and does not come into our shores to spawn. difference, perhaps, I think. There would be some The waters of Bristol Bay are turbulent and shallow, most of the area of 20,000 or more square miles being less than 50 fathoms in depth; and the region is one of frequent fogs and stormy weather. It is an area where natural conditions may be taken advantage of by foreign vessels seeking to exploit the fishery resources. The first Japanese floating cannery to operate in the offshore waters of Bristol Bay was in 1930. In each of the seven seasons since then from one to four such vessels with accompanying tenders have operated in these waters. For the most part activities have been confined to the packing of crabs, but for a number of seasons one large vessel accompanied by a fleet of trawlers has been engaged in dragging the bottom for ground fish and manufacturing the bulk of the catch into oil and meal or fertilizer. With the advent of the first Japanese outfit in Bristol Bay in 1930, the Government of the United States interested itself with a view to determining the character and extent of such operations being conducted from 15 to 25 miles north of the Alaska Peninsula. Authoritative assurances were received that operations would be restricted solely to the taking and packing of crabs caught by large mesh nets set on the bottom. It was pointed out that this type of apparatus and its place of location on the bottom would in no way interfere with salmon. Under the circumstances, a gentleman's agreement or understanding was reached early in 1931 that the Japanese operators would not interfere with salmon in any way whatever and that, on the other hand, American fishermen would not be encouraged to engage in crab operations in the region. This arrangement was confirmed informally when, in 1932, three Japanese representatives of crab-packing interests called at the office of the then Commissioner of Fisheries. They gave complete assurance that their operations would be limited solely to the taking of crabs and that they would not interfere with salmon in any way whatever. They were members of the Crab Canners' Guild and indicated that they would use their influence to the end that members of the Salmon Canners' Guild would not undertake to send vessels to pack salmon off the Alaskan coast. The CHAIRMAN. I would like to know why they would want to give consent to catch crabs, though, that come in competition with my people down my way? Mr. BELL. Well, I do not know. Mr. SIROVICH. I agree with the chairman. I think we ought to revoke that concession that the Japs have and tell them to go over to their own country and let us alone over here, and not to destroy, with their cheap labor, the living of the Virginia people. Mr. BELL. I personally agree with you very much on that. Mr. SIROVICH. Japan does not allow any of our nationals to go in the Japanese country to fish, or to do anything else, and I think it is time that this pussyfooting we are doing with Japan stops, and they ought to be told to get out of our waters and get out in every way. We have enough to do to protect the fishing industry in the Atlantic, the Pacific, and the Great Lakes, without having the competition of the cheap labor of Japan. And I think you, Commissioner, for whom I have a wholesome affection, ought to put into your report this very thing, that it ought to stop and we ought to protect the Alaskans and the natives of Alaska against the encroachments of aliens and foreigners who do not belong there. I would be in favor of sending up torpedo boats, cruisers, airplanes, and bombers and get rid of all of them. Mr. BELL. American industry has never evidenced any particular interest with respect to packing crabs off the Alaskan coast. It is a specialized line of business in which the Japanese are experienced by reason of similar operations off the Asiatic coast. Much hand work is involved in the preparation and packing of the crabs, and as labor costs are low the Japanese are able to do the work upon a paying basis and in a way with which American industry would find it difficult to compete. The pack of crabs by Japanese vessels off the Alaskan coast in the long season from spring to fall has aggregated upward of 30,000 cases each year. The pack is taken to Japan, and probably two-thirds of it ultimately finds its way to the markets of the United States. It is reported that this country absorbs approximately 65 percent of the total pack of crabs by Japanese interests from all sources. There is comparatively little packing of canned crabs in the United States. It is believed that the gentleman's agreement in regard to Bristol Bay operations has been generally adhered to by Japanese interests, although two exceptions may be noted. On June 23, 1936, the Japanese floating salmon cannery Chichibu Maru was observed by the Coast Guard patrol vessel Morris using long salmon nets at a point about 95 miles due east of the Pribilof Islands and approximately 140 miles due north of Cape Cheerful on Unalaska Island. This place was 130 miles from the nearest mainland on the Alaska Peninsula, in a region having a depth of about 50 fathoms. Subsequently it was learned from official sources that this vessel had been liceused to can salmon off the Siberian coast, but while awaiting the clearance of ice from Siberian streams had temporarily proceeded toward the Alaskan coast. Mr. SIROVICH. Do you know where those Japanese salmon and Siberian salmon spawn; do they go along the Japanese coast and along the Siberian coast? Mr. BELL. They spawn along the Siberian coast and the Japanesecoast. Mr. SIROVICH. They do spawn there? Mr. BELL. Yes. Another instance of the taking of salmon for commercial purposes was reported in the season of 1937 when the Japanese floating cannery Taiyo Maru, with three auxiliary vessels, each operating floating nets about 2 miles long in 15 fathoms of water, was observed off Ugashik on July 5 by the Coast Guard patrol vessel Cyane. Ugashik on this map is right here [indicating], so that the operation there was within about 14 miles off the mouth of the Ugashik River. The activities of the Taiyo Maru and accompanying trawlers were also observed on July 7 by Mr. H. B. Friele, of the Nakat Packing Corporation, and others who flew over these vessels and took a number of photographs. It was stated that approximately 20,000 freshly caught salmon were observed on the deck of the Taiyo Maru. Mr. SIROVICH. The Japs did not say that they caught that fish to feed the 400 fishermen they had on the ship, did they? Mr. BELL. No; I did not hear any statement of that kind. Further confirmation of the activities of the Taiyo Maru and three accompanying tenders was obtained on July 12, when Agent L. G. Wingard, of the Bureau, and Mr. Aubin Barthold, of the Alaska Packers Association, found these vessels a few miles from their location about a week earlier, and circled over them in an airplane for more than an hour, taking a number of photographs. Freshly caught salmon were distinctly noted in boxes on the deck of one of the smaller vessels, and the crew was seen stowing boxes of freshly taken salmon in the hold. Each of the smaller vessels had large piles of what appeared to be gill nets placed neatly on the afterdecks and some on other parts of the vessels. The Taiyo Maru had nets, apparently drying, spread in every available space. When located, this fleet apparently was ready to move, as two of the smaller vessels and the mother ship were under way and were soon followed by the other smaller craft. The Japanese Government advised that it had not licensed any vessels to fish for salmon off the Alaska coast in 1937. The fact that Japanese interests have for a number of years been casting eyes toward the shores of Alaska, particularly Bristol Bay, with a view to exploiting the salmon fisheries, is evidenced by the action of the Japanese Government in its inauguration of a 3-year program of research to determine the character, extent, and abundance of salmon in the Bristol Bay region. The obvious purpose of this investigation is to determine the feasibility of Japanese vessels securing salmon upon a paying commercial basis in offshore waters of Alaska. In 1936 the Tenyo Maru, 657 tons, accompanied by one auxiliary vessel of 61 tons, made a study of migration routes and availability of salmon in Bristol Bay waters. It is understood that the investigation was continued in 1937 by the training ship Hakuyo Maru. A motorboat fishing for salmon with gill nets was observed near this vessel by one of the Coast Guard vessels. These investigations complete two of the three seasons of the program along this line announced by the Japanese Government. The Hakuyo Maru, of the Imperial Fisheries Institute at Tokyo, cruised in Bering Sea in 1930 and again each year from 1933 to 1937, inclusive, for the purpose of instructing students in pelagic fishing methods. Usually 30 or more students were aboard, in addition to the crew of 44 men and 15 officers. The Hakuyo Maru is a modern steel vessel of under 2,000 tons, Diesel powered, and well equipped with modern appliances, including machinery for the canning of fish. Salmon, as well as crabs, have been canned in the course of the season's operations. Although the vessel is not Government-owned, the work is subsidized by the Japanese Government, the Fisheries Institute having a semiofficial connection with the Department of Agriculture and Forestry. In 1937 Japanese businessmen approached American interests on the Pacific coast with a view to undertaking joint operations in extraterritorial waters off the coast of Alaska by American and Japanese fishery concerns. This proposal was sharply resented and rejected by American interests and labor organizations upon the ground that such overtures by Japanese interests would be seriously detrimental to American fishermen and cannery workers, not only because of the immediate division of the runs of fish with a foreign group, but because ultimately such foreigners might absorb the bulk of the business as a result of cheap labor and lower costs of operation generally. Destruction of the salmon fishery of Bristol Bay, Alaska, by foreign interests would work tremendous hardship upon the 2,000 local inhabitants of that Territory, who depend almost entirely upon salmon for the staple article of their diet and for employment by the canneries during the summer months. It must be remendered that this district offers comparatively little other employment for the resident population. The region is almost treeless and therefore no lumber industry exists. Trapping is engaged in during part of the year. The supply of furs, however, is holding up none too well, and unless the natives can have the benefit of salmon fishing, they will not be able to earn a livelihood. As the local population in the Bristol Bay region is insufficient to meet labor needs, it is necessary for the salmon packers to import from the States or from other parts of Alaska, about 6,000 persons to carry on the salmon-fishery work, which is concentrated in a brief period during the summer. The business could not be carried on unless there were such importations of labor for a few months each. year. To the extent that the runs of salmon were destroyed by foreign fishing vessels, there would be corresponding loss of employment to American fishermen and cannery workers. Increased unemployment undoubtedly would be the portion of American fishermen and cannery workers if foreign interests invade the salmon fisheries in offshore waters of Alaska. There is only so much raw material; and if foreign operators get part of it, to that extent American industry would suffer and unemployment would result. Moreover, there is the danger that the supply of salmon for commercial use would be soon exhausted if operations were carried on without regard to restrictive measures for the purpose of assuring an adequate escapement of brood fish. The unimpaired continuation of the salmon fisheries of Bristol Bay is of very great importance to the Territorial government of Alaska. This for the reason that the Territory derives upward of 70 percent of its total revenue for the operation of schools, care of indigents, and various other matters coming within the scope of territorial government, from taxes levied on the fisheries. The highest rates are applicable to the red salmon fisheries, the chief producing center of which is in the Bristol Bay region. If the salmon fisheries of Bristol Bay were destroyed, the Territory would be forced to revise its entire license tax program. Not only is the threatened foreign exploitation of the Alaska salmon of vital consequence to American fishermen, but it is also of real concern to other lines of American industry. Our shipping interests, our railroads, net makers, tin-plate manufacturers, cordage firms, machinery and engine builders, the producers of cotton, foodstuffs, and other supplies, all would feel the loss of business resulting from the virtual destruction of this great salmon industry. Casual consideration of the matter generally leads to the conclusion that only the fishery interests are concerned, but the foregoing outlines how extensively destruction of this industry would be felt in other directions. Attention is called to the fact that for many years the Government of the United States has spent several hundred thousand dollars annually in the protection and conservation of the salmon of Alaska. This has been not only along the line of enforcing laws and regulations but has included an extensive program of fish-cultural work; also considerable scientific work has been carried on. It is argued that these activities give the United States a proprietary right or vested interest in the salmon hatched in the streams and lakes of Alaska, and which return there to spawn and die after a year or more spent in the sea. I believe, Mr. Chairman, from the facts presented it will be apparent that the salmon fisheries of Alaska are vulnerable to attack by foreign vessels, and unless definite action is taken to prevent encroachment, this long-established American industry which gives employment to thousands of our people will ultimately be destroyed. Ι Mr. DIMOND. Mr. Chairman, may I interrogate the witness? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. DIMOND. Mr. Bell, can you tell the committee something of the development of the laws and regulations for the protection of the salmon fishery of Alaska, and particularly for that part which exists in Bristol Bay? What I have in mind is that, in former days, as I recall, the regulations and laws were not nearly so restrictive as they are now and purse seining, for example, was permitted in Bristol Bay and adjoining waters, and traps also were permitted at one time, you will just relate that historically to the committee, I am sure it will be of value to show the efforts made by the Government to protect, preserve, and conserve the salmon fisheries of Alaska. If Mr. BELL. I tried in my statement, Mr. Dimond, to outline that in a brief way. Of course the restrictive measures and the sacrifices we have made through regulations put into force up there have cost the American people a lot of money not only in appropriations, but in regulating the fishery so as to get our spawning grounds built up, and to maintain the fishery. And each year we have to formulate our regulations on the scientific data we have as to what the escapement might be. And during the fishing season, if the runs of salmon do not show up adequately, we close fishing until we know what we are doing. So with this power of regulation we can maintain the industry perpetually; but if we have this outside fishery, with no regulations and with the way they can catch them, the entire fishery there can be completely destroyed. Mr. DIMOND. Well, then, assume you have an outside fishery, such as the Japanese at least have started in Bristol Bay, and suppose they took about half of the normal run of fish, then would you feel obliged to close down the operations of our fishermen entirely, so as to permit a sufficient escapement of the salmon? Mr. BELL. It would not be a matter of feeling obliged; I am obligeted by law to see that 50 percent of the salmon escape, regardless of who catches them. If the Japanese caught 50 percent, the other 50 percent would have to escape. Mr. DIMOND. And then our conservation measures would be merely for the benefit of Japan under those circumstances? Mr. BELL. That is correct. Mr. DIMOND. And our people would not get any benefit? Mr. BELL. That is correct. Mr. DIMOND. And we would spend $400,000 a year on the salmon fisheries of Alaska just to perpetuate this run of fish for foreign nationals? Mr. BELL. Yes. Mr. CULKIN. How far at sea is it practicable to take these fish? |