Senator BARTLETT. No meat?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. No meat. They used to give us two cans of salmon and no meat.

Senator BARTLETT. For how long?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. For a week.

Senator BARTLETT. I am glad they didn't give you tuna. [Laughter.]

At least you had an Alaska product.

When did all of this change?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. This changed since 1950. It has been going for the good and has been getting better since 1960 or 1962.

Now, I am pretty sure everybody feels that we are almost on the same level as any other city. That is, in buying what you want, all the different varieties of food from the Government store.

Senator BARTLETT. I don't know whether you would be a good witness on this subject. Probably a woman would be a better one. But I will ask you anyway.

How about the price of food? How does it compare with Anchorage, Bethel, Fairbanks, and so forth, if you know?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. I don't know. I hardly ever see my food bills. I think my wife sees them. I think a comparison, our prices here, from what I understand from some of the tourists that come in through here, they say some of the islands are lower and some of the items are higher. Of course our prices are based on the selling price of Seattle. I mean the cost price of Seattle.

Senator BARTLETT. Plus a certain percentage?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Plus 35 percent.

Senator BARTLETT. Thirty-five percent across the board?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Across the board.

Senator BARTLETT. Thirty-five percent across the board doesn't seem like a very scientific way to assign prices.

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. That is the way it is.

Senator BARTLETT. We will ask the witness for the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries to testify about that.

In the report to which we have referred, I think the suggestion has been made that a tourist trade might be built up here. What do you all think of that? Would you welcome tourists?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes. I think in fact we had asked the Commission that we would like to provide facilities and services to the tourist there. Before I go further, I just glanced at the Commission's report about half an hour ago, or maybe an hour ago now. It was handed to me by Mr. Bowman. It is one of the initial copies. They are now making copies to distribute around.

As I glanced through it, that is what I saw in there that was recommended to the Bureau.

Senator BARTLETT. Are many of the women here gainfully employed now?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. NO. There are very few, very few.

Senator BARTLETT. What if they had a chance to work around a tourist hotel or motel, or call it what you will, do you think they would be willing to?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. That is what we are trying to progress toward.

Senator BARTLETT. How about the women?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. I am pretty sure they all want to. We have had several women come in, young girls come in. We couldn't provide all of them jobs this last summer.

Senator BARTLETT. You would like to have a situation created whereby you could own your own homes, is that right?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. That is provided in your bill. I assume it will be, subject for us to pay for them. In the long run, I think it will be much better for us to pay for the homes.

Senator BARTLETT. Most Americans agree with you. Because they feel at least with monthly payments they are getting an equity in their homes, and eventually will own them.

How about the wages here; from your understanding, do they compare favorably with those on the mainland?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. I can't compare our wages against the mainland wages because I have never seen what the wages are. But I understood that our wage board here is based on the civilians that are working for the Navy in the Kodiak area.

We have always thought and I pointed this out to the Commission-that one of these days, if we are incorporated, and if we have to pay for all the services, that is, commercial services, for transportation of goods to the island here, we feel our wages wouldn't be sufficient. Senator BARTLETT. Aren't you paying for those now in respect to food?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. There is a little charge there. But if we were all on our own and had to pay commercial prices, like any other city, if we charter a ship and have them bring in a supply of merchandise to us, if the boat laid around here for 2 or 3 weeks with no landing, that would be charged to us and our wages wouldn't be able to meet that.

Senator BARTLETT. You are talking about things now that would be brought on a ship that might go into the store?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes. Plus the fact that everything else we order for the house, like furniture or so forth.

Senator BARTLETT. I surely don't know, because I am not an economist.

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. What I am trying to point out is that Kodiak has docks where the boat just ties up along side the dock. They don't have to pay what they call "demurrage" when the boat is laying around.

Senator BARTLETT. You are probably paying for that now in that 35 percent. Maybe that is the reason it is applied across the board. Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. That isn't my understanding. Senator BARTLETT. What is your understanding?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. My understanding is the handling of the said purchased groceries and the wage that you are paying for the employees in the regional office, plus the wages of the collection here at the store, plus the unloading, what you might call stevedoring.

Senator BARTLETT. The committee understands, on the basis of maintaining a fairly close association with the State group, that there is a considerable feeling of depression over the fact that so relatively few people are employed the year round, and the committee sympathy lies with this, of course. I as one Alaskan feel compelled to remind

that, unhappily, this is a situation that more frequently than not is true throughout Alaska; it is a seasonal industry country. To leave aside the pulpmills in southeast Alaska, the people don't work very much throughout the year. That 1S one of our difficulties economically.

You have been very, very helpful. I want to thank you for appearing and making such an excellent presentation as our first witness. Now, I will ask Mr. Foster if he has any questions.

Mr. FOSTER. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Just a few.

I wonder if you would look at section 209 of the bill, in that section the legislation deals with the question of prior service before 1950 in terms of civil service retirement.

Do you know whether there is any expression in favor of that type of a provision which would recognize prior service in terms of retirement or not here?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes. I am sure everyone in the community at the retiring age, especially now, is in favor of that. They hope and pray it will be adopted.

Mr. FOSTER. In other words, as you understand it this would permit work done before 1950 to also be included in computing the retirement benefits under the program?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes, sir.

Mr. FOSTER. In section 208, they define the term "Pribilof Islands." Does that definition meet with your understanding of the term?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes. The council as a whole was kind of stunned because the term "Pribilof Islands" there, naming all the islands, included all of the Pribilof group there. We were under the assumption that they may be thinking of another island popping out of the water here or something.

Senator BARTLETT. Is that because the words "but not limited to" appear?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes, sir.

Mr. FOSTER. That question in your mind would be resolved by striking those words and clarifying the definition; is that true?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. That is true. I think it will be to our benefit if there is an island that shows up. We will own it then. [Laughter.]

Mr. FOSTER. On page 12 of the bill, the bill provides that any deedand this is a deed, of course, of title to the property, to the house"Any deed issued by the trustee"- who is the person appointed by the Secretary to administer the allocation of the sale of the lots and the homes

Any deed issued by the trustee shall provide, in addition to such terms and conditions relating to the use of said lots or tracts as the Secretary deems necessary, that the title conveyed is inalienable

that is, it can't be transferred or can't be sold—

except upon approval of the Secretary of the Interior.

What that would mean, of course, is that if you did obtain title to your home and your next-door neighbor or someone else wanted to buy it, you would have no authority to sell it to him unless the Secretary approved of the sale.

62-646 0-66 4

Do you see that to be of benefit to you, or do you think that you should be able to sell your home without checking with the Secretary of the Interior?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. No. I think our understanding there is that we will have to approach the Secretary or his representatives in any case if a person wants to sell their lot or their home. That was our understanding.

Mr. FOSTER. This is acceptable to you?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes.

Mr. FOSTER. Section 206 gives to the Secretary authority to convey property or land inside the township or the townsite. You would have a townsite or city and he could convey land inside that townsite.

Do you think there would be any interest at any time in giving him authority to convey land or some interest in the land outside the townsite?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes. I am glad you brought that up there. We were thinking, when we had the meeting with the council, that our townsite here at present is not sufficient for expanding. I do realize there are plans for another townsite alongside the graveyard there, but what we were going to propose was to have land available to us that is out in the country, not anywhere near to the rookeries.

We feel that all that land should be made available for us for recreational purposes. We have one Southwest Point, as we call it. We are planning to make picnic grounds there.

You can never tell, somebody here might then decide to raise cattle or a chicken farm, or a sheep ranch, that is, providing the biologists will let us. Biologists get in and say everything bothers the seals. I don't know. [Laughter.]

At one time they suggested we couldn't buy any parakeets and bring them up here. That hasn't been stopped. We are still buying parakeets.

Senator BARTLETT. They were going to bother the seals?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes. The parakeet has some kind of disease that is contagious for the seal, I think. That is the biologists' opinion.

But I do hope there will be land made available to us outside of the present townsite, and the plan of the townsite that would have to be outside the country, not near the rookeries, where it would not interfere with the seals.

Mr. FOSTER. At the present time, as I understand it, the receipts from the sale of the fur seal are divided 70 percent going to the State and 30 percent going to the Federal Government. As I understand your interest would be in obtaining 15 percent of the U.S. share?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Negative on that; no. [Laughter.] We were under the understanding that 15 percent is shared to Japan, another 15 percent to Canada, and the remaining 70 percent, after all the so-called bills that are paid for the islands, the balance of that goes to the State of Alaska.

I think the State of Alaska should be lenient enough that they can give us at least 15 percent of their net proceeds.

Senator BARTLETT. But you wouldn't mind if we could contrive, after a great effort in the U.S. Congress, an arrangement whereby this came out of Uncle Sam instead of the State.

Mr. FOSTER. In other words, you are not too concerned with whether it does come out of the State's allocation of the Federal Government's allocation of the sealskins, are you?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. I don't know.

Yes, in answer to your last question; we would prefer the 70 percent-the 15 percent to come out of the 70 percent. We ask for 15 percent or $50,000 per year because we feel that we are all paying State income taxes and school taxes, and the State of Alaska provides little in the way of support for either St. Paul or St. George.

We feel that it would only be fair for the State to agree to the amendment we have asked for, which is, like I say again, 15 percent or $50,000.

Mr. FOSTER. As I understand it, you would prefer an amendment to, say, page 18, section 308, which now provides:

Commencing with the year during which Alaska is admitted into the Union, the Secretary of the Treasury, at the close of each fiscal year, shall pay to the State of Alaska 70 per centum of the net proceeds * * *

You would prefer that to read

pay to the State of Alaska 65 percent and to the Pribilof Islands 15 percent of the proceeds.

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes. That is exactly what I have asked for there.

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you.

Senator BARTLETT. You have opened up a very interesting subject. The States do bear a responsibility, I think we all agree to that, but you stated at the last that you would be content with 15 percent or $50,000.

Is that a declaration from the community? You said before, I believe, you wanted a little time

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. That has been discussed here in our previous meetings, when we had meetings with Mr. Bowman, I believe. Did we mention the 15 percent then?

Mr. BOWMAN. I don't remember that.

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. It must have been after you left there, then. I did mention it, and I think there are several here on the floor who will agree that it was discussed at our community meetings.

Senator BARTLETT. If you were to get 15 percent this year from the State of Alaska, you would, as I previously indicated, receive nothing. Because that is the amount that the State will receive zero, or virtually zero. And you know that there was some question about the renewal of the fur seal contract, do you not?

Mr. ILIODOR MERCULIEFF. Yes, I do know that.

Senator BARTLETT. As that went on, I reprimanded myself many, many times for not having persisted in making an effort which might not have been successful, but might have been, too, when the statehood bill was under consideration, in insisting that all of this be turned over to the State of Alaska for administration, and the Interior Department be divorced from any participation. Because unnecessarily the granting of a new contract for the processing of sealskins was delayed, delayed, and delayed. It went on for years. As a consequence, the treasury of the State of Alaska has been and is being denied very substantial sums of money.