Mr. KERSHAW. May I add one more thing: that one of the monumental tasks that our Commission has and is going to tackle is the codifying of all of our marine laws in the State. We have hundreds and hundreds of them. It is going to be over the next years one of our jobs to go over all these and try to pick out the ones that are now 80 years old that have no bearing on the fishing today and so forth, to try to sift down to some sensible laws for our fisheries.

The CHAIRMAN. Our main purpose here is to try to protect the States in the 3-mile territorial waters and use the Coast Guard in the protection with penalties on foreign-flag vessels.

Mr. Grover?

Mr. GROVER. Mr. Chairman, I am just a little worried over what Mr. Tupper says, because on Long Island we have some statutes that date back to the early 1600's which have the same provincial shellfish taking rights associated with the towns' territorial waters; and even within our own country, if a shellfish pirate comes cross the town line, he gets arrested by the constable.

Our shellfish people are very fond of those old traditions.

I would not want to see those wiped out by this bill.

I think there are constitutional, State constitutional concepts here which might not be affected.

I will direct this question to the witness. Perhaps you can clarify if for me. You said that Maine had given permission for those Canadian or Soviet vessels.

Mr. KERSHAW. No gave permission to our whiting fleet. We were driven off the banks right on our own shores, off Nauset Light. There were 75 big trawlers there working in unison with blinking lights. They would turn right all together and they would turn left together. Of course, our boats would be caught in the middle and they would run and try to get out of the way with their nets down on the bottom. This is almost impossible, with the result that they were not getting the fish.

When they called in and said they could not fish there, they were not getting the fish, at the same time in the Maine waters there was a very prolific catch of fish-the Fish and Wildlife report shows thisI got in touch with them down there and asked if we sent down the permit money would this be all right, and they worked along with us. We sent a partial fleet down there to keep our factories going up there on the fisheries.

Mr. GROVER. That clarifies one point.

The other point that Mr. Culbertson brought up before, probably the key to enforcement, is the fact that if you do have foreign vessels coming in under permit they would not be unloading them in local ports, they will be taking the catch to the mother ship.

Mr. KERSHAW. Again, we have another law which is in the record of your Senate hearings, we have a law in the State that says you can't take fish out of the State of Massachusetts. In other words, unless you are a citizen of Massachusetts, or you are a fisheries concern in the State of Massachusetts and paying taxes there, you cannot load that vessel and take it out of the State.

Mr. GROVER. What do the menhaden fleets do?

Mr. KERSHAW. If you look on the transom of the largest menhaden fleet on the east coast, you will notice the name of the vessel is there

and the home port is Boston on at least 12 of them. You will see on the bow of over 30 of the big aluminum seine boats, a Massachusetts number on there. Those boats are in Massachusetts. They will be registered and paying taxes in Massachusetts.

Mr. GROVER. Even though they come from North Carolina?

Mr. KERSHAW. These boats do not come from North Carolina. They are registered to the city of Boston. They are corporations licensed in the State of Massachusetts.

Mr. GROVER. Is that particular regulation peculiar to Massachusetts only?

Mr. KERSHAW. No; lots of States have that. The States have to trade with each other. We have to negotiate the use of our fisheries with each State. That is why it seems so odd to us in the fisheries when somebody brings up this thing about South America. It just takes a little diplomacy to go down and sell your idea. Maybe it is going to cost a few thousand dollars, but how can you take another section, another fishery, and sacrifice that? How do you measure what this other fishery is that you are going to bargain off down South? You know 80 percent of your fish caught in the United States are outside of these coastal waters. So, would you sacrifice a great menhaden fishery, we will say, or jeopardize it, to trade down in South America where you know you can go in there and but that license for $5,000? If you go inside the 3-mile limit down there, I don't believe you should be shown any mercy anyway. We don't go in other people's States without permission or we don't go to other countries without permission.

Mr. GROVER. No further questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Goodling.

Mr. GOODLING. Are any of your fishermen licensed to fish in the territorial waters of foreign countries?

Mr. KERSHAW. No, sir; I know of no license that any countries would give us to fish in their waters, that is in the North Atlantic. Mr. GOODLING. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Downing.

Mr. DOWNING. No questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Keith.

Mr. KEITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have a letter here from Senator Saltonstall addressed to you.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I am glad to have it delivered.

Mr. KEITH. It was delivered to my office and supports the point of view of Mr. Kershaw.

Do I understand, Mr. Kershaw, that Massachusetts has a law which would prohibit the landing at any other port than a Massachusetts port of fish taken within the 3-mile limit of Massachusetts?

Mr. KERSHAW. The law is that you cannot fish in the territorial waters and take the fish out of Massachusetts.

Maine, I think, has the same thing.

Mr. KEITH. If Maine has that law, then you would not have been able to go up there when the Russians drove you off Nauset Beach, you would not have been able to go up there and take menhaden and land them in Gloucester.

Mr. KERSHAW. Not without permission from them, not without first getting a permit to do it.

Mr. KEITH. You said that there was a law in Massachusetts that prohibited the taking of Massachusetts fish and landing them elsewhere.

Mr. KERSHAW. That is correct.

Mr. KEITH. There is no license to permit variations from that law? Mr. KERSHAW. No, sir.

Mr. KEITH. But Maine does not have a similar law.

Mr. KERSHAW. I am not sure of that. Mr. Tupper for many years was the head of the Seashore Fisheries Commission.

Mr. KEITH. We have other witnesses. I think you have done a fine job explaining the nature of the problem. I just wanted to know if by chance you had the answer to that question.

I appreciate very much your coming down here and bringing with you my constituent, whom I wish you would identify for the purpose of the record.

Mr. KERSHAW. This is Mr. Bachoff, the present chairman of the Massachusetts Marine Advisory Fisheries Commission, sitting at my right, and assisting me.

May I just add one more thing for the record? There are three of the large sporting clubs which have asked to be recorded as against that section of the bill that we have also been against. They are the Massachusetts Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, the Massachusetts Striped Bass Association, and the Massachusetts Alliance of Salt Water Clubs.

Thank you, gentlemen.

The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Green.

Mrs. GREEN. If I understood you correctly, you said we should never have any fishermen within the 3-mile territorial waters of other countries. Is that what you said?

Mr. KERSHAW. I do know that South America will allow an American fishing boat inside its territorial waters, its 3-mile limit, if it has. a license. I believe they should get that license before they get down there.

Mrs. GREEN. This bill would require a license.

It seems to me that this is being oversimplified. Let us take a hypothetical case, being mindful that I am not suggesting that this exists. Let us suppose it is in our best national interest, including that of security, to have American fishermen, who are well informed in aspects of national security, to go within 3-mile waters

Mr. KERSHAW. Of a foreign country, you mean?

Mrs. GREEN. Yes.

Mr. KERSHAW. I think you should do the same as we do. You should negotiate with that country a permit to put that vessel in there in the position you want it.

Mrs. GREEN. Is that not what we are saying on page 2, that you would have a permit that would be granted by the Secretary of the Treasury?

Mr. KERSHAW. That is correct. But you also asked at the same time that in order to make a loophole in this law we all think is so good, you want this hole in the law which would directly affect another segment of the industry.

Mrs. GREEN. Which would be more important, the national security or a segment of an industry?

Mr. KERSHAW. May I answer that in this way? We in New England have been sacrificed to the national interest to a tune that we have today lost almost 50 percent of our production because when we were granted relief under the vote of the Tariff Commission we were then politely told that "because of the national interest we just can't give you this. But come up with something else and we will try to help you."

Mrs. GREEN. Let me pose the question in this fashion: If it is in the national interest to have a reciprocal agreement with another country in which our fishermen and theirs would be within each other's waters by permit only, then should not the U.S. Government be in a position to negotiate such an agreement?

Mr. KERSHAW. They certainly should but I don't think they should at any time sacrifice any rights of any American citizen. I negotiate with other States all the time. I would be glad to negotiate with other countries at any time, but I don't think I should have a bagful of gifts to give them such as the rights of any of our American fishermen. I don't think they should be called to sacrifice one section for another or to change our laws and put loopholes in them. I am sure the other countries won't do it.

Mrs. GREEN. I have other questions.

I first refer to the chairman's question that was directed to the previous witness. For example, in situations wherein you catch fish off the shores of one of the 50 States, but you bring the catch to a port in another State-the laws of which of the two States are controlling?

Mr. KERSHAW. The State that you catch the fish in controls that. If they say you cannot take them, then you had better not take them or you will be fined and in many cases your boat will be seized and sold at auction.

Mrs. GREEN. Does one State have a reciprocal arrangement with ports in another State so that the enforcing agency of the first State can go to the ports of delivery to see if laws have actually been violated?

Mr. KERSHAW. They can get it through Fish and Wildlife if they want to but they can board you. Every State has its own patrol vessels. If they are going to fine you or are going to seize your vessel, they will do it within their own waters. They will watch you and then the coastal wardens will step aboard your boat with photographs that they have seen you catching these fish in their waters. They may seize you then, tow you in, or they may take the license of the vessel and then follow up with procedures between the States.

Mrs. GREEN. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. You have certainly made an interesting witness. Mr. KERSHAW. Thank you, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask you about the Russian fleet that you mentioned. How close do they come in the territorial waters? Mr. KERSHAW. They have been inside the territorial waters many times inside the Cape Cod area.

The CHAIRMAN. Where you spoke about their driving you off? Mr. KERSHAW. This is Cape Cod [indicating on chart] outer Cape Cod where your national park is. This is the mainland here. This is Cape Cod here. This is the new national park in here. This little valley right in there, this is where we had the trouble last summer with the Russian fleet.

Then, of course, also the Russian fleet came into Cape Cod Bay. This one instance we had one vessel in Nantucket Sound.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that not all international water inside Cape Cod Bay?

Mr. KERSHAW. It might be in some areas, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What does the Coast Guard do up there?

Mr. KERSHAW. Under the present law-that is why we are here to back this law-the Coast Guard does go out and run them out and tells them they are inside, and the same off the coast of Maine in the case of one violation. They are told they are inside and they go out. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Mr. KERSHAW. Thank you, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. We will now have a short statement from Congressman Burke of Massachusetts.

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES A. BURKE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS

Mr. BURKE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I agree and endorse the entire statement made by Mr. Raymond Kershaw, who is a member of the Massachusetts Marine Advisory Fisheries Commission. I believe he has outlined in a concise way the problems of the fishing industry, particularly those engaged in inshore fishing and who would be greatly affected by the adoption of the Senate amendments referred to by Mr. Kershaw.

The fishing industry at the present time in New England is confronted with monumental problems. It seems to me that a Federal directive authorizing a foreign vessel to operate within the territorial waters of States where our own citizens are constantly confused by various laws enacted for conservation of our State resources would only add to this problem. I trust that this committee will adhere to the recommendation of Mr. Kershaw by eliminating the objectionable amendments referred to, and send the bill along as it passed the Senate with exception to the provision which would authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to license fishing by a foreign vessel within our territorial waters.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Burke.

I would like this letter from Senator Saltonstall to be placed in the record at this point.

(The letter referred to follows:)

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, February 25, 1964.

Hon. HERBERT C. BONNER,

Chairman, Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Massachusetts fishing industry is very disturbed about one amendment to S. 1988 which I believe is presently being considered by your committee.

Although the professed reason for the amendment was to permit foreign research vessels to make fish landings, authorization would be made by the Secretary of the Interior with the agreement of responsible State officials. I can foresee a situation where a large stern-ramp trawler from some friendly nation might be used for such research purposes, and one visit per year would be sufficient to ruin a fish auction such as at Gloucester or New Bedford.