ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES, The Honorable JOHN FOSTER DULLES, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: The Alaska Fisheries Board is composed of five members appointed by the Governor, with the approval of the legislature. Membership is composed of 3 commercial fishermen, 1 processor, and 1 member at large, all of whom are residents of Alaska. As a Territorial agency, it is the official representative of the people of Alaska on matters pertaining to fisheries. The attached resolution was passed at the recent meeting of the Board, which was held in Juneau, Alaska, on November 10-18, 1953. The fisheries of Bristol Bay are of paramount importance to the Territory, therefore, your assistance in having Bristol Bay declared a historic bay will be deeply appreciated by all the residents of Alaska. Respectfully yours, C. L. ANDERSON, Director for the Alaska Fisheries Board. ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES, Whereas the real and permanent economy of any area of Alaska depends upon the wise utilization of its natural resources; and Whereas the economy of the Bristol Bay area has long been dependent upon the fishing industry, which industry utilizes the annual salmon runs to the streams of this region; and Whereas these runs of salmon have been diminishing in recent years, which has forced the imposition of severe fishing restrictions upon the local residents in an effort to rebuild the runs; and Whereas pelagic fishing for salmon has recently been inaugurated in Bristol Bay and unless immediate action is taken to stop same, it will continue to expand; and Whereas further expansion of this pelagic fishery will nullify the restrictive measures now in force in the area in an attempt to rehabilitate the salmon runs and will eventually lead to their complete annihilation; and Whereas under the present laws the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, which is the agency in charge in Alaska, cannot legally regulate this pelagic salmon fishery in Bristol Bay; and Whereas there is now a new industry being developed in Bristol Bay by American companies to utilize the king crab resources of the bay; and Whereas competition from Japanese operators in the same bay, who pay little attention to conservation needs, is making it exceedingly difficult for American producers to continue successful operations; and Whereas proper regulation of the king crab fishery is also impossible under present laws: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Alaska Fisheries Board, That the Secretary of State be requested to explore the feasibility of having Bristol Bay declared a historic bay and, if feasible, to take such action as quickly as possible to accomplish it. For purposes of definition it is suggested that the description given in the United States Coast Pilot for Alaska, part II, page 305, be used: "Bristol Bay may be said to include all that part of Bering Sea lying east of a line drawn from Cape Sarichef, Unimak Island, to the Kuskokwim River." C. L. ANDERSON, Director for the Alaska Fisheries Board. Senator CORDON. Might I inquire whether anybody here has any knowledge as to the extent of the Continental Shelf in this area? Delegate BARTLETT. It runs about 1 mile out. Mr. RHODE. That is shallow water all of the way out, and they generally concede the Continental Shelf as the 100-fathom mark. That varies, of course, all along the coast. Senator JACKSON. Could we have a chart showing the Continental Shelf? Mr. RHODE. I think there is a general chart that would show that. Senator CORDON. That is a problem we did not have in the Hawaiian matter because it is deep water. But, gentlemen, we have it here, and we have taken a position with respect to the Continental Shelf of every State, and every littoral State of the United States. I do not think we can walk away from it here. Senator ANDERSON. No. Mr. RHODE. It is a problem that faces me every day now, and more and more people are at least talking about it; in several cases this year they have threatened to start fishing offshore outside of the 3-mile limit to make a test case. Senator JACKSON. What do you do about the people, some of them fishing beyond the 3-mile limit? Have any of them engaged in unlimited fishing? Mr. RHODE. On a few occasions they have. And we have tried to prevent that by passing a regulation to prohibit the landing of the fish taken in violation of the regulation, but it is not the answer. Senator JACKSON. No. Mr. RHODE. Of course, it only applies to our nationals, too. Our particular fisheries act does not authorize the application of our laws to our own nationals on the high seas. That would solve it with respect to our nationals. Senator JACKSON. Yes, but you have the problem in connection with the Japanese that are coming in. They are coming in pursuant to a treaty which has been approved by the United States but not Canada. Mr. RHODE. Canada has approved it now. Senator JACKSON. That is all three countries then. And the treaty is in full force and effect. Mr. RHODE. The United States has not appointed anybody to represent it. Senator JACKSON. So that the treaty will be implemented and ready to be carried out as soon as we appoint these people? Mr. RHODE. That is right. Senator JACKSON. Well, do I understand the Japanese are permitted under that treaty to fish in the Aleutians and they renounced all right to Bristol Bay proper? Mr. RHODE. Not to king crab. They are fishing up there in that part of Bristol Bay in the vicinity of the letter "Y" at the end of the word "Bay." Senator JACKSON. They are fishing for king crab? Mr. RHODE. Yes, sir; and it is already causing us considerable trouble. They are fishing inshore, right up into the bay. And there is no delineation of what is historic water. That tremendously valuable Bristol Bay red-salmon run could largely be intercepted in waters more than 3 miles offshore. The same thing has occurred off the mouth of the Copper River; it has occurred to some extent in Cook Inlet. They could intercept the run there. Some of lower Cook Inlet is open to halibut fishing by Canada, which would indicate it to be international water. We insist on compliance with our fishery regulations on salmon, and we are in an area there now where we are not too sure where we stand. It is something that will be faced by the State to an even greater degree, I am afraid. Senator CORDON. I suggest to the members of the committee one of our very early witnesses ought to be from the State Department. Senator JACKSON. I suggested in your absence that the Interior Department arrange to have people from Justice and the State Department and bring them up here. Those would be people familiar with this problem. Senator CORDON. I do not know whether Interior could do it, but we could do it. Senator ANDERSON. Who do you know from State? I think it is fine, and we ought to have someone. Mr. RHODE. Mr. Harrington is the expert on fisheries, and I think he would be the proper one. Senator ANDERSON. Completely above fisheries, we ought to know what is out there in that Continental Shelf. Senator JACKSON. And the legal staff up, too, from the State. Senator CORDON. We had acted upon it, or at least it was the springboard for our outer-shelf legislative declaration of dominion with respect to resources. That is the Presidential proclamation to that effect. I do not have it before me and I do not recall what it says. Senator JACKSON. I think we have it right here; that is the declaration or proclamation of 1945. It is 2668. But the area, Mr. Chairman, as I understand that that proclamation would give to the United States Government the right to administer the fisheries beyond the 3-mile limit on the Continental Shelf for conservation purposes. In those areas where historically only American fishermen have been fishing, we would exclude from the waters in the Continental Shelf any other foreign citizen who might come into the area. If it has been used jointly, we protect the right of the historic users of the area, as I understand that proclamation we then reserve the right to administer for conservation purposes, not only over our own nationals, but over foreign nationals as well. Mr. RHODE. I am not sure, Senator. Senator JACKSON. That is what it says. Mr. RHODE. It sounds the way I recall it, but it was never implemented by law, so it has never had any force or effect anywhere to my knowledge. Senator CORDON. It goes a good deal further than that. This is a proclamation with reference to national resources of the soil and subsoil and seabed of the Continental Shelf, and that takes in the waters above it. I am taking out of context one paragraph: Having concern for the urgency of conserving and prudently utilizing its natural resources, the Government of the United States regards natural resources of the subsoil and seabed of the Continental Shelf beneath the high seas but contiguous to the coastal line of the United States, as pertaining to the United States as subject to its jurisdiction and control. In cases where the Continental Shelf extends to the shores of another State and that we have here already shared with an adjacent State, the boundary shall be decided by the United States and the State concerned in accordance with equitable principles. The character of high seas and the right to their free and unimpeded navigation, are in no wise affected. That is the meat of the thing we have. And then we have the policy factor that you have mentioned. Senator JACKSON. That is in the next proclamation, 2668. Senator CORDON. I get down past the whereases, and I reach the resolution of the proclamation: In view of the pressing need for conservation and protection of fishery resources, the Government of the United States regards it as proper to establish conservation zones in those areas of the high seas contiguous to the coasts of the United States. *** I interpolate there that that raises a question. *** wherein fishing activities have been or in the future may be developed and maintained on a substantial scale. Where such activities have been or shall hereafter be developed and maintained by its nationals alone, the United States regards it as proper to establish explicitly bounded conservation zones in which fishing activities shall be subject to the regulation and control of the United States. Where such activities have been or shall hereafter be legitimately developed and maintained jointly by nationals of the United States and nationals of other States, explicitly bounded conservation zones may be established under agreements between the United States and such other States; and all fishing activities in such zones shall be subject to regulation and control as provided in such agreements. The right of any State to establish conservation zones off its shore in accordance with the above principles is conceded. Senator JACKSON. I was in error in saying where there is more than one country involved, we would still administer it. As I understand it, we concede that it would have to be by consent. Senator CORDON. It says: *** provided that corresponding recognition is given to any fishing interests of nationals of the United States which may exist in such areas. The character as high seas of the areas *** are in no way affected. That is from the proclamation of September 28, 1945, No. 2668, which is in the record. Both proclamations raise some problems that we run into here. I might read this into the record. It is a statement made by Edward W. Allen, attorney of law, at Seattle, Wash., who has long been an expert in the fisheries question, and who was on the International Fisheries Commission, both the halibut and the salmon. Senator JACKSON. He was on the International Fisheries Commission, which administers the salmon fisheries of the Frazier River, essentially, and the treaty between Canada and the United States. He remains as a member of the International Halibut Commission, which is also a treaty between the United State and Canada. Mr. RHODE. He also worked on the Japanese treaty for the North Pacific waters. Senator CORDON. In 1950, according to his statement, he was then Chairman of the International Fisheries Commission, having been appointed in 1932. This is one paragraph out of his statement that seems to be particularly pertinent. The Truman proclamation was a Presidential proclamation in which the right of the United States is asserted to conserve and protect its coastal fisheries not only inside our Territorial waters, but outside of our Territorial waters. And the press release which was issued concurrently with the proclamation contained the statement to the effect that now the United States would be in a position to protect its very valuable Alaska salmon fishery. So you will see that the Presidential proclamation was directly related to the protection of Alaskan fisheries, although, of course, it included all fisheries of the United States. It was not restricted to Alaska by any means, but it was intended to protect the tuna fisheries and all other fisheries. The press release indicated that the inspiration came from this Japanese attack or invasion of our Alaskan fisheries. I think that is as far as we need to include the quotation. Well, gentlemen, it is 4 o'clock and if there are no other questions of these gentlemen we will adjourn. Mr. RHODE. I have one thing more that I would like to mention, and this will not take long. The law that you read here, the proposed law, would transfer our equipment of the Fish and Wildlife Service to the new State of Alaska, and I think it is important that it be understood, at least, that the equipment which the Service would still need for its Federal commitments in Alaska would be retained, which would be a minor portion of them; but we would have migratory bird work to do, and our refuge program to handle. Senator ANDERSON. It was understood that was the purpose of the language. Senator JACKSON. I think the language covers it all right. The intent is there. Mr. RHODE. That is fine. Senator CORDON. We meet tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock. (Thereupon at 4 p. m., a recess was taken until Friday, January 22, 1954, at 10 a. m.) |