abnormal conditions as far in advance of their effects as possible so that we can govern our operations accordingly.

There is no question that it is a proper function of government to carry on such a service; for the necessary scientific research is far beyond the capacity of industry, State or university efforts. And the Government should engage in this research for all the Nation's fishery resources, not just for a few certain ones that happen to be at a low ebb of production.

In general, our fishery biologists of Federal and State governments have been given too little to work with and have been expected to do too much with the limited funds that have been available. Thus they have been able to study only a small fraction of all the fishery species. They all tell us that one of the most important things they have learned is that all of the fishes and shellfish in an area live in a complexly interlocking system in which competition for food and space plays a very important part. We are also told that the ocean currents, which fluctuate continually in direction and speed, control the food supply, consequently the abundance and distribution of the fish. Unless we study all these elements in relation to each other, how can we understand any one of them?

The preceding is a brief summary of some of the areas of fishing research that are desperately needed by the entire fishing industry. We should now like to give some specific details on some of the areas of fishing investigations sorely needed by the Southeastern States of our Nation.

Shrimp are our most valuable fishery resource in the gulf. Their value to the fisherman was about $45 million in 1952. The market for them has expanded greatly in recent years, and the fishermen have fished harder and have gone to more distant grounds. Total production has been high, but catches are not now as good for the same fishing time as a few years ago.

Further, production from local waters is less so industry men in the gulf are wondering whether the shrimp beds are becoming depleted. They also question why brown shrimp are now so much more plentiful in the western gulf than previously and why the numbers of white shrimp have declined in this area. Are changes occurring in gulf waters which will affect production? Changes have occurred in the kinds of shrimp caught and in the places where they are caught, but no one knows what this means in relation to dependable supplies of shrimp.

Research should be started to answer these questions. The industry should know whether their fishing practices are sound and whether they can depend on a good supply of shrimp.

Perhaps production can even be increased through research. Shrimp grow rapidly, so with proper nets the small ones might be saved and then caught later when they are more valuable. Perhaps the fishermen can catch just as many shrimp with less fishing if they fish at the right place and in the right season.

The oyster industry has occupied an important position in the economy of the Gulf States for the past 50 years. It provides employment for hundreds of our fishermen and for greater numbers of people in the processing and distributing plants. The most recent figures show that our southern oyster provides nearly 6,000 tons annually of the

most nourishing kind of food to the Nation and adds approximately $10 million to the economy of the Gulf States.

But the figures show also that there has been a tremendous drop in production and we are now producing in Florida, for example, only one-fifth of our former yield. In the past 50 years, when technical know-how and the need for increasing our food supplies have been steadily increasing, the production of oysters has been steadily going down.

In many cases we know the reasons for this decrease. Overfishing, natural disasters, such as floods, hurricanes, and pollution have all played some part. These problems have been mostly localized and were solved in the past by State and Federal biologists who conducted short-term surveys and investigations. Recommendations for increasing the amount of cultch on the reefs for young oysters to grow on, transportation of small oysters to better growing grounds and the rebedding of market oysters to better areas for fattening have all helped improve both the quality and quantity of oysters harvested in some places.

Despite these advances, we have seen large sections of our oyster producing areas drop out of production entirely. Canneries employing hundreds of people have had to shut down and oystermen have had to turn to other work in order to make a living.

We realized the urgent need for more knowledge about the oyster and in the past 20 years all of the Gulf States have appropriated large sums of money to establish research laboratories and to increase the cultivation of oysters.

We realized, too, that many of the problems did not exist in one area or one State alone, but were found throughout the gulf, and so we requested the former Bureau of Fisheries to establish a permanent laboratory which could study problems common to the entire gulf area. Excellent facilities were acquired for this work at Pensacola, Fla., 14 years ago, and the States have benefited greatly from the work done there.

Unfortunately, budget limitations have prevented full development of this laboratory; in fact, in some years it has received no appropriation at all. Most of the time they have been able to employ only one full-time biologist. Despite this limitation, they have made good progress in uncovering the background information essential to a full scale investigation of the problems of the oyster industry. In recent years, too, valuable contributions have been made by one State laboratory and by investigations supported by the industry.

We feel that an expansion of this laboratory's program at the pres ent time would produce the greatest benefits to the oyster industry. One of the problems that needs attention now especially is how to control the oyster drill. This is a small snail which destroys over a million dollars worth of oysters each year. This snail can wipe out the entire population of an oyster reef in a single summer when conditions are favorable for it, and we have no economical way of controlling it.

Another problem which requires a greatly expanded research program is to find out why oysters in some places grow much faster and are of far better quality than in other areas. If we had the answers to these problems the industry could expand tremendously. But these questions are of such a general nature that they are largely beyond

the scope and capacity of our State laboratories which are overburdened now in solving problems that are of local importance.

At times we have disastrous outbreaks of disease on some reefs, and our oystermen lose their entire crop before it can be harvested; and we have almost no knowledge of the causes of these epidemics, let alone methods for preventing them. We need much more knowledge about the enemies of oysters and how to control them. We need to know why oysters have disappeared from some areas entirely. We need far more information on how to select and develop new areas for cultivation to replace those that have been lost because of industrial pollution and by natural changes.

The following figures show the actual decline in oyster production just in the State of Florida and indicate the huge loss to the economy

of the south:

Year 1902, production in thousands of pounds was 3,057; 1910, 1,140; 1930, 1,787; 1940, 877; 1950, 902; and 1951, 680.

Fishmeal has become an important supplemental feed ingredient in the Nation's poultry, hog and cattle industries. During the early 1940's most of the meal was furnished by the California sardine and Alaska herring fisheries. However, with the collapse of the sardine fishery in 1947 and the progressive decline of the herring fishery, menhaden of the gulf and Atlantic coasts became almost the sole source of domestic meal. Consequently, the menhaden fisheries in these areas greatly expanded, and with this expansion, problems have arisen which must be solved.

As in the case of many of our fisheries, menhaden are subject to great changes in numbers; periods of good catches may be followed by sereral years of poor catches. A thriving menhaden fishery in the Gulf of Maine suddenly collapsed in the late 1800's. Except for 1 year stand, menhaden have not returned to that area. There has been a decline in the catch along the south Atlantic Coast. Landings in the Gulf of Mexico have gone upward from the early times of this fishery. Some of the catch records are as follows:

In the year 1936 the catch in millions of pounds was 3; in 1940 it was 25; in 1945, it was 65; in 1046, 71; in 1947, 100; in 1948, 219; 1949, 276; 1950, 326; in 1951, it was 358; in 1952, 459; and in 1953, it was 429. Although landings have steadily increased, it is important to know whether the increase was due to economic causes or to larger numbers of fish. Advanced knowledge on such apparent changes would be useful in planning for future seasons.

In connection with these proposed menhaden studies, we should like ⚫ to point that many of the important fish in the gulf seem to live in the same areas and in the same kind of waters. For instance, the menhaden are found along the shores and in the inside waterways, and so are the mullet. Biologists studying commercial fish in these areas probably will learn considerable about all types of fish living there, particularly mullet, another species which we know relatively little about at this time. The production of this fish in the gulf is higher and is more important in dollar value than most persons think. For instance, the average production of mullet in the gulf has been between 25 and 30 million pounds in the last few years, and this has paid over $3 million a year to the fishermen.

I should like to emphasize one point that Mr. Heydecker mentioned, and that is that for sometime those of us in the gulf and Southeastern

States of this Nation have been making extensive studies into the need for fishery investigations in our area, and we have all joined together to try to get as much money as we can from State and local and industry levels to carry out this needed research, and we now feel that we have reached our optimum in securing local funds, and for that reasons, also realizing the fact that while we have all the money we can get from our local State agencies, we know very little about many of the fish resources in our territorial waters and beyond them and in the inland waters of our States.

We need more money, and thus we would like to see this bill passed so that Federal funds may supplement the efforts of our State and local agencies in securing the much-needed answers to the many questions which we have about our fishery resources, and thus I should like, on behalf of the States which we represent, the gulf and southeastern area, to urge that this bill be passed.

Senator DUFF. Senator, any questions?
Senator MAGNUSON. No questions.

Senator DUFF. William J. Hendry.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM J. HENDRY, VICE CHAIRMAN, GULF STATES MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION

Mr. HENDRY. Mr. Chairman, I am William J. Hendry, vice chairman of the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission, and I have a prepared statement by Hermes Gautier of Mississippi, chairman of our commission, which I would like to submit for the record, and I would like to speak a few words on behalf of myself.

Senator DUFF. Without objection it will be received.

(The statement of Hermes Guatier, Chairman, Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission, is as follows:)

STATEMENT OF HERMES GAUTIER, CHAIRMAN, GULF STATES MARINE
FISHERIES COMMISSION

Since the creation of the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission, July 16, 1949, the interest of the States party to the compact in the salt-water fisheries has continued to show a year-to-year increase. Appropriations made by the several State legislatures has been comparable with the mounting interest in the marine fishery resources. Research laboratories have been constructed, research facilities have been expanded in the laboratories which were previously established, boats and vessels have been purchased and properly equipped, programs designed to develop better knowledge of the fisheries have been instituted. Funds have been provided to both the State conservation agencies represented on the Commission and State universities.

The Gulf Coast States believe it to be the duty of the State to provide funds for use in such investigations as will bring about a better understanding of the State's marine fishery resources, and to the greatest extent possible before moneys are requested from the Federal Government. However, such State appropriations have reached levels which now cause it to appear appropriate to request Congress to support participation of the Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service in a full scale investigation of the several species of shrimp common to the waters of the Gulf of Mexico,

The Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission has realized for several years that the shrimp resources should be thoroughly investigated but of necessity delayed action until such time as all agencies which would be concerned with a full scale program were in position to supply the coperative effort essential to the success of a program of such magnitude. In latter 1953 the commission requested Federal, State, and State university scientists to meet and determine the present state of knowledge of shrimp and to suggest a research program deemed essential to the procurement of information upon which proper con

Mr. Chairman, that is the conclusion of my brief statement on this

matter.

Senator DUFF. We will now hear from Mr. John Kaylor, SecretaryTreasurer of the New England Fisheries Technologists.

STATEMENT OF JOHN KAYLOR, SECRETARY-TREASURER, NEW ENGLAND FISHERIES TECHNOLOGISTS

Mr. KAYLOR. My name is John D. Kaylor. I am secretary-treasurer of the New England Fisheries Technologists who endorse S. 2802. Our organization is composed of technologists and specialists in various sciences who have associated themselves for the purpose of expanding the usefulness of technology in the fisheries common to our region. One of our objectives is to promote better understanding of the application of scientific knowledge to fisheries problems.

Now that phrase "application of scientific knowledge to fisheries problems" implies two significant considerations. The first is that scientific information is available and the second is that there are problems in the various fisheries. We acknowledge that there is a certain amount of such information available and already being put to good technical use. At the same time we must also confess that where we now have a pool of information what we really need is an ocean of knowledge.

We need it and we need it badly. It's through technology that we can help ourselves in spite of rising costs and ever increasing imports from subsidized fisheries of foreign nations. Not only do we have these handicaps of rising costs and imports but we also have additional handicaps not even dreamed of by other food producers.

Consider raw material.

A farmer sows seed and protects the growing plants against insects and diseases. He reaps his crop at the desired stage of maturity. He can even replenish the very soil itself when it shows signs of exhaustion. He can in a large measure then, exert control. He does all these things by applying scientific knowledge to agricultural problems.

Now, let's look at the fish business. Unlike the farmer, we reap but don't sow. We can't put a fence around schools of fish to keep out enemies. We can't see how fish act in the bottom depths when conditions change. We don't know, for example, what conditions prevail when we get good catches. We don't know what conditions might explain poor catches. We're not entirely certain that our nets are as efficient as they could be. We can guess at the answers. Maybe our guesses are pretty shrewd but they are poor substitutes for facts. Basically, fish are simple creates with few desires-a full belly, a reasonable chance to escape enemies, preservation of the race, optimum temperature. What's more, they're not intelligent. Yet they do a pretty good job of leaving us holding an empty net, tow after tow. That doesn't mean our I. Q. is lower than that of a haddock. But it does mean we lack basic information.

Information that tells us when and why not to fish on what's normally considered good fishing grounds. Information that not only tells us that the fish have left but what prompts them to be where they "ain't."

That's the stuff we need.