I'm not too familiar with it, but I do know

Senator BARTLETT. I think that is right.

Mr. NELSON. That countries in this world have adopted this system: and went through the World Court with it and won out.

As I understand it, Russia has recognized that particular limit for fisheries purposes.

Senator BARTLETT. Which limits, Nils?

Mr. NELSON. The 12-mile limit.

But, as you know, we do not have it in the United States proper,. nor do we have it in Alaska.

The Alaska State Fish and Game Commission has officially asked for a limit to be extended to 12 miles for the purpose of conservation and regulation. It is a very important thing not only in salmon but in any other species of fish that is in the Pacific Ocean.

Therefore, I urge you to do all in your power to see that this limit be extended to at least 12 miles. That is what they have asked for, what the State has asked for.

It is going to help out not only in the Bering Sea and the Gulf of Alaska, Kodiak, Alaska, or the Aleutian Chain, but right here in our own neighborhood in time to come. There is no question in my mind about that.

I have one more subject, and on this one here I have to ask you a question.

I am not too familiar with this so-called Magnuson bill, the subsidy bill, the building of fishing boats. I have had some briefing on it, but I still don't get it.

Is this on a straight across-the-board proposition of subsidy or is it specifically for some specific type of boats?

If it is straight across the board, I would be opposed to it for the simple reason we have too many boats now. We do not have fish enough to support the boats and the gear and equipment we already have in the field.

Senator BARTLETT. May I interrupt you there?

Mr. NELSON. Yes; go ahead.

Senator BARTLETT. One purpose of the amended bill which is designed to replace the original law is to take care of just this situation, Nils. It is to provide for the retirement from the fleet of some of the older outmoded vessels which aren't truly competitive in the American fleet and surely not competitive with some of the foreign competition in a manner best designed not to hurt the owners of those vessels but to permit them to get newer ones, more modern ones, better ones, and lay up the old ones.

This is just like they do in the subsidy program for the merchant marine fleet. They constantly strive to modernize, to improve, and put the old ones in the mothball fleet.

This is one reason for offering an amended bill, to do just this, because you are right that if you just use a lot of new ones in addition to the old ones the situation would get worse instead of better.

Mr. NELSON. Well, on the other hand, if this subsidy was along the lines of putting bigger vessels into the field in competition with foreign nations to establish a historical right in the fisheries anywhere in the Gulf or the Bering Sea in Alaska in relation to the State of Alaska's waters, then I would go for it, for the simple reason—I have

said this 2 years ago and I will repeat it-that we will eventually see allocation of fisheries on the high seas within 25 years due to the tremendous effort that all nations in the world now are practically putting into it.

Just to give you an example, no one in the 1920's ever thought that there would ever be an allocation in the whaling industry in the Antarctic. Just look at what it is today.

The same thing is going to happen throughout the world with this tremendous effort and pressure brought on our fisheries. There is no question about it.

Now, if this subsidy was given to vessels of that type that could go out there in direct competition with these foreign nations in order for us to establish historical rights, sure, then I would go for it, because we are behind the eight ball whenever these allocations take place, because we do not have this.

In the 1920's, yes, we had codfish in the Bering Sea. We never caught what we called the scrap-fish variety of fish.

So if that was the thought behind it, I would be all for it.

That's all I have. Thank you.

Senator BARTLETT. Just a moment. Would you please give your mailing address?

Mr. NELSON. My address is 2520 Third Avenue, Ketchikan, N. E. Nelson.

Senator BARTLETT. Thank you.

The next witness is Robert Lindsey.

Mr. GEORGE ANDERSON. Robert is out of town.

Senator BARTLETT. I know it. In fact, he was down at the hearings in Seattle yesterday morning, and we couldn't get to him. I thought he would be there to testify yesterday afternoon, but he did not appear. So let me say here that anyone who sees him on his return can tell him that he can submit a statement in writing.

The record is going to be held open for 1 month for supplementary statements or for brandnew statements, and these should be sent to Mr. William C. Foster, 248 Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. They will be placed in the printed hearings just as if they were delivered.

Jim Pinkerton.

STATEMENT OF JAMES G. PINKERTON, MANAGER, KETCHIKAN COLD STORAGE CO., KETCHIKAN, ALASKA

Mr. PINKERTON. My name is James G. Pinkerton. I am manager of the Ketchikan Cold Storage Co.

Senator BARTLETT. What is your mailing address, please?

Mr. PINKERTON. Box 1309, Ketchikan.

Senator, it is a pleasure to be here to contribute what I can to this hearing.

Now, I would like to ask if there are any questions the Senator would like to ask.

Senator BARTLETT. No; we will try to develop some questions later. You just go ahead and make a statement, and some questions may flow from that.

Mr. PINKERTON. I would like to say that I feel that our fisheries are in dire need of development in areas not heretofore exploited. I make reference here to bottom fishing.

There have been statements made that there is not sufficient bottom fish available in Alaskan waters and adjoining waters to support such a fishery. I believe that theory has been proven wrong by the production being taken by the Japanese and Russian fleets, which, according to the most recent information made available to me by the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, now exceeds 1 million tons per year, a large portion of which is utilized for food fish.

Now, I can think of no better way at this time to improve the economy of Alaska than to establish a bottom fishery to harvest these fish and to put them on the American market in competition with imported bottom fish fillets and fish blocks.

Now, this might require a certain amount of Federal assistance in construction of the vessels. You know on the east coast they are able to get one-third subsidy if the vessel takes more than 51 percent of its catch in one of either five or six species of bottom fish. That includes cod, haddock, and perch that I know of specifically. And it has to be Atlantic perch.

Now, we need assistance for machinery and for vessel construction and for training of the necessary crews and shore personnel to get into this type of fishery.

I would like to inquire of the Senator whether or not he thinks we should proceed toward this development.

Senator BARTLETT. Well, you reverse the role. I was supposed to be mute. But I don't mind answering that. I most assuredly do, Jim, and my only fear is we may be coming to a realization of the need for this somewhat belatedly, because the discouraging fact is that we have established no historical fishery in this situation, and since that is the case we can't make an exclusive claim.

But, nevertheless, I think we must step out boldly and with imagination and competitively with any nation that wants to face us.

Mr. PINKERTON. Those thoughts are in accord with what I have been thinking, that if we can get the facilities, the machinery and shoreside facilities and the vessels which can operate alongside the Japanese and the Russians, we will take our chances in harvesting this fish both for food and for fish meal and fish oils.

I dont' think there will be a great deal of profit in it to begin with, but at least we will be providing more nearly year-round employment for our people who are now engaged in the fishing industry some 4 or 5 months per year.

Senator BARTLETT. How do you think the American market would respond to these species of fish? Let me ask you that, Mr. Pinkerton. Mr. PINKERTON. I believe there is an excellent demand. I have made some surveys lately in connection with perch, and as far east as Chicago there is a good market for perch, Pacific Ocean perch.

With the coming of our ferry system and daily transportation out of Alaska becoming available in a manner not heretofore available, we will be in a position to provide food—that is, fish-to the tables of the population centers as far east as Chicago.

Senator BARTLETT. What kind of ground fish are available and which would be the most easily exploitable commercially?

Mr. PINKERTON. Perch and cod primarily, but you have a very delectable item known as sole up here too, which the machinery for filleting has not yet been finalized for. They have baiter equipment available from Germany which is a highly mechanized form of filleting bottom fish and would enable us to create an entirely new industry up here.

It is only through the use of this particular machinery that the Russians and the Japanese are able to maintain the fleets that they have now in the Bering Sea and in the northern Pacific in taking these fish.

There is too much work involved to do it by hand, regardless of the price of wages, so they do it mechanically.

Those machines are available to us if we are willing to lay out the money and construct the plant and the ships.

1

Senator BARTLETT. Are there other kinds of ground fish available? Mr. PINKERTON. You have got cod and sole and flounder and perch. Those are the main ones.

Senator BARTLETT. As to this sole, is it a true sole or

Mr. PINKERTON. You have got English sole, you have got Patrole sole, and several other species. There are about five. And it's good. Senator BARTLETT. Is the English sole comparable in quality with the sole off of Great Britain?

Mr. PINKERTON. Well, I understand it is better.

Senator BARTLETT. I am going to believe you without inquiring further.

Now, most of the Atlantic coast fish are ground fish, are they not, that are placed on the commercial market?

Mr. PINKERTON. Yes; they are.

Senator BARTLETT. You spoke about the ferry system to be inaugurated that will make your marketing problem easier. Will you explain that for the sake the record?

Mr. PINKERTON. We will be able to load direct from processing plant into refrigerated vans the finished product, which will then be hauled aboard the ferry and/or loaded into rail cars at the new Saxman terminal, and in the case of the ferry the refrigerated vans would be hauled to Prince Rupert, and they could roll over the highway to Seattle in 40 hours and thence anywhere in the United States the same as fishery products originating in the Puget Sound area.

Now, this service has not been available to southeastern Alaska ports in the past. And in volume production, daily deliveries would be very important to keep the tonnage moving. We would be making a lot of fresh shipments as well as frozen, and in the case of refrigerated vans you would be moving the product under controlled temperatures, and we could put fresh fish into California with its 17 million population down there.

There is a good market for true cod down there.
Senator BARTLETT. How would you go to Chicago?
Mr. PINKERTON. Over the highway.

Senator BARTLETT. Except if you had a train freight car?

Mr. PINKERTON. It was published in the paper just recently that the Propeller Club in Seattle had been informed that the Canadian National Railway is going to offer piggyback service from southeastern Alaska once the ferry starts operation.

91963-63-9

Now, you have piggyback service available out of Seattle now and out of Vancouver on the Canadian Pacific. And when that service becomes available out of Prince Rupert, we will be able to load fish in vans at any of the southeastern Alaska ports where the ferry calls, and the vans will be put aboard flatcars at Prince Rupert and hauled to the Midwest and discharged directly at the consignee's door.

Senator BARTLETT. The cold storage plant which you manage handles at this time what kinds of fish?

Mr. PINKERTON. Primarily halibut, with as much salmon as we can buy and a considerable amount of sable fish when available. I might say the Japanese have gone into the sable fish or black cod as it is known up here extensively lately. They are fishing in the Bering Sea with long lines.

They are heading and gutting the fish with baiter equipment, and they are turning out an excellent product at a price we find it most difficult to compete with.

Senator BARTLETT. This is new for them?

Mr. PINKERTON. This is new within the last 2 years, and they are using the mechanized form of processing, and they are taking off the nape, they are removing some of the belly flap, and from this product the smoker gets 10 percent better recovery than from fish processed in the customary manner in which we have been handling the fish in prior years.

Senator BARTLETT. Do we import any of that Japanese sable?

Mr. PINKERTON. It is brought into New York. It is brought into Los Angeles. And it is carried inland from those respective ports. Senator BARTLETT. Mr. Pinkerton, do you have any familiarity with the bill which particularly brought the committee to Alaska at this time, S. 3093? And if So, do you desire to make any comments concerning it?

Mr. PINKERTON. The only comment I would have in connection with it is that I would have no opposition to negotiating on fish prices so long as they are legal, so long as the process is made legal.

Senator BARTLETT. As it now is not?

Mr. PINKERTON. That is correct.

Senator BARTLETT. In 1954 a ruling to that effect was handed down by the Federal Trade Commission.

Mr. PINKERTON. And we ran up against the antitrust laws, did we not?

Senator BARTLETT. That is right. And, as a matter of fact, legislation comparable to S. 3093 has been before the Congress in one form or another for something like a decade. Doubtless we will hold a further hearing at least in Washington so the views of the interested Government agencies may be expressed.

Mr. Foster, do you have any questions?

Mr. FOSTER. No questions.

Senator BARTLETT. Do you have anything further, Mr. Pinkerton? Mr. PINKERTON. I believe that covers the thoughts I had in mind at this moment, and I appreciate having been afforded an opportunity to appear.

Senator BARTLETT. If you have anything additional, put it down on paper and send it in, and it will be printed.

Mr. PINKERTON. Thank you, Senator Bartlett.