one of American products being undersold by cheap Japanese imports of canned salmon.

I am told that the total Japanese pink salmon pack last year was 945,260 cases. Of these, 496,000 cases remained unsold on March 1, 1962. As of that same date, 310,000 cases had been imported by the United States and the balance of 139,000 cases were either consumed in Japan (if any) or sold elsewhere. Meanwhile, the Japanese are said to have 1 million cases of red salmon unsold which may in time. come on our market.

Of course, the Japanese are exercising great caution right now in order not to antagonize industries in the United States while a new tariff policy is pending. But we should not overlook what is going to happen after a new law is enacted. For example, the Japanese are dumping tuna in Europe now at less than our American cost of production. Once a new act is in effect, unless Congress provides safeguards, the Japanese if it were to their advantage would dump here too and undersell our fishing industry and put our fishermen out of business.

Congress must provide machinery that can effectively deal with such a situation. Our American standard of living and wage level must be protected.

At this point, I include a series of questions and answers which specifically refer to the Alaska red salmon industry and which provides supplementary information and background on the overall Japanese import problem and the need of remedial legislation.

Question. Do the Japanese catch salmon spawned in the American lakes and rivers?

Answer. Yes; they catch on the high seas a large proportion of salmon spawned in the rivers and lakes of the Bristol Bay area of Alaska. Our scientists estimate that in the years 1955-60 the Japanese caught more American-born red salmon than our own fishermen.

Question. Has this country spent any money to preserve these salmon runs? Answer. This country annually spends large sums in the millions in research and in the enforcement of regulations in an endeavor to preserve these runs, and imposes severe fishing restrictions on our own fishermen for these purposes. Question. Where do the Japanese catch these red salmon?

Answer. Out on the high seas, where in 1961 they operated 12 large so-called mother ships or floating canneries, steamers of over 10,000 tons each, and 410 catcher boats.

Question. Why do not our fishermen fish out in the high seas for salmon? Answer. They are prohibited from fishing salmon outside of territorial waters of 3 miles from shore because we consider it inconsistent with proper conservation. It is impossible to segregate the different races of salmon out on the high seas or open ocean.

Question. What difference in fishing gear is there between what we use and they use?

Answer. They have no restriction on the length of the nets used. One Japanese catcher boat may have from 5 to 7 miles out at one time, whereas our fishermen are restricted to gill nets not over 900 feet long. It is estimated that the Japanese fleet in 1961 used more than 2,500 miles of fishing nets every day they were fishing.

Question. Does this country import any canned salmon from Japan? Answer. We do not have the latest figures, but in 1960 this country imported more than 18 million pounds of Japanese canned salmon.

Question. Then what happens is that we spend large sums to conserve the salmon runs, put severe restrictions on our own fishermen, then the Japanese catch more than half of the salmon we have preserved, can them in their floating canneries, and sell part of this pack back to us and put the rest in competition with us in the world market?

Answer. That is about it; and the American fishermen do not feel this is right.

In conclusion, again let me express thanks to the committee. I hope I have made my point in favor of a peril point provision that means something, and, likewise, I want to emphasize my support of such a protective safeguard provision being under the control and jurisdiction of the Congress and not abdicated to the free trade one-worlders in the State Department who seem to want to help humanity every place except right here in America.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Pelly, for coming to us and giving us your views on this subject.

Mr. PELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Love?

STATEMENT OF CHARLES H. LOVE, ASSISTANT SECRETARY TO C. K. WILLIAMS & CO., EAST ST. LOUIS, ILL.

Mr. Love. My name is Charles H. Love, assistant secretary to C. K. Williams & Co. I have with me Mr. Robert A. Stevens. I have already filed two briefs dated March 20 and March 30. I would like to have them on record.

I have selected five points from these briefs.

First, the industry itself. This is described on pages 1 and 2 of the March 20 brief. There are 16 plants in 9 States manufacturing iron oxide pigments. Ten of these make synthetic iron oxides, in the year 1960 produced about 40,000 tons with a value of about $11 million. Most of the companies in the industry are small and represent true private enterprise.

My company, for example, was founded in 1878 by the grandfather of the present board chairman and has grown from a few employees to over 1,100. During the 84 years of its existence the company has developed its own processes and products, designed and built much of its own equipment, and trained its personnel.

The second point will be the product itself. This is described on page 1 of the brief and also in appendix A, which you will find toward the back.

Synthetic iron oxides are a group of black, brown, red, and yellow pigments manufactured by chemical processes requiring specialized equipment and in very close chemical control. These oxides have many unique properties not duplicated by other pigments. They are color permanent, chemically stable, have high purity and are quite low in cost.

Point 3, importance of this product to national economy and national security. References are made to pages 4, 5, and 6 and appendixes B and C.

Synthetic iron oxides are used by more than 50 basic industries as coloring agents and chemicals. These industries include paint, plastics, paper, rubber, glass, glass polishing-as a matter of fact, the window on Colonel Glenn's satellite was polished with one of our rouges-leather, metals, ceramics, building materials, electrical products, chemical catalysts, and so forth.

Some of the new important uses are an ingredient in solid rocket. fuels, magnetic ferrites used in radar and other electronic devices and magnetic oxides for recording purposes.

These are listed in appendix B.

Mr. CARRY. (1) The Association of Pacific Fisheries, organized in 1914, is a nonprofit trade association representing producers of 95 percent of the canned salmon pack of Alaska, Washington, and Oregon. There are approximately 25,000 direct employees. The wholesale value of the pack in 1961 was $120,238,769.

(2) Fishing is one of the oldest and most respected industries. Great as is its monetary value, its importance to the welfare of the people of this country goes far beyond that. It involves the production of food of such an essential character that our people should not risk becoming dependent on importations from abroad. It develops real seamen, men of boldness and hardihood who do not wish to become dependent upon Government subsidies even if this were practical, which we doubt. The industry not only gives direct employment to thousands of fishermen and cannery workers, but to shipbuilding and other plants essential to a well balanced economy.

(3) The fisheries of this country have become subject to increasingly severe competition from foreign nations so that while our own production has failed to increase, that of Japan and the Soviet have increased enormously and unless there is protection from the lower production costs of Japan which are aided by disregard of American standards of conservation regulation, and the Government-financed operations of the Soviet, which are indifferent to costs, various branches of fisheries are in trouble.

(4) What is said is particularly applicable to the salmon industry of the Pacific Coast States of Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and the northern part of California. This is especially serious for Alaska where the value of fish production, primarily salmon, has exceeded that of all other industries put together, and from an Alaskan income standpoint has only been exceeded by Government-financed defense expenditures in recent years.

(5) The Pacific coast salmon industry directly confronts the two most aggressive fishery nations in the world, Japan and the Soviet, and is even in competition with Canadian production at lower costs. At the same time our fishermen are subject to rigid governmental regulations as to time, place, and methods of fishing. The types and sizes of fishing gear are restricted by such regulations and because high-seas salmon fishing is believed to be inconsistent with effective conservation it is prohibited to our fishermen, yet Japanese do practically all their salmon fishing in the open ocean, much of it on American spawned salmon, with nets thousands of feet long and with monofilament nylon web, the use of which is forbidden American fishermen.

(6) In July 1951, the ad valorem duty on the importation of canned salmon was, as a result of negotiations, reduced from 25 percent to 15 percent. This was a severe blow to the industry and any further reduction in duty would encourage the Japanese that much harder to fish in the open ocean on American-born salmon and market their salmon pack in the United States, the result of which would be disas trous to our fishermen and industry. Even with the 15-percent duty Japanese canned salmon are being imported into this country.

(7) By the proposed bill, regardless of what it is entitled, Congress would be abnegating its powers and duty to deal with the matter of tariff, and turning its proper functions over to negotiators,

cent of the industry but still we are faced with imports that represent over 12 percent of the total. Export value for the category is $100 million. For synthetic iron oxides about 1 million or less than 1 percent of the total.

Chart No. 2 in the addendum charts the ratio of exports to imports for the components of this category.

For paints, the export-import ratio is 167 to 1.

For the entire category, all pigments and paints, it is 8.7 to 1.
For our industry it is 0.78 to 1. Less than 1 to 1.

We are about to be out in the category where the ratio is 167 to 1. How much can such similar commodities be studied or negotiated together? It is impossible to do so on any basis of fairness and justice to our industry. We strongly oppose the inclusion of oxides in any basket category and request that H.R. 9900 be written to permit each product to be considered as an individual in cases where it will be harmed.

That is it. Thank you, gentlemen.

(The statements referred to follow :)

IRON-OXIDE AND IRON-HYDROXIDE PIGMENTS (SYNTHETIC), N.S.P.F.

(Par. 73-Commodity No. 8400200)

TRADE EXPANSION ACT OF 1962, H.R. 9900

Submitted by C. K. Williams & Co., East St. Louis, Ill., March 20, 1962

Foreign competition.

Table 1. Domestic production and imports, 1950-60.

Table 2. Variation from average, 1950-60, domestic production and imports.

German competition.

Canadian competition.

English competition.

Total foreign competition.

Prices and wages.

U.S.A. export data.

Conclusions.

Description of synthetic iron oxides.

Industries using iron-oxide pigments.

Federal and military specifications using iron-oxide pigments.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Iron-oxide and iron-hydroxide pigments (synthetic), n.s.p.f., tariff paragraph 73, commodity No. 8400200, have been placed on the list of "dominant supplier products" or "zero list" in connection with H.R. 9900. This action anticipates a reduction of the present 10 percent tariff to 0 percent. Currently there are 10 domestic plants producing these pigments, which in 1960 totaled 39,946 tons with a value of $10,816,400. The present tariff is 10 percent, having been reduced from 20 percent to 15 percent in 1939, and from 15 percent to 10 percent in 1951.

Synthetic iron oxides are used by about 50 basic industries as coloring agents and chemicals. They include paints, plastics, paper, rubber, textiles, glass (and glass polishing), leather, metals, ceramics, building materials, electrical products, etc. Such important uses as an ingredient of solid rocket fuels, magnetic ferrites used in radar and other electronic devices, and magnetic oxides for recording are included in the industry list in appendix B. Over 100 Government specifications using iron oxides are listed in appendix A.

Shortages of synthetic iron oxides occurred in both World War II and the Korean war because of their strategic uses and they were placed on the critical

within the industry. The downward trend is continuing. While the consump tion of fish in the United States has increased by about 40 percent during the last 10 years, our production remains at the same level it was 10 years ago.

The United States is unable to hold its own because of lack of adequate protection, either by tariffs or quotas. To reduce such scant protection as we now have would serve only one purpose-that of speeding up destruction for the fishing industry. As pointed out in the statement of the Association of Pacific Fisheries, any lowering of tariffs on fishery production would only be an incentive for Japan and Russia to increase their fishing efforts off the Pacific coast to a point where they would most seriously deplete and even destroy those fishery resources for all time.

Congress should be aware that in discussing fisheries, we are not talking only about dollars and cents, but what is really important is that we are talking about conservation of a food resource which is a necessity to the well-being of the American people.

We join with the Association of Pacific Fisheries in opposing any lowering of tariffs on fishery products and ask that the problem of maintenance and conserving of the U.S. fishery resources not be considered on the basis of foreign policy but that it be considered on its own merits, so that this invaluable food may always be available and in good supply for the American people.

H.R. 9900 is probably one of the most important bills to come before the Congress in this session and it no doubt will have far-reaching effects on the future.

We hope that Congress, in its wisdom, will carefully consider all aspects of the problem before it, and in particular, conservation of the fishery resource which is seriously involved in this legislation.

Sincerely yours,

ALASKA FISHERMEN'S UNION,
GEORGE JOHANSEN,

Secretary-Treasurer.

That, Mr. Chairman, completes the second statement.
Mr. KING. Thank you, Mr. Carry.

Mr. Curtis will inquire.

Mr. CURTIS. You probably may not be able to answer this but if you could have this question passed on-he states that our fishermen are subject to these various governmental regulations that have to do with good conservation practices but that the Japanese are not. I presume these kinds of regulations, though, are set by treaty.

I assume we endeavor to make treaties with Japan and other nations in regard to proper conservation regulations. That is one question I would like to ask. Do you happen to know?

Mr. CARRY. I know a little bit about the subject; yes, and I will try to answer to the best of my ability.

If I find that I am not able fully to answer the question, I will see that the answer is supplied for the record.

Mr. CURTIS. That is one question.

I would like to find out just what are our difficulties with the treaty: namely, are there requirements in the treaty that the Japanese fishermen comply? That is another question.

The real question-it will be two questions-I am getting to is, if there are violations: (1) How will our fishery people go about trying to get these mutual or reciprocal arrangements in regard to good conservation practices in a treaty; and (2) if they are already in the treaty how do they go about registering a complaint with our State Department, or wherever, so that something is done about that; and there is a third thing, of course, what is the matter with our negotiators if we enter into an agreement in reducing tariffs and yet find good conservation practices like this being violated?