The salmon area and the halibut area, for instance, are in the same geographic region, but the problems are so diverse that we found it necessary to have a commission working on the halibut problem and a commission working on the salmon problem. I might say that the Halibut Commission-the older one-has worked with extreme satisfaction. The halibut stocks have been rebuilt to the extent that a yield is now being had larger by a considerable extent than was the case in 1931, when the regulation started. Furthermore, the larger yield now is being taken with about one-third the fishing effort that was formerly used. It has worked much to the benefit of both countries and to the fishermen of both countries.

THE WHALING CONVENTION

We have also a third convention, the whaling convention, which is just really getting under way now, to which 22 countries were signatories. We have not had the background and experience on the Whaling Commission that we have had with the others.

ADHERENCE OF NONSIGNATORY POWERS

Senator GREEN. In article 15, section 3, it says:

Any government which has not signed this convention may adhere thereto by notifying in writing the signatory government.

Is that all they have to do to become a member?

Dr. CHAPMAN. That is correct.

Senator GREEN. Then they have all the rights of any other member? Dr. CHAPMAN. That is right.

Senator GREEN. Ireland, the Netherlands or Soviet Russia could join any time. Well, then, their consent would be necessary as new members, just as well as the older members, when a new change in the regulations is made.

Dr. CHAPMAN. No; not unless they became a member of a panel. They can adhere to the convention and become a member of the Commission. They will then ask in the Commission for an assignment to a particular panel area. That may or may not be granted by the Commission.

Senator GREEN. Would that granting have to be unanimous?

Dr. CHAPMAN. The recommendation has to be accepted by a two-thirds vote, both at the panel level and at the commission level. All recommendations are settled by a two-thirds vote. It is only when the recommendations are to become regulations that the governments have to be unanimous on making a recommendation into a regulation. But the commission itself works on the basis of a twothirds majority.

Senator GREEN. Well, it has to be unanimous to place the regulations into effect; is that correct?

Dr. CHAPMAN. That is correct-unanimous on the part of the nations, not the Commission.

Senator GREEN. Would it be better for the admission of additional members for the existing members to pass on it?

Dr. CHAPMAN. That would be so, Senator, but there was no possibility of getting the countries to sign under that stipulation. There

was very sensitive feeling at the convention on the part of all the nations on that. I might say that there was rather a feeling in the background when the conference was held that it was being held mainly for the benefit of the United States and Canada and for the purpose of keeping other nations out of the area. So that the point was extremely sensitive at the convention.

Senator GREEN. Yes, but after you admitted these 10, I should think they would be satisfied that they could pass on additional members.

Dr. CHAPMAN. That was not the case, however.

Senator GREEN. But you said all of the nations were opposed to it. Dr. CHAPMAN. I wouldn't say that all of the nations were opposed to it. We did not bring the matter to a vote actually. The subject was so sensitive that it was not brought to a vote.

Senator GREEN. Then if an additional nation, an eleventh nation, did join, it might not be assigned to any panel; is that correct?

Dr. CHAPMAN. That is a possibility. They would be giving up certain rights but not getting any.

Senator FULBRIGHT. They don't have to do it.

Senator GREEN. I understand. I assumed the purpose of this was to have all nations that were exercising fishing rights there abide by the regulations.

Dr. CHAPMAN. Yes. I assume if any eleventh nation began fishing there and established a fishery in one of the areas, it would be assigned to a panel and become a full member. I cannot foresee any probability of a fishing nation permitting its fishermen to be regulated by any body in which it was not represented, but I just mention that as an outside possibility.

COSTS

Senator FULBRIGHT. What will be the cost of this commission? Dr. CHAPMAN. The cost of the Commission will be actually of three types. There is the administrative cost, which we would estimate on the part of the United States to be about $3,500 a year. The second type of cost would be for the expenses of our representation, for the expenses of our commissioners and their advisers, and on the basis of the Salmon Commission of similar size, we would guess that to be about $5,000 a year. There is a third category of expenses, which is a larger one, and that is concerned with the investigations.

Now, under this convention, the official fisheries' agency of the various countries will conduct the investigations; so, therefore, the investigatory costs will come in the regular budget of the Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior, and the Department has an estimate on that which I believe they will present later. It will be in the neighborhood of $300,000 a year.

Senator GREEN. How much?

Dr. CHAPMAN. $300,000 a year. I will leave that third cost for discussion by the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Senator GREEN. Are there similar estimates for the three conventions?

Dr. CHAPMAN. Yes, sir; we have similar estimates for the tuna .conventions.

ADHERENCE UNDER THE COSTA RICA CONVENTION

Senator GREEN. To go back, in the Costa Rica Convention, there is a provision that an additional government must apply and be acted on favorably.

Dr. CHAPMAN. That is quite so.

Senator GREEN. If it was there, why was it not possible in the other?

Dr. CHAPMAN. We had quite a different political situation in the Northwest Atlantic Conference than we had in the Costa Rican conference. We would have liked to have had the provision that you brought up in the Northwest Atlantic Conference. We could not get it there; we could in the Costa Rican conference.

Senator GREEN. That was brought up and considered, was it?
Dr. CHAPMAN. Yes, in detail; sir, yes.

COSTS CONTINUED

Senator FULBRIGHT. Is that $300,000 for just one convention or is that for each convention?

Dr. CHAPMAN. That would be for the investigations, sir, under the Northwest Atlantic Convention alone. That is subject, of course, entirely to the will of the Congress. The appropriation will be included in the general appropriation of the Fish and Wildlife Service. The Fish and Wildlife Service spends in that area at the present time on investigations in the neighborhood of $250,000, and the further work of investigation in our own immediate area will cost in the neighborhood of double that.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Double that?

Dr. CHAPMAN. In that neighborhood.

Senator FULBRIGHT. And that is for each convention, is it? Dr. CHAPMAN. No. That is for the Northwest Atlantic. The halibut is only $35,000 a year. The salmon is $250,000 a year. The two tuna conventions, between them, will be in the neighborhood of $750,000 a year maximum. It depends on the difficulty of the problems, mainly, in the tuna area. For instance, you can't justify at all an expenditure of $50,000 a year, you would just be throwing money in the water year after year. If you don't have an investigation on a considerable size, you don't accomplish anything. Some different problems take a different range, different magnitude of money.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Is that investigation principally one of checking how much fish is taken out of the area?

Dr. CHAPMAN. No. It is much more complex than that. It pertains to the migratory habits of the fish and the breeding habits, and things such as that. You have to know the biology of the fish; then you have to know what your population of fish is and the size. You have to know what is being taken by the fishery. Then we have to find the relationship between the young fish and the size of the population. Until you know those factors, you are not able to sensibly regulate the fishing activity.

THE UNITED STATES SHARE

Senator GREEN. Are those figures you mentioned for this country low out of the total for which we bear a share?

Dr. CHAPMAN. I had mentioned in the statement that in the case of the Northwest Atlantic investigation, the figure in the neighborhood of $300,000 is our share. It is the work that we would undertake.

Senator GREEN. What portion of the total is our share?

Dr. CHAPMAN. Actually, that is not determined. The administrative costs are based on the representation in the panels. If we were represented in five panels, we would pay more than twice as much as the $3,500 figure that I gave you, but being represented on two panels only, our share of the cost is smaller. Administrative costs are based on the number of panels you are a member of, and we put that in that way purposely to try and get the countries to come in only on those panels that they were actually interested in.

Senator GREEN. What was the total cost to all the nations? Dr. CHAPMAN. Actually, I don't know and it was not possible to estimate it at the Conference. I think Canada at the present time spends in the neighborhood of $500,000 a year on investigations in the area. The Norwegians and the Danes spend smaller sums, much smaller sums, I think in the range of between $25,000 and $50,000 a year. The Portuguese and the French also have investigations going on in the area. One of the main purposes of the convention is to draw all of these threads of investigations together so that they are not overlapping, so they are not duplicating, so that each one knows what the other is doing, so it is a whole investigatory effort expended in the area for the benefit of the whole. There is no compulsion whatever in the convention for the investigation being expanded at all. We have indicated to you what we anticipate the expansion of the United States investigation would be, but I don't know what the figure of the total investigation is at the present time or what it will amount to. Senator GREEN. There is no legal obligation on our part to conduct any investigation, is there?

Dr. CHAPMAN. That is correct.

Senator GREEN. That is just your recommendation; that is what you meant by saying if Congress could pass on it; is that correct?

Dr. CHAPMAN. That is quite correct. This will be in the ordinary budget. There must be some budget for the commission itself. That is an administrative budget which I mentioned to you. It is a rather nominal figure.

Senator GREEN. When you mentioned the other conventions on the Pacific coast, you were referring to administrative, weren't you?

Dr. CHAPMAN. Administrative. There the administrative costs will be in the same neighborhood, though it is a different situation there. The expenses of our commissioners will be about $5,000, I believe, the same as this Northwest Atlantic Commission. All of the other costs will be included in that investigatory cost as in the Halibut and Salmon Commission set-up.

We have no separate administrative budget on Halibut and Salmon. The staff of the Commission assumes the rather minor administrative duties, so there are no additional administrative costs whatever. So that there would be no split whatever between the administrative costs and the investigatory costs, in the tuna conventions. The two of them together will require investigations, which I should imagine would come in the neighborhood of $750,000 a year at the outset.

94247--49

Senator GREEN. Is that divided on a voluntary basis?

Dr. CHAPMAN. We have in mind that the United States will bear the great preponderance of the cost, and I will tell you the reason why. We planned to divide the cost on the basis that about 95 percent of the total catch of tuna taken in that whole area is taken by the United States.

Senator GREEN. Ninety-five percent of the cost?

Dr. CHAPMAN. In that neighborhood. I wouldn't be surprised. The costs will be adjusted in relation to the utilization of the resource.

PRESENT INVESTIGATIONS AND THEIR COSTS

Senator FULBRIGHT. Are we already doing that at the present time without the convention?

Dr. CHAPMAN. No. We haven't got any investigations in the area. Senator FULBRIGHT. You don't know?

Dr. CHAPMAN. No.

Senator FULBRIGHT. But you do know the North Atlantic, don't you?

Dr. CHAPMAN. That is correct.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Why is it necessary to double the amount of the costs, simply because you join the convention?

Dr. CHAPMAN. I wonder if I may leave that question with the Fish and Wildlife Service. The technical part I am not familiar with. I am acting on their advice, and I wish you would refer that question to them a little later.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Is the amount included in this year's budget? Dr. CHAPMAN. Not for the convention, no; for investigations in the area, yes; but not anything under this convention.

Senator FULBRIGHT. I think it would be well if somebody could submit a condensed statement of the cost of all three of them for the record.

Dr. CHAPMAN. We had an estimate of the cost in this statement, which will go into the record, for the tuna convention, and Mr. James has prepared in his statement with respect to the Northwest Atlantic an even more precise statement of costs. That will be in the record.

We have made the cost as little as possible, on the coast.
May I go on?

Senator GREEN. Yes; if you will, please.

ADVISORY COMMITTEES

Dr. CHAPMAN. I want to call especial attention to the provision for the advisory committees. As I have stated in the case of our two older Commissions on the west coast, we have found that to be a most useful element of the convention, because through the advisory committee, the industry is made a part of the working operation of the Commission. The advisory committee sits in on the planning of the Commission's work and on the planning for the regulations, so the industry becomes an essential part of the whole mechanism. We insisted upon an advisory committee being provided in the Northwest Atlantic, as well as in the other two conventions. In the Northwest Atlantic, we were about the only country that was strongly desirous of that, and the same with the other two conventions. We found it