Senator BARTLETT. Thank you and I wish you would go into that further. First, I think the apprehension of these fishermen-and I have particular reason to know why fishermen are apprehensive and they have every right to be--I would think though that the language here suggested might provide a medium, mechanism-call it what you willthat could be perfected, altered, and meet the approval of the Government, as well as carrying out the desires and intentions of the industry, and of the fishermen themselves. I see your concern, that is easy to follow, but short of seeing to it that these other countries are actually enforcing their regulations, it would seem to me that language could be provided here that would leave all of us in exactly the same position, and ready to go at the appropriate moment. I don't think this is beyond the capacity of man at all, and I infer, in a preliminary way, from what you said, that you sympathize with the concern in a general way, of the fishermen and industry, and I would like to express the hope, in conclusion, that Government and industry and the fishermen, even this day if possible, might sit down together and see if something can't be done to change this language sufficiently to achieve the objectives that are really desired. I don't think it would be too difficult, and I know of no further data we need from either of you for the record. If the need should become apparent before the closing date of June 5, I hope that we may call upon you. Mr. HERRINGTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to be here. Senator BARTLETT. Thank you both for being here. The committee will stand in adjournment. (Whereupon, at 12:32 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.) The following materials were subsequently made a part of the hearing record:) DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Chairman, Committee on Commerce, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. MAGNUSON: At the conclusion of the hearing on S. 2568, the chairman, Senator Bartlett, requested from representatives of the Departments of State and Interior that certain further information be furnished for the record. There are enclosed four statements which constitute the response of the Department of the Interior to the request made. The statements are as follows: 1. Statement of the Department of the Interior describing developments of markets for tuna outside the United States. 2. Statement of the Department of the Interior regarding the catch and disposition of yellowfin tuna caught in the regulatory area. 3. Statement of the Department of the Interior regarding the implementation of the import-control provisions of S. 2568. 4. Statement of the Department of the Interior regarding the provisions of S. 2568, as amended, for suspension, in certain circumstances, of regulations applying to U.S. fishermen. We are advised that the balance of the information requested will be furnished by the Department of State. Sincerely yours, CLARENCE F. PAUTZKE, Commissioner. STATEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DESCRIBING DEVELOPMENTS OF MARKETS FOR TUNA OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES It is believed that the market for tuna outside the United States has been growing at a faster rate than the U.S. market. This appears to be substantiated by Japanese export statistics, an important indicator of market developments in tuna. Japan is by far the largest producer and exporter of tuna. In 1960, Japanese exports of tuna to all countries amounted to 434,365,000 pounds, nearly double those in 1956 (see attached table). The 162,633,000 pounds exported in 1960 to countries outside the United States represent a 301-percent increase over the 5-year period; the quantity exported to the United States represented a 61-percent increase. The West European tuna market has been expanding most rapidly. It is quite possible that this market could reach a magnitude comparable with the U.S. market within the next decade. Adoption of American supermarket selling techniques, desire for convenience food, and an increasing standard of living all indicate a continuation of the rising trend in tuna consumption in Western Europe. A brief description of developments in selected foreign tuna markets is as follows: Japan: In addition to its exports of large quantities of tuna, Japan is the largest consumer of tuna other than the United States. In recent years, Japanese tuna consumption has increased, particularly with development and expansion of the production of fish sausage. Increasing quantities of tuna, especially varieties with darker flesh, are being used by Japanese processors of fish sausage. Italy: The Italian market for tuna is probably the third largest in the world, surpassed only by the markets of the United States and Japan. Although Italy has produced some tuna in a trap-net fishery off its southern coasts, additional quantities have been traditionally imported from Turkey and other Mediterranean countries. In the last decade, Italy began importing raw tuna from Japan, and is now the second most important market for Japanese tuna. Italian imports of raw Japanese tuna increased from 11,233,000 pounds in 1956 to 39,293,000 pounds in 1960. Furthermore, considerable Japanese raw tuna enters Italy via Yugoslavia. The raw tuna is processed in Italian canneries. Yugoslavia: Several years ago, Yugoslavia began importing Japanese raw tuna for use in its canning industry. Imports of raw tuna rose from none in 1956 to 27,509,000 pounds in 1960. Considerable quantities of this tuna are used locally; the remainder has either been transshipped to Italy or exported as canned to other European countries. In addition to canned tuna in oil, Yugoslavia exports a special canned tuna product made of a mixture of tuna and vegetable in a tomato and oil sauce. West Germany: The large consumption of tuna in West Germany depends primarily on imports of canned tuna from Japan and, to some extent, on Spanish, Yugoslavian, and other European sources. Very little if any tuna is produced or canned locally. Switzerland: Low duty rates and possibly demand by Italian and other Latin workers in this country help account for increasing consumption of tuna. France: The market for tuna in France has been increasing despite high fixed ex-vessel prices to the French tuna fishermen and high tariff rates on imports of tuna. Considerable tuna enters France from the South Atlantic tuna fishing grounds via Senegal. 2 Whole-fish weight derived by doubling reported canned weight and adding to fresh and frozen weight. STATEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR REGARDING THE CATCH AND In 1961, according to U.S. Bureau of the Census data, U.S. imports of raw yel- Prospects are that the U.S. fishing fleet may not maintain its high percentage area. 1 Includes small amounts of bluefin and bigeye tuna. At present, most of the yellowfin tuna imported into the United States is taken from waters outside the regulatory area. Based on import statistics in 1961, a fair estimate of the division of U.S. imports of fresh or frozen yellowfin tuna is about 5 percent from the regulatory area and 95 percent from outside the area. Imports of canned yellowfin tuna are not separately reported, but it is expected that the breakdown would be somewhat the same as for the fresh or frozen product. Amounts of yellowfin and skipjack tuna utilized from the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean during 1961 by country Amounts of yellowfin and skipjack tuna landed in each country from the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean during 1961 1 Includes transshipments from U.S.-flag vessels in the following amounts: Yellowfin, 4,952,138 pounds; skipjack, 2,726,009 pounds. STATEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IMPORT-CONTROL PROVISIONS OF S. 2568 As indicated in the testimony of the Director, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, the Department of the Interior, like the Department of State, interprets the language of section 2 of S. 2568, as amended, beginning with the word "when" on line 4, page 4, of the bill and ending with the word "commission" on line 8 as applying to circumstances rather than to time. That is to say, in considering the eligibility for entry of a particular shipment of tuna, the circumstances currently obtaining in the country from which the tuna are offered will be determining. The Department also interprets this language as authorizing the Secretary, in examining the circumstances currently obtaining in a country from which tuna are offered for entry, to look beyond the mere promulgation of regulatory measures to the adequacy of such measures and to the adequacy of the enforcement of such measures. The Department would consider tuna ineligible for entry when any of the following conditions obtain in the country from which it is offered for entry: (1) The country does not provide or arrange for the timely provision of pertinent statistics to the Commission. (2) The country does not put into effect conservation measures applicable to its own fishermen adequate for the implementation of the Commission's recommendations. (3) The country, having put conservation measures into effect, does not take reasonable enforcement action. (4) The country does not take measures which will enable it to control the landing in its ports and subsequent export of tuna caught in the regu latory area by nationals of third parties. The Department would propose to implement the pertinent provisions of section 2 in the following way: It would seek, in concert with the Department of State, to obtain from all governments whose fishermen exploit the tuna resources of the regulatory area, both members and nonmembers of the Commission, assurances that those governments would take adequate action. As has been indicated by the testimony of both State and Interior, certain steps in this direction have already been taken. We would expect that there would be further discussions with officials of those governments regarding the particular measures to be adopted, discussions aimed at satisfying us that appropriate measures would be adopted, that enforcement capabilities were adequate, and that the intent was bona fide. We would, as a matter of course, obtain copies of pertinent laws and regulations. We contemplate in this connection a meeting of the government party to the convention prior to the entry into force of regulations in the United States. Most likely we would seek to have present at such a meeting representatives of governments not party to the convention, but which are involved because of the activities of their fishermen. If adequate assurances would be received from some governments but not from others, we would plan to issue regulations which would require in effect that all tuna offered for entry into the United States from countries from which we had not received adequate assurances be accompanied by documents. These documents would give such particulars as would demonstrate that the tuna were not ineligible for entry; i.e., proof that if caught by nationals of the exporting country, the tuna were not taken in the regulatory area or that adequate conservation measures were being carried out; and proof that, if caught by nationals of a third party, the tuna were not taken contrary to the recommendations of the Commission. The regulations might require that the documents take the form of a certificate signed by a responsible official of the government concerned and countersigned by a consular official of the United States. Shipments of tuna from such countries not accompanied by the required proof would be denied entry. Thereafter we would, through the several channels available to us, seek to insure that the procedure was not being circumvented. With regard to tuna offered for entry from countries from which adequate assurances had been obtained, we would initially require no accompanying proof that the tuna were eligible for entry. We would bring any evidence of failure to follow through on the assurance to the attention of the government concerned. Should that government fail to take adequate action, we would institute the certification procedure in respect of tuna offered for entry from that country. With regard to the submission of statistics to the Commission, we can maintain adequate surveillance merely by inquiring of the Commission from time to time as to the countries which are supplying it with statistics sufficient for its needs. STATEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR REGARDING THE PROVISIONS OF S. 2568, AS AMENDED, FOR SUSPENSION, IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, OF REGULATIONS APPLYING TO U.S. FISHERMEN The Department views the language of S. 2568, as amended, beginning with the word "except" on line 24, page 2, and ending with the word "recommendations" on line 5, page 3, as providing a means of avoiding the regulation of U.S. fishermen and the consequent inequities when, because of the activities of foreign fishermen, the regulation of U.S. fishermen would offer little or no promise of achieving a worthwhile objective, i.e., the objective of the particular recommendation of the Commission applicable at the time, but on the contrary would place the |