -.1 rS r^CM CNJ _:J C^ Ovcp Q vO C^vO U\vO vO CO CM C^CM OXACM CM r- Q UNt^ O CM UN On iH p^CnoCn NO CM ra r-1 ?3 CO vO OvO 0O$p 0-- CO CNl f^CM UNvO O Q C-UNr-l O t— CM Ov 4 CM ,-i 0-30NUNUNUN On en CO r--:t r- rn fn p- On On r^-rr p-v i-i vo « I « « » « « -3 CNJ r-l CM r-i cr\ NO OvvO CO On Ov CM CO (-1 CTv UN [--iJN O r-1 CO UNvO P* rH ft r-i UN r-t On On p- CM -^ OvvO _:j O CM UN t^r^M ^^ r^ iH UN 1-1 P- •I CO O On cm CM rH r-1 H rH m O ft .3 -3 CNJ vO OO UN -3 On • UN - r- ■1 NO <5n oo "N o CM CM CNJ m rH t~- CM OO vO On rr\ Pl m CO CM • •V C^ oo ON CM -3 UN r-t rn -3 r-t r-t CM CM oo p o Ov UN rH Ov O t^ r^ CM OO r 3rH CO CO CO oo rH O CM CNJ rr\ rH O oo I It O 1 n 73 o (B (0 CO) (B a rH JS O O 0) 0) 0) O O CO a ti o 3 a) C jH tH cj 1-1 £ PL, o » UN r— .3 -3 OO « 9) +3 4J O XJ^ CN^UN o rH P-UN P-UN CJVVO rH CM O Csi r-t rr\ ,-t C\J rH P- CM CO rH NO P- 0-3UN rH OO OO (-1 Ov rr\ ft r-t ft ft gO-3 O Ov P^vO r--UN r-t 0'-:3 CM rH -3 rH ON rH CNJ CVJ NO O UN ON •* CNJ Ov _3 rH 1 « S< a> cX OJ ■o ID -p n o 9 ^, 0 rH § 0) 4) l4 C 3 ra'c30'Hta o Tao |a U a (ucCrHv -H cm 8 o S CO. u d -p id » n ■p s at expe Hepalrs mainte Boat 3u Fishing Insuran Depreci Interes License Miscell H rH C •H o. 3 01 El H O. P C 9) o o ^ CQ s: 188 "S ?„ -^ V bo to TJ x: ti a (u 3 s ^^{n^^S s On_:J_3sO cm O rH C^ fA^O rH CO CM -J' O OJ 8 S oJ 5 ^ *• s iH OJ r*-CM fA rH cr^ rH Os rH S • fA r-i n ^o c* ODNO lA C\) lAoO _-f MDCMCMrHi-tCOXArH MD eg fA 5 ^ ^ CM OO o CD H 0 CO C^-^- XA r^ CM . fA • 8 s^ lA OJ _3- rH Od r-i -a CM •» 1 •, -* -t 1 •. XA rH rH CO rH CO fA fA ^ On O CM fA 1 S I-U\ CJ rH CN) rH On UN CO OJ CM fA CM nO CO t-t O fA rH CM ? U\ 0^ O r-l NO Cs* r>-i r^ cvj "O cu en fn fA <^ rr^ CM _:J CM O o fA CM OJ r-i s vJ CO o • f-i On CM -3^ O O On CN UN NO - fA ^ *'t> -» ^ •. "1 •t «l >V «V *k 1 •» CM '« rH CJ r- OJ O O CM CNJ H C-- CM OJ rH rH OJ r-i CO _=r -=r CM ^ s rH iH r-l OJ r-i o -p {X^ t^CNJ rH Q O -5 ON_cr^ NO -^ <*>CO r^ CNi 8 r*-XANO CM CM NO o rH fA On O O CD C- -=f O fA rH XA XA s sa -U XA CO r-i XA o r- • r-t r-i CNJ . -=J <-l M •l ^ CNJ •* -* • •> 1 •• -^ >^ t 1 •. •» CO •» _a- -:t o o -Ij CVJ CVJ C\J CM CM CM CM rH On rH CM XA fA Ti r- ^ rH CM CM § 8 OO n-\ r-t r-XA On fn U\ q? en r- On XA rH rH O XACO OO CM CM fA -^ Ov Os Os -3 p fr f- OJ oxaoono r^ r-i -3 n-. CM fA eg -=f o • tr> CM c^ i-t <\j CM OO rH fA XA O OO CO O . O • O •-9 C^^ ^ •» •. •> 1 r^ OJ c\j cvj CN r-i Oi r^ t-^ r- f-'^ •» CO so r-i J3 CO rH rH fH r-t <^ r-i o \A "^^ O rH CM i-H O -3 XAXr\CM-^CO-^rH On CO CM CM XA CM XA s ^0 CO H rH r^rH On b- r^ CM CM CM ir\ r-_:jXA c^xnXAoj H U\ -3 :3 ^ -\ OO • t^ -^ G^ fnoJ-3 O St • CM H •« -"^ ■t ■, #, •% 1 •1 ■t •«*,•, *, * OO •» On 9^ o -o O CM_Cf CM 0\ -3^ CM CM rH CM fA Fi H -3 rH nO rH OO rH r-i-:3 On M 0\ O OJ rH Q rH Q 0^\r\ rH ^ fA NO 1 9 .r^ - « * 1 *l ^^ ^ ^ ^ *, i 1 - •» -. NO •V r— XA S CM n-i (^ 0\ OO fACM CM lA r-i ^ fA XA NO m OS « CM CM CM XA . .^ lA fX 9 CO CM_:J rH OO NO NO r^lA CM 3 Ol COO OJ-Cf NO OO r^ XA nO XA g O i5 -^ l:f> "-* OJ CM rH OSrH XA OJ 0- r-- OO fA Q) ";) O CVJ • CM On rH lA On OJ rHoO CM On fA r- nO . XTv . g U 0) -•-3 •^ -. -. 1 •> ^ 1 •» ^ •» 1 ^ •> CO •V XA 0) s "5 rH CM XA CM On CM r- ^r-i^ ^ CM OJ OJ _^ XA S ^ -p (0 CO ^ t-< <» ^ § s R Ov o OO S ^^QS R vO OO O XA o o r- S O rH CO On & g to •H :- Cx CO OO • J O^^-JD J C— _^0O C*- fA CM OS CM 0- • rH • 3 u •V ^(^ •s -. - If •« vv », n •« 1 •» O •s CM S a) On «9- 0\ Q-3 lA OO O lr\ CM Oi lAlA O lA CM CM CM O XA XA l^ Os r- sO On 5 S pv r-l vO lA r-i C^ r- fA Tl ^ C^ • 00 i-l m M -3 XA_3- fA CM r-i MD rH • NO . o U CO s"- > ' ' •I II I r-i ^ MD fA r^ cm";3 c .9. r^ CK \0 rH NO XA CX> CM P- On CM rH r-i o ^ ^ rA o •rt lA r- c\j -3^00 00 rH sO (a NO fA O o< fA r-t (0 T» Q vO p^ • CM CM CO -3 CM r- o< " •H (D -^ •s - -s 1 1 CO rH CM •1 CM •t •, ^ •« ^ 1 1 1 -^ r-i r-i r-i <>i r-l p^ ^5 XA S n 4 :3 f^ ^ rH rH CNJ ' 1 S r^ o sg Q CD fn 51 {^3S;«S r-l P- fA O P- ^^ T3 s vrv r- • rH-^CM CO V\0O rH CM CO r^ sO . CO • +3 o o\ On,H CM CM ,-1 •t «^ -t •. >« 1 1 1 rA rH CM rH r-t •I o r-t * On fA XA OJ •* Os 7 ' to 0) ;3 CO f^ so m r^ CM rr\ xano r^ § f^J OO CO CM rH U\rH rHOO O -atrirH l^r-l •^ •. •« >v n 1 1 1 CM Q vO OJ m Os ^ •rl O OJ n OO • -d- On CO ^ « ^ 1 1 1 CM \A oo • On . « \A O 3 o XA OO XA {^ r-i C\i CO ^A CM CM rH CM f^ r-i XA OJ 1 Vi j^ r^ r-i r-< fA 1 ca W CM o NO XACM nO CO On -a ^ O CO CU CO C^OO C5 00 rr\ :! r- On CO V\ r-< CO C^ OJ o < o 0\ • CO rH O ^ ^ ^ I 1 1 H ^ r^^O c^rH OS o . ^ l' to 73 3 ^ r-i lA ^^'^ O CM r^ CM CM rH CM r-i r-i CM XA r-i (0 f3 CO 0) (0 0) •s-f: +3 O to > Cd 0) f O « -P o ■3 s s ■g (0 •rt &s .1 o .. ^ s O "O o (i> n e fi 1 n ^ n 1 IB S. CO 8 1 rH P J3 «iH O O bO t5 o 0) 0) t +> nses: and nance pplie gear ce Btion t and aneou 2 4^) ^ a ■p ID (U c 3 w -P w Oh ^ o U Of a> qj cio-H (H rH oat expe Repairs mainte Boat su yishing Insuran Depreci. Interes License Miscelli r-l rH C •rl £14 o J^ O 1 ,9^ 0) -p P. » C (h r-l OS r-l J 0 - f> « 2 O P B H Eh Eh o. c Pi O o CO 0) •H O M £ P4 O 2 (1) -P o 0) ^v. ^N^ 1 a. o EH m a rHi CMl 189 ■a (B — s v to m t3 -I all Q) 03 •H > O s_3-UN CM -;J UN UN O On r-l <^ UN CM UN rH ^ vO "LA O rH CM CVJ r^ rH ^ MD UwO -3 r^ r-j-l c^ C^^UNCO t— 00-3 CN rH CM Jri O O o o n CO tn -H a, c5 s -3 CO o OnCM rH-3cO OsCM'O COcnUNrHOsrrvOOO UN CM CM CM c^ CM .:3UN_3 t- C^ro OM3 r\ UN Sr^m3 rH rH O r^UN tO M3 M3 UN rH rH UN f«N rH CM VO C— \^ On On UNXAUN O^ -3 On-3 -.1 ., t «^ I CM rH rH CM ^ r-i '^ CKaO-3 O f*N f^U\_3 CM UN ra _3 Ost— Os ONrH CO rH rH _3CMNOr^UN rH On I^_3r^_3rn CM ^O O rH-3 O UN UN " J J c>-> en rH rH rH CM -JOJrHp-CO^SrHON UNUNCTnCmUNUNCMCM rH 0\ ON-3- cm _3 cJ'rH rH rH CM CM ^ en c^ 0\ r- -=} CO en 0-3 rH-3 m CO ONCn O O O M3 ^ rH rH rH U\rH -3 C^UN Q CM n tn fnONrHlAOsNO CM r- m CM C^ CM CO UN •, ^ •» •. I "« CJN rn CM -^ r-t CNJ On^J rr^ r-_ nN O CM NO Q N [^ CJN rH NO O < \S\ rr^ r^ r-i -3 r-l r-i I UNf^NUN UN O O CO UN UNUNrH CM C*N rH ^O GO c^ -3 en f- O rH CO CM On CJnUNUN CN •\ •^ •! •» I CM CM rH rH O rH CM UN UN r~i ~3 CM NO QUN p- CM rH On-3 O moo ■t •\ at as •\ I (■^ r-< r-i r-i r-< CO-3 rncO Or ti (tf _ 3 ^0 S -H -p n c; 0) o 5 H. 3 ^ 2 X CD -p s o> to (uiO'. .. -,_..- _ - p^cflnJionD^-pom ■pa>Bo-Hc;a)CTisl to a) rH 0) n rH ti d IS 0) » ■ CM CM rH -3 t- CO m NO CN UN CM <0 o Eh NO S^ C^ M3 XA C— {^ ^O rH CM CO O • CM UN 00 -3 CN r-i ^ UN I UN -3 O Us .3 2 i? 7 .3 r^ r-i t-- p- p- o CM m O • M3 . •> O - -3 -3-3 CM I rH m t^ O CM rr\ t~. o • •> O CM _3 CM On UN 00 t— CO On [~- MD O • « \A O -3 a> Or & ^ t O 2 I ■p I CM m TJ ^ 0) •H t3 to vH P. > 4) -5 fj -a -p m (U 43 c o. •H CM 0) -~^ o "2 * u c O iH rH XI © +3 T3 to & 0) a) -rt 10 (h O B CO CO "H CO ^ XI to CM <» X ^^ to O M rH Q O 3 OJ CM tH C -H H •rj t^ n 4J O T3 -P B" P I" •H O bi) to ^ O nJ - "■ >^ 190 TABLE IV - 28. —AVERAGE COST OF PRODUCTION AND OPERATING PROFIT AND LOSS OF TYPICAL SHRIMP VESSEI5 1952, 1953 AND 19Sh Region I Region II Region III Region IV Item 9 vessels 1/ 2 vessels 12 vessels 13 vessels 1953 1951; 1952 1953 195U 1952 1953 I95ii "l952 1953 195U ( Cents per pound ) Gross receipts 62.30 1^7.27 62.80 62.37 1^6.16 1^1. 1^7 50.6o 36.79 50.06 60.68 lil.61i Costs of production 1+8.07 14;. 76 1+0.60 US.Ol; 50.99 33.05 1;0.21 30.35 la.05 1+7.00 1+1.25 Profit or loss 11+.23 2.51 22.20 11+.33 -1;.83 8.1+2 10.39 6.1+1+ 9.01 13.68 .39 1/ Data for 1952 insufficient for comparison. Note: Table covers only vessels for which complete information for the three years was furnished. The break-even analysis in a later section of this chapter, in addition to showing data for the operations for which complete inforriiation is available for tliree years, includes summaries for all operations in the Federal Trade Commssion sample. When details for indi\'idual operations are coi.pared, vd.de vari- ations in cost of production are noted. In 195U production costs in Region I ranged from 15. 9U cents per pound of shrirp taken for one (der- ation in the Carolinas (Vessel B) to 65.70 cents per pound for a vessel operating out of Brunswick, Georgia (Vessel I) (see table IV - 18). The two operations, one s. lowing a profit, the other one a loss, were among the smaller in the sajnple with catches of 8,581+ and 5,927 pounds of shripp (heads-off) and total expenses of $1,368 and ^^3,891+ respectively, for the year. Size of catch, the same table shows, varied substantially from vessel to vessel ranging from as low as l,52l+ pounds for an owner-skip- pered vessel in the Carolinas (Vessel A ) to 39,377 pounds for a Thunder- bolt, Georgia, operation (Vessel D) . Catches of individual vessels in other regions during the same year (195M were as high as 63,1+07 pounds on the west coast of Florida, Region II (see Vessel A, table IV - 21) j 57,225 pounds in the northern Gulf, Region III (see Vessel J, table IV - 21+) J and 95,392 pounds in Texas, Region IV (see Vessel M, table TJ - 27). As indicated by table IV-28, there was a marked similarity in the fluctuations of fjross receipts, costs, and profits in Region III (Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana) and Region IV (Texas) over the three-year period. The year 1953 saw a steep rise in the price received for the catch, amoimting to about 20 percent in each of the two areas. This boost in prices was more than eradicated during the drastic decline in the market in 1951;, when average receipts in the two areas amounted to about 36-1/2 and Ul-l/2 cents, respectively. Profits fluctuated in corresponding fashion. The fluctuations in costs were somewhat less pronounced than the fluctuations in receipts which accounts for the poor profit showing in 1951;, particularly in Texas (Region IV) where most operators barely broke even. Results of operations in Region I (south Atlantic) and II (west coast of Florida) apparently did not differ substantially from those in the other two regions; the pattern here, though, is somewhat less clear 191 ■because of the limited amount of information available for these two areas. 17/ In Region II, costs failed to recede with prices in 195^, resulting in heavy losses to the operators. It is possible that the two vessels for which comparable data are available for the three years are not sufficiently representative of operations in this area. More- over, the data may show that these operations which involve loOti^er trips and are substantially more costly, are particvilarly vulnerable during periods of market depression, A region by region comparison of the data reveals at a glance that Rsgion III enjoys a significant cost advantage over the others. This advantage is offset to a large extent by the lower prices received by the fishermen. The fact that a large proportion of the catch in this area is made up of the smaller shrimp used by canning and drying plants explains this difference in average receipts. This is demonstrated by table IV- 29 which contains a detailed comparison of the elements of costs in the four regions. In the above classification of costs, a distinction is made between trip and boat expenses. Trip expenses, in connection with boat operations, rouglily correspond to the term commonly referred to in manu- facturing coat statements as direct or variable expenses, i.e. costs which vary in direct proportion with operations. Boat expenses in con- trast, would be equivalent to indirect or fixed expenses of production, i.e. costs which cannot be controlled in the short run. Region III, table IV-29, shows a cost advantage, both with respect to trip and boat expenses. The lower boat expenses are easily ex- plained in terms of the shorter distance to fishing grounds of ports in Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana. The cost of insurance per pound of shrimp taken in Region III in 1954 was less than one cent as compared to approximately two cents in Regions I and IV, and over three cents in Region II. The more modest investment in boat and the lesser hazards and lesser wear and tear on fixed capital, characteristic of inshore operations, is reflected in lower interest and depreciation costs. 17/ No usable data \-jere collected for the year 19^2 in Region I. In Region II complete information for all three years could be obtained only for two vessels. 192 ci o •si, O On r-l S tA OS r-i i M E-t f-5 W CO o m H Q) 0) (Q 0) t> CA H (0 M r-l H dJ d (0 o a> u ** H ra C « O CO •H vCM CACM -d^ CM Os CA O XA-CJ r-l • ••••••• _^^ rH CM CA H ■LACMrH<»0sOr~00 OrA-^CJsCAvOcAlA CACM H CA CM OssO CNt^CNCACM MDCACOCOIAOCACN • ••••••• ^ r-i rA r^^ vOlAcACArH CACJsrH rH-=J-OC?s-Cfc^cACN • ••••••• CO rH CM rH CA S CA O CN C^ • • CJs r— rH -:* CM ■LA CM O • * r-i i^ -=t lA r-i CA • • o o rH CA CO rH CA CM • • rA o r-i -d -=t XA O o • • CM CA rH CA s C>x Os • • O o CVJ ■LA _::f -:}• H O • • CO CO rH -=t O o r~ so • • CA o H -:d- C~- vo SO C— « • C- _:3- rH -^ r-i t— SO O • • CO CO H -d- CO CO -P CO •• :i P. 0) a) n^ a _^ rl -p m TJ O •H CO (o'dO'Hnj o "do til CO Q> CO C W, 0) U 0) 0) C C rH 0) -rl C n) cgaJ^[!P^t^O'D+> roC rt a Ph (J nJ -p «I o Q) ss, CO C CO rt •r) a> ei ■P CO c ^ CO (0 t\J W)TJ -H rH c a U r4 •rl O (i> o -p ^ •p -g r-i a ,-i O O O CO (U 0, o c, o to E-< pi< rt tfl fc) to P< -P t) 10 +i a> E^ o -rH d C -H .jj o H o o Oh U •H O en o M ts 0) o1 o 193 Thore is an explanation for tho differential in trip exjjensQS wliich is found in Toxas oparationa (Region IV). Tho explanation is a si:nplo one. Tho principal elomont of trip oxponae is crow wages. The low crow wajos in Regions III and IV, the principal reason for tho lov/or trip costs in those areas, are explained, thareforo, in tonus of the smaller proceeds from catch. Tho smallor proceeds are accounted for in part by the higher co\mt slu'iiiip constituting a largo proportion of the Louisiana (Region III) catchos, and by the lower price received for the brown shrimp in Texas (Region IV) • VJhen the individual elenienta of cost are related to total costs it becomes apparent that tho proportion of trip to vessel ex- penses in tho sample of operations surveyed remained relatively con- stant from year to year and region to region. Trip expenses account for approximately tliree-fifths, and vessel expenses two-fifths, of total expenses. Crew wages, the most important single element of cost, accounted for 3D to hi cents of every expense dollar, tho corresponding rango for operations in Regions III and IV (for which mora complete data woro available) was considerably smaller, i.e., 33 to hO cents. Fuel costs, ranlcing naxt in importance amorig trip expenses, represented from 7 to over l6 cents of each dollar of expense. Repairs and maintenance £ind vessel depreciation were the biggest vessel expense items, account- ing for Ik to 25 cents of every expense dollar. Motor Boats ■ ■ I III II itiiii ■ Tables IV - 30 through IV - 38 show gross receipts, cost of production and operating profit (or loss) for the Federal Trade Cohw mission sample of shrimp motor boat operations in the South Atlantic and Gulf States for the years 1952, 1953, and 19514. Production costs for motor boat operations showed a fair de-» greo of unifoi*fflity. On the basis of data for the year 195i», the only year for which comparable data for all regions are available, costs in Region I appeared to exceed costs in the other three regions (sea su)taary - table IV - 39), The unfavorable rosxxlts of operations in 1951i in all regions must be blamed on the severe price decline in tha market for rav/ shrirap« The motor boats in tables IV - 30 through IV - 38 are identified by numbers. However not all the motor boats surveyed by the Federal Trade Commission furnished data which could be used for analysis. 19h TABLE IV - 30.— I95ii COST OF PilODUGTION AND PROFIT AND LOSS - ATLANTIC COAST MOTOR BOATS, REGION I Item Motor boats Total 6 motor boats Wel£-hte. average 1 • 2 3 \x 5 6 ( cents per nound ) Pounds of shrimp caught (hoads-off ucight) 1,206 5,127 6,101; 2,93li 3,717 3,156 22, 2 W; Gro;:js receipts Cents per pound $337 27. 9U $1,719 33.53 $1,526 25.00 $968 32.99 $1,227 33.01 %999 31.65 $6,776 30.1,6 Trip expenses: Crew uagos 1/ leo (2) 565 393 636 636 II18 2,378 10.69 Fuel packing and unloading Gi'oceriea iliGcellanoous 150 221 mm 3U8 215 273 li03 "150 1,610 150 7.2li .67 Total trip expenses i5o 786 7iil 851 909 701 14,138 18.60 joat expenses: Repairs and maintenance Boat supplies Flfjhing gear Insurance Dapi-eciaticn Interest lie ens o and tax Miscellaneous 200 120 25 121 5i4 203 296 790 369 150 27 91 28 160 170 19 63 18 137 176 19 115 100 33 9$9 100 500 296 1,506 123 I1.31 .145 2.25 1.33 6.77 Total boat expenses yu^ \yh(k 5U6 i;68 lil3 2ii8 3,m 15.66 Total expense Cents per pound i495 111. Oil 2,250 li3.89 1,287 21.08 1,319 1,322 35.57 Sh3 30.07 7,622 3li.26 'et profit or loss Cents par pound t -158 -13.10 -531 -10.36 239 3.92 . -351 -11.96 -9$ -2.56 50 1.58 -81(6 -3.80 -/ Data were not obtained to show basis of crew wages paid to helpers on these owner-operated motor boats. \j Ouiier operated; no crew employed. 195 TADIJ2 IV - 31,-19^3 COST OF PRODUCTION AMD PROFIT AUD LOSS - FLORIDA WEST CO/vST MOTOR BOATS, IffiGIOH II Motor boats . Total V/eifhted Item <*V ^.-1 c i/t; 2 ( cents 1 7 8 motor por boats pound) Poimda of shrimp caught (heads- off weight) U7,930 23,iill; 71,3l4ii Gross receipts $11,16U $5,862 $L7,026 Cents per pound 23.29 25.OI4 23.86 Trip expenses: Crew wages 1/ 5,I;78 2,7itO 8,218 11.52 Ice 35^ 2i;2 597 M Fuel 82U h^^ 1,279 1.79 Packing and unloading - - - - Groceries U58 llOO 858 1.20 Miscellaneous - - - - Total trip expenses 7,11^ 3,837 10,952 . 15.35 Boat expenses: Repairs and maintenance 38^ 1;93 878 1.23 Boat supplies 320 317 637 .89 Fishing gear 265 310 575 .81 Insurance - - - > Depreciation 521 U20 9ia 1.32 Interest - - - - License and tax - - - - Miscellaneous - - - - Total boat expenses 1,1491 l,5ii0 3,031 I4.25 Total expense 8,606 5,377 13,983 Cents per pound 17.95 22.97 19.60 Net profit or loss 2,558 1;85 3,0U3 Cents per pound 5.3I4 2.07 I4.26 1/ Basis was to deduct fuel, ice and groceries from gross receipts and divide balance 1/2 to boat and 1/2 to crew. 196 TABLE IV - 32.— 195U COST OF PRODUCTION AND PROFIT AMD LOSS - FLORIDA WEST COAST MOTOR BOATS, REGION II Motor boats Total 2 Weighted average r ^_ -, ^_ 4. ■, Item motor ( cents 7 6 boats per pound ) Pounds of shrirap caught (heads-off weight) 29,735 25,255 51i,990 Gross receipts $5,882 $5,157 $11,039 Cents per pound 19.78 20.1;2 20.08 Trip expenses: Crew wages 1/ 2,335 2,030 li,365 7.9U Ice 275 317 592 1.08 Fuel 868 7I4I 1,609 2.92 Packing and unloading - - - - Groceries U80 S69 1,0U9 1.91 Miscellaneous - - - - Toteil trip expenses 3,958 3,657 7,615 13.85 Boat ejrpenses: Repairs and maintenance 632 581 1,213 2.21 Boat supplies 1+50 35U 80I+ I.I46 Fishing gear ii36 3U5 781 1.1|2 Insurance . . . . Depreciation 521 1+20 9ia 1.71 Interest . • 216 307 1,159 2.23 Fishing gear 506 637 100 208 302 1.753 3.38 Insvirance — — - - 74 74 .14 Depreciation - - 300 58 516 874 1.68 Interest - - - - - - - License and tax — - - - - - - Miscellaneous 55 55 22 164 122 418 .81 Total "boat expenses 1,401 1,418 647 1,100 1,573 6,139 11.83 Total expense 2.035 2.267 3.356 3,220 3.438 14,316 Cents per poimd 134.50 75.09 19.23 22.94 21.67 27.59 Net profit or loss -1.557 -1,283 2,611 893 2,130 2,794 Cents per pound -102.91 -42.50 14.96 6.36 13.42 5.38 200 TABLE IV - 36.— 1952 COST OF PRODUCTION A^JD PROFIT Am I.JOCS - TEXAS MOTOR BOATS, REGION IV Motor boats Total 2 VJeightod average ( cents Item motor 21; 27 boats per pound ) Pounds of ohrlnip caught (heads- off weight) 6,992 i2,ai 19,1^03 Groos receipts $2,566 $li,555 $7,121 Cento per pound 36.70 36.70 36.70 Tr*lp expenses: Crew wages (1) (1) - — Ice 52 I18 100 .51 Fuel 375 259 63U 3.27 Packing and vuiloading - - - - Groceries 52 155 207 1.07 Miscellaneous - - - - Total trip expenses U79 Ii62 9ia it.85 Boat expenses: Repaii^ and niaintonance 367 560 927 h.lS Boat supplies 282 - 282 l.ii5 Fi;;hing gear - - - - Insurance ^ •• > •• D3pr<2ciation I4OO 1*50 850 U.38 Interest - • • > License and tax - - • . liiscellaneous 26 37 63 .32 Total boat expenses 1,075 l,0ii7 2,122 10.93 Total expense 1,55U 1,509 3,063 Cents per pound 22.23 12.16 15.78 Net profit or loss 1.012 lli.l47 3.0U6 2L5U U,058 CentiS per pound 20.92 1/ Ovmer -operated; no crew employ .id. 201 TABLE IV - 3Z— 1953 COST OI'" PRODUCTION AND FP.OFIT AMD LOSS - TEXAS MOTOR BOATS, REGION IV Motor boats Total V/eighted Item 2 Sl)tc>^*x\ cr'Tt 2ii ot Kjotor *^¥ \.f± ^"^ £5 CJ ( cents 27 boats por T)ou nr] ] Pounda of shrimp cau^t (heada-off wei^t) 7,351 12,687 20,038 Gross receipts $2,698 $5,087 $7,785 Gents per pound 36.70 lo.io 38.85 Trip ejcpenses: Crew wages (1) (1) . w Ice la nil 155 .77 Fuel 338 lai 7l;9 3. 71; Packing and unloading - - - . Groceries > 18U 181; .92 Miscellaneous - - am Total trip expenses 379 709 1,088 5.i»3 Boat expenses: Repairs and maintenance 279 609 888 1;.1;3 Boat supplies 131 - 131 .65 Fishing gear - - - mm Insurance - - ■B — D;ipraciation Uoo 578 978 1;.88 Interest - 37 37 .19 License and tax 26 - 26 .13 Miscellaneous - •• - Total boat expenses 836 l,22li 2,060 10.28 Total expense 1,215 1,933 3,ll;8 Cents per pound 16.53 15.21; 15.71 Net profit or loss 1,W3 3,151; 1;,637 Cents per pound 20.17 21;. 86 23.11; 1/ Otmer- operated J no crew employed. 202 TABLE IV - 38.— 195ii COST OF PRODUCTION AND PROFIT AND LOSS - TEXAS MOTOR BOATS, REGION IV Motor boats Total Weighted 2 motor average Item C cents 2li 27 boats per pound ) Pounds of shrill^) caught (heads- off weight) 8,930 114,801 23,731 Gross receipts $2,171 $3,508 $5,679 Cents per pound 2li.31 23.70 23.93 Ti*ip expenses: Crew wages (1) (1) . - Ice 1$ 77 92 .39 Fuel 131 197 328 1.38 Packing and unloading - - - - Groceries 80 9k llh .73 Miscellaneous 3 - 3 .01 Total trip expenses 229 368 597 2.51 Boat expenses: Repairs and maintenance 265 h32 697 2.9li Boat supplies 83 - 83 ,3$ Fishing gear - - - ~ Insurance - „ . • Depreciation 571 li5o 1,021 U.30 Interest - . - •• License and tax • . . _ tm Miscellaneous 97 26 123 .52 Total boat expenses 1,016 908 l,92ii 8.11 Total expense l,2l45 1,276 2,521 Cents per pound 13.91+ 8.62 10.62 Net profit or loss 926 2,232 3,158 Cents per pound 10.37 15.08 13.31 1/ Owner- operated i no crew eit5)loyed. 203 TABLE IV - 39.— AV1:HAGE COST OF PRODUCTION MD OPEBATIWG PROFIT AMD LOSS OF TYPICAL MOTOR iOAT OPERATIONS, 1952, 1953 AMD l95^^ Costs Ret^ion I Re,^ion II Region III Refjion IV 195'+ 1953 195^ 1952 1953 195^ 1952 1953 195ii (Cents per pound) Gross receipts 30>6 23.86 20.08 32.98 42.35 32.97 36.70 38.85 23.93 Cost of produc- tion 34.26 19.60 20.65 25.44 28.65 27.59 1/15.78 1/15.71 1/10.62 Profit (or 1088) -3.80 4.26 -.57 7.54 13.70 5.38 1/20.92 1/23.14 1/13.31 1/ Crew wages not included since boats were owner-operated. Data conse- quently not conrparalDle v/ith those of other threo regions. Two additional B3gion IV motor boats for which 1954 data veve available, and which were not owner-operated, operated at a loss. Motor boat receipts were considerably below those of the large vessels for corresponding regions and years. The smaller radius of operations and the smaller and less valuable shrimp caught by motor boats in all probability account for this difference, VJhen measured in cents per pound of shrimp taken, trip ex- penses of motor boats are substantilly lower than those of vessels. The big differential in trip costs is accounted for by low crew wages. Many of the motor boat operations are conducted by one man. Where a helper is taken on, his wages under the lay system of compensation depend on boat receipts vjhich are lower in the case of motor boats than in the case of vessels. Aside from crew wages, trip expenses of motor boats are lower because of smaller fuel and ice consumption. Average grocery expenses appear larger since the grocery purchases of the owner-operator show up on his operating statements in contrast to the practice on craft manned by hired labor vjhere the crev/ pays for its food. By components of cost the motor boat expenses were distributed as follows: (see table IV - 40) 204 TABLE IV - IjO.— AVERAGE COST OF PRODUCING SHRIMP, BY ITEFiS OF EXPENSE, TYPICAL MOTOR BOAT OPERATIONS, 19^2, 19B3, AND 19% Region I 6 motor Regi 2 on II 2 5 Region III 5 5 Region IV 2 2 2 Costs boats motor motor motor motor motor motor motor moto boats boats boats boats boats boats boats boat 195U 1953 l9Sk 1952 1953 1951i 1952 u n d 1953 ) 195 ( C e n t s per p o Trip expenses: Crew wages 10.69 11.52 7.9h 7.66 9.69 5.10 (1) (1) (1) Ico - M 1.08 1.91 2.18 2.68 .51 .77 .3 Fuel 7.2U 1.79 2.92 3.67 3.95 li. 80 3.27 3.7I1 1.3( Packing and unloading - ~ - _ _ ^ ^ _ Groceries .67 1.20 1.91 2.91 3.06 3.18 1.07 .92 .7 Miscellaneous - - - - - .0] Total trip expenses 18.60 15.35 13.85 16.15 18.88 15.76 U.85 5.I43 2.5:] Boat expenses: Repairs and maintenance ii.31 1.23 2.21 2.87 3.57 3.59 U.78 k.h3 2.9i Boat supplies .li5 .89 l.ii6 2,16 2.75 2.23 l.ij5 .65 .35 Fishing gear 2.25 .81 l.Ij2 2.91 1.5ii 3.38 Insurance 1.33 - - - .11* ^ ^ _ Depreciation 6.77 1.32 1.71 1.15 l.lj2 1.68 h.3Q U.88 h.3i Interest - - - . •• «• .19 License and tax .$B «• .. „ ^ ^, _ .13 Miscellaneous - - .. .20 M .81 .32 • *-^ '52 Total boat expenses 15.66 Ii.25 6.80 9.29 9.77 11.83 10.93 10.28 8.11 Total expense 3U.26 19.60 20.65 2$M 28.65 27.59 15.78 15.71 10.62 1/ Crew wages not included since boats were ovmer-operated. Data consequently ai'e not comparable with those of other regions. 205 Boat oxpcnrsoa, item by item, arc louor on motor boata than on vessels. Intarest costs, iriLth ono exception, do not appear on tho motor boat cost svuc.iaiy. IJlijthor this is thD result of tho rela- tively modest capital investment roquirod (cost at acquisition of motor boats on tho Federal Trade Coimiiission tabulations ranging from ^1,000 to .,'3,500 fully equipped) which can bo mot by th3 ovmor himself or stems from a roluctanco on the part of lending agencies to ox^tond credit for tho acquisition of those craft, could not be detoiTnincd* Co!Rparison Bot;j3on Iced and _Fg:^3ror Vercals Among the vessels in Region II ('.^est coast of Florida), for which 19^h coct imormation was obtained^ \rs3 one unit -trhich had a freezer installation on board. V/hile this vessel sustained a net loss during this year of depressed prices (data for other years x/ould have to be gathered before the cconomcs of this type of operation can be properly assessed) the data permit a rough comparison with the operations of iced vessels fishing out of the same ports and making the Cai.peche trip. Tha flreezor vossol not only was ablo to obtain a better price for its catch but also managed to savo on trip e^qpensoa as com- pared to the iced vessels. In contrast to those advantages is the svib- stantially greater depreciation charge in the case of the freezer vessel. This amounted to over lU conta par pound, nearly three times the amount charged off annually to iced vessels. INDIVIDUAL ELEMENTS OF FISHING COSTS Trends in cost can be observed most readily by a comparison of average total costs. In order to identify the areas where economies may be offoctod, the average total cost must be broken dovn into ita individual coinponents* There is littJ.e that can be dona to effect savings in tho short run as far as certain areas of cost are concerned. In other fields prospects for cost cutting are brighter. A thoroxigh examination of tho variables having a bearing on the matjoitude of individual elements of cost is required before these fields can be discovered* Thus, a study of fuel costs will lead to an evaluation of engine efficiency. A discussion of icing costs will involve a study of hold insulation. Sources of credit and financing probleans have to be considered in connection with interest expense. A thorough analysis of these and other factors affecting individual elements of fishing costs would lead beyond the scope of this report. It will suffice to point out here the principal considerations in a study of cost economies* 206 Proceedo frcm catch axe affected by vhether or not heading io done on board chip. In soae locatione on the south Atlontic and in the northern Gulf ax'ea vhere shriiEp are landed hco.ds-on, a fixed charcG ic deducted from the price paid to the fisherman. Cre'.r \Jo,fr,eB ■ •" I ■■ Crew xTOges depend on the method of ccmjiencation prevailing locally. The principal methods of paying vessel labor were dlocuBsed in Chapter III - Agents of Production. Ifliere tho ouner operates his o^m vessel vithout crexr, as in t'.ro oporatlons in the Carolinao surveyed by the Federal Trade Coarmission, the D.iovint othenilce paid in T/ages to captain end crew accrues to the o'.;Ti[or-oii orator. In one instance, the OTmer-oporator netted from $1,500 to :1a, 6bo in both 1952 end 1953> hut differed a net loss of $60 in 195^ TvhGn his catcbaa \rere consistently very low. On the basis of the data for this operation, it ^rould cijipoor that low productivity vaa respon- sible for the failixre to attain a break-even catch. The favorable ro- cnlto of a similar operation in the cvjt.q geographic area imst be cited in contrast, vhere the oimer-opcrator fishing without ci-ew v;aa able to not j13»126 in 195'^ on a catch over 25 times as large as that of the other o^mor-operator. ^Jiiere the oimer functions as captain and hires a crew, the net profit froju operations includes whatever amount a hired captain \ro\ild I'ocoive as ccap^naation. Individual otmer- captains fared dif- fci'cntly in various locations, no tusro operations \?ere c:cactly cciispar- ablo. In 195'»' ac^^o owner-captains suffered fairly substantial losses while others iiionasod to net in excess of $10,000. V/agos of hired crctr Kwiboro varied considerably depending upon the nature of the lay syst.ziii, the nutiber of ficherasn etsployed on the vessel, and the cuccCiDO of oiJerations. Total annual Gariilngs of the crew mtiabers frca the tihrinip fishery in I95U, in soaie instances, were below $1,000 and at the other limit of the range, as hig^ as $5,000. Fac'l, IcG and Groceries FucjI and ice coots, to a varying de£p:'ee, are borne by both boat oiaiors and creit. Cost of ice, more frequently than not, is split between boat owner and crew, \jhile costs of groceries, for the most 207 part, are borne "by the crew. Deviationo from these practiccc, however, are coitimon. In Alabama and Mississippi fuel and groceries are often deducted from receipts before the distribution of shares to the boat and ci'ew is nade. In Morgan City, Louisiana., gross receipts, in some operations, are split between boat and crew, the crev; paying for all groceries and for one-half of the ice costs. Some crev/s opei-ating out of Sabine Pass-Crange, Texas, receive one-half of the gross receipts from v;hich all groceries and one-half of both ice and net repair costs are deducted. As reported by the Bureau of Business and Economic Hosearch of the University of Miami, fuel and ice costs were fairly imifonn in some sections of the Gulf coast at the time the B\n'eau's survey v/as made. In Texas ice costs in the summer of 1955 averaged around $7.50 per ton loaded and fuel varied in price from 11 cents to 13 cents per gallon. Ice costs here were high compared with Tampa, Florida, where they v/ere $5.50 per ton and Mississippi where they were $7,00 per ton. Fuel costs elsewhere v;ere either about the same (Tampa: 11.5 cents per gallon) or higher (Mississippi: 14.9 cents). Some boat operators Xirere able to secure discounts on these items by purchasing through the fleet with which they were affiliated. Costs were slightly lov:er in the more active southern ports than they v;ere farther north. Small local vessels, according to Harwell, Knovdes and Associates, have fuel capacities from 250 to 600 gallons and ice capa- cities from 3 to 10 tons. The smaller of the off-shore vessels can load 600 to 1,000 gallons of fuel and 7 to 12 tons of ice. The larger Canpeche type vessels have capacities of 2,500 to 11,000 gallons of fuel and 28 to 50 tons of ice. Fuel, water, and ice capacities of shrimp vessels in the south Atlantic and Gulf region surveyed by Harwell, Knovjles and Associates are sha^rn in table IV - Ul. TABLE IV - l|l.~I-IAXIMroi LOAD CAPACITY OF FUEL, WATER, AND ICE. SAMPLE OF I4O SHRTi^P VESSEI5, SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULF STATES, 195U Type of hull and 3sel C A P A C I T Y length of ve; Fuel Ice Water (Feet) (Gallons) (Tons) (Gallons) WOODEN 3O-U7 250- 600 3-10 20- 150 l;8-55 600- 1,000 7-12 50- 150 56-62 700- 3,000 10-20 150- 350 63-69 2,500- 6,000 28-I4O ca. i|00 70-80 3,000- 9,000 36-ij5 ca. 900 81 8,000 (1) (1) 96 10,000 50 (1) STEEL 6U 9,000 liO 2,200 70 10,000-11,000 50 1,000 1/ Not available. 200 An attempt was made to correlate length of vessel, type of en^^ine, and horsepov/er with quantity of fuel used per fishing day, quantity used annually, and quantity used per pound of shrimp taken. The tabtdationg for the limited data available are sliov/n belov/. TABLE IV - 42.— AVJiJMGS ITUlffiSR OF GALLONS OF FUEL USED Ai\Il«JALLY, PER FISHING DAY AND PZR POUND OF SHHII.5P TAKEN, BY LEl^IGTH OF VESSEL, SELECTED SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULF STATES SHRIWP FESSELS, I95Z1. Vessel length (feet) Number of vessels Average gallons used annually Average gallons per fishing day Average gallons per pound of shrimp caught k2-i^6 1 12,254 61.9 .33 ^7-51 4 12.531 59.1 .31 52-56 2 12,786 55.0 .29 57-61 2 15.960 66.8 .30 62-66 1 27,^58 131.^ A3 67-71 k 27,243 121.8 .3^ TABLE IV - 43.~AVEHAGE NUl>fflER OF GALLONS OF FUEL USED ANNUALLY, PER FISHING DAY AND PER POUND OF SHRIMP TAKEN, BY TYPE OP ENGINE AND HORSEPOWER, SELECTED SOUTH ATLANTIC AND GULP STATES SHRIMP VESSELS, 1954 Type of Nxuaber Average Ave rage Average gallons engine and of gallons used gallons per per poirnd of horsepower vessels annually fishing day shrimp caught Diesel 77 1 10,780 42.4 .23 83 1 8,551 41.9 .22 100 1 14,792 65.4 .35 no 2 12,447 56.6 .32 120 5 24,252 110.0 .36 165 3 14,940 69.2 .3^ 170 1 31.198 125.3 .30 209 I I u o u (0 J3 r^ Cl. CO • .2 M U S o d) CD DU T3 a C3 3 ti o I E o O 0) 0> •> t) 0) :;^d:;1 J3 ■p Q> g> -tJ -p -p Q, " f, f, ti t, t, i^ o o o o o S Eh f-i Eh e< e-1 O r- U\\A ro C\J -:J 03 fn fn m r»^ <*^ r^ CsJ >Hh CJ -^-d- On C^ CO CO NO r- lA f-1 CO -J- a? O-USvO O vO r^ O On 'n 00 -::t r- O CJ \0 -J^ C— CM CO -:t ^ \0 CVJ_3 OJ \A O^GO m m m m m mm CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CM Cy OJ OJ lAlAlA ■O NO \0 ^ ^ ^ ^ \A O Q XAVMA O NO rH O NO vO NO CVJ 0) tl) 0) \ CO r^cO iA .3 O t^XTv nnn; _3 r^ CM \A On ^ ^ ^ rH i-i r-i i-l ,3_3 r-»U\ • • • • .3VO-3.3 lArH CM CN CM I— OO CM -aiA-^-iJ r-j r^_3 O H c^r^ rH « Ov CM >0 rH.3 CM (H nj M --s « (Q n PQ PQ ■H U\3 CM ■O a 8: lAvO VNlrv a CD IQ Eh •rl * CO CO O O C-rr, ^ ■id rH CM t~-CX) rH rH d if 1 o rH rH r-t r-t g d 0) 0) ® 0) 3^r^(»^ O O rH -3 m rri rr>-^ >1 0\-3 Os en r^oo C~rH IA.3VA-3 rr> ^'^ rH rH CM O rH rH rH rH rH CM t^OO CM moo Q rH 1A CM en Cys Q t^_3 0O CM rH O in a^ •« *l •> ^ u\ r— r--3 rH t~ CM CM CM CM m rH h pB« h h ^ &4 VO NO ^ NO ^ O OO CO OO CO GO rH O O O O O O CM CM CM CM r- rr» rH rH rH rH rH fTi rH rH rH rH rH rH 0) 0} 0> 0) 0) 0) n Q 00 CO n n ^ 0 0} a> 0) 0) ^ 0\ 0\ On 0\ On oncm r- c*--d' CM ■^ CO c^ t*- r* On Xf\ CN On cy\ r- O CO CO r- r- On Ov r^ <-t r^ rH i-i rH On cm \AXAqO On On-iU On ON-JtND IAIAUMAnOnO CM CM CM CM r^r^ »j E e o 0. cy o o •p p. a> cd B X> o I o • ■rl rH -tl E H CO 01 A Ei! >.^ 210 Details for individual operations as vfell as for different home ports ore shown in table IV - I4J4. Vesoels ranging froia 1,0 to 60 feet in length on the average consvaaed between 12,000 and l6,000 gallons of fuel annually. Average consumption per hour at sea, according to the figures per 12-hour fish- ing day shown in the tahle, was approziiiiately five gallons for these vesoels. Per pound of shriEjp tolccn, fuel coneumption averaged close to one third of a gallon. The vessel in excess of 60 feet in length con- sumed on the average over 27,000 gallons of fuel annually 6uid at least 10 gallons per hour at sea. In terms of the number of pounds of shrimp taken, fuel consumption of the larger vessels, except In one instance, did not differ appreciably froa that of the smaller vessels. Engines vlth less than 100 horsepower were significantly more econcmlcal than the larger engines. Two of these emaller engines had an average annual consumption of fuel of about 10,000 gallons and an hourly consvjoption of less than four gallons. ConouEiption par poxmd of shrimp taken, in these operations, was slightly more than one- fifth of a gallon. The average consumption of fuel of the bigger installations was appre- ciably higher, with 120-and I70- horsepower engines averaging approximate- ly ten gallons per hour. Three 165-horsepower engines of a different make fraa the other more poijorful engines were considerably more econom- ical, consuming on the average lees than six gallons per hour. If it is assumed that the average cost of fuel at the time the cuirvey was made, was between 11 and 13 cents per gallon, total annual fuel costs of the vescelo making up the eeiuple includod in the t\JO tabulations above ranged anyvhere frcai about $1,000 to $l|-,000. Since the number of couple observations was considerably larger in the Federal Trade CoiLmission study than in the Han/ell, Knowles and Asso- ciates survey, the range of total annual fuel costs was consequently- wider. The amovmt of Ice required to maintain a certain sttindard of quality depends on numerous factors, oinong which are the material used in the construction of the vescel (wood or steel), the capacity of the hold, the material used for the Inculation of the hold, the time of the year, the size of the catch, and the type of ice used for chilling. Among other factors, the length of time which the shrinip Is to be stored in the vessel's hold will dstenmine the ©Mount of ice that must be carried. In Louisiana, the lugger-type vessel which shrimps for eight or ten hours occasionally carries no ice at all. In such case the Bhrlmp are protected by an axming which is spread over the vessel's deck. Trips to Campeche require that the vessel carry 30 or more tons of ice. Total annual consumption of Ice on vessels for which data were obtained by Harwell, Knoxrlec and Aasociates ranged from I69.5 tons for one vessel with a 7-ton hold capacity operating out of 211 Biloxl, IliGaicclppi, to U32.6 tono for a vecsel \d.th a 37 -ton hold capacity oporating out of Broimevllle, Texao. Concur^ption vaa lo-^?c;st durln3 tlio January-April period and vas highast during the montha of May through August. Ice concuiption of Biloxi, lliGDisoiijpi, veccels which rani^ed frcin 6.h to 7t9 pounds of ice per pound of ahritjp vas lowest daring the cuisner months, in terns of pounds of shriJip caught, because of the loree quantity of shriiirp landed then. In the oi_ue period Key West, Florida, vessels and vessels operating out of T^xas i>ortQ used from 10. 5 to l3eO pounds of ice per pound of ehriiaji caught. Variations in consump- tion bot^reen individual vessels are shown in table IV-14-5* Vessels with insulated holds are substantially more economical in their consumption of ice than uninsulated vessels. (s2e table IV - k$) A preference ^?as expressed by scce vessel owners for focm plastic as insulating material. On the basis of their observations Horu-ell, Knowles and Associates Ends the following reccniinendQtions with respect to icing and insulating methods: (1) Avoid insulating material that is likely to crumble and form voids when adjacent to ribs, (2) Reduce vapor and condJictivity by putting two layers of 30-pound asphalted felt on hull and bulwarks . (3) Seems formed by Insulating material slabs should overlap to avoid air gaps. (U) The slabs should be secured to each other \rith an adhe- sive such as hot tar, or other suitable ccupound, rather than by nails driven into the hull planlcing. (5) It is important that a proper balance be struck bett/aen the need for reduced temperature and the need for the bathing of the Bhrlup in vater from the malting ice. Too heavily Insulated holds will precarve the catch but ^rill result in the forijation of "black spot" on the shrinifp shell since adequate water film will not form to protect the shrimp agaiuat access to oz^gen. Tliree-inch insulation of the hull and four- inch of tlie dock and engine roca bulkhead appears to cpproximate this balance. An additional Inch is recoaHiended for steel hulled vessels. (6) An alternate and perhaps better method of insulation can be etiployed. The insulation in bins can be increased so as to reduce melta^s of ui-jusad stoclcs of frech ice to a mlniraui and provide a vent to let a controlled Eiiiount of vcjcn air into bins vhave shrinp are already iced. This trill psitilt proper bathing of the ehriEp and at the 63ie tliiia conserve ice not in use. Recently, antibiotic ices have been developed which extend the keeping life of shritip foxir to eix days (Ccuber, 1955). The application of such ices to ccciiaercial catches, however, is still barred by Federal Law, 212 E-« -3- ■LA p, Os B rH CO •t ^ Cc < o Eh W •a! O Eh O CO a g g 1^ •a: £2 & i e o K g H H iJ BJ g £ ^ g a o to ■5 s (d o ■S +> 9 CJ 0) "ob s g ■S T3 & §<» ti g -3 o $ 3 ti CI. & O •3 -p ^ »> *-■ -ft O « OB :i o s» O -H O. s s o Eh m « ■2 , "2 Q O ^ C 3 o » 3 & o a •5 o OL, fe-S c o E-> - r— O oj i-H OD o (d CM r-) J 1-1 <^ ' Si O i-ir~eDC\jVAt— c\j-^ • ••••••• OO OvO rnCjN-iJvOVA CN-3vOC\Jt^Or^cy Xrva3r-i 0\cO-3HCM r-ICUCM(VJCMl-ICMCM COOOi-IOtn_3CO _3oo^ O r~-3oooo O ^ (H OO f- * • • • • • • •GOc|]<0 OO CM ^^-:J CM • • • r^^^^^Hr^flflC OO OO Os V^ rH OOr-lrHcH^A • • • v\r^_3^CKa) cd rH rH rH e jc ^ a a a 3 R) 3 3 o o pE« pE4 PC4 0) oipaoaHii^c:)^ t--oo o r- OO OO -O r- p-^ OsCO UN \A-3vO C^ UNO O O rH CNIArH -:J r- c^ t- CNJ -3^vO On rH UN CTn CM C^^UNCO CM r^oO <^ On ■LA O O O 0O-3 CN<-3 OO vO On t^ OO-S CM H -3 0\t-t r-< On NO CM U\ 1^ OO rHVN O OO f^OO UN O O UN Os VArr\UN r^ <^nO rr> C0 0 ol (d (D (V a> S ^ n B •H « O CO cd CO OO CO t— CM • CM CM CM rr^ c VO • r-l r-t r-i a • Cd • • • • NO • r— CO 00 NO a 8. CM r^-3-3 cd rH U\ O CM r^ • O C^ CNI Os «c •>->•>« rr> _:3 rA-3 rA UN CM -3 CAN© C^- OO On O CM ^ OO rArA'UN-:^ rANO CM-S-a^tAC--:* rANO rA 0-:t CM i CNI O us rH <^NJ _ _ ... UN 0-3 rH NO OO _a--:» CA fA CA rA O rH^ OO rH rA t^CM i-t t-O ^ C^UNCM On CM UN rANO CM O O r^ • ••••• rH ("A CM NO CA On CNJ O Q H-3-3^ 0O-3 O oo-d- [^ OU\Un r-CAMD CM CM CA CNJ CM CNI ■UN CM U\ _3 On vO O'LA^Ux CM C^ On CNOs rH CM OO O O m n cd tlD t< Cd Cd c c o i. CO t-l --s « 1^ ■a 0) Oh ti I cd cd 213 (7) Ice 1136(1 for preservation should be made of certified pure de-mineralized water. Metal ions in the ice will assist the forma- tion of black spot. Research by the Marine Laboratory of the University of Miami (-onpublished) has shown that clear ice which was aerated while being frozen contained from two to three times as much oxygen when melted as the non-aerated opaque ice. The latter is recommended and is currently being used by many vessels of the Tampa fleet, (8) Chilling imparted per unit of time is a function of the surface area of the chilling agent and its temperature. The smaller the ice particles, the greater the area in contact with the shrimp. Observa- tions made at the Marine Laboratory indicate that flat ice surfaces are more efficient than round siirfaces in chilling shrimp, Finely crushed ice preserves shrimp for two or three days longer than the larger "rickey" ice particles. In many areas the nightly needs of ice in insulated holds may be supplied by one-ton flake ice machines. Such machines are very compact and are reported in use aboard a number of fishing vessels in Prance. In the domestic fleet such machines would prove particularly useful to the small Atlantic seaboard vessels which, since they rarely fill their hold to capacity, might do with half-ton units. Variations in grocery costs betv/een different operations are explainable in terms of the different agreements for compensating crews. Where the crew buys its own groceries before going out on a trip and the boat ovmer does not share in the cost, no charges for this item will be foxind on the books of the vessel operators. Where receipts are divided after deduction of grocery costs, the boat o\nier assumes at least a portion of the costs. In soma instances, particularly in the case of longer trips involving a considerable outlay for groceries, the boat owner guarantees payment of groceries purchased by the crew. The boat owner under these circumstances assumes at least a contingent liability for the payment. Packing and Unloadin,? Packing and unloading costs are defrayed by the boat owner where these operations are performed by a shrimp plant which does not take title. Where the shrimp plant talces title or where packing and unloading is performed in facilities owned by integrated companies, these costs are not properly chargeable to the boat. Where packing and imload- iig is done on a custom basis for the independent boat owner, the charges made will vary considerably depending on the type of service performed by the shrimp plant. In Mississippi the shrimp plant — at the time the Bu- reau of Business and Economic Research of the University of Miami (1955) made its survey— was receiving 6-1/2 cents per pound of shrimp handled 21I4 for unloading, washing, grading, heading, and readying the shrimp for the freezer. In Alaharaa a charge of k-ljZ cents covered washing and packing costs. In Florida ports, according to the same source, the charges were 3 cents plus 1/2 cent extra for hoats that landed catches of other 'boats. . On the total fee the shrimp plant reportedly realized a net profit averaging one cent. In Texas, shrimp plant charges tended to grow smaller from north to south, t Processing charges which included costs of unloading, washing, grading, and packing for removal hy tnicks, averaged three cents per pound exce-nt in the Brovvnisville-Port Isahel area where they were onlv tvo cents. This difference was accounted ror by the fact that in Browios- ville-Port Isabel the shrimp -worfe iced loose in the removing trucks whereas elsewhere the shrimp were packed, as a rule, in 100-pound boxes. An additional charge of one cent per pound was charged by shrimp plants for trucking to the processing plants. Ordinarily such costs are assxaned by the buyer rather than the boat o>mer. In Brovmsville, Texas, the boat ovmer has to pay a fee of &.00 per day for dock space to the Brownsville Navigation District. (In addition, the raw shrimp plant is charged ^^.00 per foot par month for Traterfront privileges, one percent of catch value per ton \anloaded, and has to pay a fee for fuel and ice loaded over Brownsville docks). The i^arvdces made available to the fisherman at the Brovjnsville facilities were described in Chapter II, page lOii. The foregoing may explain the wide variations in unloading and packing costs collected by the Federal Trade Commission accountants. Baponding on the type of sei'vices perf oiined by the raw shrimp plant and tha quantity of shrimp handled, the total costs incurred by boat owners in 195ij in connection with the packing and unloading of catch ranged fi-oiu comparatively modest amounts to close to $3>500 per boat. Boat Expense The principal items of boat expanse are repairs and mainte- nance, boat supplies, fishing gear, depreciation, interest and insurance. Tho classification of soius of these itci.uj among fixed costs is somewhat arbitraiy. The siao of iri:iintenanc< O CNJ -:J -J tTN CNJ CM at I I I I I I I I I I rn, t I I I loi locni C^ ^% w^ o^ o o o o . CM CM CM CO CM CM %R.W,m >>«.CJV^c^4 % \r\ O cr\ I u\ I CM I I I I M I I I I I OC en I I I I I lOir2.0IXA iH ^"^ CM r^ rH ^^ fn I i I I H CM r-l IrH Hlfnfn OOrH ^^r^r^^^ m r<\ r^ V!.M.%^ ^^^^^^ O O rH _ M (-1 H (-1 rH rH p^ iH OO CO n-\ CM CM •O CM oo-:i gg§ CM iH 1 » rH CM lA CN-:f n-v XA O lAOOOsOOQcor- CM r-QOOOOOCM^O fn rA O O-J O lA C^\A O r-l rH lAOs W-3 O HXA-^ CM rHr-H rHrHf-ICMM OOOOCO Q OCNOOsOOO**>t— _:J r-r-r-QiAQ-:*'^r-rHoor-r^ f^fAoD OXAOIAOcDOcnOJ CK lAlACM OCMrACMCMOOrHf^&N-:? CMCMCMCM (^fAfArHCM rHCM S 1^4 g 11 a O CD O OJ CM tA •. * I CM CO CO CO QO O fA fA fAlA OsO 0\ O Q "A \A O O lA CM OD rH fA CM - O (A r--:t _J CO t^ t^ ^ fA CM On d CD CO CO OO CS -3 ES 88^ NQcMcOola) (4 <0 OlOoVA ■»-»•■ ^.»* ) CM C C C C fl CK'O CM >. >) O C fl^lAONO-^fOcor-rA u 1 u^ ^>d fj\ \.\i p— t\ >UiMlAkiM lAl XAl J3 q, I I I I 01 ni a c3 \A On S0Or-O\XArHOCM r-HCMCMO -ZJ .:J _:J _zf I 1A_^ I tAlAlAlA 0\CKO\0\ONrAOsOs OsCJnOnCTv rH iH rH rH rH XA rH rH r^ r-i rH rH 0\ I I I CN I I I I Os 17s CN 9n I I On I vO O O. O OO O CM _=J XA -^ lA -3 -Ct lA On Os, On Os OS On 0\ OO OO f- CNXArH O CM CM iH • CM O _:}_::j-3_:!j_:jtAlAlAXAXA cd XAIA OnOnOnOnOnOsOnOsOnOn "OiC^ r-ii-ir-\r-ir-ii~*r^r-ii-tr-i C r-t r-l ■3 ?tA: . • • - oO r^CO >_:? a tc to a ta-d^xA-3 OnOnC^ • " • • 'OnOnOn rHrHrH CC C S O i-t r-t r^ 3 -^-d^J-3-d^Xr\_:j_:j t . (jN • "OvCKOnOnOnOnOnOnOn rM a tir-ir^r-i»~ir~tr-ir-ti-{i-i ^_:jZ:r-:t_:jlAii3Sm-LAlA cd XA XA OnO\OnOnOnOnOsOnOnOn •0»0\ r-tr-KrHi-ir^r~lr-ir-ir-i>~i O r-i i~i C o rH rH rH rH f •a On On I-H -NOOe-OOr—rt rHCMCMC^ HrHrHCMrH .rHCMrH a 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I O%(?n0nOsOnCK0nOn r-*r~ir-ir-*r-tr-i<-tf~ir-it-ir~Ar-ir^ I I I I t I I I t I I I I 219 cases where vessel loans are given, not for certain time periods, but on a demand "basis with an arrangement that repayments are to he made in accordance with the owner's income from the vessel, hut not later than 36 months. Most vessel loans in the Gulf States are secured hy a pre- ferred mortgage which is registered at the Custom House where the "boat is registered. Vessels on which loans are given must he covered hy ftill marine insurance. They must also he covered hy protection and indemnity policies. These insurance expenditures are very high. Part of the loan must often he used not only for acquisition of the vessel hut also for the first year's insurance payments. The reasons why the hanks do not extend longer credits are manifold. Among these reasons the following should he mentioned: (1) Commercial hanks can only allow part of their deposits to he used for long term loans because they have received most of the • deposits under the condition that they can be withdrawn by the depositor without notice, (2) Very few banks have enough experience in the fishing business to make the type of loans which are requested for fishing vessels. Reference is made to the woi'ds of W. P. Aberly, vice-presi- dent, Gibbs Corporation, expressed in the November 1953 meeting of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute "... this stringent requirement hy the bankers is the resiilt, not of a lack of confidence in the shrimp industry, but of a lack of knowledge of the industry, its operations, marketing techniques, etc., due in great measiire to the reluctance of the industry to bring the bankers into its confidence." (3) Commercial banks regularly ask for additional security since the boat owner is often iinable to obtain adequate insurance cover- age against loss. In many cases the additional security consists of an endorsement of the note by the construction company which has built the vessel. This company often guarantees the obligation of the fishermen, who bought the vessel and mortgaged it. To date the Maritime Administration (formerly Maritime Com- mission) alone among government agencies has had the power to guarantee payment to commercial banks or other financial institutions which lent money to the fishing industry for the construction of vessels. A statute of June 29, 1936 established the Federal Ship Mortgage Insurance System under which the Maritime Administration was enabled to insure mortgages for construction or reconditioning of fishing vessels. In spite of this opportunity to obtain insurance on loans only a few tuna vessels have qiialified in the past to obtain this protection iinder the Federal Ship Mortgage Insurance Act of 1936. 220 In earlier years the predecessor of the Maritime Administration, the Maritime Commission, was approached several times with the request to insure mort^-ages on shrimp vessels and New England trawlers, but without success. Requests were denied "because of (l) instability of the fishing trade, (2) inadequate standards maintained in the construction of the vessel in question, or (3) exhaustion of the guarantee fund. In the course of a conference called at the request of the industry on January 6, 1955, the Maritime Administration expressed its readiness to insure mortgages given for the construction or recondi- tioning of shrimp vessels. Among the reasons which prompted this de- cision were: (l) shrimp vessels of today are big modern boats, the construction of which involves a substantial investment. They are equipped with modern navigation equipment including radio, loran, depth finders, etc., (2) the experience of commercial banks with the financing of shrimp vessels has been good, (3) there is a distinct need for reconditioning vessels in many instances, (4) modernization of the fleet is considered to be in the national interest. Unfortunately, few vessel owners have taken advantage of the provisions of this plan to date. One of the main reasons for this re- luctance is a feeling that too much red tape is involved in obtaining a guarantee. Nevertheless, a step in the right direction was taken. The most significant consequence of the agreement of Januaiy 1955 was that some shipbuilders as well as some local banks have adopted a five-year repayment plan on loans for shrimp vessels as compared with the previous three-year plan. The enactment of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (70 Stat, 1119) provided another source of loan funds to fishing vessel owners and operators. Under the provisions of Section h (reproduced belovj) of this law, operators of shrimp vessels as well as operators of other fishing craft ought to find it comparatively easy to obtain adequate financing, SEC. 4. (a) The Secretary /of the Interior/ is authorized under rules and regulations and under terms and conditions prescribed by him, to make loans for financing and refinanc- ing of operations, maintenance, replacement, repair, and equipment of fishing gear and vessels, and for research into the basic problems of fisheries, (b) Any loans made under the provisions of this section shall be subject to the following restrictions: (1) Bear an interest rate of not less than 3 per cent\ira per annum; 221 (2) Matvire in not more than ten years; (3) No financial assistance shall "be expended pursuant to this section unless reasonable financial assistance applied for is not otherwise available on reasonable tex*ms, (c) There is hereby created a fisheries loan fund, which shall be used by the Secretary as a revolving fund to make loans for financing and refinancing under this section. Any funds received by the Secretary on or before Jiine 30, 1965, in payment of principal or interest on any loans so made, shall be deposited in the fund and be available for making additional loans under this section. Any funds so received after June 30, I965 (at which time the fund shall cease to exist), shall be covered into tha Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the fund the sum of $10,000,000 to provide initial capital, (d) The Secretary, subject to the specific limitations in this section, may consent to the modification, with respect to the rate of interest, time of payment of any installment of principal, or security, of any loan con- tract to which he is a party. Suppliers of marine equipment and supplies have in the past been notably lenient about granting terms and extending payments. The drastic fall in slirimp prices in 195^. however, forced them to revise their policies, and many are now requiring payment on a strict 30-day basis. This fact is partially responsible for the trend back to fleet affiliation since affiliation often enables the individual fisherman to obtain financial backing from the fleet operator and thus purchase supplies on a term payment basis. Similarly, the position of the marketing cooperative has been strengthened by virtue of its ability to aid the boat owner in times of financial stress. Insurance In order to obtain financing for his boat the boat owner is required by the lending agency to cari-y both hull and protection and indemnity instirance. Insurance of this type is expensive. Hates range from as low as 3-1/2 percent of the value of the boat to as high as 18 percent. The insm-ance company uses varying criteria to determine the rate to be charged for the insurance, among which are age of the vessel, its condition, and type of ownership. Until recently, insurance compa- nies have felt that boats that are fleet-affiliated are less subject to 222 1 loss than are individually owned and operated vesaolo. This hian wan prodicatcd upon the belief that fleets exercise stricter control over the maintenance and repair of the vessels than do individual owners. The hanks, hov;ever, in loaning on vessels, have historically judged the quality of the risk hy the character of the vessel operator rather than hy his affiliation. Mor? recently, insurance companies have tapjen the same attitude. Shrimp "boat insurance at times has teen highly unprofitable to the insurance companies. Many general agencies have ceased writing insurance on such vessels altogether. Losses were particularly high in 195^. There have been rumors in tl:i6 industry connecting this situar- tion with the fact that shrimp industry profits were particularly low in that year. Regardless of their validity, these allegations have had detrT|,m9ntal effects on the ability of fisherman to obtain ins\irance. In point of fact, the follo\tfing observation can be made: the preceding year had been one of abnormally high profits and had attracted many newcomers to the industry. The use of less exi:)erienced crews, in some instances, may have had some bearing on the number of claims filed. Whatever the reasons for it, the abnormally high loss ratio in shrimp vessel insvirance forces premium rates up. Many boat owners do not carry insurance unless they must for purposes of financing. The answer to the insi-irance dilemma is not clear-cut. In- creased emphasis on crew training would imdoubtedly reduce the loss ratio and result in a lovrering of premium rates. The introduction of a nev; typo of policy written especially for shrimp boats v;ould also be beneficial, since existing marine insvirance policies fail to take into account the special charBcteristics of the shrimp industry, Finally, a stabilization of the market for shrimp would make the shrimp fisher- man a better insurance prospect by tending to effect a decrease in loss claims and policy lapses because of "bad years". Some examples of 1952 premiums are cited as follows: for a wooden diesel shrimper valued at $25,000 (about one-half of the replace- ment cost), the insured paid 5*^ percent ($1,350) which included hull and limited protection and indemnity insurance for trips not exceeding 100 miles offshore. In a similar case the vessel was valued at $22,000 and the premium was $1,450 (6-1/2 percent); for a third vessel of this type valued at $20,000 ($200 deductible) the premium v;as $977.50 or 4,9 porcent, for a marine research vessel of a university (hull coverage limited to $10,000, protection and indemnity limited to $100,000 for any one accident, $50,000 for any one person) the premium was $5'^'^«50, Tliu policy in this instance covered LUe vessel only when used in coastal or inland waters. 223 The a"bove data as well as premium costs for a fev; additioneJ. vessels are shown in tahle IV -hi. TABLE IV - 47.— INSaRMCE PR3MIUMS FOR SELECTED COMI'ffiHCIAL SHIII-IP AND HESSARCH VESSELS, 1952 Vessel type Declared value Total annual insurance cost Premium Remarks Percent of declared Dollars Dollars value Wooden diesel Shrimper A $25,000 $1,350 5.4 Protection and indemnity limited to trips of 100 miles offshora. Wooden diesel Shrimper B 22,000 1,450 6,5 Protection and indemnity limited to trips of 100 miles offshore. Wooden diesel Shrimper C 20.000 978 4.9 Protection and indemnity limited to trips of 100 miles offshore- deductible clause $200. Marine research vessel D 10,000 5^14- 5,4 Only to he used in coastal or in- land waters. Marine research vessel E 25,000 1,250 Shrimp vessel I" 25,000 1,250 5.0 Hiill insurance only, 5.0 Restricted to 500 miles off Key West. 224 A large shrimp fleet operator at Brovrasvills , Texas paid 4,0 percent on hull inaarance and 1,8 percent on protection and indemnity insurance. His fleet operates over the entire Gulf of Mexico. A simi- lar large operator in Louisiana paid 4.2 percent for hull insurance and 2,6 percent for protection and indemnity incurance, Hovraver, his fleet includes menliaden vessels as well as shrimp vessels. A Tampa hoat owner, operating a fleet of ten shrimp vessels paid ^,0 percent for hull in- surance and 2.8 percent for protection and indemnity insurance. A large shipyard company in Jacksonville, i'lorida requests that the purchaser of a shrimp vessel carry insurance at the rate of 8,0 percent for hull and 2,5 percent for protection and indemnity coverage to he paid in accordance with a three-year installment plan. Recently individual owners of shrimp vessels in the Gulf area have banded together, in some instances, to ohtain insurance on their vessels at lower rates ranging from 4.75 - 3.25 percent for steel diosel vessels and from 5.75 percent to 4,25 percent for wood diesel vessels, the rates decreasing in proportion to the increase of the deductible clause. Miscellaneous Among the elements of cost which, in some instances, aro not separately shown on the boat owner's cost statements are license fees paid to state authorities. Where license fees have to be paid to mora than one jurisdiction, the amount shown on the cost statements under ^Miscellaneous Expenses* may be considerable, COST COMPARISON 1942-1943 AND 1952-1954 In connection with a study of distribution methods and costs of important food products completed during World War XL the Federal Trade Commission obtained cost of production particulars for two shrimp fishing vessels for the years 1942 and 1943. The two shrimp vessels operated out of ports located in the State of Louisiana. Data obtained for those Uio operations can be used as bench marics for a rough comparison of costs of producing shrimp in the war years with costs in the survey years 1952-1954, \Ihon the 1942- 1943 data are checked against corresponding data for Region III (which includes State of Louisiana operations) it appears that prices and costs in the years 1952-1954 were approximately twice their corresponding wartime level. The boat owners' profit in this region averaged one- fifth of ex-VQSsel prices in both periods. The relative importance of individual cost items as components of total cost appears to have undergone a significant change in the decaia betv/een survey years. Crev; wages, grocery, and fuel coots represented larger proportions of the total exi:)ense dollar in 1952-1954 than in 1942- 1943, while the reverse held true of fixed expenses and costs of ice. 225 BKCAK-SWiJlT MALYSIS Profit and loss and break-ovan charts are simpl-3 and useful tools in analysis and control of business operations. These charts, in recent years, have foiiiid v/ider and v;ider application in industry. Ordinarily used in conjunction with each other, the tv;o charts relate costs to sales and measui-e profit as a function of this relationship, Araon^ the many examples of the types of questions answered by profit and loss and brealc-even analysis the following may be cited: (1) Are current costs in line with what could be expected on the basis of long-terra trend? (2) Given the current cost and price structure, what is the quantity of product that must be sold to brealc even? (3) Given currently prevailing costs, hov/ much will an increase in selling price add to profits (assmning that demand in the short miii is relatively inelastic)? The first of these questions can be answered by a glance at the profit and loss chart. This chart delineates the long term rela- tionship between costs and sales and malces it possible to discover deviations from exi:)ected trend values for a particular year. For practical purposes, if it is decided that an excess of actual, over estimated, costs cannot be defended on grounds of fundamental changes in the cost structure of the operations under scrutiny, control measures can be initiated without delay, V/hile the profit and loss chart reflects how profit varied over a period of years and illustrates whether current results of operations are in line with general trends, the break-even chart focuses on operations during a single year and facilitates the assessment of the effects of alternative policies on profit showing. It is, therefore, ideally adapted to furnishing the answers to questions (2) and (3) above. A break-even analysis for the shrimp industry is somewhat handicapped by the lack of representative cost data for years prior to 1952 as v;ell as by the limited number of operations for which cost data were obtained by the Federal Trade Commission, Since cost information for three consecutive years (1952-195^) is not adequate for the constx^uction of a profit and loss chart, the analysis below was confined to preparation of brealc-even charts for typical opera- tions, Brealc-sven charts were constructed separately for vessels and motor boats. From the samples of operations surveyed in each year average values for catches, receipts, and costs were computed and break-even catches determined. 226 To permit comparison of data for successive years, charts vere constructed for the 38 vessels in the Federal Trade Commission sample for which complete cost information for both 1953 and 195'^- vere available (see figures IV - ^1 and IV - ^2). In addition to these charts, break-even charts were also constructed for 7 motor boats (figures IV - h3, IV - kh and IV - ^5) for which complete information for 1952, 1953 and I95U was available. Average break-even catches of 7 motor boat operations, on the basis of the Federal Trade Commission data, were in the neighbor- hood of 6,900 pounds in 1952, about if,800 pounds in 1953 and 6,200 pounds in 195i<-. Compared to the data for vessels, the motor boat figures were lower in each Instance. The two series of data, however, bear some resemblance to each other. The break-even points for vessels and boats alike moved at the same time and in the same direction during the thi'ee-year period studied. An effort has been made to construct break-even charts for the fishery as a whole. For this purpose the ratios for boat (fixed) and trip (variable) expenses, to gross receipts for vessels and motor boats included in the Federal Trade Commission sample were computed separately for each year. The two ratios were then applied to total annual catch figures for each year to make i-ough estimates of total fixed and variable costs in shrimp production for these years. The resulting charts are sho^m below (profits, as shown, are before State and Federal income taxes) in figures IV - 46, IV - ^-7 and IV - 48. 227 w w > CO « O Eh a w S o o w CO •i n 9 n p. t^ CJ UN H vO ^ m t) \A V\ _:J OS r^ 0\ CVJ ^ m OO ?J M-e*c^«S- o-j ««•■£«■ 4^ ^- o tH ■tn (0 0) •M +» ^ O 1 10 O u en o 0) T> > n) i< a) Tl g ^^ a ^ n h 1 « in an 1 « CO V ■p xs 1 c V o [0 V u w •r-i Cc 0\ 0\ h o 03 «H -P 4) iH m ^ « O ^'— s v> o n n ■P «> « ■^ •H 9 +> 1 ■p g to -P rii 5 '^ 4) •H « «> u SP Sy a- Tl tl 4) ti u 4> V »i a) t> l>4 t> > l> < ■5 «: « rH « .q -P d a ? o o O 10 S B o s f") w en s P^ 1 a « w m 228 J3 w CO CO w > o Q W 0) CO CO 0) t> oo a? a rH-^ cvj CO q-^ O lA t~- f^ H -a' O O t^f^ H CJ\ C-- C>\ O C--CO (4 «> 0< n 0) o c^-trv CM (M CM H Os H o g n M CO s I o H ■3. a53 o o o fl) -P w CO s—^ O 229 g 09 1 ^ a ot o CO rH 0\ r~- a^ -P < Catch Recei Varia Fixed Total Pron ■n § ,-^ a n (^ 1 (1) to a-a 1 (d O 01 ■p x: c a> u iH t~ -:* r- u\ r-l • • "n 1^ o (^ C\J (H t-t (d > o > ^'+» < < <« m ■1 u o IS o r-l O a- w t3 ^ 10 •r-l o (0 u- nj X> o 8 ^ •s t r-i (0 T1 J5 c8 (> 0) -P a: 1) o 230 s . - t~ (M 0\ C~- h-\0 ro On t— ^ rH 0\CVJ H 0^ C\J l/N rH rH CO -H iH-W- to W W to o 5 OS 01 ^ n D — -P r^ Pi ^ _ 43 -H aj "d H O 4) -H D (d ■P V u >< &H (H •^ 1^ ITS ITS • • O rH ITS ir\ U 1 -* C\J rH PlTJ 0] CO (1) ■P J3 C--' «) rW O D ■^ a ■p tl ?; +> O OJ »< O tn fc V O ■p p. ■P 4) 01 M 4) 1) t<^^ sc ■H a) S) eg &) O U id -P d Vi 0) w 0 a> ^ S < -< < g H Q w 231 §5 a H f- to K p S O <: S E-i **■ Q g OS a rovD r-i w ITN ^ giJS ir\ >r> O "^ •k «k ^ «k «k O C^ «-• H W H ■to «0 to ■«»■«» ■P O U X *» O O (K > E F P, O o 83 n 4) ■P J3 0— ' «) O O m CM CVI OJ V (0 -P V P< 4) tf 0) a -p (h U *4 o V V V o 0) O (0 «H «> w -P o 31 X> 0) OJ +> ■d Oj IW tJ H C^-tB- c-^ -p O «) ■H 01 X o ^ pci g o 0) to -p PM V 4J 0) H a> p4 i) Q) W-^ Q\ • • -O +> bD4H bU (0 tc O to JO G m 05 ti H -H 00 o; «rt -p 08 *H 0) o O ■P o M Vi X -P O u o : ^ > V >;--^+J U M O > fe EH CU, < < <: I ■a o 00 to C V. o o LTN CVJ l/N c > o o •H C o .H O H H 1 •H to S -b CO 1 0) li> -C h- ^ — CI -p cd CJ O ITN ITN CM o s O o oo o CM 233 cvj-c«- CO CVJ iH "> OO CVJVQ rH -to- to to -te- V <3 g 01 oj "O H iH O O -P -H P^ E-i Pn c I- S.€ vo ON CVJ CO CM On o CO -P •H 60 OJ 4> cd -P U h o t) V o u > o ^ 3 > +i < a r^ g^A OS W ;f3 ID CO C ^5 ss ^ o Pi' •H H O H I y 0) o 23U n I OS m vo H H (M H •H CVJ 00 CV/ •. •* "^ "S PO CVi IfN X) a CD «J >« ,H ^ •P o to H X +5 O ^-<5 > E P &< 00 a) 5 0) CO $ V p< 4) tl) •H W (0 ?> 4) 0) +J ^ O ^1 a> 9) 0) 0) o > Ih > () < < * 0) I O U X 10 VA ^ (M H ^ O c! l/^ rH P(^— % +J U\ ^■s, W •H H CD i) a > o •H c 8 s? rH ^1 1 0) 43 ir\ J3 v-- t^ CJ +> O R cvi 235 SELECTED 11EI''EREIICE3 Caaber, C. Icaac 1955 Aureomycln dips and Ice for the precervation of shrimp. l!a,rine Laboratory, University of Mlanii, Coral Gables, Florida. (Special Report 55-7) Faublon, J. J., Jr. 195** Financing of fishing vesaels in the Golf states. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 6th Annual Session, September, Marine laboratory. University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida. Kahn, R. A. 1955 Shrliap boat financing. Southern Fisherman, February, Murphy, R. S. 1954 Financing of fishery vessels by financial institutions. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 6th Annual Session, September, Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida. Taylor, C. T. 1954 Financing of fishing vessels by CCTomercial banks. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 6th Annual Session, September, Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Cored. Gables, Florida. 1% CMAPTER V miLIZATIOM A\ m a s I Chilled froten Booked 8 "O « T3 % h n -g-s ^ iH Q 0) 5S TJ 0) iH * %t (m 0» T3 « 9 m no 'tJ5 4 U sa. 8 § 8 •H 0) •P u c 0) n P. CO a> CQ V J3 ■p c « s 239 To the supplies derived from the domestic catch must be added some 68.6 million pounds of shrimp imports, the majority of v/hich was imported as packaged frozen headless. Conversely, somewhat more than h.l million pounds of exported manufactured products must he subtracted before the net supply available for domestic consumption can be determined. TRENDS IN UTILIZATION In 1930 more than 50 percent of total supply went into manu- facture of the canned product. By 1956 only about 7 percent of total supply was utilized in this manner. The production of frozen shrimp was relatively insignificant at the beginning of this period, whereas in 1956 shrimp freezers took about 60 percent of the total supply. Frozen breaded shrimp alone, a new product introduced only a few years ago, today utilizes about 20 percent. PROCESSING FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION Product Yields Technological progress in most industries can be expected to bring about Improvements in product yields over a period of time . In the shrimp industry, the net effect of advances in processing techniques on product yields is somewhat difficult to assess. The majority of processing operations today are performed by hand labor. In canning, the use of machine operations has been more conspicuous, and processing economies have been achieved. The latest peeling and deveining equipment, in addition to cutting down the manual labor required for operations, makes it possible to process very small shrimp formerly not used for commercial purposes. Product yields, how- ever, have not improved as much as expected as the result of the replace- ment of manual by machine labor. 2iiO A study of processing yields of four different species (including the three species of Peneidea accounting for the bulk of domestic catches) was made by the College Park, Maryland, laboratory of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The results of these experiments were described as follows in the November 19^2 issue of the Uoiimercial Fisheries Review; "The percentage of recovery for the boiled, peeled, and. drained shrimp \ra.s the highest for the brown-grooved shrimp, and the lowest for the red Greenland shrimp. The latter species, being very small, would not ordinarily be deveined, but even before deveining the percentage of recovery after peeling and cooking was the lowest of the four varieties tested. Tlie percentage of recovery for both the white and pink-grooved shrimp was the same when cooked, peeled, and deveined. However, when only cooked and peeled, the pink-grooved shrimp showed in these tests a higher percentage of recovery than the white shrimp. The sizes (count per pound) for three of the five lots of white shrimp were larger than for the other species of shrimp. However, these three lots had a slightly lower average percentage of recovery. It is not known if size has any relation to the percentage of recovery." While yields may vary with the species and count (size) of shrimp processed, it is possible to utilize average yield factors for rough conversions. Average yield factors commonly employed for various shrimp end products are as follows: Percent Frozen green headless 59.5 Frozen raw peeled ^ 49.0 Frozen cooked and peeled . 27.6 Frozen breaded uncooked V 83.3 Frozen fantail raw 50.0 Dried 3/ 13.0 Canned zJ 27.0 1/ Hand peeled. 2/ Yield varies considerably depending on amount of breading added. 3/ Head and shell removed after drying. h/ Yield from whole shrimp (includes pre- cooked or blanched shrimp.) 2i^l Geographic Location of Processing Facilities A large proportion of the shrimp taJcen on the Atlantic and Florida GuLf coasts is marketed fresh. The Central Gulf States account for the bulk of the canned shrimp and dried shrimp packs. Processors in the State of Texas have concentrated on freezing and breading operations . Historically, the industry developed first along the south Atlantic seaboard. This location made it possible to transport the fresh product to a mass market at a low cost. The Central Gulf States have heavy landings of small shrimp which lend themselves best to the canning and drying processes. Can- ning and drying developed prior to freezing and breading. The industry in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama started their development between 1870 and 1880. Freezing is particularly suited to Texas and Florida since the trade in frozen products shows a preference for the larger shrimp landed there. Freezing is a simpler processing method requiring less fixed capital and labor than canning. In contrast to the other processes which had their origin in efforts to introduce new preserving methods, breading has come into existence in an attempt to meet consijmer demand. Essentially, the breading process is an extension of freezing, and more often than not, plants which bread also market the frozen headless product. The processing of shrimp waste into meal today is confined to Louisiana and the Carolinas. Value of Manufactured Products Within a period of twenty-five years there has been a more than ten-fold expansion in shrimp processing, as measured by the increase in the value of manufactured shrimp products at the processor's level. Figure V - 50 shows, in addition to the increase in total value of manufactured products from $6.1 million in 1930 to $109.5 million in 1956, that there has been a change in the relative importance of the principal classes of manufactured products over the years. In 1930, canned products accounted for as much as 82 percent, and in 1956 for only 15 percent, of the total value of manufactured products. Frozen packaged products show the reverse trend, rising from i^ to 83 percent of total value. Other manufactured products that fall neither in the 2I42 w E-i u t3 a o q UN CO ^ H < c W U CO p 03 •< d M C CO T3 « «1 o to s pL, .'.IjIjVU- Vl ^O y- ^"^ ^^Nv -3 • / ^V i-i r^ / \ i-t o i-l 1 TJ fn \ «> rH>^\ viT 1 _ C O CV r B •oo) ■*^ 0\ ""? rH -a t^^ ■V n» VN / 0) r^/ V^ / o <^ / 3 oo' V / / iH <«• s* r / 5 1^ a> c £ v r-yA s «nO--;J o CVJ • fe •ee^^ 2U3 category of frozen packaged nor canned products have declined in iiaportance. In 1956 they accounted for only 2 percent of the total value of manufactured products at the processor's level. Average por-pound values of frozen packaged, canned, and all manufactured shrimp products have been computed in table V - 48. The table shows that a pound of frozen packaged shrimp at the manufacturer's level in I930 vas valued at I8 cents and at 7^ cents in 1956. Per-pound value of canned shrimp rose from 37 cents to $l.l8 during this period. The average value per pound of all manufactured shrimp products increased from 27 cents in 1930 to 78 cents in I956. fear TABLE V - 148.— AVERAGE VALUE PER POUND OF MANUFACTURED SHRIMP PRODUCTS AT THE PROCESSOR'S LEVEL, SPECIFIED YEARS Frozen packaged (Including breaded) Canned (Including canned specialties) Total nanufactured products y Value of pack Average Quantity value packed per poxind Value of pack Average Quantity value packed per pound Value Quantity Value of of pack packed p^ck Thousand Thousand dollars povmds Dollars l,h8? .180 16,118 .1514 3/52, 76U .5U1; 80,797 .698 112,981 .578 116,617 .637 121,992 .7I1I Thousand Thousand dollars pounds Dollars Thousand Thousand dollars pounds Dollars L930 267 L9i|0 2,Ii86 1950 28,729 1953 56,396 I95U e^,lS$ 1955 7U,291 1956 90,339 5,013 U,33U 12,9ll( 19,lii9 13,792 13,678 16,758 2/13,633 16,883 12,102 15,653 li|,326 13,802 11*, 207 .368 .257 1.067 1.223 .963 .991 1.180 6,llU 7,231 l4l;,963 li/76,537 ~ 80,269 89,7U6 109, U82 23,06U 38,503 70,659 99,379 130,592 133,679 liiO,735 .265 .188 .636 .770 .615 .671 .778 1/ I Includes dried and miscellaneous products. Estimated. Does not include 1,520,326 pounds of cooked and peeled, fresh and frozen. Includes 5, 91 5 pounds of smoked shrimp manufactured in 1950. Processing Facilities and Operations i_/ Raw shrimp are landed either directly at the docks of processing establishments or at public or private docks from which they are trucked to a plant or market. With the exception of shrimp v/hich are frozen at sea 1r/ Information on shrimp processing facilities and procedures has been gathered for the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries by the Bureau of Business and Economic Research of the University of Miami, by First Research Coi-poration of Florida, and by the Federal Trade Comr,iission. 2M1 I after headinc f^^^ paclcaged ready for the market, nearly all shrimp landed ai'e shore-processed in some manner before entering market channels. Upon landing, the shrimp ordinarily are tal^en directly from the boat to the shrimp plant vhere they are initially processed. The essen- tial task of the plant is to wash and weigh the shrimp, head them if necessary, and pack them in whatever form is required. Fresh Shrimp, l-Thole or Headless Fresh-shrimp plants, in general, are relatively simple estab- lishments. Since the fixed investment required for operations is small, some raw-shrimp dealers on the Atlantic coast are in a position to operate at various locations up and down the coast in the course of a year. They participate in the fall run in South Carolina or Georgia, the winter run in Florida, and return to South Carolina or Georgia for the spring season. Their plants apart from some office space may con- sist of nothing more than unpartitioned buildings containing tables for heading shrimp, washing vats, scales, ice crushers, and space for storing boxes and fishing gear. Functionally, establishiaents of this sort con- fine thejnselves to unloading, weighing, heading, washing, and packing in ice. (see figure V - 5l) On the Gulf coast, fresh shrimp plants tend to be establishments of more permanent character. The larger firms may have their ovm fuel tanks, machine shops, boat ways, etc., as do many of the canneries. In addition, establishments of this size may operate their own fishing fleets, or at least take title to the catch, oim freezers and breading plants and main- tain their own sales staff as part of integi'ated operations. From a technological point of view, it is desirable to head the shrimp on the boat as soon as they are caught. Decomposition starts in the head rather than in the tail of the shrimp, and if the head is removed early, spoilage is markedly retarded. The practice of Including a header among the crew of a fishing vessel is of recent origin. Aside fran heading, this man may perform incidental tasks aboard ship such as washing down the decks, etc. The practice at present is making rapid headway in south Texas ports and may spread to other Gulf coast ports in the futxxre. Some non-operating vessel owners disapprove of the system. They feel that a header taltes the place of a skilled crew member on board vessel. Since the header is not capable of performing all of the duties performed by a fisherman, they fear that boat operations and maintenance suffer when a header is taken along. Packing methods vary primarily according to the distance over which the shrimp are moved. By far the most common method is to pack the shrimp imbedded in chipped ice in 100- pound wooden crates or boxes. 2U5 t3 C ^ cd C o C -P o •

, (0 ^ VI 0) = U 03 ^§ 85 ^ (D aj o a) -H -p to = IQ 0) o P M «l (0 o a> t. g* o o M • M C (0 C -H p •H IS c (U N o a> M (U x: > CC OJ 10 U tl p O fn •V Ui P (0 at n r-i 1-1 • 0) Xi -o e 1 M o H F^ O o 3 •H o h ■p CO § M §^ _c -a !c § c (to 0) m o a -p rt M-H •H C •S C -P •HO O. O Q) • © -H e -H D,+i •H 1 CO rH t-s !•< 0) C 0) <5S< C 11 CO O U •ri * J3 « t< (0 nJ O rH V< tifl • ^ -H iH bO M I C -P - tc ti; a. «l o z' ^ 'N; 4 0. *i ■z z lit UJ 1£ o < 1* |0 .111 1 V < 1 o •H t O o 253 FIGUHE V - 5U.— Washing machine installed in shriinp processing plant of Twin City Fishermen's Cooperative, Morgan City, Louisiana. Twin City Fishermen's Cooperative, Association, Inc. 25It I The receiving and unloading procedure, where the processing plants are located dockside, has been described in connection with fresh shrimp plants (see p. 2k9 of this chapter). l-Jhen shrimp are received by truck they have already had an initial washing. One or more men manually un- load the shrimp directly into the wash vat either by shoveling or empty- ing the boxes. The shrimp are washed and the ice is flushed away. When a plant is unable to handle and process the shrimp immediately on arrival, they are held on the trucks or the trucks are vinloaded directly into holding bins located in the processing work area. First Research Corporation suggests that whenever practicable present methods of unloading shrimp from vessels and trucks be replaced by portable power conveyors. Conveyors of this type are presently in operation in some of the shrimp canneries and are used for unloading shrimp from both vessels and trucks. 2. Inspection and grading: When quick freezing was first adopted by the industry a id-de variety of package sizes vras used and little attention was given to size grading before packaging. The grading that was undertaken was a hand operation. This method still prevails in some of the smaller plants. Recently perfected grading machines have replaced hand operation in nearly all of the larger plants. Moreover, package size has been standardized. The standard package today is the five-pound carton, with other sizes accounting for only a small part of the total production. The present method of inspecting and grading shrimp, as detailed below, is based upon a sur- vey of six plants, all using grading machines. A conveyor belt removes the shrimp from the vrash vat and feeds them into the receiver of the grading machine. As the shrimp move from the wash vat to the grading machine, they pass inspectors who remove all extraneous matter and shrimp of visually inferior quality. A single operator mans the grading machine, which mechanically sorts the shrimp into four size categories ajid discharges the graded shrimp onto four conveyor belts or through four metal chutes for delivery to the packing stations. Some plants have additional inspectors stationed between the grader and each of the four packing stations to check machine errors in grading. The six plants inspected by First Research Corporation that process frozen headless shrimp all have comparable operational facilities and functions. Installations for moving shrimp from the wash vats to the grader and thence to the packing stations appeared adequate and further mechanization was not indicated. There were significant differences betvreen individual plants in the man-hours required to unload, inspect, and grade a hundred pounds of headless shrimp (see table V - 50 )• These differences may have been due 255 to variations in distances between the vessel and the packing stations or else they may have resiHted from the uneven "flow" of shrimp from the vessel, tmck, or storage bin to the packing stations which accounted for occasional idle time on the processing line. TABLE V - 50.— FROZEN HEADLESS SHRIMP AVERAGE MAN-HOURS REQUIRED TO PROCESS 100 POUNDS OF END-PRODUCT, 6 PLANTS, 1955 Company Receiving, inspecting and grading Packing and weighing Operations Loading freezer Glazing and master carton Total ( M n h u A 0.292 0.467 0.067 0.267 1.093 B .iKDO .500 .050 .130 1.080 C .333 .400 .050 .120 .903 D .257 .258 .057 (1) - E .233 .267 .053 (1) - P .365 .299 .133 .111 .908 Average .313 .365 .068 .157 .996 1/ Company does not have a freezer, commercial freezer. These operations performed at The study made indicates that, with the adoption of a conveyor unloading system, and through minor changes in operational procedures in certain plants, the man-hours required to imload, inspect, and grade a hundred pounds of headless shrimp could be reduced by as much as 35 per- cent (see tables V - 50 and V - 51). 256 TABLE V - 51." FROZEN HEADLESS SHRIMP, ESTZI-mTED PRODUCTION RATES, NUlffiER OF WORKERS AND MAN-HOURS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE 100 POUNDS OF END-PRODUCT, HYPO- THETICAL PLANT USING SYNTHESIZED PROCEDURES AND LAYOUT Operation Estimated Production Man-hours number number °l/ Type of per required per and name workers operation man-hour 100 pounds Pounds Man-hours 1. Receiving and , unloading 2 Machine 2,000 0.050 2. Inspecting and grading 8 Hand and machine 500 .200 3. Packing and weighing 8 Hand 500 .200 k. Overwrapping 2/ 3 Machine 1,334 .075 5. Loading freezer 3 Hand 10,000 .010 6. Mastering Total man-hours per k Hand 1,000 .100 100 poiinds - .635 1/ Based on a desired average production rate of 4,000 pounds of frozen headless shrimp per hour. 2/ Part time. 3. Packing and weighing-: After the grading machine has sorted the shrimp into four size categories, they are normally delivered to four packing stations. Some plants subdivide the chutes enabling them to set up eight packing stations. Wi The standard procedure in packing and weighing headless shrimp .3 found to be as follows: Set up folded five-pound waxed carton. Pill carton with shrimp. Weigh filled carton and adjust for correct weight. Rubber stamp Bhrlmp size on carton. Place carton on shelf, pallet, or rolling rack for removal to plant freezer; or in open vrooden crates for removal to commercial freezer. In the six plants inspected, the weighing crews ranged from two to five. Whei'o the crew consisted of only t\;o, one performed the first two functions, and the other the remaining tliree. V/ith a crew of three men one performed the first two functions, one the third, and one the 257 i-ciiiaininG t^ro. In the plant employing a crew of five, there vas one operator for each of the first three functions, a fourth operator added water to the filled cartons, and the fifth operator performed the last tv70 functions. In some plants inspectors continuously spot checked the packing operations. Tlie number of man-hours required to pack and weigh a hundred pounds of shrimp is reflected in the size of the crews used. About tv/elve percent more man-hours were required by a crew of five than by a crew of three, and about eighty percent more than by a crew of two. Most plants have well designed conveyor systems for moving the shrimp through the packing and weighing lines. Ttiere were instances where minor adjustments would have made for a more efficient operation. In some plants there appeared to be an over-allocation of manpower; this could have been remedied by combining certain functions. k. Freezing: Methods of handling headless shrimp from the paclcing and weighing line to the freezer are more or less standard. The principal differences found depend upon whether the processing plant operates its own freezer or uses the facilities of a public freezer. In the former case, the packed cartons of shrimp are placed on pallets or rolling racks which are manuaJLly rolled or tmcked to, and loaded into, the blast freezer. The temperature in the freezer is main- tained at -30° F. to -kO° F. Freezing is usually completed in approxi- mately fifteen hours. If the freezer room is exceptionally large and loaded to capacity, freezing times may vary. \7here the facilities of a public freezer are used, the five- pound cartons of shrimp are placed in an open wooden crate as they come off the packing and weighing line. The crates are hand- trucked to an ice bin where crushed ice is shoveled over the filled cartons. Tlie iced crates are then manually loaded on trucks for transporting to the freezer. In most processing plants that operate their own freezer the packed and weighed shrimp are loaded directly from the packing line into the freezer. Most of the freezers covered in the svirvey consisted of only one freezing tunnel or room. There are plants, however, where the freezing unit consists of two or more tunnels or rooms of different capacities. In one of the plants surveyed, the freezer had a chill room connected with it. Here, shrimp were placed in the chill room and held at -10° F. until the particular production run ^/as completed, then the entire load was placed in one of two blast-freezing rooms. This method of handling eliminates the frequent opening of freezer doors and reduces freezing costs. 2^8 The number of man-houro required to talce a hundred pounds of headlcos Ghriinp fi-ora the packing and weighing line &nd load the.n into the freezer vas fairly uniform for five of the six plants inspected, ranging from 0.050 to 0.067 man-hours for processing plants operating idth adjoin- ing freezing facilities and for processing plants using public freezers. For the sixth plant this operation took 0.133 raan-hours. Here, the freez- ing unit was located approximately I50 yai-ds froiti tte processing plant and all handling operations were performed manually (see table V - 50). 5. Glazing and mastering: Procedures for glazing and packing frozen headless shrimp in master cartons were foimd to be more or less standardized in the six plants surveyed. The shrimp are removed from the blast freezer on the rolling racks or pallets on which they were frozen. Each carton lid is opened prior to placement on a conveyor equipped with a water spray. About eight ounces of vrater are added, the lid is closed, the carton is Inverted and then packed top-side do\m, ten five-pound cartons to a master. The master is then sealed and placed in cold storage to await shipment. For two of the six plants Inspected, glazing and packing were done at public freezers. The other four plants operated their own freezers, The number of man-houry requirr 1 to glaze imd pack a hundred pounds of frozen headless fihrimp in plants operating their oun freezers varied from 0.111 to 0.267. The plant with the lowest man-hours employed a 5-inan crei; for these operations; the other plants used ci'eijs of 11 or 12 men. The man-hours reqiu.red for these opei'ations do not appear to have been greatly influenced by the size of the crew performing them. For example, one plant employing a 12-man crew had a man-hour rate only slightly higher than the plant using a 5>-man crevj. On the basis of their observations the First Research Corporation engineers concluded that some plants ^rould benefit from more efficient methods of operation which might be developed after "trial and error". By equalization of the workload spotty idling time could be reduced in a mimber of the establishments. First Research Corporation recommends that the water glazing process be replaced by overvrapplng the cartons. It was estimated that the adoption of overiirrapping in lieu of glazing, the replacement of the power hoist iri.th a portable poirer conveyor for unloading shrimp and efforts to obtain a more efficient distribution of labor on the production linCj wotild result in a saving of upvrards of i^O percent in the man-hours re- quired to produce a hundred pounds of paclcaged frozen headless shrimp (see tables V - 50 and V - 5l) . Based on the assianption that each producer operates his o^m freezing plant First Research Corporation has devised a recommended pro- cedure for procecsors of frozen headless shrimp. Tliis procedui'e v/hich 259 combines the beet features of the plant operations surt'eyed with certain modifications GUCi2;ested by the ensineerc who made the study is i-cx^roduced below. A yynthcjized layout as well as a tabulation of cotlriiatod irian-hour values for individual operations under the streajjilined procedure is included. Plant procedure — synthesized operations. — (see figure V - 5^) 1. Receiving and unloading: Tvro men, woi'king as a tearn in the hold of the fishing vessel, shovel iced headless shrimp onto a portable power conveyor. The conveyor elevates the shrimp from the vessel hold and discharges them into a wash vat located on the dock, -v^here storage ice is washed away from the shrimp. 2. Inspecting and grading: A conveyor ranoves the shrimp from the vat and feeds them past a tecun of seven inspectors. Ilie inspectors remove by hand all extraneous matter and shrimp of inferior quality. The Inspected nhrimp are discharged into the receiving hopper of a grading machine. A single operator oversees the grading machine \'Mdi mechanically sorts the shrimp into the size categories, and through four discharge out- lets, ejects the shrimp according to size to the packing stations. 3. Packing and weighing: At each of the four packing stations a teojn of two operators is stationed. The first operator sets up the folded five-pound size waxed carton, fills the carton with graded shrimp and passes the filled carton, lid open, to the second operator. The second operator weighs the carton, closes and places it on a conveyor belt feeding to the ■vnrapping machine. h. Overwrapping of carton: An operator, stationed at the load- ing end of the irrapping machine, removes the cartons of shrimp from the conveyors feeding from the packing stations and places them on the feed belt of the in-apping machine. The \rrapplng machine mechanically overiTraps and seals the filled cartons and discharges them to a team of t^ro v7orkers who load the ^/rapped cartons on rolling shelf racks for transport to the freezer. 5. Blast freezing: The rolling racks of filled cartons are manually loaded into the chill room of the freezer installation. This room chould be designed and utilizable for freezing when volume production warrants It. The shrimp are left In this area until the production run is completed and then loaded into either a large or a small blast freezer room, depending upon the quantity of the production run. The approximate capacity of these blast freezer rooms should be 10,000 pounds and 20,000 pounds. 6. Mastering: The frozen five-pound cartons of shrimp are re- moved from the blast freezer by tito teams of two men each and packed ten cartons to the master carton. The master carton is then sealed and placed in cold storage to await shipment. 260 T < UJ M UJ (C u. t — *- IP < m _j < UJ (r U. t t UJ o UJ ^ UJ O 15 O -1 IX 4 -1 O -- -- _ 1 - .\ -J t 2 -J X o **"" o cr ^t 1 1 1 Al ? 1; W i s-s: |0 < uji >- ' °- s, ^ i: ' Al s*«; < uj' 1 1 Q. ,1 1 1 ROLL- ING 2 t wi 2 I -J I I 1*1 1 M ■{ l- . 1 L . |Z la: lo i2 0 L J s i CO ;^ -N PL. 9 a Q en Ix. kJ tsi B H o ■H m o & o o (U a: u •H 261 Plant operation — summary and special problems. — In the opinion of the First Research Corporation, the ideal plant for packing frozen headless shrimp vould be situated on 6. waterway, thus enabling shrimp fishing vessels to unload directly into the packing plant. This would eliminate excessive handling and transportation. The plant should have adequate facilities for grading and packing and a well-designed flexible freezer arrangement. Of the plants chosen by First Research Corporation as represent- ative, only one incorporated all of the above desirable features. The others operated under one or more of the following handicaps. Shrimp had to be trucked to the processing plant. The plant had no freezing facilities on the premises. The plant freezer was constructed as one large unit rather than sub-divided to fit production needs. Frozen Peeled and Deveined Shrimp One company included in the First Research Corporation sample of processors of frozen shrimp specialized in the packing of individually frozen peeled and deveined headless shrimp. Equipment used, and procedure followed, in the preparation of this end-product were described as follows: Plant procedure. — 1. Receiving and grading: Iced fresh headless shrimp are de- livered by truck in hundred-pound boxes. The boxes are unloaded through a wall opening directly into a cold holding room. From the holding room shrimp are emptied into a vat where the storage ice is flushed away and the shrimp are washed. A conveyor belt removes the shrimp from the vat and feeds them past a team of inspectors who manually remove any extra- neous matter and damaged shrimp. The inspected shrimp are then fed into the grading machine which sorts them into six size categories and dis- charges each size through one of six metal chutes. The shrimp are caught in metal containers which when filled are pxJ.led manually along roller tracks to a scale. The weight is checked by a recording clerk and the | shrimp are rolled back into the cold holding room to await further J processing. " 2. Peeling and deveining: The shrimp are transported in buckets from the holding room to peeling machines and emptied into hoppers. The machine operator removes the shrimp from the hopper and places them in the machine receiver one by one. The peeled and deveined shrimp are dis- charged ont.-. u conveyor feeding to an inspection station, the shells and veins ave discharged onto a waste belt. 262 FIGURE V - 56. — A part of the peeling and deveining room at a Texas shrimp plant. Southern Fisherman. 263 3. Inspection: The peeled and develned shrimp are fed past a team of inspectors who check for any reinalninc shell or vein, pulling aside nny shriwp needing further cleaning, the clean shrirap continue on to the next operation. The incorapletely cleaned shrimp are diverted to hand operators who complete the operation and place the shrimp' bade on the conveyor feeding to the next operation. 4. Preparation for freezing: The peeled and deveined shrimp are discharged by the conveyor to tvo adjoining work stations where two teams of five workers each place the shrimp on thin aluminum sheets. Each sheet holds approximately 2-1/2 pounds of shrimp, and the shrimp are spaced so as not to touch each other. The aluminum sheets are sepa- rated by angle irons and placed in twelve stacks of five each on a rolling rack and manually rolled into the freezing tunnel. 5. Freezing: The blast freezing tunnel holds 2k racks. Oper- ators of the plant state that the tunnel is operated at approximately -65° F. and that the shrimp are "flash" frozen in approximately 25 minutes. 6. Glazing: The racks of frozen shrimp are manually reiuoved from the freezer and placed by a v/ork station where an operator empties the aluminu}n sheets of shrimp onto a funnel top table . The frozen shrimp drop through the funnel opening into an open mesh basket. A second oper- ator takes the filled basket, dips it into a glazing tank, and empties the glazed shrimp onto one of two packing tables. 7. Packing and overwrapping: An operator at each of the pack- ing tables scoops a waxed carton full of glazed shrimp, and places it on a conveyor feeding past the weighing stations. The shrimp are weighed, the carton lid is closed and the carton is placed on a conveyor feeding the wrapping machine. The ^/rapping machine overwraps 120 retail-size, or 60 institutional- size caxtons per minute. After overwrapping the car- tons are manually packed into master cartons, which are sealed and placed in cold storage to await shipment. Frozen peeled and develned shrimp are produced by this plant in eight, twelve and sixteen ounce and two pound containers . Frozen Cooked and Peeled Shrimp In most plants cooked and peeled shrimp is packed as a second product in conjunction \r±th a processor's principal end-product. Accord- ing to First Research Corporation, the quajitity of shrimp packed in this foi-m usually accounts for only a small fraction of a processor's total production. A few canning plants customarily put up cooked and peeled 2614 shrimp in larger quantities. Similarity of procescinc procedures Kialceo the packing of cooked and peeled shrimp particularly adaptable to canning operations. Tlie buUc of the cooked and peeled shrimp pack is frozen. In order to get a picture of processing operations for cooked and peeled shrimp. First Research Corporation selected two canning estab- lislmients ■J/^hich paclced the product on a regular basis. The t^ro plants selected vere both located directly on water\7ays to receive raw materials from the fishing vessels and concentrated on the production of the came type of end-products. Here the similarity between the two operations ended. One plant, recently completed, had installed the most up-to-date processing equiprnant, and devoted about 15 percent of its capacity to the production of cooked and peeled shrimp. The other plant had been in operation for a number of years. It did not possess the most modern type of equipment for the processing of cooked and peeled shrimp, a product which constituted approximately 35 percent of its total production. Plant No. 1 made use of portable po\7er conveyors for unloading shrimp vessels, had an automatic peeling and deveining machine, and food pujnps for transporting the product at certain operational stages. At plant No. 2 vessels were unloaded by means of a basket and power hoist and the shrimp were peeled and deveined by hand. Since processing of cooked and peeled shrimp talies place pri- marily in canning establisliments, the comments made with recpect to seasonality of production and quality inspection in the discussion of operations in these plants also apply here. Plant procedure. --As a result of leng-thy observations and direct contact with equipment manufacturers, a synthesized plant layout (see fig- ure V - 57) and procedui'e has been drafted. The procedure for cooked and peeled shrimp is for all practical purposes identical wltli that of canned shi'iiiip up to and including the point of can filling. (see discussion under •Canned Shrimp ', p^i^e 28U) Cooked and peeled shrimp are usually packed for institutional use in four or five-ijound metal containers. In recent years a portion of the paclc has been marketed in consumer size containers. All shrimp are packed dry. Most producers vacumi pack by utilizing vacuum closing machines. After closure the cans are either placed in ice storage to await shipment as "Fresh pack" or to await movement to the freezer. Manpower requirements and production per man-hour. — If the synthesized layout and procedure are utilized, estimated production in terjiis of end-product per man-hour and man hours required per 100 pounds, would be as follows: (see table V - 52) 265 ■;: ¥ ? >ioa f ^iTjjCja 0 n 2 .Mi WK o o c c > > « « Q Q 'Si i: V c / V 1. s. to \ / II , _] L. JJ L- , y OTmtJ / aoi^T J ^ \M/ El: 266 TABLE V - 52. --FROZEN COOKED AND PEELED SHRBIP, ESTBIATED PRODUCTION RATES AND MAN-HOURS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE 100 POUNDS OF END-PRODUCT, HYPOTHETICAL PLANT USING SYNTHESIZED PROCEDURES AlID LAYOUT Production per Operation Type of man-hour (end- Man-hours required operation product vcight) (Per 100 pounds of (Pounds) end-product) Receiving and inspection Hand 173.3 0.577 Poelin.'j Machine 1040.0 0.096 Blade light inspection Hand 130.0 0.769 Deveining, blanching « and general Machine lOUO.O 0.096 Grading Machine 1040.0 0.096 Sorting and inspection Hand 130.0 0.769 Pacliing and v;eighing Hand 346.6 0.288 Can closing Machine 1040.0 0.096 Storage or freezing Machine 1040.0 0.096 A production rate of 4 barrels (840 pounds) of head-on shrimp per hour per peeling machine and a yield of 65 pounds of end-product per barrel has been used as a basis for these calculations. Assuming 1,040 pounds of end-product per hour is produced by 4 peeling machines, the man power needed at each operational stage would be as follows: Operation Receiving and Inspection Peeling Black light Inspection Develning, blanching and general Grading Sorting and inspection Packing and weighing Can closing Storage or freezing Number of workers 6 1 8 1 1 8 3 1 1 Packaging of frozen cooked and peeled shrimp in Alaska where most of the catch is processed in this form is accomplished as follows: 267 VJith tliG improveinento in refrigerated transportation in rjcent j-cars the Alaskan ehriup are alj;iost ccr.ipletely ranxketed in the dry frozen atate and are packed in No. 10 double -Gaa;.:ed cans, 5 poundr; of ucats to the can (until about 19^0, the iiieats were pad:ed 5 pounds to a l-C'^illon can and shipped in ice). Gr.rinz to the increaced demand for frozen prod- ucts in the hone in recent years, 1-pound and even c/naller containers are used. A consuiner-cize can (307 x 113) holding k ounces of laaats sealed under vacuuiri has been marketed. Vacuuj.i packing increases the frozen- storage life of the product and mlniraizes toughening over long periods of frozen storage. Besides being marketed as cooked picked meats, sojue Alaskan shrimp are prepared in other vays. Spot shririip are coolied whole and frozen in ^/ajced cartons, 20 pounds to the box; frozen raw picked meats of large side-stripe shrimp are packed 6 pounds to a No. 10 can and hermetically sealed. Alaskan shrimp are usually marketed -idthin 6 months after being packed. In the South Atlantic and Gulf Areas only a small proportion of the shrimp are marketed as frozen cooked. Instead of being cooked in fresh xrater then peeled, and given a second cook in brine as in Alaska, the shrimp here are raw peeled and then boiled in a brine solution. The cooJied shrimp, after being cooled, should be packaged ir;i;iediately. Vte-red cartons are widely used \d.th oven/raps having good moisture-vapor-proof qualities; No. 10 cans and cans holding only 5 ounces and 7 ounces are also used and are usually hermetically sealed. The packaged shrimp should be stored at a tciuperature not exceeding 0° F. The cooked shriiiip have a very short frozen- storage life and soon become tough, with a loss of flavor. Peeled boiled slu-lmp should not be stored longer than k months, whereas unpeeled boiled shrimp have been found in tests to be acceptable after storage up to 6 months. These storage periods are probably maximum, and in x^ractice, it is believed that considerably shorter storage periods should be used. Production should, therefore, be planned so that a rapid turnover in stock lall occur. The following problems merit special consideration in connection with the packaging of frozen shrimp products: Large losses in moisture which can occur through the use of packages and ovenrraps that have low resistance to the passage of moisture vapor. Loss of moisture and rapid quality deterioration as the result of improper glasing or failure to reglaze v/hen necessary. Product losses due to failure to make periodic inspection of frozen storage holdings. 268 StntiGtics on Frozen Pacl:i.v;fed" Slil-l! jv Proditction (Othor ThfUl Breaded) Trends. — Ficure V - 58 revouls that production of frozen iiacka^ed shrijiip inci'eased from I.5 million pounds in 1930 to 16.I million pounds in I9JJO, hG,2 Million pounds in I95O and by 195*1 production had risen to 88.2 million pounds and decreased to about 71«1 million pounds in 195^. Value of product at the manufacturer's level dui'lnr^ the 27 -year period increased froia a quai'ter million dollars to over 53 i^iHion dollars, in 195^ (exclud- ing brended shrxjiip ) .(see figure V - ^9) Seasonal characteriGtlca of shrliirp freezin.r^-, — The ceasonal pat- tern of Ghrirap freezing clocely follo;/3 the seasonal pattei'n of nhrii.ip landincs. Freezings reach a peak during the period of high production in the nonths of September through October and are at their low during the firat four months of the year. Monthly freezing statistics for the years 19'+0, 19^5, and 1950- 195^ ore cho-vm in table V - 53- The saiae d2.ta are expressed as percentar;;es of total annual freezings in table V - 5^)-» As can be seen fror.i this tabu- lation, tlie 19^ data shovr evidence of a secondnry peak of production in May and June as well as the succeeding smrj.ier lull vliich was characteristic before the expansion of the grooved shrimp fishery, TABLE V - 53." SHRIMP FREEZINGS, MONTHLY MTA,. SPECIFIED YEARS (Thousands of pounds) Months 19^10 19J,.5l/ 195017 19511/ 1952jy 19531/ 195W 1955 1956 January 703 1,262 1,936 2,931 i^,936 3,307 2,918 3,675 U,389 February 625 866 2,331 2,171 3,218 2,oli-7 2,51+9 3,126 3,328 March 809 512 2,03!t 2,38^. 2,556 3,01+9 1,967 2,981 3,060 Apx'il 573 617 2,517 2,628 2,899 2,996 2,526 2, 111) 2 2,895 May 1,517 l,09'^ 5,560 3,659 k, 12lt l+,662 3,125 2,566 2,919 June 2,176 919 i*,970 i+,079 if, IH6 3,762 3,589 3,9'i2 3,81+9 July 675 7^9 i^,115 5,255 4, 096 5,670 H,1^15 7,158 6,136 Au,'5U3t 293 2,566 6,578 6,867 5,089 7,155 8,169 5,559 7,33i|- Septeiiiber l,itijO ^,350 7,752 6,619 6,787 7,051 1M2 5,81i0 7,396 October 2,l3iv 5,538 8,265 10,713 8,1+76 7,1^61 7,769 6,722 9,983 Novei.!ber 3,102 3,9^^5 5,^51 6,381+ ^,517 6,330; ^8,166 3,228 7,690 December 1,939 2,noo hAlh U,90i 3,891 3^2ioj y5,iio7 2,80!+ 6,125 Total i5,9ti5 "2it;8i8 35,(^^3 58,591 55,005 56,700 5M92_ 50,0113 '65,101+ Avera,r,'e 1,332 2,068 i<-,6iiO ^,883 if, 581). ^,725 ^■,&ir ■^^,170 5,ii25 1/ Includes shririip meat. 2/ Includes 2,126,687 pounds of other than raw headless in November and 1,928,686 pounds in Deceuiber. Tliese data were not collected sejiarately pr.Lor to Kovejiiber, Note: The statistics on- ehi-imp freezing .were obtained from firms i/hich mcJce monthly reports on their cold storage holdings to the United States Fish and Wildlife Gorvice. Since the coverage of firms is not complete, the above statistics are not to be constinied as representing total United States freezings of shrimp products. 269 « Q W O ISJ S I I • CN \A T3 C CO I a n o u •H 4 o • fn XTv r^ • t- -S' -i 4 CNJ > • r- N^ -=f o • r^ -^ UN • -:t C\J o UJ O XA < • ^ u < a. • L_ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 so \/N 0\ 0\ CN Ox 0\ o Os o UN S O xr\ o UN U\ i c o m o r-{ • i-l • •H • as oo • o CVi • lU O < 1-1 • < o. 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1.5 Os 0\ OS Ov o \A OS O Os o Os 8 o Os O oo O s o \A O o o CSJ 270 TABLE V - 5U.— Sffl^BiP FREEZINGS, MOrmiLY DATA IN PERCENTAGT^S OF ANNUAL TOTALS, SPECIFIED YEARS Months 19'tO 19l^5 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 Per- Per- Per- Per- Per- Per- Per- Per- Per- cent cent cent cent cent cent cent cent cent January k.h 5.1 3.5 5.0 9.0 5.8 5.0 7.3 6.8 Februsjry 3.9 3.5 U.2 3.7 5.9 3.6 4.4 6.2 5.1 March 5.1 2.1 3.7 k.l 4.6 5.4 3.4 6.0 4.7 April 3.6 2.5 1|.5 h,3 5.3 5.3 4.3 4.9 4.4 May 9.5 h.k k.6 6.2 7.5 8.2 5.4 5.1 4.5 June 13.6 3.7 8.9 7.0 8.0 6.6 6.2 • 7.9 5.9 July k.2 3.0 f.h 9.0 l.h 10.0 7.6 lh.3 9.h August 1.8 10.3 11.8 11.7 9.3 12.6 l4.l n.i 11.3 Septeraber 9.0 17.5 13.9 11.3 12.3 12.4 12.9 11.7 11.4 October 13.lv 22.3 llv.8 18.3 15.4 13.2 13.4 13.4 15.3 November 19. 1* 15.9 9.8 10.9 8.2 11.2 14.0 6.5 11.8 December 12.1 9.7 7.5 8.3 7.1 5.7 9.3 5.6 9.4 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Charges foi • Freezer Services Charges made by custom or public freezers vary vith the type of services performed. Wie Bureau of Business and Economic Research of the University of Miami obtained the following information on practices found in this branch of the industry. Consumer packages may contain from tirelve ounces to two and one- half pounds of shrimp. The most commonly used institutional package for headless shrimp contains five pounds. The individual cartons are packed in master cartons, usually containing 50 pounds of shrimp. Headless shrimp may or may not be taken to the freezer already pacl:ed in individual cartons, depending upon the extent of the operations performed by the shrimp plant. Most commonly, the freezer receives the product in bulk and performs all packaging functions. In certain areas, such as Galveston, Texas, the shrimp plant malces all preparations up to and including packaging in the individual carton. In such cases, the freezer charges about 1-1/2 cents per pound for handling in and out of quick freezer, glazing, making up of master cartons, marking and check- ing, and one month's storage. Since the five-pound institutional package is the most common type, the freezer charges for smaller packages are slightly higher. 271 If the freezer performs more services than indicated above, costs rise accordingly. The largest operator in Broimsville charges 3 cents per pound for retioval by conveyor from delivering truck, culling, grading, freezing, glazing, mastering and loading on the removing ti-uck. In almost every Instance, tlae o'smer of the shrimp provides his o\m individual carton, but if he does not, the freezer vill supply cartons at a coot of 1.8 cents per pound. Storage charges are not included here because many public freezers located on the Texas coast do not have sufficient facilities for storing large quantities. Hence, those who use facilities of public fi^eoz- ers do so with the understanding that their shrimp will be stored only \m- til they have accvmnilated a full truck load. In Alabacia, the cost of freezing at the time of the Bureau's survey was 2 cents per pound with the person holding title paying for the cartoning, glazing, and the preparation for freezing. The charge for warehousing was 50 cents per 100 pounds per nonth. A 1-1/2 cent-per-pound charge in Mississippi included glazing and packing in master cartons but did not cover the cost of the carton and the preparation of the shrimp for the freezer. While the l-l/2-cent charge allowed for one month's free storage, additional storage was pro- vided at a cost of 35 cents per 100 pounds per month. Freezer charges in the State of Louisiana varied from 1-1/2 cents per pound, if the customer supplied his cartons, 3 cents if niateri- als were provided by the freezer. If complete packing and freezing serv- ices were performed, a charge of 5 cents was made which included one month's free storage. Charges for additional storage varied between 50 to 75 cents per month per 100 pounds. Rate schedules for custora packing and free.iing of shrimp fur- nished to the United States Fish and VJildlife Sei^ice by two corapanies are reproduced in tables V - 55 and V - 56. 272 TAT3LE V - 55.--CO!PAW 'A' CIL'IRGRS FOR CUSTOM PACKIHG AND FlffiEZllTG amiw EFFECTIVE iiAi^cn 1, 1956 5 Pound Pack Procer,sir)c^ per pound $ .035 Cacec and cartons, per case 1.00 Caces only ,30 Cartons only .70 2-1/2 Pound_Pack Proceoain;;;, per pound .0525 Cartons (all belonj3 to Company 'A' foods), each .0^2 I2/2-I/2 cnaen, per package .011 2-1/2 Company 'A' labels, per package ,0l4 1 Pound Pack Procefising, per package .06^2 (Company 'A' has no packing materials for 1 pound) 12 Ounce Padc Processinc, per package ,06k2 12 ounce cartons, per package .015 2U/12 case, per package .005 13" Plain wax O/W, per package ,005 Miscellaneous Hantlling and 1 month storage on frozen, per povind .OO583 Strapping charges per case, 2 straps .29 Strapping charges per case, 3 straps .35 Grading only, per pound ,0117 TABLE V - 56. —COMPANY 'B' CHARGES FOR FREEZING, MASTERING AND FIRST MONTH'S STORAGE (In effect in August, I956) If glazed If overwrapped Boxes Per cvft. Per ton Per cvt. Per ton 5 pounds $ l.it5 $ 29.00 $ - $ - 2-1/2 pounds 1.65 33.00 1.50 30.00 1 pound 1.50 30,00 1.50 30.00 12 and 10 ounce I.50 30.00 1,50 30.00 Note: All prices based on net weight. 273 ContB of Orcvr.tiono — F.roc;cn Pp.nkn.^-ed Shrir.rp (OtliJ r ■^lOirmPr ec-^V ,• d ) T\ro ccnpnnier. furnished cost data on fro;^en hcad.l.cGs, and on fj,-02en p.;.jled and dcveined, shrliup to tlie Fede.L-al Ti-ad.Q Coj.uiiission accountants for the year 1954 (see table V - 57). One other coiapany vnn able to jprovide cost infoniiation by type of packn^e for the liionth of October 1954 (see table V - 58). TABLE V - 57. --AVERAGE COST PER POUI-JD OF END- PRODUCT OF PRODUCBIG FROZEN HEADLEGS, AND KWZSN PEELED AND DEVEINED SHRB'iP, 2 PRODUCERS, 1954 (Cents per pound) Company A Company B Item Frozen headless Frozen peeled Frozen headless Frozen peeled Green shrimp Containers Labor Overhead i/ Total producti( costs 49.32 3.42 1.53 .63 on 54.90 60.05 3.42 9.48 3.90 76.85 48.67 3.85 5.41 .99 5b. 92 60.84 2.62 6.82 1.46 71.74 1/ Includes depreciation insurance, repairs and maintenance, utilities, supplies, payroll and property tfoxes. Costs per pound of finished product for one company which furnished statistics on its total annual volume \7ere clo:-c to 59 cents for frozen headless and some^7hat less tlian 72 cents for peeled and de- veined shrimp. Labor, packasinc hi.tterials, and overhead costs, in this instance, vere approximately 10 cents on frozen headless and 11 cents on peeled and deveined shrimp. The other coiipaiiy for which comparable data for the sariie year were available listed its total production costs for frozen headless as 55 cents, for peeled and deveined shrimp as 77 cents. Costs other than raw material. In tliis instance, was slightly hither than 5 cents for frozen headless, but nearly 17 cents for peeled and deveined shrimp. Comparable cost data for 1953 which were available for this company vere higher than in 1954; this may be interpreted as a reflection of the price inflation in the raw shrimp market in the earlier part of 19^3. 274 r^ M H _r^ C3 irv ;-i K fr\ 1- fn H () fe s ^ ->o o Pi H H H a O ^ o CO (^ r; w C) 1 I'l B p H o c- < I'-l K hJ f'l (1< It, M H < ) Q •\ H SI &I b g (/) \-^\ bJ l-^ Ph ^i^ o F-i 1 — ■ rn CO n CO ( ) ^ o o J f^T ^^ u i R ^ H ^ ^ P 1 CO crj ^ CO ti m LPi H o ■ i ^ > <; Ph ti M Pi ^J o O H -P -P o o u U • m rC! S-i (I) u> u> ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo H rH H rH H r-l H H .H rH rH r-l Hr-jHHHCOCOcOCOCOCMCMaiOjUt- HHHHHOOOOOOOOO 00 CO o -t^ CO VO _-j- uA o -* O C-- CM VO OJ -^ _i- ,^1 CJ m H o CO CO H r-i LPi UN CO OJ CM UA UN r>1 VO t— CO VO C— ^t _ri- UN c^ r- H i-i VO oj t- ,-1 o UNUNUNUNUNUNOOOQOOOOO ■"■■"UNUNOOOO OJOJCMCMCMOJUNUNUNI CM CM CM CM CM CM H'-ir-lHr^HHr-^ OOOOOOIi^lAUNUNUNHHr-|.-| UNUNUNUNUNUNHHHHHr—r—C^C^ -*-4--d--:t^-:l-CMCMCMCMCMHHHH OCM(7\OOCOOCMt— CTnCO CO CM:— O O CJ> C7N O O VO O roCO O -ci- VO -^- UN O ir> CM H CO UN UN CM f--:t on CO H VO H CT\ ^ J- ^ OO CM CM UN^- CO OO CM UN^ J- en O UN H VO VO u\^ en oovo -=^ -3- cj\ cjNVD CM^ VOOOOCMUNOOUNUN Ol t— O Q vp CO UN CACO 00 CM CM rO_3- J^ I-- CJNCO CJ\-:t UN m r-( ai u^ H ON H r-l CM H oovo en ofivo f— r— iH no m o") ooooooooo UN UN UN UN irN UN UN UN UN oooooooo oooooooo H r-l H H H H r-l I-) UN UN UN UN UN ir\ UN CO t— >- t~- CM or-) OO I On p -p +> +3 +> q a o Pi c B :3 7i 0 ::i 0 o o o o V u V u V LCN O O ICN O CM m ro CO UN 1 I I I I VO NO H O CM CM ro^ (!) (U 0) flJ C) hi to bT to to U) CJ to C) PJ '■i '■•! '-I '•* ') o o o t) "o ri CJ p! cr? p) fJi ^1 Pi P< fl| ol +> d g CJ Pa 0 P eJ O UN X) en OOOOVOOODro OOOO0NOOCJ-.0 • ••••«•• t~-UNUNUNJ- t^f-UN r-i H .-^ OOOOOOOO UN r-l r-\ H 00 CU OJ CO • ■•••••« ^rocooOHHHH t—vo C-- ro o t— UN o 0-^0\r-\ t:— UN t-- O O UN UN^ OJ CO cnt~ o en CM UN UN CM ^ ro CM UN f— UN UN C~- en UN c— --t OJ fnco H o C3NO OO ONCO CM t— CM H cncM H UN OJ 'JO o ■p -g +> O O O 0 V V O UNO CM OJ (V-) 1 I I UN H VO H CM CM 0) (U d) to to to P3 ci P3 r'^ .M .',i o o o n! c3 pi P- P4 Pi +3 O O CM O O tVJ ^^ PJ o Pi s 0) pf ^J +J +> +J C C P C 3 rJ ::i 3 O O O O 0 CJ o o O ICN O ICN CM OJ oo en 1 I I I UN HVO H H OJ ai cn Pi .g w ■d OJ p tH ^J tl M M tq O O O O O O O OJ CM 01 H r-l r-l l-t r-l CM CM _0J _OI CM ai f-i m'h" I I I OJ Ol OJ r-l rH I I CM OJ Ai ^ ^ O iH rH rH i-l E-l UN IPv I.A UN •P -P -P C P c ::! ^ P GOO CJ CJ o W O OJ CM O I UN •H rH Ph (U I to to V Pi Pi M Pi o al . UN IfN CM OJ I I UN ■ol bO to N CM CJ Ol H r-l H O I I I I OJ 01 OJ -P HJ « C P P WOO (D O U (\> O to (U UN CM PJ •ri m^ ^ Pi t 1 rH HVO Pi 1 en m M 1 1 ° r 1 f t s i ^i i ^ i 1 1 1 1 1 1 L- ^j 1 ^ o. 1 O 1 •- i i i WEIGHING |- ^_ 1 1 L^ STATIONS WRAPPING MACHINE a I 1 t t I r--T L ., |. J 1 1 1 1 ' t ' 1 1 Si Ik S t 5 lU a t a o o u a: OE O t V) r 1 o t ' o 5 1 -J ' o 1 V. o HECEIV PORTAB CONVEY DOC 8 § £o ?;5 ik; 5 o & o o j3 o (U (4 id 278 2. Grading: Hundred-pound boxes of chriwp are eraptied Into a ■\/ash vat located inside the cold holdinj^ rooiu. Mter waf^hin^ the shrimp ai'e conveyed through a cut-out in the vo.ll of the cold roojn, directly to the receiving end of the gradin^i machine. Tills tyije of procedure is superior to the co;iJiion practice of dracGing the boxes of shrimp from the cold room, hand-tiaicl:inc and emptying the shrimp manually into a wash vat, and feeding them into the grader.- 3. Peeling: Containers of graded shrimp are loaded manually on the conveyor feeding past the peeling work stations. The operators remove the shrimp from the conveyor, hand peel each shrimp leaving the tails on, and place the peeled shrimp in a container. VJl-ien filled the container is placed on a conveyor and emptied into a v/ash vat. k. Deveining and splitting: The peeled shrimp are removed from the wash vat by means of a wire mesh scoop and placed in a con- tainer. The container in turn is placed next to a splitting and de- veining machine. Tlie operator feeds the peeled shrimp individually into the receiver of the machine using both the right and the left hand. A rotary knife blade in the machine splits the shrimp to the desired depth, removing the vein by the cutting action of the knife blade. After discharge by the machine the stirimp are placed in a wash vat. The capa- city of the splitting machine is governed by the rate of feed by the hand operator. 5. Breading: The chrinp are removed from the wash vat and brought to an automatic breading machine. This machine autoi^atically breads the shriirip, discharging theiu ready for packaging. Tne machine is hand-fed by operators who position the shrimp on the receiving belt. From this point on to the discharge of the breaded shrimp the operation is fully automatic. It is claimed that, using a forty percent breading pick-up, 9^8 pounds of finished product can be produced per machine hour with this machine. To maintain this rate of production a hand feeding crew of 6 operators would have to be employed, tlie productivity per worker averaging I58 pounds per raan-hour (one-eixth of the 9^8 pounds produced per machine -hour ) . A good operator breading shrimp manually, in comparison, will only produce 30 to kO pounds of finished product per hour. In addition to the production advantages of the machine, an appreciable savings in breading waste is claimed, as well as a saving in floor space. 6. Packing: After breading, the shrimp are discharged on a conveyor flowing past packing operators who hand-pack the shrimp into cartons. The filled cartons are placed by the packer, lid open, on a, conveyor feeding to the weighing station. 279 7. Weighing: Eac)i filled carton is welched by a tevan of two operators, the lid closed, and the carton placed on a conveyor leading to the packaging machine. 8. Packaging: The filled cartons are conveyor-fed into an automatic machine where they are overwrrapped and sealed. 9. Freezing: From the packaging station the cartons are con- veyor-fed to an automatic loading plate freezer where they are frozen and then discharged onto a table ready for mastering. 10. Mastering: The cartons of frozen shrimp are hand paclced in the master cartons, placed on a conveyor feeding to a machine where they are sealed and discharged ready for cold storage. Manpower requirements and production per man-hour. — AsBiuaing that both the synthesized layout (see figure V - 60) and the synthesized operations described above were to be adopted, production per man-hour (in terms of end-product weight) and man-hours required per hundred pounds of end-product were estimated by the First Research Corpui-ation engineers as follows: TABLE V - 59. —FROZEN BREAD"!) SHRIMP, ESTIMATED PRODUCTION RATES AMD MAi-i-HOURS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE 100 POWJD,S OF END-PRODUCT, HYPOTHETICAL PLANT USING SYNTxIEST'^D PROCEDUl^S AlID LAYOUT Production per Man- •hours required Operation TiTpe of man -hour (end- (per 100 pounds of nuiiiber and name ("perft t ion product weight) end-product) Pounds 1- Receiving Hand 4,000 0.025 2. Grading Machine 1,330 0.075 3. Peeling Hand 26.6 3.759 h. Splitting and deveining Machine 106.4 0.939 5. Breading Machine 158 0.633 6. Packing Hand 50 2.000 7. lieigliing Hand 250 0.400 8. Packaging Machine 1,500 0.067 9. Freezing Machine 900 0.111 10. Master carton Hand and machine 334 0.299 280 An estimate of manpoirar needed at each operational ctace baned on a desired average production rate of 900 to 1,000 pounds of end-product per hour was ari-ivod at as follov7G frora the above fi^jiu-es: Estimated Manpover Requirciiients '• Operation Number of vorkers (Part time) (Note: The part-time (Part tiiae) irorkers vould seinre as a service group where needed. ) 1. Receiving 5 2. Gradins 2 3. Peeling 36 k. I>3veining and splitting 7 5. Breading 6 6. Pacliing 20 7- Weighing k 8. Packaging 1 9. Freezing 1 10. ilasfcer carton 3 Statistics on breaded products. — Tlie rapid pace at T.hich the breading industry is expanding can be seen from inspection of figures V - 61 and V - 62. Production of frozen bieaded cooked and uncooked shrimp in I95O, the first year for which statistics for breaded products are available, amounted to slightly less than 6.6 million pounds. In 1956 breaded production was in excess of 50 million pounds. The value of the pack increased from $U.2 million to $37.3 million. llhile the production statistics cited above cannot be broken down between cooked and uncooked shrimp, it is known that the greater proportion of the breaded shrimp production is marketed uncooked. Costa of operations (breaded shrimp plant). --In the course of Its tjtudy of costs of operation at the processor's level the Federal Trade Coniiaission obtained production costs from three producers of breaded ohriiup, Tiie follovrlng general observations regarding the operations of the three companies can be made: raw shrimp were purchased either frora outside sources or obtained from subsidiary organizations in which the coj.ipany had an interest in fishing operations. Companies which did not have freezing facilities of their own, froze and stored their products in public freezer and cold storage plants. The raw shrimp were run through grading machines to produce uniform sizes. Certain sizes were used in the breading process and the remainder were marketed as frozen headless, peeled deveined, and cooked peeled shrijup. Breaded shrimp in all three cases was the principal product . 281 a ac CO Q w 8 o Q a S w ISJ s o CVJ M o ^ •§ r^ • r- r^ CN • eg a> o 1 r-\ i-H _:j • a LU O < CO LU CNJ Oi 1-1 CQ CM • 1 1 1 1 1 -^ 1 1 1 L lA ^ -3 o CM O 04 i-t UN g I I • CM •s o I CO C5 0\ o lA (5 a o » •'-' "2 I O • Os f^ ^ •H CO 4J • CM O? lA • r— • o LU r- O r-{ < LU Q£ vO 00 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 _J O \A O lA O lA o ■LA -:* -^ P~V in cents per pound of product, as reported by the Federal Trade Comjulssion for three firms, vrere as follows: TABLE V - 60. --AVERAGE COST PER POUITO OF FROZEN UNCOOICED BREADED SHRB4P AND SHARE OF TOTAL COST REPRESENTED BY RAU SIIRBIP, THREE PRODUCERS, 1952, 1953 Aim I95U Cents per pound of product Percent of total cost 195^ Cents per Percent pound of of total product cost 1953 Cents per pound of product^ Percent of total cost 195^^ Cost of raw shrimp hO.'J 65.: k9.S 68.6 36.3 61.5 Total cost of breaded product 62. k 100.0 72.6 100.0 59.0 100.0 Cost of the breaded product varied in direct pioportion with the cost of raw shrimp vrhich averaged approximately two thirds of the total. Breading, packaging materials, direct labor, and plant overhead were the other elements of cost. Table V - 61 compares total costs of product in cents per pound for the three companies for wliich costs were obtained. The spread in costs between the least and the most economical operation was 10 cents in 1952 (duta for two plants available only), almost 21 cents in 1953> and lif.5 cent'.-, in 1954. Plant A's costs exceeded those of the other two operations because of a relatively high allocation of overhead. 283 TABLE V - 6l.--AVT^RAGE COST PER POIJIID OF FHODUCIHG FllOffiN UlICXvOKED ]3l^CADED GIIEm'IP, DETAILS FOR TIKEE PRODUCERS, 1952, 1953 AlfD 195*^ (CcntG per pound) Item 1952 1953 195'^ Co:upany A 71-61 83.93 72. ^t? Company B 61.8I 73.27 57.89 Company C n.a. 63. 07 58.99 n. a. - not available. Detailed cost data for the three companies and two other com- panies for which information for part of the year is available are found in table V - 62. Cost of breading materials in the plants studied averaged about ten percent of total production costs. The breading expense will depend on the amount of so-called 'pick-up', the quantity of breading mixture added to the raw shrimp meat. The 'pick-up* ranges from 35 to 60 percent. Coarseness of breading material, consistency of batter-mix, and the number of dips into each are factors controlling the amount of 'pick- up'. Tlie style of the end-product, i.e. tails on or of f, butterfly style or round, affects the amount of breading mixture that can be added. Tlie consensus of processors interviewed by First Research Cor- poration viis that soraev/here between 35 and ^0 percent of 'pick-up' would yield the most satisfactory product. Most of the processors reportedly would welcome the establishaient of breading standards. Canned Sliriiup Canned shrimp plants are the most highly mechanized segment of the shrimp industry. Nevertheless, First Research Corporation reports, hand operations still account for all bvit a relatively small fraction of the total tiiue required to pack canned shrimp. Mechanization has been applied to shrimp canning comparatively recently. It was not until the end of the year 1953, for instance, that all sliriiup canning plants in Louisiana, as v;ell as a number of the estab- lisliiiients in Miosissipiji and Alabama, were using automatic shrimp-peeling machines. Several plants at that tiiiie were using hand-feed develning machines, though an appreciable quantity of shrimp is still deveined 28i| c5 I ir\ [3 O lA H K Ch O (X, H (^ Ph CO a\ Q CVJ o OJ VD o m O ON H tJ s re) t) 0) a) w (-1 O ra P 0< ^ a 0) (1) W PL, a ■p :3 w o O Ph Q) r^ fcO t H H VDCO • • H H t^VO 0\H 00 0 00 -^ VD ir\ ir\ m lA "^o ooco f-O VD-* eg Q h-VD3-VO ' tr ONONp p t^ ^ CO On CO QO 00 • ••••• CM C~-C0 Q OJ J- h- ir\ lAVO lA lA VD O t-p p CO f-o t^co a5 t— • •••*• o\-* j-^^ 1^ t;- ONVD O O OJ ^- >-v5 OJ OJ 00 OJ VO H ^^ On H -* OJ p O O ONco^ a5 CO H • ••••» ro^ 00^ ^ po OJ lA lA Q O H O VO^ 3 ^ VO • ••••• VO VO J-VD VD-* H iH OnP p H • ••••• O ' O -:* 00 lA C -* CO ,^^ CO 01 CO ^ lA h-i CT\OJ OJ 1 00 ONVD -* 3- CO VO lA lAVD VO lA ONO ONp O lAVD OOP VO lA H p p CO t--voa5 CO H O ^ O p 00 CO 01 CO O O VO 00 t-- c^ 01 00 00 0\OJ OJ H ^ ^ -4- -:J- CO^ (U OJ CO OJ)rol ^ lA lA LA o\< m 0^ <; m u Q ci On r-i H H -4-|lAlVO < 03 O Q O w CO in ^ 285 mmiuttlly. A l\illy nutomatic procedure for pcvillnf; nncl cV,^vcininc in the moot recent innovation in the inclnatry and is probably the- mout ol;:;nifi- Giint advance In toclmlque made. Aaide from c-^'cably rcduciri'j; uicinpover requirements, it has lent mox-Q flexibility to production planning;. Fnrtlionnore, it allows the pack'jrn to use email shrimp that fox'inerly could not px'ofitably be paeJcad. First Research Corporation rexjorta that functions connected with the unloadin:;, peeling, dovelnin;::, blanching, tiradlnn, and closiiic of cane have been luechani-.'ied in jnuny oatablicluncnta, and that conveyors, fluraeo^ and puiajs for trunoportinfr the product between operationo have been introduced. In throe typical plantn surveyed, hand operation;', ctlll accotmted for ovtir 0*3 percent of total man-hours required for packiiif:. Such tlincj-conuumin;;; operations as eortin^ and innpectinc after bloucliing lis veil aa pacldnf^ and weighing before can closure are still pei-fonucd on n manual bar;ia, ?li"^LJiliy^^!i* — *^'oiiviion faults observed in the layout of the planti3 surveyed by First Recearch Corporation were the remoteness of wai'ehousinc space from the final processing operation, and the consider- able distance between receiving and inspection area and the area where Initial processing took place, resulting in excessive transporting of product. Allowing for the use of most up-to-date machinery and endeavor- ing to eliminate whatever crossover or back-tracking of product between operations encountered in the plants visited, the analysts of First Research Corporation drew up a model layout plan for a shrimp cannery •^^Jhich may be of help to the plant intending to streamline its px-ocedures (see figures V - 63 and V - 6k for the flow of operations in a typical plant and in a hypothetical plant using the synthesized layout and procedures reconmiended by First Research Corporation.) Plant capacity. --T\-/o of the three Louisiana plants surveyed had an average daily production (based on a one shift - ten hour operation) in ternis of raw he ads -on shrimp of 40,000 pounds, one an average of 60,000 pounds. Tliese production rates were estimated to correspond to 70 to 90 percent of total capacity at standard or 100 percent efficiency. Since tlie plants in the past have usually closed tiri.ce jfearly for a total of approxiiuately two months' non-productive tL'iie, there are approiciinately 200 to 220 vorlting days during tlie year. Total annual production in terras of raw naterial used, consequently, was upwards of eight million pounds for two plants, and twelve million pounds for one plant. Api^lying an average yield rate of 2? percent (27 pounds of finished, for each 100 pounds of ra\7 product) to these figures, theoretical production in tenns of finished product was over two million pounds in one instance and over tiiree million pounds in the other in the plants surveyed by First Research Coirporation. 19/ ^q/ Raw shrir.ip quantities ordinarily are listed in barrels of 210 pounds, "Whereas canned product quantities more often than not are given in standard ea.r>os of fifteen pounds. Tlie quantities cited above were converted to pounds for ease of comparison. 286 ; u a> o (A i -■; I Liu 1. 1 - -i- J / \ an t K0A3AN00 * " *^ T 9NINI3A3a r -- - • - - - --1 *" I ♦■ H0A3AH00 ♦■ '*" t II3-I33.I U3133d HttOilVld 113133d a3i«A313 t U3n33d < X in z 4 U z < Q 1 NOIifiS 1 I 1I0A3AN03 4- 1 Naii33 g I g z Z < H ^ CM O CM CO I g Z z < o o •H a r-4 < r-4 U rHl CM O r- C a ri OS 00 -d- CM 0) o 0) •s a» rH o (^ \r\ t^ r^ CJs 0\ vO CM CO 1 1 1 1 1 1 CM CO -o CM 29I1 Statdstics on canned shrimp production. — Production of canned shrimp, figure V - 66 shows, ha£^ remained relatively stable over the years since 1930. In that year a total of 826,2l42 standard cases of shrimp was put up by canning establishments, while in 1956 the canned pack amounted to 920,9^0 standard cases. A standard case of shrimp being equivalent to 1$ pounds, the quantity of shrimp put up in cans, therefore, was approximately 12. ij million pounds in 1930 and 13.6 million pounds in 1956. Value of pack increased from $5 million in 1930 to $16.8 million in 1956. (see figure V - 6?) ^/hile the annual pack of canned shrimp has not varied much over the years, the number of canning plants reveals a long-term tendency to decline. Average pack per establishment, consequently, is larger today than it was twenty- five years ago. The geographic concentration of canning operations is more pro- nounced today than it was years ago. Of the total of 69 plants in oper- ation in 1930, UO were located in the States of Louisiana and Mississippi, the remainder being distributed over the other six States comprising the Gulf and south Atlantic region. In 195^ Louisiana and Mississippi ac- counted for 37 of the k'i shrimp canning establishments then in existence. Costs of ope rat Ions. --Data on the cost of operations of eight representative canning plants during the period from 1952 through 195^ were obtained in the course of the Federal Trade Commission field study. For the purpose of this report only the five operations for vjhich com- plete information is available are considered. The operations of the canners in the Federal Trade Commission sample differ in scope. Three companies are fully integrated operations with fishing, canning, and distribution facilities. The other two com- panies, which do not own boats, extend financial assistance to vessel owners to assure themselves a supply of raw shrimp. Packing is under the canners' own brands and private labels. At the time the cost study was made shrimp canning constituted only a portion of the five companies' operations. All but one company, however, listed canned shrimp as principal product. The fifth company concentrated on cooked and peeled shrimp packed in institutional size cans. Other seafood products canned and distributed by the five companies were oysters and crabmeat. Two companies, in addition to seafood, canned vegetables in plants located in other areas. Average costs of the pack for the five companies for the years 1952, 1953, and 1954, were as follows: 295 TABLE V - 6U. --AVERAGE COST OF PRODUCING CAMWED SliRBIP, Am SHARE OF TOTAL COST REPRESENTED BY RAW SHRIMP, DOLLARS PER DOZEN FIVE OUNCE CANS PACKED, 5 PRODUCERS, 1952, 1953 AlfD I95U 1952 1953 19 Dollars per dozen 5i^ Item Dollars Percent per of dozen total Dollars per dozen Percent of total Percent of total Cost of raw shrimp Processing costs 2.079 57.16 1.558 1^2.81+ 2.581 1.51^ 63.03 36.97 2.376 l.I^Ill 62.25 37.75 Cost of pack 3.637 100.00 i+.095 100.00 3.817 100.00 Processing costs represented in the neighborhood of two fifths of the cost of the pack; they were 5 cents lovrer in 1953 than in 1952 and declined another 7 cents in I95U. Tlie cost of the pack, however, varied in direct proportion with the cost of raw shrimp which increased 50 cents in 1953 and fell 20 cents in 195^*^ per dozen five ounce cans packed. The reduction in processing costs from 1952 to 195i<- is accounted for by a decline in labor and packing materials costs, as illustrated in table V - 65. This drop was only slightly offset by a rise in other elements of cost, e.g. royalty and icing and storage expenses. Random observations on canning costs and labor made by the field investigators of the Bureau of Business and Econoniic Research of the University of Miami in the course of their survey were as follov/s: Canning labor frequently is paid on an hourly basis, the usual wage being the minimum wage set by law. VJhere the workers in packing plants are affiliated with the Seafood Workers' Association of the Gulf Coast SIU, AFL-CIO union, however, fixed piecework rates for individual operations are established by contract in addition to hourly rates. It was estimated that under piece work schedule, workers could earn between $8 and $12 per day when production is good. 296 TAnjE V - 65.--AVi';imGi.'j VROCv.s-.iiU} costo CAliiraO SllRIIff', DOLIAPvS VFAi DOZKII FIVK OUl'ICK CANS PAClffiD, FIVE PROaJCERS, 1952, 1953 AND 195'l- 19 52 15 Dollars per dozen '53 19 55— Item Dollars jjcr tlozen Percent of total Percent of total Dollars per dozen Percent of total Direct costs Cans, packing cases, etc. .360 Labor .61»-7 Supplies, salt, etc. .018 Royalties .040 23.11 in. 53 1.15 2.57 .328 .579 .018 .066 21.67 38. 21). 1.19 h.36 .298 .020 .099 20.68 37.75 1.39 6.87 Total 1.065 68.36 .991 63 M .961 66.69 Indirect costs Stean, poiTer, fuel Icine and storage Processine overhead Fixed expense .022 .019 .152 .300 l.J+1 1.22 9.76 19.25 .020 .029 .136 .338 1.32 1.92 8.98 22.32 .023 .026 .13'+ .297 1.60 1.80 9.30 20.61 Total Jjf>3 ■^1.6'' . ^y^3 3h.5k .480 33.31 Total processing; costs 1.558 100.00 1.51k 100. Ou I.4I1I 100.00 Tlie labor in processing plants is drawn from many serpnents of the labor force in the area. Mgrant labor is uncorasrion. The larger canners and processors generally operate on a year-round basis and can oITer employment on a permanent basis. The introduction of machinery for dcveining and peeling has had economic repercussions. It is esticiated that one peeling machine repl^.ices about kO i/orkers. Peeling machines are in -.tailed on a minimiun 3-7ear lease ba.-;is. The rent is calculated on the basis of machine utilization with a flat annual minimum. A company utilizing five peeling mcichines esti- jiiated that the daily cost of operations for all five machines was .t600, or .'[>120 per day ijer umchine. The- more recently developed deveining machines are also leased on a royalty basis. 297 Dried Shrimp In the United States dried shrimp are produced almost exclusively in the States of California and Louisiana, the latter State accounting for most of the production. Methods of processing and drying are somewhat different in the two States. The methods de- tailed below are based upon a survey of one plant in Louisiana by the First Research Corporation and upon information available in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Plant operations. -- 1. Unloading: Raw whole shrimp are unloaded manually from the hold of the fishing vessel directly into a rectangular mesh basket holding approximately 200 pounds of shrimp. 2. Washing: The filled basket is lowered into a stream of running water where sand and other foreign matter are washed away. 3. Blanching: The washed shrimp are then emi)tied into smaller wire mesh baskets and transported manually to the cooking vat located about ten feet from the wash station. The baskets of shrimp are placed in position in the cooking vat, allo\/ing the shrimp to be covered by a boiling saline solution, but leaving the handles of the baskets exposed for ease in removal from the vat. The shrimp are boiled for approximately fifteen minuter;, the time depending upon the species and size of the shrimp being proc.issed. Hie cooking vat has a capacity of approximately k^O pounds per load. h. Drying: The baskets of cooked shrimp are removed fi'om the vat, emptied into a wheelbarrow with a perforated body, and rolled manually to the drying platform. Tlie platform is built up on pouts to allow free passage of air underneath to facilitate the drying process. The surface of the platform is constructed with a gently undulating surface in order that the shrimp may be swept to the crest of the "waves" and covered with tarpaulin whtta rain occurs and at night to keep off the dew. The shrimp are spread out on the platform witli wooden rakes in a thickness of two to three inches. Every two or three hours the slu-imp are "turned" with rakes to effect uniform drying. Drying is usually completed during the summer in three to four days, but in the winter five to ten days may be required. (see fit;Lue V - 68) 298 FIGURE V - 68. — ^A small shrimp drying platfomi on Bayou Grand Caillou below Houraa, Louisiana. 5. Tumbling: After drying, the shrimp are raked to the edge of the platform adjacent to the peeling building. Thro\igh an opening in the building wall the dried shrimp sire shoveled into the receiver of an open mesh cylindrical tumbler. When sufficient shrimp are in the tianbler, it is rotated by means of a drive motor which effects a tiombling of con- tents while allowing the heads and shells to drop through the mesh into a receiving receptacle and retaining the peeled shrimp meats within the cyl- inder. 6. Weighing and packing: The peeled shrimp meats are removed from the tumbler, weighed up in 100-pound bags, and stacked to await pickup by the wholesale buyer. The heads and hulls (shrimp meal or bran) are also sacked in hundred pound bags and purchased by the same buyer. Summary: According to First Research Corporation the pro- cessing operations of the shrimp drying plant surveyed were adequately handled by a work force of two men. The processing methods involved do not lend themselves to mechanization. Since most processing takes place in the open, the need for plant buildings is reduced to a minimum. The firm surveyed uses only two small buildings. One for housing miscellsmeous work tools and materials, and the other for housing the tumbler equipment guad sceiles. This building, in addition, contains the required storage space. All operations except peeling, weighing, sacking, and storing take place in the open. At the plant surveyed, removing of heads and shells from the shrimp was the only mechanized operation. The cylinder of the tvmibler had a capacity of about 1,500 pounds of whole dried shrimp, but operated more efficiently if loaded to one-half or less of capacity. One hundred potinds of whole fresh shrimp will yield about kO pounds of whole dried shrimp which in turn will yield 13 to lU pounds of dried shrimp meats and 26 to 27 pounds of heads and hulls (shrimp meal or bran). Cost of operations. --Cost data for two producers of dried shrimp were obtained by the Federal Trade Commission. One operation was a family business conducted by the owner and his unsalaried relatives. The dried shrimp operation of the other company was part Df diversified activities performed by hired labor. 299 Production costs did not differ materially between the two companies. Tlie average cost of a pound of end-product in both instances was in the neighborhood of $1.00 in 1953; and in the neighborhood of about 63 cents in 195^ • Tlie big difference in costs between the two years must be ascribed to the low raw material costs which prevailed throughout 195!^. Platform expenses (fuel, salt, repairs of equipment, depre- ciation, etc.) in the case of the company not depending on outside labor represented approximately one-tenth of total production costs, the re- mainder being accounted for by raw material costs. The percentage repre- sented by platform costs in the case of the other establishment was only slightly higher. Labor costs were nearly twice as large as overhead. Tlie difference in operational results between the two companies, one showing a loss, the other one a profit, in both years for which data are available, cannot be ascribed to a different cost structure. It was due rather to the better price obtained by the one company for a higher quality product. Shrimp Specialties Canned shrimp specialties to date have been only of minor importance in packing operations. Brand competition amor^ processors and distributors, hov/ever, tends to place increasing emphasis on prod- uct diversification indicating a bright future for this still compara- tively small branch of the industry. Statistics on canned shrimp specialty production are currently collected for eleven styles of pack, viz.: Aspic Gumbo Bisque Wewburg Calces Paste Cocktail Smoked (in oil) Creole Soup Curry In 195'^^ a total of 13 companies distributed over eight states packed the equivalent of a total of 6,3^4 standard cases r/of one or more styles of canned shrimp specialty products; the products were valued at $100,702 at the manufacturer's level. Statistics on chilled and frozen shrimp cocktails which are specialty products not coming under the general classification of canned products were collected by the United States Pish and Wildlife Service for the first time in 195^. In that year a total of 523,552 pounds (in manu- factured weight) \/ere put up in this form. Tlie value of these products at the processor's level was placed at $459,819. _^/ A standard case contains kQ pounds net weiij;ht of product. 300 Snoked Shrimp • The chances of developing a market for smoked shrimp are considered promising by some specialists in the mai-keting of fish and shellfish. It has been pointed out that the smoking of shrimp is a simple process and that the public could be expected to pay a sliglxt premium — necessitated by higher production costs — for the tasty and eye-appealing product, Einoked shrimp are cooked shrimp -which are smoked lightly for additional color and flavor. Shrimp smoked in the shells retain their flavor and texture and remain moist. Shrimp may be smoked also after the shells are removed but the finished product is usually dry-textured and bitter and the yield is smaller. Pickled Shrimp Pickled shrimp is a regional specialty of the New Orleans Area but is sold in fish markets from Key We., t to Washington, D. C. UTILIZATION OF SHRIMP FOR NON-EDIBLE PURPOSES Bait Shrimp In addition to the very valuable commercial fishery for shrimp for human consumption, an important but more localized industry is engaged In capturing shrimp for sport-fishing bait. In some areas, notably New York and New Jersey, substantially the entire catch of shrimp is used for bait purposes. In Florida and Texas — which are among the leading producers of shrimp for human consumption — there are also substantial commercial shrimp fisheries devoted exclusively to supplying bait to sport fishermen. At times, some of the catch which would normally be sold for food purposes may be diverted to bait and at other times some of the bait catch may be used for human consumption depending on the market situation at a given moment . Raw shrimp of a grade unfit for human consumption may be sold for bait provided it is dyed and labeled as "bait shrimp" in accordance with United States Food and Drug Administration regulations. The quantity of edible shrimp purchased annually by sports fishermen for use as bait is unknown. As no price differential is involved, the trade is not concerned about the quantity of holdings that may ultimately be used for bait. Since Louisiana permits taking such small shrimp that the heads-off count may ran to about 85 per pound, dealers in that state get most of the bait shrimp bu'jiness, 301 Bait shrimp are marketed either alive or dead, large amounts of the dead shrimp ai'e frozen. The method of keeping live shrimp for bait is described in a study of the Branch of Fishery Biology of the United States Fish and Wild- life Service, (see Fishery Leaflet 337, Keeping Live Shrimp for Bait). The species best adapted for this purpose, according to this publication, are brown-grooved shriiap (P. aztecus) and -vrfiite shrimp (P. setiferus) . Handling of Live Shrimp Shrimp taken for bait are kept either in boxes, ponds, or troughs. In Florida and in the other Gulf States, dealers in live shrimp for bait hold them for indefinite periods in live boxes (pens) floating in salt water. These boxes are of various sizes and frequently are covered with galvanized screen coated with asphaltum paint. The wooden boxes used for holding the shrimp are coated inside with asphaltum paint for protection from sea water. The number of shrimp held in a container depends on its size. A No. 2 galvanized tub will hold fifty shrimp. The water in the boxes must be kept at a temperatvure not over 60° F., the optimum temperature being 50-60°. The common practice is to have either a stream of water running through the tank or a continuous stream of air passing through the water. If aeration is impossible, the number of shrimp is reduced by at least eighty percent. Even in well- aerated salt water, the shrimp will die rapidly when the water temperature rises. The box must be kept under cover or in the shade in order to main- tain the temperature of the water as low as possible. The boxes and the water must be kept clean. Shrimp from one box are removed to a second while the first is being cleaned. Waste products must not be allowed to collect in the tank, since they will make the water stagnant. The same is true when tanks are overcrowded. Shrimp will eat a variety of foods, e.g. minced clams, ground- up fish, and some varieties of canned dog food. Feeding the shrimp once a day is considered sufficient. The methods of handling bait shrimp Immediately after they are hauled from the water vary in different areas; they are also influenced by the type of gear used, depths fished, and the equipment employed for handling the catch. Under any circumstance, the next operation, once the catch is hauled up, is the sorting of the shrimp from the debris in the net. If the shrimp are to be marketed alive in the immediate vicinity of the landing area, they are held in boxes, floats, or pens of varying 302 sizes. When they are shipped to more distant areas they are transported in aerated tarJc tinacks holding approximately 20,000 shriinp. Bait dealers hold the shrimp in wooden or concrete tanks, or in c'^lvanized ii'on tubs or cans. Shriinp so held will keep for several days if the containers are aerated or have a good flow of water, are sheltered from the sun, and the temperature of the water is maintained at 50-60° F. live shrimp are usually sold by the dozen or hundred, fresh dead shrimp by weight or measure, and frozen shrimp by weight. Live shrimp are, of course, the most desirable and the most expensive, bringing around fifty cents a dozen in some sport fishing areas. If marketed as dead bait, the shrimp are placed in convenient containers until landed for sale to fishermen or to bait dealers. Shrimp By-Products The utilization of the waste of any industry is desirable because of (l) the increased profits if the proceeds from the sale of the by-prod- ucts exceed the additional costs incurred in connection with their prepara- tion for the market, (2) the elimination of the disposal problem which becomes more acute with the rising density of the population, and (3) the use of valuable and desirable materials that are often wasted. In the shrimp industry effective utilization would appear doubly desirable be- cause of the relatively large percentage of waste present and the health hazards caused by careless disposal. At present the only by-product of the shrimp -processing industry is shrimp meal or "bran". The product is prepared from the heads, hulls, and appendages of shrimp, the waste products of the canneries and drying platforms . In addition to processing waste, shrimp that have become softened and discolored by improper handling and very small shrimp which cannot be economically handled for canning and cannot be marketed as fresh shrimp are available for by-product utilization. The portion of the shrimp which constitutes waste is li-3 to 45 percent of the weight of the shrimp. The extent to which this material is utilized is relatively small, varying with the locality. It is used raw for fertilizer, and in the dried form as shrimp meal. When shrimp meal is prejjared from cannery waste the raw material is flame- dried in a tubular dryer; when prepared from dried shrimp no further processing is necessary before marketing. A proportion of the product of both the canning and drying industries is ground before marketing. 303 Le33 than 25 percent of the total waste of processing plants is used in the production of shrimp meal. Production is confined to Louisiana and the Carolinas. Among the factors limiting the production of shrimp meal ai'e the laclc of low- cost machinery for drying and grinding the waste in the smaller and somewhat isolated processing plants, and the limited and unstable market for the product. Shrimp meal is in direct competition irith fish meal, in that both are used in the preparation of poultry and animal feeds. Of the two products fish meal \ri.th its higher protein content is more valuable. Be- cause of this product relationship the market for shrimp meal is influenced by the available supplies of fish meal and the extent of the price spread between the two products. Average protein content of shrimp meal today is only about 38 percent as against over 50 percent some years ago. This is due to the more effective method of peeling by means of automatic peeling machines now in use in canneries; when shrimp is peeled by machine, less shrimp meat clings to the hulls, small particles arc loc;t in the wash water and the protein content of the merd, consequently, is lessened. With hand peelers twenty poanda to tue barrul was the normal yield. More recently the yield haa been only about twelve pounds to the barrel. Shrimp meal at one time v/as more nearly competitive with fish meal from a quality standpoint than it is today. This is indicated by the folloiTing data supplied by Manning in connection with a chemical analysis of shrimp in 193^^ ^IZ TABLE V - 66." CHEl^ICAL AimKfSIS OF SHRD'IP MEAL Percent Moisture 9.00 Crude protein 5^)-.51 Crude ash I8.O3 Ether extract 2.86 Undetermined 15. 60 2]/ J. R. Manning, Value of Shrimp Meal, United States Bureau of Fisheries Memo., S-328 (193^). 30U At about the sane time the above analysis was published, data on the chaidcal composition of ireal manufactured from dlffei-ent species of fis)i were tciven as follows 22/. TABLK V - 67. --CHEMICAL ANALISIS OF VARIOUS TYPES OF FlSIi MEAL Item Moisture Protein Ash Oil Steam-dried menhaden Flame-dried menhaden Flarae-dried whitefish Vacu\;jn-dried vhluefish California pilchard Percent Percent Percent Percent 10.58 62.31 l8.3i^ 7.77 9.25 61.25 20.56 7.11^ f^^.lO 62.00 29.53 l.lU 12.52 67. 68 19.20 1.90 5.9^ 61.88 20.89 3.5i^ A comparison of the protein values in the two tables shows that even under the old processing methods shrimp meal had a ;;lightly lower protein content than meal prepared from other species. With the increased use of the new machinery in shrimp processing establishiuents the quality disadvantage of shrimp meal has become much more pronounced. Prices (quoted on the basis of protein content) of shrimp meal are consistently below those obtaining for fish meal because of the quality differential. Recent quotations for shrimp meal at the cannery have been in the neighborhood of $60 per ton. At this price many canners, Tlie Bureau of Business and Economic Research of the University of Miami reports, felt that the effort expended in readying the meal for the market exceeded the revenue derived from its sale. During the 1930' s there was an appreciable export trade with some of the vjestern European countries in dried shrimp heads and hulls for subsequent grinding into meal for animal and poultry feeds. A part of the domestic production of shrimp meal was also exported to these countries. Tliis market \ras lost during the war and has not been regained. The lack of uniform standards for grade and quality appears to be another deterrent to an expanding market for shrimp meal. Fish meal and oil are the primary products of the herring fishery of Alaska and the menl\adon fishery of the Atlantic and Gulf States. Shrimp meal, on the 2_^ Soi-irce: Daniel, E. P., and McCollum, E. V., Studies of the Nutritive Value of Fish Meals, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Investigational Report 2 (l93l). 305 other hraid, is a jidnor by-product of the shrimp finhery, Perliaps for this reason, fa:Lrly uniform standai'ds of quality and f^'ade ar-e :;ot and maintained in the fish meal industry--, but are lacking in the production of shrimp meal. Recent trends in shrimp meal production can be gauged from the following statistics : TABLE V - 68.— UinTED STATES PRODUCTION AND VALUE OF SHRE-ff I'EAL, 1953 - 1956 Item 1953 195U 1955 1956 Number of processing establishments 38 37 29 22 Total pi'oduction (in tons) 1,000 885 518 561 Value at the manufacturer's level $80,036 $51,098 $31;, 1^70 $33,865 306 SiilLWCTl^D i-;D;i''t;KKf:CK3 Anderson, A. \1. and Po\?er, E. A. Fishery statistics of the United States. United States Department of the Interior, Pish and VJildlife Service, annual i-'eviews for selected years, V/ashington, D. C. Baughman, J. L. 1950 Sucs^stions for a possible method utilizing waste fish resulting from the shrimping industry. Fish and Oil Industry, vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 9-IO. Butler, Charles 1955 Techniques of freezing and storing fish and seafood, Part III. Frosted Food Field, vol. XX, no. 5, May, pp. 12-li|, J+l. Canner 19i^8 Biloxi shrimp industry optimistic about business. Vol. 107, no. 26, December 25, pp. 11-12. Commercial Fisheries Review 1952 Recovery and palatability of different species after cooking. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and VJildlife Service, vol. Ik, no. 11, November, pp. 12-13, Washington, D. C. Dmiel, E. P. and McCollura, E. V. 1931 Studies of the nutritive value of fish meals. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. (Investigational Report no. 2) Dassow, John A., Pottinger, S. R., and Holston, John 1956 Preparation, freezing, and cold storage of fish, shellfish and precooked fishery products. Refrigeration of Fish: Part Four. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. (Fishery Leaflet i+30) Dugan, 19 5^^ J. Roy Handling shrimp in the breading plant. Southern Fisherman Yearbook, March 31> PP- 62-6U. Also in Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 6th Annual Session, September, Marine laboratory. University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida. 307 SELECTED REFERENCES Empey, W. A. 1953 Fish handling and processing in U. S. A.: handling shrimp. Department of Coriimerce and Agriculture, Director of Fisheries, Fisheries Nevsletter vol. 12, no. 12, December, pp. 11 and 13, Sydney, Australia. 195^+ Fish handling and processing in U.S.A.: iced, frozen, canned, and dried shrimp. Department of Conunerce and Agriculture, Director of Fisheries, Fisheries Newsletter, vol. 13, no. 1, January, pp. 11, 15, Sydney, Australia. Erkkila, Leo 1936 Notes on feeding the freshwater shrimp, GaiTimarus, to rainbow trout. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and V7ildlife Service, Progressive Fish Culturist, No. 20, July, Washington, D. C. Fieger, E. A. 195^ How to avoid excessive weight loss in cooking shrimp. Canner, vol. 118, no. Ik, April 5, pp. 9-11. Fieger, E. A., Lewis, Harvey, and Green, Margaret 19^7 For better shrimp cocktails. Southern Fisheiman, vol. 7, no. 3, January, pp. 204-205, 226. Fishing Gazette 19^9 Packaged frozen shrimp. Vol. 66, no. 11, November, p. kO. 1950 Florida firm enters frozen ready to cook packaged shrimp field. Vol. 67, no. 1, January, p. 78. 1952 A new shrimp grading machine. Vol. 69, no. 3, March, p. ^Q. 1952 Packed in glass. Vol. 69, no. 1, January, pp. 66, 100. 1953 New shrimp grader reported by Dudley Machinery Corp. Vol. 70, no. 6, June, p. 123. 1954 New, automatic shrimp deveining machine. Vol. 71, r^o. 8, AugTJst, p. 9U. Fisheries Newsletter 1951 Compact prawn grader. Department of Commerce and Agriculture, Director of Fisheries, vol. 10, no. 3, March, p. 23, Sydney Australia. Food Engineering 1955 Slirimp peeling process. Vol. 27, November, pp. 172-173. 308 SELECTED REFKl^EUCEG Food Manufacture 1955 . Snap frozen pra\'ms. Vol. XXX, no. 1, January. Food Preservation Quarterly 1955 Freezing of prawns. Vol. 15, no. 1, March, p. 18. Frosted Food Field 1951 Imitation jumbo shrimp made from small species, fragments. Vol. 13, no. 2, August, p. I6. 1952 Vein-removed shrimp. Vol. lU, no. 3, March, p. 60. Jarvis, Norman D. 1943 Principles and methods in the canning of fishery products. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. (Research Report No. 7) 1950 Curing of fishery products. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and V/ildlife Service, V/ashington, D. C. (Research Report I8) KapaUca, E. F. and Pottinger, S. R. ISkk Studies on the icing of fresh-cooked and peeled shrimp. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Ssrvice, Fishery Market News, vol. 6, no. 11, November, Washington, D. C. (Separate No. 83) Lantz, A. U. 1951 Shrimp processing. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Progress Reports of the Pacific Coast Stations, No. 89, December, pp. 82-83. Lemon, J. M. 19k'J Notes on freezing shrimp. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and V/ildlife Service, Commercial Fisheries Review, vol. 9} no. 11, November, pp. 1-4, Washington, D. C. Manning, J. K. 1934 Value of shrimp meal. United States Bureau of Fisheries, Special Memorandum No. 328, Washington, D. C. Meyer, M. 1951 The outlook for breaded shrimp and similar products. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, Third Annual Session, June, Marine Laboratory, University of Micuiii, Coral Gc.bles, Florida. 309 SLUiCi'ED RlJFKllli;r!Ci;3 Mitchell, Terry l^kS . Fi^eezin^ of shrimp at Biloxi, Mississippi, plant. Fishing Gazette, vol. 65, no. 13, December, pp. '^o, 58. 19^3 Frozen jumbo shrimp a specialty at Biloxi. Canner, vol. 107, no. 20, November 13, pp. 12, 14. Quick Frozen Foods 1951 Seafood packer uses individual dip method. Vol. 13, no. 10, Hay, pp. 5^-55 • 1952 Shrimp "count ' vex eliminated by mechanical grader in try- out. Vol. ik, no. 10, May. 1952 To dehydrate cooked shrimp. Vol. l4, no. 12, July, p. 87. 195^ Frozen shrimp - now 57'i^ of catch and no end of grovrtih in sight. Vol. 16, no. 9, April, pp. 89-9O, 15^. Robinson, H. R. 1954 Handling shrimp in the canning plant. Southern Fisherman Yearbook, March, pp. 65-66, 125. Also in Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 6th Annual Session, September. Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida. Siebenaler, J. B. 1952 Studies of the "trash" caught by shrimp trawlers in Florida. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 4th Annual Session, April. Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida. Southern Fisherman 1949 Shrimp peeling machine, vol. IX, no. 11, September, pp. 33, 69-71. 1954 Shrimp canners set new standards. Vol. ik, no. 2, February, pp. 3I, 39. Stansby, Maurice E., Pottinger, S. R., and Miyauchi, David T. 1956 Factors to be considered in the fi-eezing and cold storage of fishery products. Refrigeration of fish - Part Three. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. (Fishery leaflet 429) Strasburger, L. W. 1952 Breaded shrimp. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 4th Annual Session, April. Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida. 310 SELECTED REFERENCES Strasburger, L. U. 195)1 Handling shrimp in the packinc and freezing plant. Southern Fisherman Yearbook, March 31> PP. 53-61. Also in Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 6th Annual Session, September. Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida. Tressler, D. K. and Lemon, J. McW. 1951 Marine products of commerce, Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York City. United States Fish and Wildlife Service 19^9 Keeping live shrimp for bait. Department of the Interior, Washington, D. C. (Prepared In the Branch of Fishery Biology) Van der Broek, C. J. H. 1950 Some aspects of food refrigeration and freezing. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, November . Venkataraman, R., Ireenivasan, A. and Vasavan, A. G. 1953 Preservation of semi -dried prawns. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, vol. 12A, no. 10, pp. h'J'S-k^k. Vilbrandt, F. C. and Abernethy, R. F. 1930 Utilization of shrimp waste. Appendix 6 to the Report of the Commissioner of Fisheries for 1930, United States Bureau of Fisheries, V7ashington, D. C. Walker, Leonard 1954 Potted shrimps. Food Man-ufacture, vol. 2$, no. 2, February, pp . 68-69 • Young, Leo 1948 Smoking shrimp. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. (Fishery Leaflet 312, July) and (Separate No. IO9) -^, IHT.-DOP. SBC, WASH., D.C. u(,9UB ■'VSmWm 5 WHSE 01275 4