increased pressure in hunting and the desire of those who have more of this world's goods than the average to get away from the routine hunting, that the pressure on polar bear is growing year by year. If there is anything to me which is unsportsmanlike, if there is anything to me which is almost cowardly, it is the hazing of polar bear by planes and actual shooting of polar bear from planes. It is true the State of Alaska controls their guides but, when you are out over the international waters and guide's reputation is made by the fact that he can or cannot secure a good trophy for his hunter, the guides are human beings, and they are very, very desirous of sending back a satisfied customer so that next year he will have a full schedule to keep that plane flying. I hope that this committee will report favorably this piece of legislation. Mr. DINGELL. We are honored to have you with us today, my friend. Mr. Hagen? Mr. HAGEN. I have no questions. Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Downing. Mr. DOWNING. It is a pleasure to have you with us. I am for this bill but there are a few points I would like to clear up in my own mind. If an Eskimo goes into the international waters and gets a polar bear and brings him back to Alaska, isn't he then subject to the laws of Alaska insofar as the game is concerned? Mr. SAYLOR. This is a matter, Mr. Downing, that I would have to check. I would have to look at the Statehood Act. Under certain of the laws which admitted States into the Union we made reservations with regard to the Indians and their hunting and fishing rights. I would have to examine the law and I will be happy to do it and report to you and to the committee as to the situation with regard to Alaska and the Aleuts and the Eskimo, who are the natives. Mr. DOWNING. I would not want to put you to that trouble. It is just a matter that came to mind. The second thing is: Is there any evidence that the Russians are hunting in those waters? Mr. SAYLOR. There is evidence that Russians are hunting in the Arctic Ocean waters. From the best information that we now have this tremendous icepack that is on the Arctic Ocean, it flows and moves continuously and so the bear that are on the ice are not just off of our shores. They may swing around and may be above Norway and Sweden and above Finland and above parts of Russia. There is evidence that there is kill going on in the Arctic Ocean above those countries. Mr. DOWNING. Regardless of the fact that citizens of other nations may be doing this, we would be doing our part in keeping American citizens from decimating these herds. Mr. SAYLOR. That is correct. Mr. DOWNING. Thank you very much. Mr. DINGELL. We are honored to have had you with us, Mr. Saylor. The committee is well aware of your distinguished record as a conservationist. We have been admirers of yours. It is a privilege to have you with us this morning. Mr. SAYLOR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DINGELL. If there is no further witness present before the committee, the Chair will note Mr. Callison of the Audubon Society had asked to be here, and Mr. Gutermuth of the Wildlife Institute had asked to be heard. They will be afforded an opportunity to submit statements. for There being no further witnesses to be heard, the committee will adjourn pending the call of the Chair. The record will stay open 10 days in order to permit any interested person to submit an appropriate statement. With that, the committee is recessed subject to call of the Chair. (The material mentioned follows:) STATEMENT OF C. R. GUTERMUTH, VICE PRESIDENT, WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE Mr. Chairman, I am C. R. Gutermuth, vice president of the Wildlife Management Institute. The institute is one of the older national conservation organizations and its program for the restoration and improved management of natural resources in the public interest has been continuous for more than 50 years. Conservationists support and endorse the objectives of H.R. 5240. The status of polar bears, walrus, and sea otter has been a matter of concern for many years. This concern has arisen because of the substantial dependence of some Alaskan native villages on the walrus and the mounting apprehension that the sport and nonsport kill and waste of walrus and polar bears may be exceeding the ability of those marine mammals to sustain themselves. Available information indicates that the walrus have been declining steadily, and a sizable guiding business has been established in the hunting of polar bears. Sportsmen from Alaska and the lower States are making more and more flights over the international icepack in pursuit of these huge white bears. Only the sea otter of the three marine mammals is more numerous. In fact, only by complete protection have these valuable fur bearers risen from near extinction in the early part of this century. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, according to available information, believes that sea otter now are approaching the point where limited, regulated taking soon may be permitted. But before that is done, the Service says, it would like to conduct additional trapping and transplanting in order to expand the distribution of the animals. Polar bears and walrus wander over a tremendous expanse. The white bears are circumpolar in distribution and their wanderings are believed to be influenced by the development of the pack ice and the availability of food and open water. Their domain involves hundreds of thousands of miles, and the animals that are seen off Alaska one year, for example, may later be bagged by shooters from Canada, Greenland, Norway, or Russia. The Pacific walrus migrates from the territorial waters of Alaska across the high seas to Siberia in a definite and regular pattern. Most of the polar bears and walrus are pursued by sport hunters and natives in international waters where no regulations apply. Major subsistence from walrus is derived by natives on the Diomede and King Islands, where the carcasses are consumed by the people and fed to their dogs. The hides provide boat coverings, and the walrus ivory is worked into jewelry and curios that are sold for additional income. Alaskan ivory carvings are widely sought and priced dearly. Nonresident polar bear hunters spent an average of $2,000 each in Alaska in 1957. The estimated income for the pilot-guides and the villagers who supplied goods and services amounted to about $121,300 that year. The money was a significant part of each village's annual income. More money also was spent by the sportsmen en route to the villages from which they hunted. Some traveled considerable distances from other parts of the United States. It is expected that the committee will be hearing from some Alaskans who will bring up the matter of States rights and the improved regulations that they have adopted. We must not lose sight of the fact, however, that more than 80 percent of the walrus and polar bears that are killed by Alaskans, and by nonresidents hunting from within Alaska, are taken in international waters where existing rules and regulations do not apply. To merely control the bringing of dead animals ashore is not enough. Reliable estimates show that about half of the walrus killed are not recovered and that only one-quarter of all walrus slain are used beneficially. The wastage amounts to about 75 percent, Mr. Chairman. It appears that walrus are being killed faster than they can reproduce. Improved management of these marine mammals presents wide ranging problems and opportunities that are beyond the scope of any State. For all practicable purposes, these resources are a single unit. Only a small part of their immense range is within the boundary of Alaska. Conservationists believe that the best opportunity for investigating the biology and needs of these marine mammals and in applying the information that is obtained rests on the recognition of these essential facts: The animals are international in distribution; they are killed largely in international waters; and their migrations and movements make it impossible to consider them in any way other than single resource units. If the committee decides on any change in language, it is hoped that wording will be developed to encourage and facilitate full cooperation between the State and Federal agencies. The elimination of duplication of effort and the consolidation of purpose and authority will be the best for the resources and for the people involved. CHAIRMAN, House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: Please support H.R. 5240, providing Federal protection for polar bear, otter, and walrus in coastal waters of Alaska. I hope we can speed conservation in Alaska before it is too late. Thank you so much. MONROVIA, CALIF. MRS. DOROTHY ALLEN. (Whereupon, at 11:35 a.m. the committee was recessed subject to call of the Chair.) MISCELLANEOUS FISHERIES LEGISLATION FISHING RIGHTS FOR VESSEL SC-1473 THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 1964 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10:50 a.m., pursuant to call, in room 219, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. T. A. Thompson (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. THOMPSON. We have another matter to be taken up this morning on H.R. 6007, gentlemen, by our friend and colleague, Mr. Rivers, of South Carolina. We will consider that bill at this time. The purpose of the bill is to permit a former Navy subchaser identified as SC-1473, to engage in fisheries. The necessity of this bill arises from the fact that this vessel was built in Nova Scotia and under the law as it presently exists, only American-built vessels are entitled to that privilege. Let the bill and the departmental reports appear in the record at this point without objection. (The documents follow :) [H.R. 6007, 88th Cong., 1st sess.] A BILL To permit the vessel SC-1473 to engage in the fisheries Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the vessel SC-1473 may be documented as a vessel of the United States and may engage in the foreign and coastwise trade and in the fisheries as long as such vessel is owned by a citizen of the United States. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Hon. HERBERT C. BONNER, Chairman, Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, DEAR MR. BONNER: Your committee has requested our views and recommendations on H.R. 6007, a bill to permit the vessel SC-1473 to engage in the fisheries. We recommend against the enactment of H.R. 6007. H.R. 6007, if enacted provides that the vessel SC-1473 may be documented as a vessel of the United States and may engage in the foreign and coastwise trade and in the fisheries so long as it is owned by a citizen of the United States. We understand that this vessel is an old Navy subchaser which has not been used for some years. It was built in Nova Scotia for the Navy in 1917 or 1918. We further understand that a resident of South Carolina intends to convert this vessel into a shrimp trawler. Generally, Federal statutes prohibit the documentation of foreign-built vessels as vessels of the United States entitled to the privileges of vessels employed in the coasting trade or fisheries. Inasmuch as other fishing vessel operators are precluded by these statutes from taking advantage of the low cost of constructing such vessels in foreign shipyards, we are unaware of any circumstances justifying an exception to this general rule. Furthermore, we believe there is no need to place a vessel of this type in the shrimp industry. Such a vessel will not serve to upgrade our present fishing fleet which is the intention of other legislation, H.R. 4429 and similar bills, now pending before your committee, because of its age and the fact that it was not designed specifically for shrimp fishing. If additional vessels are needed in this fishery, there is adequate shipyard capacity to construct them. The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administration's program. Sincerely yours, FRANK P. BRIGGS, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C., March 24, 1964. Hon. HERBERT C. BONNER, Chairman, Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, DEAR MR. BONNER: This supplements our report of July 25, 1963, to your committee on H.R. 6007, a bill to permit the vessel SC-1473 to engage in the fisheries. In our prior report we stated that the vessel SC-1473 was constructed in Nova Scotia for the U.S. Navy in 1917 or 1918. Since American fishermen are precluded by statute from constructing fishing vessels in foreign shipyards, we were of the opinion that an exception to the general rule should not be granted in this case. This is especially true when considered in the light of the vessel's age. During the recent hearings, however, before your committee, it was brought to our attention that the vessel SC-1473 was built in Nova Scotia in 1942, rather than 1917 or 1918, under contract with an American firm. In addition, we understand that the vessel's present owner purchased the vessel for $500 and intends to refit it for shrimp fishing purposes in a U.S. shipyard. It is estimated that this refitting will cost approximately $40,000. Based on these most recent facts, which were not available to us at the time we submitted our earlier report, it is apparent that the vessel, when reconstructed, will be of substantial domestic construction. Section 9 of the Shipping Act of 1916, as amended (46 U.S.C. 808), provides that foreign-built vessels sold, leased, or chartered by the Secretary of Commerce to a citizen of the United States may be documented and permitted to engage in the coastwise trade of the United States while owned, leased, or chartered by such person. We understand that the vessel SC-1473 is now eligible for documentation for use in the coastwise trade but not for use in the fisheries. In view of this and the above facts, we are now of the opinion that the enactment of this bill could not be construed as a precedent-setting exception to the general rule. We would not, therefore, object to the enactment of H.R. 6007. The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the pres entation of this report from the standpoint of the administration's program. Sincerely yours, ROBERT M. PAUL, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Interior. |