so as to cause the boom to fall onto the main deck. Gunfire also damaged the stainless steel guides on the port side that secure the mast. Mr. Bowman believed that the Warship was attempting to shoot off the guides so as to cause the mast to fall.

3. Pilot house area: Gunfire caused extensive damage to the radar antenna and motor box and gears, as well as tubes leading from the antenna to the Pilot House. Three front windows, made of safety glass, were punctured by gunfire. On the starboard side of the Pilot House, one window was punctured. Inside the Pilot House, a stand in the Chart Room was damaged. While John Virissimo was talking on the radio to other vessels, the radio transmitter (the Northerner) was hit by a shell. The front meter was hit and the radio became inoperative. Fish Captain, Virissimo narrowly missed being hit twice while attempting to maintain radio contact. A total of 27 bullet holes were located in the Pilot House. Mr. Bowman believed this gunfire was directed to cut off communications and steering.

4. Main house area : The forward crew quarters sustained gunfire damage. Two windows, one front porthole and one window on the port side were punctured. 5. Other comments: Mr. Bowman believes that armor-piercing shells were used, because the copper jackets were stuck to the steel, with the lead continuing through the puncture big enough to put a man's little finger through. The lead would then break into fragments upon contact.

Vern Bowman gave the following account of how the Warship would maneuver when firing:

"The San Juan was on automatic steering, travelling at full speed. The crew was placed in the shaft alley leading from the engine room. Mr. Bowman and Mr. Virissimo alternated their locations from the forward crew quarters to the Pilot House. Throughout the shooting incident, either Mr. Bowman or Mr. Virissimo, or both were positioned to view the movements of the Warship.

"Mr. Bowman stated that at no time was the San Juan stopped in the water with the Warship shooting at it. The San Juan stopped when the Warship broke off the chase and left the area.

"The Warship would come up alongside, commence shooting short bursts, and then drift, allowing the San Juan to continue on by. Then, the Warship would pull ahead, make a circle in front of the San Juan, shooting at the vessel. The distance from the Warship to the San Juan during these bursts of shooting was estimated at about 50 yards.

"At one point, Mr. Bowman thought the Warship was leaving. Actually, it stayed to the stern of the San Juan for a few minutes, and then attempted to board the San Juan in the stern area. Evasive steering action by Mr. Bowman and Mr. Virissimo prevented the success of this maneuver."

Mr. Bowman was in no position to establish a dollar amount on the damage caused to the San Juan.

The firing of the Warship on the San Juan commenced at 03 Degrees, 07 Minutes South Latitude, 81 Degrees, 35 Minutes West Longitude, or a distance of 60 miles Northwest of Pt. Picos, the nearest coast.

The firing of the Warship on the San Juan terminated at 02 Degrees, 49 Minutes South Latitude, 81 Degrees, 53 Minutes West Longitude, or a distance of 86 miles Northwest of Pt. Picos.

In my conversation with Joe Luis, Captain of the Mariner, he related the following information:

1. He did not know how much it cost the vessel to be released from Peru, except that a Matricula and License were purchased. Port charges were also imposed. He said that the invoice was charged to Star-Kist Foods, Inc. (On the basis of this information, the cost would be $500.00 for the Matricula, $12.00 per net ton of the Mariner, which is 259 net tons, for the License, or a total charge of $3,608.00).

2. That the Mariner was damaged at the time of the seizure, when the Warship attempted to effect boarding on the windward side of the Mariner. Mr. Luis stated that an 8 foot length of the top guard rail was smashed, a fibre-glass speedboat was destroyed beyond repair-the outboard motor was not attached.

3. That an American Consulate representative was present in Talara, and that a Peruvian naval officer checked the damage to the Mariner.

4. That numerous news reporters were on the scene, however, he refused to talk to them.

Later, on Saturday afternoon, February 15, I received a request from Don McKernan, who said that his superiors in the State Department wanted the San Juan to enter the Ecuadorean port so as to permit our Government to in

spect the damage. I arranged the entry of the San Juan through Manuel Cintas, and with the consent of Mr. and Mrs. Ed Gann. The arrangements were as follows: 1. The San Juan would enter Salinas and not Guayaquil, as suggested by the Department of State.

2. The United States Government would obtain assurance from the Ecuadorean Government that the San Juan could enter and depart Salinas without difficulty. 3. The San Juan would enter Salinas Sunday morning and leave Sunday afternoon (February 16, 1969).

4. The San Juan would arrive in Salinas on Sunday morning, about 0700 hours. Sunday morning, February 16, 1969, I received word from Ed Gann that the vessel was in port. A telephone call to Burdick Brittin indicated that he had no confirmation of the presence of the San Juan in Salinas.

About 1300-1400 hours, Manuel Cintas informed me that he had received word from John Virissimo that everything was all right in Salinas. The San Juan was expected to leave shortly. He said the U.S. Navy Officer kept repeating that he couldn't believe what he was seeing as to the damage to the San Juan, that movies were taken of the vessel, and a good inspection had been held. I requested Manuel to ask John Virissimo to call me directly after his vessel's departure so that he could give me first-hand information on the Salinas entry. Manuel made the arrangements with John and I contacted Joe Gann and gave him Manuel's report, after failing to contact Ed Gann.

At 1600 hours, I received word from Manuel that there was trouble in Salinas. He wanted to know whether the San Juan should lift anchor and depart port. In three different conversations, the last one at 1830 hours, he related the following:

1. About 1100 hours, the United States Consul and Naval Officer boarded the San Juan, then, together with John Virissimo and Vern Bowman, they went ashore where they received assurances from the Captain of the Port of Salinas that the San Juan would be cleared for departure. Mr. Bowman and Mr. Virissimo returned to the vessel to await clearance, and the U.S. Consul and Naval Officer departed Salinas a little after 1300 hours.

2. Mr. Bowman grew anxious when approximately two hours elapsed following their return to the vessel and they had no word regarding their clearance. He returned to the Port Captain's office and asked for an explanation for the delay. The Port Captain told him that he would not sign the clearance papers, and that the San Juan could not leave port. He explained that his examination of the logbook of the San Juan had revealed that in 1968, the San Juan had been in Ecuadorean waters in violation of the laws of Ecuador. Mr. Bowman said he wanted to contact San Diego by radio, but the Port Captain told him that he could not use the radio.

3. Mr. Bowman left the Port Captain's offices, boarded a speedboat for return to the San Juan. He reported that he was shot at as he raced toward the vessel, observing two splashes about his speedboat at 15 second intervals. He could not report that he definitely and without doubt heard the two shots. He explained that it was windy and he was in a rush. The logbook, ship's document and other papers were still retained by the Port Captain.

4. The San Juan lifted anchor and left the bay at full speed. The crew reported to Skipper Bowman that while he was on shore, a person they identified as a professor advised them that the San Juan would not be permitted to depart Ecuador without a fine of at least $40,000.00.

After advising Joe Gann and Ed Gann of the latest events concerning the San Juan, I contacted Don McKernan and reported the incident. Night Letters were forwarded to Senators, Congressmen and the President. Mr. McKernan called Monday, February 17, 1969, to report as follows:

1. The report of the U.S. Consul and the U.S. Naval Officer verified the gunfire damage reports that we had relayed, in fact, the Government report was even more extensive in its explanation. Photographs had not been received.

2. Protests had been forwarded to Peru and Ecuador, demanding reimbursement for the damages sustained by both the San Juan and the Mariner, and demanding the return of the monies paid for by the Mariner. The protest to Ecuador related the incident of the San Juan in Salinas.

3. Mr. McKernan had no explanation as to why the U.S. Consul and the Naval Officer left Salinas before the departure of the San Juan, except that at some time during the day, the U.S. Consul was advised by an Ecuadorean Official that no clearance would be granted to the San Juan, because of some logbook entry for November, 1968, relating to the presence of the San Juan in Ecuador. I

advised Mr. McKernan that the San Juan was in the South Atlantic during the Fall of 1968, and was not fishing off Ecuador during that period of time.

4. Mr. McKernan advised that three (3) destroyer-type vessels of the Ecuadorean navy had left Galapagos for Guayaquil and that they might intercept our vessels.

Manuel Cintas advised that the Freedom, a U.S. flag vessel operating from Coischo for Star-Kist Foods, Inc., had been intercepted and boarded by a Peruvian destroyer, and the destroyer was headed Northward at full speed. He also reported that the Day Island and the Bold Venture had been stopped and boarded by Ecuadorean patrol vessels. He was firm in his opinion that both navies (Peruvian and Ecuadorean) were working together to chase down the San Juan and seize U.S. flag vessels.

SUMMARY

The above account is a running narrative of the highlights of the San JuanMariner incident, and necessarily reflects duplication. The following represents the critical points as finally established:

1. The Mariner was seized at a location 35 miles off the coast of Peru; 03 Degrees, 31.5 Minutes South Latitude, 81 Degrees, 21 Minutes West Longitude. 2. The firing of the Peruvian Warship #23 on the San Juan commenced at a location 60 miles Northwest of Pt. Picos, Peru (03 Degrees, 07 Minutes South Latitude, 81 Degrees, 35 Minutes West Longitude) and terminated at a location 86 miles Northwest of Pt. Picos, Peru (02 Degrees, 49 Minutes South Latitude, 81 Degrees, 53 Minutes West Longitude).

3. The Mariner was taken into the Port of Talara, Peru, and paid an amount equal to the cost of the Matricula and Fishing License plus port charges for the release of the vessel and crew. The total cost is estimated as $3,608.00, exluding unknown port charges.

4. The Mariner sustained collision damage with the Peruvian Warship #23 in connection with the seizure, and a speedboat was damaged beyond repair, plus top guard rail damage. Estimates of repair, no more than $5,000.00.

5. The San Juan sustained heavy and extensive gunfire damage. Estimates range from $30,000.00 to $50,000.00.

6. No personal injury was reportedly sustained by any member of the ship's company aboard the San Juan or the Mariner.

7. No Federal Statute permits the owners of the San Juan to recover the damages sustained. The alternatives available to the owners are as follows: a. Recovery by the U.S. Government against the Republic of Peru b. The enactment of a Private Bill, or

c. A lawsuit by the owners against the Republic of Peru.

8. The damage sustained by the Mariner is recoverable under the Fishermen's Protective Act of 1967, except that the application for coverage had not been filed by the owners, and it is doubtful whether the application would have been timely even if filed, upon receipt of the application forms. The owners of the San Juan and the Mariner had been informed of the receipt of the application forms and of the visit by C. E. Peterson to the American Tunaboat Association. 9. Status of the Seizure Incidents involving U.S. Flag Tuna Vessels during the period January 1961 through February 18, 1969.

The shooting incidents, such as what occurred to the SAN JUAN are not included in the above summary, because they are not classified as seizures, but

rather as harassment incidents. There have been two (2) shooting incidents so far this year, one off Ecuador in January and the San Juan off Peru in February.

Mr. GANN. Then if you would like I have photos here that were taken aboard the Mayflower covering that incident where they were shot at with shotguns and also photographs of the San Juan incident if you care to see them.

Mr. ANDERSON. May we make these a matter of the record?

Mr. GANN. They are my only copies and I would like to have them returned.

(The photos follow :)