a

if the Government would undertake this and get the experience of other countries it might be of help in building up the fishing industry?

Mr. STONE. I think, sir, one of the most hopeful sections of the bill is that provision for a cooperative marketing section, in which the definite extension, as I have interpreted it, of educational information can be developed similar to that which obtains now in agriculture, even to the matter of the education of the youths in our fishing communities. It is extremely important. We have nothing paralleling, in fishing, the 4-H club work, which is extremely valuable, in agriculture; but similar projects and programs could be developed under a proper extension service for the education of the youths of America in marine life, in the navigation of boats, and that sort of thing in the communities in which the youngsters are growing up and should have an opportunity. It seems to me, therefore, with that bill, even though the amount of money in the cooperative marketing section is pitifully small, yet with which you could make a start, it should be a very valuable contribution from an educational standpoint; and education is needed just as we have seen evidenced in Nova Scotia.

The CHAIRMAN. My own feeling is in the main we could aid possibly in building up the industry.

Mr. STONE. I think it is extremely important that that principle be developed

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions?

Mr. OLIVER. I have a couple of questions I would like to ask, but before putting the questions I would like to take this opportunity of expressing to Mr. Stone the deep appreciation which I feel, being a Member of Congress from Maine, for the very clear and lucid presentation of his thoughts with regard to this problem.

I would like to know, Mr. Stone, whether or not you represent other organizations from other sections of the country in addition to the State of Maine.

Mr. STONE. I have been requested, both by personal contact in one or two instances, and by correspondence, because of our general interest, feeling that support in general would add to our own interests in the matter, and I have been requested by the Fishermen's Cooperative Association of Seattle, with which we have enjoyed a rather considerable correspondence, and in which they wired me they would be unable to have a representative at this hearing, and asked if I would care to act for them, and this telegram is my authority:

Shall be unable have representative Washington hearing. If you care act for us, this is your authority.

The CHAIRMAN. We would be glad, in addition to that, if you could procure from them a statement as to the conditions.

Mr. STONE. I have requested that, and they have submitted by wire this statement, which I will read:

Our association incorporated May 1935. Membership now 340 trolling boats employing 550 fishermen producing over 6,000,000 pounds salmon yearly. count lack of funds are compelled dispose of fish fresh state and prices low when production heavy. If we could obtain necessary working capital, would mild cure or freeze part of salmon and hold for sale during period when no fresh salmon are produced. We strongly recommend passage of pending fisheries credit bill. The CHAIRMAN. Could you supplement that with a request to them let you have a statement of the conditions generally in their sec1, so that we can have that information for the hearing ?

AC

Mr. STONE. I will be very glad to do so, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Just along the line of the very able presentation you have made.

Mr. STONE. I will do that.

The CHAIRMAX. So that we will have, as completely as possible from all parts of the country, the general picture of the commercial fishery situation.

Vr. STONE. I have also been requested to represent the Frenchman's Bay Cooperative Association, Inc., of South Gouldsboro, Maine. In a letter under date of June 24, they write me as follows:

The members of the Frenchman's Bay Cooperative Association are in faror of passage of the fishery credit corporation bill. H. R. 7309, will appreciate your making such representation to the Committee on Merchant Jarine and Fisheries.

We are endearoring to establish a market through our cooperatire association, beliere that the establishment of credit facilities through such agency, together with a cooperative marketing service in the Bureau of Fisheries, will be one of the most constructive measures for the encouragement of fishermen erer passed by Congress.

You are herebs authorized to act as our representative in this matter.

I also have a telegram from an individual in Jonesport, Maine, Mr. George 0. Beal, who is engaged in the fish business there:

Kindly quote me at hearing on Bland Fishing Credit Act faroring both H. R. 6139 and H. R. 1309. Mr experience indicates existing credit facilities totally inadequate for proper efficient operation fishermen cooperative association. dets herein named hold forth greater promise in alleriating economie plight of fishermen than any heretofore considered by Congress

I think this telegram, which I received this morning, is inspired by the fact that through somewhat similar cooperative study meetings conducted on a weekly basis for a time last summer, there was developed over on Beals Island a small cooperative group who faithfullr carried on those more or less economie studies and, of their own volition, without any further initiation, formed a small cooperative society. Without attempting anything on a large scale they set up dues for themselves of 25 cents a week, and I was informed, although I have not seen them since last summer, they had accumulated a little treasury of a couple hundred dollars; that they had purchased an old abandoned school building, moved it over there, and set it up to provide a little service store on that part of the island, on which there was rone, and they are also attempting, in a small way, to acquire some lobsters to sell through the cooperative association. I presume that is why Mr. Beal wind me.

Mr. OLIVER. I would like to ask rou this, Mr. Stone: This bill contemplaies an appropriation of Sin for the furtherance of cooperative activities among the fishery industry. Do you believe that inrestent, from a national standpoint, wil pur itself out orer a comparatively short period of time!

Mr. STONE Yes sir: provided it is promerel, as of course, it would be on the basis of the prorisions of this bill.

Mr. OLIVER. Would you for the sake of the natuni, state here why you beliere that, basti upon your experience for the past couple of years with the Maine coast tisheries so far as the distribution of moner to those lewalities is concerned; what it atually means to them in building up their merale; also what it means in regard to being practically the only cash income they have would you make yhrief statement on that!

Mr. STONE. I will be very glad to. I feel it is important. One of the most significant things in the building up of the cooperative groups

in our small isolated communities is the development of better social and community consciousness, which invariably developes once the cooperative idea does take hold. I think I can best illustrate that with this case of the little Frenchman's Bay cooperative, which wrote us. They received a small loan from the Fisherman's Relief Corporation last fall and built a building for putting in some salt-fish tanks. They rested in the fall. There was no wharf leading out to the water, which was needed. This spring they got together, of their own initiative, and were able to obtain as a gift an old abandoned pier on an island across from them, and they floated it over in their spare time, set up the pier, which was some 40-foot pier, planked it over with planks that they purchased from the loan we made them, and they are about ready, this week, to start in, in a very small way, with salting 2,000 pounds of salt fish. As far as the industry is concerned, that is insignificant; but to them, at least, it is a very hopeful project in which they, for the first time, have taken off their coats and without a cash incentive have gone ahead and worked together.

Mr. OLIVER. My thought was this: at the present time these people who, to my mind, are typical of a good many other communities along the coasts of both sides of this great Nation of ours, are scratching on the outside of the economic life of this Nation. Do you believe that is true?

Mr. STONE. I believe that is true; yes, sir.

Mr. OLIVER. That they have no way of rehabilitating themselves unless the Federal Government, through the means of a cooperative, is willing to encourage, educate, and perhaps finance them temporarily while they are getting together on a basis where they can make their own living. Is that a fair reaction to this situation?

Mr. STONE. I think it is, sir; with the exception I feel the provisions of this bill extend credit facilities on a basis that is comparable with the existing facilities extended to other producers and, therefore, cannot be interpreted as subsidizing, because it can be employed for extending small credit facilities that are not available to them under ordinary circumstances at this time, but are ordi rily available to other types of business.

Mr. OLIVER. So that the provisions of this bill would provide for the fishery industry the same support and incentive for development that some of the cooperative agencies that have been set up in the Middle West have done so far as agriculture is concerned?

Mr. STONE. Yes, sir; I feel that is true.

The CHAIRMAN. The fisherman as a rule has been trained in paying his debts, has he not?

Mr. STONE. Yes, sir; I think that is true.

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, his past credit has been obtained largely from credit men and, to a very limited extent, from banks, and he has usually been considered as a very good paying risk, personally?

Mr. STONE. I have had but recently, 2 weeks ago, a communication from one of our directors, Mr. John Toft, who is manager of the Peacock Canning Co., and a member of the firm, in which he stated before a group of men of the State chamber of commerce, only the past week, that he has purchased some $2,000 worth of twine for one of his seine fishermen and, without a scrap of paper, felt perfectly comfortable about it and expected it to be repaid at the end of the season; that that was not an unusual circumstance that he had done so.

Mr. Mort of Oregon. I would like to ask the witness how the proposal or scheme outlined in this bill would affect the salmon fisheries of the Columbia River. I live out there and am particularly interested in those fisheries.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not know whether you were in here when Mr. Stone read the telegram from Seattle asking him to represent them in support of this bill.

Mr. Mort. I think he was reading the telegram just as I came in.

Mr. STONE. I believe, sir, you are referring to the Astoria, Oreg., group?

Mr. Mott. Yes; particularly.

Mr. STONE. I have had some correspondence with them. I believe the same benefits would be obtained if they qualified under the provisions of the bill, and their very definite feeling is the provisions of the bill would be helpful to them, from the personal correspondence which I have had with their secretary.

Mr. MOTT. Was that the secretary of the fishermen's union out in Astoria?

Mr. STONE. I believe so.

Mr. Mott. Now we have only one cooperative fishing and canning association on the lower Columbia River and that is Union Fishermen's Cooperative Association. In that association, the fishermen are principally stockholders in the cannery, but all of the rest of our canneries are privately owned and the fishermen simply catch the fish and sell them to those canneries, and I would like to know whether your bill would help the fishermen who simply sell to the private canneries and who have nothing to do with the ownership or operation of the cannery?

Mr. STONE. I would not say it would, sir.

Mr. Mort. The benefits of this bill, as I understand, go only to the cooperative associations?

Mr. STONE. Yes, sir; and the benefits would accrue only indirectly. And quite frequently, contrary to some general opinions, sound cooperative organizations do indirectly, and frequently directly, benefit the other organizations that are in the same field.

Mr. Mort. I think that is true. The price paid the fishermen by the Union Fishermen's Cooperative Association affects, to some extent, the price paid by private canneries to their own fishermen; but I was wondering whether your bill would help the fisherman who did not belong to the Union Fishermen's Cooperative Association ?

Mr. STONE. I would not say so, other than indirectly.

Mr. Motr. They cannot als belong to that association, you know. It takes money to buy that stock and become, in effect, a partner in the canning company.

Mr. STONE. Only to the degree, of course, in which fishing-boat owners and fishermen who have a situation in which are not actually and satisfactorily served can there be any occasion that I can see for the employment of a cooperative association.

Mr. Mott. Now, the fishermen on the lower Columbia River, whether they sell to the Union Fishermen's Cooperative Association or not, belong to the union. Would this bill help them? They are catchers and sellers.

Mr. STONE. Not unless they qualified under the provisions of the bill. There may be others here who may take a different view on it.

The CHAIRMAN. They may form a cooperative association to protect themselves from the low prices paid by the private canneries.

Mr. STONE. Yes, sir; they could. That is what I mean by saying unless they qualified under the provisions of the bill for its benefits.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you want to make a statement, Mr. Mott!

Mr. Mort. I believe not at this time. My purpose in coming here was to get what information I could.

STATEMENT OF ISIDOR MARGOLIS, ON BEHALF OF THE SOUTHERN

NEW ENGLAND FISHERMEN'S ASSOCIATION

Mr. MARGOLIS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I represent the Southern New England Fishermen's Association, having its office at Mystic, Conn. The association has from 500 to 600 members, producing some 35,000 or 37,000 barrels of fish yearly, of the approximate net value of $250,000. All of this fish is shipped to New York City for distribution.

The problems confronting our members can be well described as different aspects of the problem of marketing. With your permission, I will mention three of these that have direct connection with the legislation that is the subject of this hearing.

When the boat of one of our members has been well stocked with his catch, his worries have only begun, for fish on the boat is useless. It must be delivered at some point where it can be shipped to market. The question is, Where can the fish be docked!

The fisherman has three choices, each of which really offers no choice, for each one of the three docks is privately owned, and although ostensibly the fisherman is given the privilege of landing his fish gratis, he really is paying quite dearly for this privilege, for in return for docking privileges he must buy all of his gear and tackle equipment from the owner of the dock, as well as the barrels in which he ships his fish to New York.

The CHAIRMAN. You do not have an auction block like they do in Boston ?

Mr. MARGOLIS. No; no service is rendered to the fisherman that he could not well perform himself; yet he must pay the profit demanded on all these items. Further, he can ship his fish to New York only in the trucks that are permitted to come on the dock by the owner. The truckman pays for this privilege to the dock owner and adds this amount to his charge. Thus, at the very outset of the marketing operation, the fish is saddled with unnecessary costs.

How much cheaper could this be accomplished if our members had their own dock? This requires capital and, although we could raiso a part of it, we cannot raise all of it. To apply to the banks for a loan for such a project would be useless. They would do nothing against the interests of their depositors, owners of the other docks. Here is one example where the contemplated Fishery Credit Corporation could be of great assistance.