(b) Accomplishments from the point of view of United States interest The conference and the resultant convention are considered to represent significant accomplishments from the point of view of United States interests. The International Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Conference in itself represented an important advance by bringing together the nations interested in the Northwest Atlantic fisheries for the first time to consider steps for the proper utilization of these natural resources. The convention establishes machinery that will make possible effective measures for the maintenance of these fisheries at a level which will permit the maximum sustained catch. For the first time in this area there will now be an agency for the necessary collection, collation, and dissemination of statistics, and the coordination of investigation. The convention will fill a long felt and basic need in this respect. Moreover, the convention also provides a method by which effective measures for the better management of fishery resources can be put into effect by the governments concerned, as soon as there is clear scientific evidence to support the proposal. This should prove particularly helpful, at the present time, to the fishing industry of New England which has suffered the most from the decline in abundance. In the long run, it provides a means of meeting a situation in the future, with the potential expansion of fishing by other nations in the convention area, before the situation reaches a crisis stage analogous to that at present prevailing in the North Sea. The importance of this convention, however, is not limited to the particular area and situation with which it is concerned. It should be noted that the convention breaks new ground in international organization for the conservation of fishery resources in view of (1) the number of countries concerned, (2) the fact that it will affect all species of fish which support international fisheries, and (3) the pattern of subareas and panels to meet the problem of biological, managerial, and political variations. Respectfully yours, WILBERT M. CHAPMAN, HILARY J. DEASON, FREDERICK L. ZIMMERMANN, Delegates of the United States of America, International Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Conference. EFFECT OF NOT RATIFYING THE CONVENTIONS Senator GREEN. Have you anything to say about the effects of not ratifying these conventions? Dr. CHAPMAN. Actually, I didn't state anything definitely on that score. I treated it from the positive side. I assumed that that presented the picture fully. Senator GREEN. What will be the consequence of not ratifying them? Dr. CHAPMAN. The consequence of not ratifying them would be that we could not undertake this international action and, therefore, we would have no means of regulating our fishermen. You can very well see that one country's fishermen will not fish on the same fishing banks right alongside of another country's fishermen who are unregulated. There is such an injustice in that that no fisherman would stand for it, and neither would the government. We don't have any means actually of regulating our fishermen where we think regulation is required and where the fishermen think regulation is required until we have some means of regulating the activity of the other fishermen. Senator GREEN. I think you should go further than that. That argument is simply made against our making regulations-I mean the effect on the general public in not having such regulations. Dr. CHAPMAN. The effect on the general public would be that the populations of fish on the banks would continue their downward course. There would be less fish available for the American consumer. Of course, if that should happen, you would anticipate that the price of what did remain would be greater. Senator GREEN. That isn't just a theory, is it? Do you have proof of that? EXPERIENCE WITH THE HALIBUT FISHERIES Dr. CHAPMAN. Well, we know what happened in the case of halibut stocks. We fished them to the point where we could hardly operate a fishery on them any more. Senator GREEN. That is in your record, is it? Dr. CHAPMAN. Yes; that is in the record. Senator GREEN. That I want to be sure of. Dr. CHAPMAN. Yes sir; we went through this whole experience in full detail with respect to the halibut fishery. We started out fishing the halibut, but pretty soon we found out we didn't have any more fish to catch. Now we have built up the stocks again and we have a production nearly as large as our largest production before, and this is on a constant basis, year after year. We anticipate that we will be able to boost that production further yet. It is a means for safeguarding one of our essential foods. Senator GREEN. I simply want to know whether these facts are in the record you will submit. Dr. CHAPMAN. I believe they are in fair detail, sir. I hadn't considered them much from the negative standpoint. Senator GREEN. Well, thank you. Is that all you have to say? Dr. CHAPMAN. All on the Northwest Atlantic. Senator GREEN. Then you want to go on to the others? Dr. CHAPMAN. Yes. Senator GREEN. Well, if they are peculiar to the others, you had better finish with the North Atlantic. Whom did you refer to that was going to supplement your information, Mr. James? Dr. CHAPMAN. Mr. James, of Fish and Wildlife Service. Senator GREEN. You may submit your statement for the record and we will hear from Mr. James in a moment. (Statement submitted by W. M. Chapman is as follows:) STATEMENT OF W. M. CHAPMAN, SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE TO THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE The Department of State recommends earnestly the approval of the three marine fisheries conventions now before the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification. The three conventions are: (1) The International Convention for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries; (2) The Convention between the United States of America and the United Mexican States for the Establishment of an International Commission for the Scientific Investigation of Tuna; and (3) The Convention between the United States of America and the Republic of Costa Rica for the Establishment of an Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission. The three conventions represent the culmination of long-continued efforts on the part of this Government to negotiate international agreements for the conservation of marine-food resources in areas of the high seas in which the United States has major fisheries interests. Before undertaking a detailed discussion of the separate conventions, it may be convenient to consider them as a whole, having particular regard to their common purpose, their accord with continuing United States fisheries policy, and the scope and extent of the interests of the American people concerned. PURPOSE OF THE CONVENTIONS The waters covered by the three conventions are widely separated, reaching over vast areas of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean and, in the tuna conventions, extending north and south for upward of 5,000 miles along the Pacific coast of the United States to below the equator. But the purpose is in each instance the same: to make possible the maximum production of food from the sea on a sustained basis year after year. It can be demonstrated that it is in the general welfare of all mankind to protect the resources of the sea from overfishing to the end that the sea will continue to produce the maximum quantity of food that it can. This is the goal toward which United States policy strives. The aim is to secure a mechanism which will provide for each high-seas fishery of American concern the possibility of management, to the end that the population of fish upon which the fishery works will be kept at that level at which a maximum crop can be harvested year after year, ad infinitum. Fifty years ago it was considered to be an immutable fact that the resources of the sea were inexhaustible. The sea was a bottomless reservoir of fish; the more fish that were drained from it, the more fish there were to drain. But we have had it forced upon us by bitter experience that it is not true that the resources of the sea are so huge that they cannot be exhausted. During these 50 years also occurred a number of experiments which demonstrated that it is not necessary to stand helplessly by while the fisheries resources of the seas are depleted or destroyed. Among these are: (1) The fur-seal herds of the Pribilof Islands, which probably numbered originally 5,000,000 individuals were reduced to less than a quarter of a million seals. Then, by the simple expedients of not killing the seals so rapidly, and of outlawing pelagic sealing, the herds were built back to a level of more than 31⁄2 million individuals, while a larger crop was being taken each year. (2) The halibut fishery of the North Pacific Ocean built up to a peak of yielding more than 60,000,000 pounds of fish a year, then dropped to a point where it would produce by the hardest kind of fishing less than 44,000,000 pounds per year. Again by the simple expedient of not fishing so hard, the halibut populations of the North Pacific banks have been built up until they produce steadily in the neighborhood of 56,000,000 pounds of fish per year, and with about one-third the fishing effort that it had taken to catch the 44,000,000 pounds (appendix I). From these and other experiments, evidence has continued to mount in recent years to show that the following is true: When you begin fishing on any population of fish, that population begins to decrease in total numbers as the take of fish from it increases. Up to a certain point, however, the reproductive capacity of the population increases also-whether because there is more food for the fish that are left, or less loss to natural predators, or whether there is some other cause, is not well understood yet. If the fishing intensity continues to increase, however, you at last come to a point where the population of fish cannot respond, and now the yield begins to drop off no matter how hard you fish, or how many vessels you use, or how efficiently you work. The sense of this is that for any particular population of fish there is a point of fishing intensity which will yield a maximum crop of fish from that population year after year into eternity. Less fishing than that is wasteful, for the surplus of fish dies from natural cause without benefit to mankind; more fishing than that is wasteful because it results actually in a smaller crop. This is frequently called depletion. The determination of this point of optimum fishing intensity is a difficult and expensive task. Remember also that the abundance of the population of fish is still fluctuating due to natural causes beyond the control of man, and consequently this point of maximum production changes as the cyclic changes in the climate of the sea affect the productive ability of the particular fish population. In such important kinds of fish as herring and sardine, it becomes apparent that these natural fluctuations are of major importance; in such fish as halibut, it seems that natural fluctuations are small enough that they can almost be ignored. It is the purpose of these conventions to begin the task of gathering the information from which determination may be made of the effect of man's activity on the fisheries concerned, the need for regulation in the fisheries, and the type of regulation, if any, required. Except in certain circumstances under the Northwest Atlantic Convention, to be later discussed, regulation is not envisaged, and indeed is not possible, under the conventions. Experience has shown that long years of investigation are required before regulatory measures may with certainty be applied. The conventions, then, provide for such investigation. Regulation (except in the Northwest Atlantic area), if it is found desirable, will require further international arrangements. CONTINUITY OF UNITED STATES POLICY The proposed conventions represent no new innovation in United States fisheries policy. They are essentially applications in new high-seas fishing areas of long-established principles and practices found effective by the United States in other international fisheries in which its citizens participate. Their provisions re modeled closely upon the principles of the United States-Canadian Halibut Convention of 1923, as revised in 1930 and 1937, and on those of the United StatesCanadian Sockeye Salmon Convention of 1937. In addition, the conventions epresent practical applications of the Presidential proclamation of September 28, 915, concerning the policy of the United States with respect to the establishment of fishery-conservation zones in certain areas of the high seas. The Halibut Convention of 1923 between the United States and Canada was rought about by the sharp decline in annual halibut catch beginning after 1915 then the catch reached an all-time high of 63,000,000 pounds. The convention stablished the International Fisheries Commission, composed of two United tates and two Canadian members, provided for a closed season for halibut fishing, and required the Commission to conduct investigations into the life history of the alibut and make recommendations for the regulation of the fishery looking toward is preservation and development. The years of investigation that followed resulted in recommendations for egulatory powers and, by a revised agreement between the two countries, which ecame effective in 1930, the Commission was given certain regulatory powers. Again in 1937, on the basis of further investigation and experience. the Commision was given additional regulatory powers. The results of the Halibut Convention justify it fully. In 1948, landings of alibut exceeded 55,000,000 pounds, an increase of 27 percent over the catch aken by the fleet in 1932, the year before regulation began. In one area the atch per skate increased 71 percent in the 14-year period between 1932 and 1936, and in a second area 100 percent. The increase in abundance of the fish on the anks brought about not only an increase in yield from the banks, but a notable eduction in the fishing effort required to take the greater catch. The Sockeye Salmon Convention of 1937 between the United States and Canada was the outgrowth of prolonged efforts on the part of the people of the State of Washington and the Province of British Columbia to establish a program or rehabilitation of the sockeye-salmon fishery that is dependent upon the runs that spawn in the Fraser River system of British Columbia. These salmon are taken by fishermen of both the United States and Canada in territorial waters and high seas off the respective coasts; hence both countries have an interest in conservation of the fishery, although the spawning grounds are all in Canadian territory. Following a series of highly productive years beginning late in the nineteenth entury and ending abruptly in 1913, the fishery decreased rapidly until by 1931 production reached stability at a level far below its known capacity. During the latest 4-year period 1943 to 1946, inclusive, 900,400 cases of sockeye salmon were packed, a decrease of more than 78 percent from the all-time high of more than 4,000,000 cases in 1899 to 1902. However, an even more serious picture is presented by the damage done to the large run of 1913. The sockeye salmon natures in 4 years and had developed an especially large run which reappeared nce every 4 years. The pack in 1913, the last year in which this large run was indamaged, amounted to 2,393,000 cases; while the total pack for the 8 years during which the run has returned since that time has been only 1,763,000 cases. The sockeye-salmon conservation agreement includes the waters of the Fraser River system, the greater portion of the Straits of Juan de Fuca and Georgia, and tertain areas of the territorial waters and high seas adjacent to the coasts of Canada and the United States. It established the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission, composed of six members, three of which are appointed by each of the respective Governments. The commissioners hold office at the pleasure of the respective Governments. The Commission is charged with the duty of investigating the natural history of the Fraser River sockeye salmon, hatchery methods, spawning-ground conditions, and other related matters. It is empowered to improve spawning grounds, Construct and maintain hatcheries, and to stock waters of the fishery. It is also given authority to make recommendations to the two Governments for action to be taken regarding obstructions in the river system. The Commission is further authorized to limit or prohibit the taking of sockeye salmon in the waters covered by the treaty and to prescribe the size of the meshes in fishing gear, with certain restrictions. Such restrictions as are promulgated must be made with a view to allowing, as nearly as may be practicable, an equal portion of the fish that may be caught each year to be taken by the fishermen of each country. The most spectacular achievement of the Commission has been the removal of obstructions and construction of fishways at Hell's Gate Canyon and Bridge |