This Department is not in a position to submit any suggestions to assist in the development of the fisheries industry. With kind personal regards. Sincerely yours, FRANCIS BIDDLE, Attorney General. Mr. MCCANN. On yesterday, Mr. Chairman, I had the pleasure of a visit from Mr. Alan S. Davis, of Hawaii. Mr. Davis has been engaged for a number of years in the canning business there. We have not as a committee received any communication so far from Hawaii. Mr. Davis informed me that as a result of the war they have lost approximately 22 or 23 fishing vessels; that they have only 3 fishing vessels left in Hawaii; that their production of fish has been reduced to about 10 percent of normal; that they have a very acute situation in the islands; that no fish have been canned for some time; that although they were in the tuna-canning business, all the fish caught are being sold as fresh fish; and that a considerable amount of fish has had to be shipped from the mainland to Hawaii. He also expressed concern with respect to what was going to be done with some of the Japanese islands which we are taking over in the South Pacific. He stated to me that some of the finest tuna fishing in the Pacific had been conducted around Saipan and that the Japanese had shipped large quantities of very fine tuna from that section. So I directed him to get a letter to the committee as soon as possible with respect to the Hawaiian situation. Later in the afternoon Mr. Farrington, Delegate from Hawaii, sent up a letter which he had received, a copy of a letter which had been addressed to Hon. J. Hardin Peterson, chairman of the Subcommittee on Fisheries, from the board of commissioners of agriculture and forestry, Honolulu, signed by Colin G. Lennox, president of the board. I should like this letter, our first communication from the islands, to be placed in the record at this point. Mr. DIMOND. It is so ordered. (The letter referred to is as follows:) [Copy for Delegate Farrington] TERRITORY OF HAWAII, BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY, Mr. J. HARDIN PETERSON, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Fisheries of the House Office Building, Washington, D. C. (Through Gov. I. M. Stainback.) DEAR SIR: We have your letter of May 31 asking us to give your committee any data or observations which we may have that would be helpful in drafting of legislation which would be designated to protect and develop commercial fisheries. The fishing industry in the Territory of Hawaii came to a nearly complete standstill at the beginning of the war because the bulk of the fishing was being done by alien Japanese. It is slowly building up again but the production still remains a fraction of the pre-war production. The failure to return production to normal is partly accounted for by the restrictions that must be placed on the zones and times when fishing may be done and partly by the lack of fishing boats. We feel that it would be fully in order to ask for a review of the present need that the War Shipping Administration has for the many small fishing boats which it seized at the beginning of the war. If some of these may be released to the local fishing industry it would mean an improvement in the volume of fresh fish entering the territorial markets. This matter is one which we consider as a problem that does need attention. The problem of increasing the fishing areas beyond those set up from time to time by the Navy is one which we feel should be left entirely to the judgment of the men conducting the Pacific war. You have asked for observations which may assist in the protection and development of commercial fisheries. We have had many reports from observers trained in fishery research who have returned from newly conquered areas in the Pacific to the west and southwest of Hawaii which indicate that there is a tremendous wealth of deep sea fishes in these areas. It is a wealth which the Japanese Empire alone was exploiting before the war. It is our firm belief that the fisheries surrounding these former Japanese mandates and island possessions are their greatest natural assets other than their usefulness as strategic bases. We therefore would like to urge that a full appraisal of the value of these assets be placed before the peacemakers and that they be asked to recognize the interest which the United States will have in exploiting them. This organization has been in correspondence on the subject with the Division of Fish and Wildlife of the Department of Interior at numerous times in recent months as we feel that research into the extent of these fisheries should start soon after hostilities cease. The job is a large one and one which the Federal Government should take an active part in if the United States sphere of influence is extended into these Pacific areas. We wish to thank you for calling on us for our opinions on this subject and hope that you will feel free to call on us for any data which we may be able to supply in the future. Yours very truly, COLIN G. LENNOX, Mr. MCCANN. We offer in evidence a letter from the Game and Fish Department of the State of North Dakota, signed by William J. Lowe, game and fish commissioner. This letter, dated June 29, 1944, is addressed to the Honorable J. Hardin Peterson, chairman of this subcommittee, and I should like for it to be reproduced in the record at this point. Mr. DIMOND. It may be admitted. NORTH DAKOTA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT, Mr. J. HARDIN PETERSON, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Fisheries of the House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. PETERSON: We are in receipt of your letter of June 1, advising us of the investigations into the various phases of commercial fishing that your subcommittee is making. For your information commercial fishing is not an important part of the economy of North Dakota, the poundage taken being very small in comparison with that of some other States. The Missouri River supplies some species of fish, including the channel cat, which can be taken commercially, but the fishermen available are few and the poundage taken small. In some areas of the State supplies of carp and buffalo might be utilized if manpower and net equipment could be secured to remove them from some of our waters. However with restrictions on gasoline. and truck equipment and the inability of our department to secure the necessary nets, we have been unable to undertake the removal of such undesirable species as carp and buffalo from game fish waters. Sincerely yours, STATE GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT, Game and Fish Commissioner. Mr. MCCANN. We have a letter from the Board of Fish Commissioners of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, signed by C. A. French, commissioner of fisheries, dated June 8, 1944, and addressed to the Honorable J. Hardin Peterson, chairman of the Subcommittee on Fisheries. I should like to have that reproduced in the record at this point. Mr. DIMOND. That may be admitted. (The letter referred to is as follows:) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Hon. J. HARDIN PETERSON, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. PETERSON: This will acknowledge your letter of June 1 in reference to a series of investigations pursuant to House Resolution 52, Seventy-eighth Congress, first session, with respect to the progress of the national defense program insofar as it relates to matters coming within the jurisdiction of the committee. The only information we have prepared on the subject was in accordance with telegram communication from Hon. S. O. Bland, chairman of the Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, of which you no doubt have a copy. Insofar as any data or observation which might be helpful I am getting in touch with our superintendent at the port of Erie and he will contact those interested in the commercial industry and if they have any suggestions we will be very glad to pass them along. Would it be possible for you to send me a copy of the resolution in question so that we may know just what it contains? Very truly yours, C. A. FRENCH, Commissioner of Fisheries. Mr. MCCANN. We have a letter from the Game and Fish Commission of the State of Colorado, dated July 1, 1944, signed by Gilbert N. Hunter, game and fish manager, addressed to the Honorable J. Hardin Peterson. Mr. DIMOND. It may be admitted. Hon. J. HARDIN PETERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, Chairman, of the Subcommittee on Fisheries of the DEAR SIR: On my return from an extended field trip I found your letter relative to commercial fisheries and regret the delay in answering. Colorado has 16 commercial fisheries, 15 of which are confined to the production of trout and 1 to the production of rough fish. These plants are of a very small nature and their output is confined to the supplying of hotels, restaurants, and dining cars. Since the war a few others have gone out of business or leased their plants to us, The main reason for discontinuing their operations was the shortage of manpower. There has been no particular demand for the further development of commercial fisheries, but more farmers are taking advantage of the Fish and Wildlife Service program of stocking farm ponds. This fact, together with the department's policy of stocking only legal-sized fish near the centers of heavily populated areas, may be satisfying the local demands. During 1943 our stream surveys revealed that Colorado fishermen caught an average of 50 fish each or a total of 7,437,150 trout and 391,878 warm-water fish. These fish average 4 to the pound or a total of approximately 780 tons. Fishing license sales in 1943 increased 5 percent over 1942. I am unable to supply you with the commercial fisheries' output, and if I can be of any further assistance, please advise. Very truly yours, C. N. FEAST, Director. Game and Fish Manager. Mr. MCCANN. We have a letter from the Fish and Game Department of the State of New Hampshire, dated June 28, 1944, signed by Ralph G. Carpenter 2d, director, addressed to the Honorable J. Hardin Peterson. I should like to have this letter placed in the record at this point. Mr. DIMOND. It may be admitted. J. HARDIN PETERSON, STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Fisheries of the Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. PETERSON: In reply to your letter of June 1, the one suggestion we would make, after working with the fishery coordinator's committee, would be that all problems such as manpower and supplies, and all essentials such as gas, oil, equipment, and deferments of essential workers be handled by the fisheries coordinator's committee, working in cooperation with the State fish and game department, and that if legislation is to be enacted, it should be for that purpose. Sincerely yours, RALPH G. CARPENTER 2d, Director. Mr. MCCANN. We have a letter from the Board of Fish and Game Commissioners of the State of New Jersey, signed by Georged C. Warren, Jr., president of the board, dated June 29, 1944, addressed to the Honorable J. Hardin Peterson. I should like to have this letter placed in the record at this point. Mr. DIMOND. It may be admitted. (The letter referred to as as follows:) STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Hon. J. HARDIN PETERSON, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: I have given considerable thought to your letter of June 1. With respect to your request for constructive suggestions, I think the best thing I can do is summarize the specific requests that have been made to the Fish and Wildlife Service by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission of which this State is a part. These requests have been as follows: (1) State systems of catch statistics.-The Fish and Wildlife Service has been cooperating with individual States and with the Commission in working up the data on which the States can determine their policy with respect to such State systems. (2) Striped bass.-To determine how State statutes should be modified to provide for the most efficient use of this fishery on a sustained yield basis. The Service has been cooperating extensively through our striped bass panel, but further assistance will be required from time to time. (3) Formula for the distribution of costs of this commission.-The Service has cooperated extensively, and further help will consist merely of reporting the latest statistics. (4) Management plans.-The Service has been cooperating extensively in the discussion of this important matter, but the continued assistance of the Service personnel will be required. (5) Channel bass.-Apparently little is known biologically and commercially with respect to this species. Further research is required. (6) Soft clams and quahags.-The problem here is primarily related to the closing of areas alleged to be polluted. Conference with the Fish and Wildlife Service and the United States Public Health Service indicate that considerable further study of this matter is needed. At present a special study is under way in the Chesapeake Bay area under a special appropriation of $17,000. At the present time the executive committee of this Commission is considering the suggestion that the Service be asked to make a study of all the closed shellfish areas along the Atlantic coast, particularly those in which there appears some possibility of rehabilitation. If this request is approved by our executive committee, it will require a very marked increase in technical assistance from the Fish and Wildlife Service, and we assume will require a special appropriation. Such a study if requested will not be limited to the soft clam and quahag areas, but should also cover the oyster areas. (7) Shad. The Service has rendered valuable assistance to the States of Maryland and Virginia with respect to the shad in the Chesapeake and is now conducting a study looking toward the rehabilitation of the shad in the Delaware. The restoration of the shad run in the Hudson leads us to hope that similar results can be obtained in other important shad waters. The program to be evolved from the present Delaware shad study may require additional appropriations for help from the Service as well as contributions from the States concerned. (8) Blue crab.-This problem is particularly acute at the present time in Chesapeake Bay where some differences of opinion have arisen with respect to the adequacy of the crab sanctuary. A joint study made possible by financial assistance from the two States is now being conducted under the guidance of the Fish and Wildlife Service with the help of the biological laboratories in the two States. The present scarcity of mature crabs, the wisdom or unwisdom in the permitting of taking of sponge crabs, and the adequacy of the sanctuary are all topics of earnest discussion. Further help will undoubtedly be asked from the Service with respect to this question. (9) Oysters.-The Service has been assisting the oyster panel of the Commission, and it seems probable that the request by the several States for further technical help from the Service will increase rather than diminish. (10) Atlantic salmon. The possibility of reintroducing Atlantic salmon in rivers formerly frequented by them south of Maine apparently must await the outcome of research on certain Maine rivers which appears to have been subject to some interruptions because of the war-shortage of personnel, etc. The States concerned are awaiting the results of the research and hope very much that it can be expedited as much as possible. (11) Shrimp. The Southern States of the Commission have earnestly requested more extensive study of the spawning and migration of young shrimp and the effects of shrimp trawling on other fisheries. This study is now progressing according to our information, but if these southern Atlantic States develop their program, further requests for help will undoubtedly arise. (12) Lobster.-On the basis of the recommendations of the Fish and Wildlife Service, a standard minimum legal size of 3%-inch carapace has been adopted by most of the lobster-producing States. But this is far from a solution of the problem. Intensive research as to the optimum length of lobsters in each State and a study of predators has been requested. (13) Predators.-A special study by the Service on the control of predators along the Atlantic coast has been requested. (14) Fluke.-Little apparently is known of the fluke which is of concern to the States from Massachusetts to Delaware. The Service has been requested to make a biological study and to recommend appropriate minimum legal lengths for this coastal area. From the above tabulation you will observe that the States which are members of this Commission have presented to the Fish and Wildlife Service a considerable number of problems which are important to these States. The work involved in performing this research was unfortunately delayed by the necessity of assigning members of the Service to the work of the Office of Fishery Coordinator. recent appropriation by the Congress to the latter office it is hoped will make possible the return of some of these biologists to the research work for which the States are waiting. The The members of this Commission appreciate the earnest efforts made by the Service to fulfill the requests which have been made. But we earnestly ask your assistance in making certain that sufficient funds are appropriated to the Service to permit it to perform these research services requested by the States under the Marine Fisheries Compact. You will recall that under that compact ratified by the Congress, the Fish and Wildlife Service was made the primary research agency of this Commission. Unless the Service is equipped with funds and personnel to do the technical work requested, it is quite obvious that the States will not be able to do their part in the joint task of bringing our fisheries to maximum production, consistent with sustained yield. |