area; pelagic species in the Mid-Pacific south of 

 Hawaii and off the Pacific Coast states; mid-water 

 and surface resources off the New England Coast; 

 and the groundfish and midwater resources in the 

 Bering Sea and the Gulf of Alaska. Some of these 

 resources are already under exploitation by foreign 

 fleets; others are virtually untouched by any 

 commercial operation. It would appear most de- 

 sirable to concentrate on those species and areas in 

 which U.S. vessels might be expected to enjoy a 

 strong competitive position if they use modern 

 vessels, gear and techniques. Basic exploration of 

 internationally shared species would best be 

 carried out on a multinational basis, wdth results to 

 be made available to all participants. 



The basic justification for an expanded pubUc 

 program of this sort Ues in the widespread diffu- 

 sion of the benefits generated. No single fishing 

 enterprise or group of fishing enterprises could 

 afford to undertake the necessary work, not only 

 because of the scale of operations required, but 

 because it could not hope to capture more than a 

 small proportion of the total economic advantages 

 generated. 



2. Reduction in Costs of Vessels and Equipment 



The relatively high cost position of most U.S. 

 fisheries— the tuna and shrimp fisheries being the 

 only notable exceptions— has continued to frus- 

 trate all efforts to expand the total U.S. fishing 

 effort. No single factor accounts for this situation; 

 the problem of making the U.S. industry cost 

 competitive, at least in its own coastal waters, 

 requires simultaneous action on a number of 

 fronts. 



The simplest to define, but one of the most 

 difficult to deal with, is the high initial cost of 

 vessels and major items of fishing gear. Under 

 existing law, U.S. fishermen are unable to register 

 foreign-built fishing vessels; another law proscribes 

 the landing of fish in U.S. ports directly from 

 fishing grounds unless landed in U.S .-registered 

 vessels. In combination these two laws effectively 

 prevent our fishermen from taking advantage of 

 lower foreign shipyard costs. Except for a few 

 cases, like U.S. shrimp boats, most fisheries vessels 

 of equal or superior technical characteristics can 

 be bought at much lower prices from a number of 

 foreign countries. 



Moreover, since the discrepancy in costs in- 

 creases with the size and complexity of the vessel, 

 the restriction reduces severely any financial incen- 

 tive to bring American fleets up to the technical 

 levels required for efficient high seas operation in 

 many areas. The panel does not beheve that the 

 United States should simply duplicate the very 

 large distant water vessels employed by other 

 major fishing nations; it cannot escape the con- 

 clusion, however, that efficient vessels, capable of 

 fishing in all but the most difficult weather 

 conditions and over wide ranges, should be larger 

 than those now employed in many U.S. fisheries. 



A less widely pubhcized element in the high 

 cost of U.S. fishing activity is the complex of high 

 import duties on many important items of fishing 

 equipment. For example, nets and twine, both 

 important cost items in commercial fishing opera- 

 tions, could be obtained abroad at much lower 

 prices if it were not for very high duties. The same 

 is true for some types of instrumentation, such as 

 precise positioning and sonar scanning gear, and 

 for basic and auxiliary power sources. While no 

 one of these factors is critical, in combination they 

 add up to a definite competitive disadvantage for 

 U.S. flag vessels. 



The effects of these restrictions extend out in 

 still other directions. Because they lead to greater 

 obsolesence of an aging fleet, they contribute 

 (together with Jones Act requirements) to the high 

 cost of insurance that plagues U.S. fishermen. 

 Similarly, the effort to pare costs at every turn in 

 order to remain competitive has led U.S. fishing 

 enterprises to provide working conditions that 

 simply will not attract and hold efficient young 

 men in the labor force. While there are some 

 exceptions, the general working conditions of the 

 U.S. fishermen are worse than almost any other 

 major category of labor except migrant farm 

 workers. For example, a $100,000 shrimp trawler, 

 recently built for a major U.S. fishing corporation 

 to operate off the coast of Latin America, has no 

 shower or toilet facilities for crew members. Less 

 than one-third of all U.S. fishing vessels would 

 meet the minimum standards for safety and health 

 of crew members developed for consideration of 

 the fishing nations by the International Labor 

 Organization. It is hardly surprising that the 

 fishing industry finds it difficult to recruit young 

 men, particularly in areas adjacent to metropohtan 



VlI-54 



