The Chair will read for the assistance of all persons present the program schedule for this afternoon, and any other persons desiring to be heard may make appropriate comment to the very able members of the staff.

This afternoon we will hear the following: Mr. Joseph A. Gann, secretary-treasurer, Gann Enterprises, San Diego; Mr. Robert B. Young, executive director, American Tuna Sales Association, San Diego; Mr. Anthony Pisano, general manager, Fishermen's Co-Op, San Pedro; Rose Sarukian, district representative for Senator Ralph Dills, who will read a prepared statement; Mr. John Royal, executive secretary-treasurer, Fishermen and Allied Worker's Union, Local 33, ILWU and Ken Jordan, San Pedro Chamber of Commerce.

That is the tentative schedule of witnesses. If any other persons desire to be heard on this matter if they will communicate with members of our staff we will endeavor to hear them in a courteous and gracious fashion.

If there is no further business to come before the committee at this time, the subcommittee stands adjourned until the hour of 1:45 p.m., punctually.

(Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., the hearing recessed to reconvene at 1:45 p.m., the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Mr. DINGELL. The subcommittee will come to order.

The Chair will recognize first Miss Rose Sarukian for purposes of making a brief statement and inserting certain materials into the record of this hearing.

If you will please identify yourself fully by name and address to our reporter for purposes of the record.

STATEMENT OF MISS ROSE SARUKIAN, ADMINISTRATIVE
ASSISTANT FOR SENATOR RALPH DILLS

Miss SARUKIAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Anderson, and the other distinguished members of the committee.

My name is Rosen Sarukian. I am administrative assistant for Senator Ralph Dills of the 32d Senatorial District.

With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I have a letter from Senator Dills which I would like to read.

Mr. DINGELL. Without objection, you may proceed.

Miss SARUKIAN. The letter is addressed to the Honorable John D. Dingell, U.S. House of Representatives, Special Committee on Fisheries.

"DEAR CONGRESSMAN DINGELL: Thank you for extending an invitation to appear before your distinguished committee. Although I am deeply concerned with this problem confronting our fisherman, the press of legislative business in Sacramento precludes by attendance.

"In my absence, I have instructed Miss Rose Sarukian, my administrative assistant in San Pedro, to present this letter and the enclosed Assembly Joint Resolution No. 11, authored by Assemblyman Vincent Thomas and myself and adopted by both houses of the California Legislature.

"I would appreciate this resolution being included in the record of your committee hearing."

It is signed: "Sincerely, Ralph C. Dills."

I have the required 25 copies.

Mr. DINGELL. Without objection, the document alluded to will be inserted into the record of the proceedings.

(The statement follows:)

Hon. JOHN D. DINGELL,

U.S. House of Representatives,
Special Committee on Fisheries

CALIFORNIA STATE SENATE,

February 8, 1971.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN DINGELL: Thank you for extending an invitation to appear before your distinguished committee. Although I am deeply concerned with this problem confronting our fishermen, the press of legislative business in Sacramento precludes my attendance.

In my absence, I have instructed Miss Rose Sarukian, my administrative assistant in San Pedro, to present this letter and the enclosed Assembly Joint Resolution No. 11, authored by Assemblyman Vincent Thomas and me and adopted by both houses of the California Legislature.

I would appreciate this resolution being included in the record of your committee hearing. Sincerely,

RALPH C. DILLS,

State Senator.

ASSEMBLY JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 11

Adopted in Assembly February 2, 1971

Chief Clerk of the Assembly

Adopted in Senate February 3, 1971

Secretary of the Senate

This resolution was received by the Secretary of State this

day of

Assembly Joint Resolution No. 11-Relative to federal action to precent seizure of U.S. fishing boats by foreign powers, while such craft fish further than 12 miles from foreign shores.

T

WHEREAS, Since 1961 the governments of Ecuador and Peru have seized over 100 tuna fishing vessels of United States registry, 17 of these in January of this year, including most recently the boats Coimbra, Jeannette C. and Western King, which tuna fishing vessels at the time of their capture were fishing further than 12 miles from the shores of Ecuador or Peru; and

WHEREAS, Such seizures have, as of late, been made with planes and gunships, which have fired upon unarmed tuna fishing vessels, creating great risk of destruction to such vessels and risk of injury or death to the crews of the boats; and

WHEREAS, From 1961 through 1970 over three-quarters of a million dollars in fines were paid to foreign governments by the American fishermen to secure release of their vessels which had been unlawfully seized; and

WHEREAS, Such fines extracted by the governments of Ecuador and Peru in the month of January of this year alone are likely to exceed in amount all such fines imposed by these governments during the period from 1961 to 1971; and

WHEREAS, The frequency of seizures of American tuna fishing vessels by the governments of Ecuador and Peru has increased drastically, culminating in a record number of seizures this January; and

WHEREAS, The United States and 92 other countries within the United Nations, out of a total of 105 United Nations countries, recognize a 12-mile extension of a sovereignty from a nation's shore, but the governments of Ecuador and Peru claim sovereignty to a full 200 miles from their respective coasts; and

WHEREAS, Seizure of United States vessels fishing in excess of 12 miles from foreign shores is an infringment of the right of the United States to freely use the high seas; and

WHEREAS, Attempts by the United States to settle this dispute, which has existed since 1951, with the governments of Ecuador and Peru have failed; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to congressional authorization sales of United States military goods to Ecuador and Peru have been stopped, but this has not been effective to eliminate or even to curtail seizures of American fishing vessels; and

WHEREAS, The United States has additional sanctions which it may impose which have not yet been implemented; and

WHEREAS, Congress has passed legislation authorizing the Secretary of State to withhold foreign assistance to recompense losses arising from the seizure of American fishing vessels on the high seas, but such measures have not been implemented; and

WHEREAS, The President of the United States should take all necessary action to protect the rights of American citizens on the high seas; now, therefore, be it Resolved, by the Assembly and Senate of the State of California, jointly, That the Legislature of the State of California respectfully memorializes the President of the United States to undertake to implement all sanctions within his power to prevent the seizure of American fishing vessels on the high seas, and also to deploy American naval power where necessary to protect against such seizures; and be it further

Resolved, That the Legislature respectfully memorializes the Congress of the United States to hold hearings to study the effectiveness of present legislation in preventing seizures of United States fishing vessels and to study the necessity of enacting new legislation to deal with this problem; and be it further

Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit copies of this resolution to the President and Vice President of the United States, to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to Senator Warren G. Magnuson, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Congressman Edward A. Garmatz, Chairman of the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, and to each Senator and Representative from California in the Congress of the United States.

Attest:

Speaker of the Assembly

President of the Senate

Secretary of State

Mr. MAILLIARD. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Mailliard?

Mr. MAILLIARD. It occurred to me several times that reference has been made to the position of the Department of State and I thought it might be worthwhile to have in our record-I happen to have it with me both the resolution of the OAS to which, I think, Congressman Wilson referred, and the speech of Under Secretary Irwin at the opening session of the OAS Foreign Ministers meeting in Washington, and for the information of those who may have missed it, I shall read one sentence from it because I think it does represent one of the first cheerful sides, it would seem, of a firmer attitude on the part of the State Department.

I will just read this one sentence out of Secretary Irwin's speech :

The facts show that it is Ecuador which is using economic coercion and force in seizing fishing boats and fining them, thus seeking unilaterally to enforce its claim of territorial sea. Such coercive action by Ecaudor is designed to force the sovereign will of the United States into accepting Ecuador's territorial claims and thereby to obtain advantages which Ecuador would not otherwise enjoy under international law. Under these circumstances the U.S. Government has had no choice but to apply the provisions of this law in response to actions of the Government of Ecuador which violates the rights of the U.S. nationals under international law.

I ask that these be put in the record because I think they bear on the subject.

Mr. DINGELL. Without objections, so ordered. The documents referred to will be inserted in the record at this point and the Chair thanks my good friend and colleague from California for his assistance in this matter.

(The documents referred to follows:)

[Department of State Telegram]

JANUARY 1971.

From Secretary of State, Washington, D.C.

To American Embassy, Quito, immediate

Information all American Republic Diplomatic Posts

U.S. Mission, USUN, N.Y.

USCINCSO POLAD.

Unclas State, 016598

Subject: Tuna Boats in OAS

1. Following is text of statement made by Under Secretary Irwin at opening session of 14th MFM January 30:

"My distinguished colleague, Foreign Minister Ponce, has with his usual ́eloquence and forcefulness stated the case of the Government of Ecuador concerning the seizure of United States fishing vessels by Ecuadorean Naval forces. I can assure you that there is another side to this unfortunate dispute, and I wish now to set forth the position of the United States. I characterize this dispute as unfortunate advisedly, because the United States cherishes its traditional friendly relations with Ecuador, and we hope that an amicable solution to this problem can be found which is fair to both countries.

The facts are that since January 11, Naval forces of the government of Ecuador have seized seventeen United States fishing boats while those vessels were fishing far off the coast of Ecuador in waters which the United States and more than 90 other countries of the world consider to be high seas under established principles of international law. Fines have been imposed on these vessels by Ecuador amounting to $822,550. As a result of these seizures by the Ecuadorean Navy, the United States has, pursuant to its domestic law, suspended its military sales to Ecuador.

The position and views of the United States with respect to the territorial sea and the exercise by the coastal state of rights over the living resources of areas of the sea adjacent to its coast are well known. It is the view of the United States that coastal areas, in the absence of broad international agreement, may not make unilateral territorial sea claims such as the claim under which Ecuador purported to seize fishing boats in the present case. In addition, the United States holds the view shared by most other countries of the world that with respect to fisheries, a coastal state may exercise jurisdiction in a zone contiguous to its territorial sea, but not exceeding twelve miles from its coast. Any changes in the international law governing the territorial sea or coastal state jurisdiction over fisheries must be accomplished through international negotiation and agreement, and not by unilateral action.

The United States recognizes that coastal states have a particular interest in the living resources of the seas adjacent to its coasts. The United States itself has such an interest in the resources off its own coast. The particular problems relating to the use and conservation of off-shore living resources can be solved by treaty, bilateral agreement, a course the U.S. would be happy indeed to follow, but it cannot be solved by unilateral extensions of sovereignty over broad areas traditionally regarded as the high seas. In our view, an attempted solution along these lines benefits neither the coastal state nor non

coastal states which have a concurrent interest in the development of these

resources.

For this reason, the United States has been working diligently over the past several years to encourage states to convene an international conference for the purpose of defining precisely the maximum breadth of the territorial sea and preferential rights which a coastal state may exercise in areas of the high sea adjacent to its coast. The United States has circulated several proposals aimed at achieving a mutually beneficial solution. On the issue of high seas fisheries, the United States has suggested the establishment of a new international regime under which the particular interests of coastal states could be recognized, and providing certain criteria are met, special preferences could be granted to meet these interests. At the same time, all fishing nations would cooperate with international organizations, including those of a regional nature, whose aim would be to assure conservation of the living resources of common concern to all states.

In December of 1970, the United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly adopted a resolution 2750 C (XXV) which calls for the convening of a conference on the law of the sea in 1973 for the purposes inter alia of establishing an equitable international regime for the area and resources of the seabed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, and of reviewing a broad range of related issues, including the breadth of the territorial sea and the regime of the contiguous zone, and fishing and conservation of the living resources of the high seas. Both Ecuador and the United States were among the cosponsors of United Nations Resolution 2750 C. The United States intends to employ its best efforts in the intervening years to insure that this conference is a success. Among these efforts will be an attempt to effect a practical solution to the very vexing situation resulting from conflicting claims to territorial sea jurisdiction in this hemisphere.

In this regard, the United States has been negotiating with the countries of Chile, Ecuador and Peru over the last two years with a view towards establishing an arrangement to avoid conflicts in areas where there remains a dispute over jurisdiction. Such a solution would be without prejudice to the respective juridical position of each of the four countries. In the United States view this type of negotiated settlement is the only effective means of ending the long standing and troublesome dispute which is presently before this meeting of consultation of foreign ministers.

In these meetings with Ecuador, Peru and Chile, the United States has advanced several concrete proposals which we believe could serve as practical solutions to the vessel seizure problem, without prejudice to the juridical positions of any of the parties, and which would also serve to stimulate cooperation among the parties in fishing industry development and the scientific conservation of fishery resources. For example, the United States has proposed establishment of a Regional Fishery Development Institute which, among other functions, would regulate the activities of tuna fishing vessels in the waters of the region, using the funds generated thereby for fishery development projects in the coastal countries. Alternatively, the United States has proposed an agreement which would set up a joint licensing and enforcement system to regulate the tuna fishery of the region for purposes of conservation and management of the resources, with enforcement activities to be conducted by the coastal states. In connection with this proposed solution, the United States has expressed its willingness to assist the coastal countries in fishery research and development, including consideration of their trade in fishery products. We feel that the United States has approached the problem with great flexibility and in a true spirit of compromise. During the last round of these negotiations in September 1970, progress was made toward the establishment of a framework upon which international agreement could be reached. We believe that all four countries have the firm desire to reach a mutually satisfactory solution and that to this end it is important to resume the talks scheduled to be held before July 31, 1971.

It is quite clear, however, that progress toward such a peaceful disposition is made much more difficult by actions such as those during recent weeks when the seventeen United States fishing boats were seized by Ecuador in the disputed waters. For its part, the United States remains ready to find a practical solution to this problem through peaceful procedures as required by the Charter of the Organization of American States. We are also prepared to have recourse to the machinery provided by our charter for the peaceful settlement of disputes. We stand ready to resume at once the four-party talks to which I have just referred.