insignificant by comparison of the size. We consider a large ship that carries 825 tons, but that is nothing compared to what the Russians have, fishing out of Hyannis Port, Mass. Senator BARTLETT. For what? Mr. MASCARENHAS. For bottom fish. They have a fleet that goes in there with a mother ship-I believe some of those ships are 5,000 or 10,000 or 15,000 tons in size. And they process the fish caught by that fleet. So, I think that we are going to legislate ourselves right out of the picture. If we do legislate, we need sound legislation and it seems to me that we have to get the other countries to go along with us or this will be a failure. The 90 vessels which operate out of San Diego at the present time are going to wind up out of the picture because they got to operate on a 6-month basis, assuming we catch the quota during a 6-month period. You can't lock the door on any business for 6 months. If you do, you are doomed. Now, in 1950 I was skipper of a boat and at that time I came into the dock and they tied me up for 30 days with a full load of tuna, back in 1950. Senator BARTLETT. Who were they and why did they tie you up? Mr. MASCARENHAS. Because they were getting fish from Japan. Now, this is a paradoxical situation because the cannery owned 75 percent of the boat and I owned 20, so I went to the cannery and pleaded with them and explained the possibility; I said, "You own 75 percent," but that didn't count. They were getting fish cheaper from Japan. I came back to San Diego and I sold my boat and got out of the business and stayed out until 1960, and in 1960 I thought we had the Japanese fishermen whipped again, so I went back into the picture. Here is a situation that is odd, because of all of the industries in the United States, the U.S. fishermen was the only business that was able to beat the Japanese competitively, and they thereby earned the right to remain in business. The price of Japanese fish is $360 a ton right now. The price of American fish is $310, and we can still compete with them, thereby earning the right to stay in business. How many companies in the United States, the textile industry, and so forth, would like to be in that position? They aren't. We are but yet we are about to be legislated out of business and that is about the height of my remarks. Senator BARTLETT. Tell me, if you know, has the price of tuna to the consumer declined since the use of the power block and the new nets? Mr. MASCARENHAS. I didn't get your question, sir. Senator BARTLETT. Has the price of tuna to the American consumer gone down since they started to use these new nets and power blocks? Mr. MASCARENHAS. The price of tuna has gone up and the price of tuna has gone up just because of one reason: the Japanese produce more tuna than any other nation, thereby they set the price, so we have felt that we can demand more so we have just kept behind them and kept demanding more increase for our fish as they have. We have got an increase in five different stages, $1 or $5 or $10 a ton increase, but we are still behind them and we shouldn't be, the cannery should be willing to pay the same price but unfortunately we can't get it. Senator BARTLETT. It was testified here yesterday these other nations did make a contribution in respect to the research program. Can you dispute that? Mr. MASCARENHAS. The research? search? Senator BARTLETT. Yes. Who contributes to the re Mr. MASCARENHAS. I think Mr. Felando would have the figures on that but I understand that we do most of the research. Mr. FELANDO. We pay most of the money, about 90 percent. Senator BARTLETT. Do you believe there could be enough fishing to wipe out tuna in all of the oceans of the world? Mr. FELANDO. I believe there is more tuna in the world than any other fish and I base it on this factor, the area, there is a terrific area, 25,000 miles around the world, except for land masses, plus 4,000 miles from 32° north latitude to 32° south latitude, and we have experience for this. Off Newfoundland-I was raised in Cape Cod, Mass., and I know the intensive fisheries conducted there over a great period of timetaking the banks off Canada and Newfoundland, they have been fished for 350 years and each year has seen increased effort of the fishery in there and they have placed very little restrictions there, and you have nations from all over the world competing-England, France, and Spain. You have Russia and even Japan is sending vessels there, and we have not seen diminishing returns there. How can we compare an area of that size with the area in which tuna is found? Senator BARTLETT. Thank you very much. Now the next witness is Jeff Kibre, who is here as the Washington representative of the International Longshoremen's Union, accompanied by John Royal, secretary-treasurer, International Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union, Fishermen's Local 33, San Pedro, Calif. STATEMENT OF JEFF KIBRE, WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVE INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S & WAREHOUSEMEN'S UNION, WASHINGTON, D.C.; ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN ROYAL, SECRETARYTREASURER, INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S & WAREHOUSEMEN'S UNION, FISHERMEN'S LOCAL 33, SAN PEDRO, CALIF. Mr. KIBRE. Mr. Chairman, I want to say this, that on behalf of the union, we appear here as friends of fishery conservation, and management. Our record on that story reaches back to the mid-1930's and we intend to sustain that record in the future. Now we also appear as supporters of treaties or conventions which seek to manage international fishery resources on a sustained yield basis. Our organization, along with other interests, played a vital role in bringing into existence the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission as well as a number of other international treaties. Now, while we are proud of our record of support for domestic and international fishery management programs, we likewise take pride and I want to emphasize this in our hardheaded approach to these programs. Our organization, for example, expressed serious reservations over the form of the International Convention for the High Seas Fisheries of the North Pacific. We were almost alone at the time that that legislation was adopted in expressing serious reservations over the form that that legislation and that treaty took. I might add that recent painful experiences, of which the chairman is quite aware, conformed strikingly to the warnings which we sounded some 11 years ago. Today we are considering far-reaching changes in the role of InterAmerican Tropical Tuna Convention. These changes fall most heavily on the American tuna fishing fleet, a fleet that is fighting for its very existence. Now the end result of these changes as proposed in this legislation, a program of maximum sustained yield harvesting of the Eastern Pacific tuna resources, is a desirable and necessary objective. But the means by which we reach that objective must be examined with the utmost care and down-to-earth deliberations. Our fishermen can hardly afford a repetition of the mistakes involved in the North Pacific salmon program. Now, as you are aware, the various interests involved in the southern California tuna operation, have presented their position through a single spokesman, the first witness this morning. Our union fully supports that stand, and we urge that the committee_give those proposals, those amendments, its full and earnest consideration and we say that, Mr. Chairman, in the conviction that this committee must agree that the Congress not only should concern itself with conserving resources, but also should concern itself with the job of conserving the American fishing fleet. Those are my remarks. Senator BARTLETT. Thank you, Mr. Kibre. Mr. Royal, do you have anything to add? Mr. ROYAL. Yes. Mr. Chairman and members of this committee, my name is John Royal. I am an ex-tuna fisherman, and I have been and at the present time still am the secretary-treasurer of the Fishermen's Union, Local 33, of San Pedro and San Diego, Calif., and as Mr. Kibre pointed out, we are an affiliate of the International Longshoremen's Union. The people which I represent, I believe, comprise a substantial portion of the American tuna fishermen today. These people are very, very concerned with the problems which are confronting them as fishermen and with their future livelihood and with what the results of this particular piece of legislation will be. I have been a member of the advisory committee to the U.S. section of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission for the past year and during this time I have had many, many opportunities to sit in meetings and watch and listen to what our scientists have told us and what their predictions will be for the future if we continue to fish these stocks of yellowfin at the rate we have been. In many cases myself and my people are not too happy with some of the language that is in this bill, but I believe that it is a matter of being safe rather than sorry. I think we have no alternative or no choice but to accept the findings of our scientists at this time, and try it out and put it on for size for 2 or 3 years and just see what the results will bring. I know that Mr. Nizetich was a spokesman for the entire industry representatives that have come back here to Washington, D.C., and I concur most wholeheartedly with the amendments that he has placed before this committee here today and I feel very strongly and very sincerely that this committee should and must give strong deliberation and study to the amendments as proposed by Mr. Nizetich. Without the amendments as proposed by him to this bill, I believe that the American tuna fisherman is going to be placed in a very precarious position and in the near future, I think, be driven out of the waters of the Eastern Pacific Ocean. I do not have a prepared statement, Mr. Bartlett. I prepared one prior to leaving San Pedro, Calif. Then I left and went to Ecuador to attend the annual meeting of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission at Quito, Ecuador, and I just returned and have not had time to prepare a statement in greater detail. However, with your permission, I would like to submit at a later date a prepared statement in greater detail to be made part of this record. I believe also that there are other members of the industry here today who would like the opportunity to do so. Again I want it to be on the record, and no doubt about it, that myself and the people I represent will support this legislation wholeheartedly, only if the amendments as proposed by Mr. Nizetich are incorporated into this legislation. That is about all I have to say, Mr. Chairman, in regard to this particular legislation, but before leaving I would like to make one more statement and that is that we in the industry are aware of the provisions in this legislation regarding embargoes. We also feel that to write in additional conditions to this section at this time would deter the effectiveness of it. Therefore, we in the industry will ask at a later date that legislation be introduced that will place a complete embargo on all species of tunafish in all forms, from any country, who takes homestead action to exclude our American tuna fishermen and boatowners from the waters adjacent to their coast. That is about all I have to say, Mr. Bartlett, and thank you and your committee for giving me the opportunity to appear here today. Senator BARTLETT. What do you mean by "homestead action"? Mr. ROYAL. What I am concerned with and I believe other members of the industry—a good example is what Ecuador is attempting to do today. In the face of the fact that we went down to attend this annual meeting of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission and to bring about this program jointly with them and the rest of the coastal nations of conservation of tuna, we were advised that the Minister of Ecuador had cleared a decree and I believe I am safe in saying it was signed by the President of that country-which if enforced would preclude or exclude all purse seine-type vessels from within 40 miles of their coastline despite the fact that at certain times of the year, it is necessary for the American tuna purse seine fishermen to fish in these waters to maintain their livelihood and to maintain our industry. And this is what I meant when I made reference to homestead action. In other words, in the face of joint action taken by the four member nations of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, and with the hopes that the nonmember nations will see fit to pass a similar type of legislation and enforcement programs thereto, some of these countries, one, two, or all of them, may go out on their own and take unilateral action to claim jurisdiction over the fishing rights of the waters adjacent to their coasts, that would preclude us or exclude us from these waters. That is why I made mention that we will, in the very near future, as an industry, ask that new legislation be introduced to protect us from this type of happening taking place. Senator BARTLETT. Did you own a tuna boat formerly? Mr. ROYAL. No, sir; I was a peasant; I was a working fisherman. Senator BARTLETT. Well, in respect to your request that you be permitted to submit a written statement for the record later, it will be granted, but with the note on the part of the chairman that you don't need to get down in front of a typewriter to make a very effective statement. You can do it extemporaneously. But, if you desire, the record will be kept open and will be kept open for all others until June 5. Is that long enough? Mr. ROYAL. That is fine, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate that, and once again I would like to express my thanks to you and to your fine committee here for affording me this opportunity to speak. Senator BARTLETT. Thank you, gentlemen. The next witnesses are John Calise and Lester Balinger. Mr. Calise is representing the Seine & Line Fishermen's Union, AFL-CIO, and Mr. Balinger is secretary of the Cannery Workers & Fishermen's Union, AFL-CIO. Mr. Calise comes from San Pedro and Mr. Balinger from San Diego. STATEMENT OF JOHN CALISE, SEINE & LINE FISHERMEN'S UNION, AFL-CIO, SAN PEDRO, CALIF.; ACCOMPANIED BY LESTER BALINGER, SECRETARY-TREASURER, CANNERY WORKERS & FISHERMEN'S UNION, AFL-CIO, SAN DIEGO, CALIF. Mr. CALISE. That is right. I will talk first, I guess. I represent the original purse seine-the men who worked on the original purse seine fleet that worked out of San Pedro and went down in these waters to catch the original tuna. And originally these purse seiners got sardines and tuna. They had two seasons. During the winter months they caught sardines and during the summer months they went out for tuna, and they numbered about 50 or 60 purse seiners which did both and then during the sardine season the purse seiners from as far north as Washington came down and followed the sardine down the coast. And like I say, we are in favor of conservation because we were part of the great sardine fleet of California, and right now the sardine has disappeared. In fact, from catching over 500,000 tons a year, we are now down to about 20,000 tons a year. Although we don't believe overfishing is the reason that the sardine has not come back to Cali |