for the fiscal year 1968, and for each subsequent fiscal year only such sums as the Congress may specifically authorize by law. It was felt that this legislation embodies a program of long-range promise and need and, therefore, it was desirable to indicate that funds would be made available beyond the 2-year period originally contemplated by the House bill. (2) The conference substitute provides that programs under the legislation will be accomplished through contracts with, or grants to, "suitable public or private institutions of higher education, institutes, laboratories, and public or private agencies" engaged in, or concerned with, activities in the various fields related to the development of marine resources. It is expected that under this legislation the initial program will emphasize assistance to suitable institutions of higher education, institutes, and laboratories. However, the inclusion of "public and private agencies" would provide the National Science Foundation with the necessary administrative flexibility which may be needed in the future. (3) The conference substitute provides that the National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development shall, at the request of the President, submit an annual report on its activities and its recommendations (in connection with its functions of furnishing certain advice and policy guidance to the National Science Foundation) to the President of the Senate, the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries of the House of Representatives. (4) The conference substitute requires the National Science Foundation to consult with all Federal departments and agencies interested in, or affected by, the Foundation's activities under this legislation, including specifically the U.S. Office of Education in all matters relating to education. HEARINGS ON BILLS-PENDING FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION H.R. 9492 and H.R. 15001—Amendments to the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act The purpose of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act is to give fish and wildlife conservation equal consideration with other features of water resource development programs. Presently, before a Federal permit or license can be issued for the construction of any facility that impounds, diverts, controls, or otherwise modifies the waters of any stream, it is required that such department or agency issuing the permit consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the head of the State agency concerned with a view toward preventing loss of and damage to such resources. H.R. 9492, among other things, would provide that after July 1, 1967, no such Federal permit or license shall be issued until a detailed study has been made by the Secretary of the Interior in cooperation with the State agency concerned on the effect of the construction on fish and wildlife resources and until the Secretary has made recommendations to such Federal department or agency in behalf of such fish and wildlife resources. A 2-day hearing was held on the legislation, beginning May 11, 1966, at which time the Federal Power Commission witness advised the committee that this legislation would not be necessary. He stated that the purposes of the legislation would be satisfied with the implementation of a newly revised departmental regulation. Pending a review of the effects of the new regulation, no action was taken on the legislation by the committee. H.R. 14414 and H.R. 14975-Amendments to the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act The purpose of the legislation is to make the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act applicable to the Atomic Energy Commission, the Federal Power Commission, and any public or private person, agency, or instrumentality licensed by either of these Commissions. Two days of hearings were held on the legislation, beginning on May 11, 1966. Because of adverse departmental reports and in view of the contention of the Interior Department witness that the act now applies to these applicants, no action was taken by the committee. H.R. 14455-To make the Fish and Wildlife Act applicable to the TVA The purpose of H.R. 14455 is to make the Fish and Wildlife Act applicable to the Tennessee Valley Authority, Two days of hearings were held on this legislation, along with H.R. 14414 and H.R. 9492. No action was taken by the committee on the legislation. H.R. 9530-To implement the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone The purpose of the legislation is to protect coastal fishery and other resources by implementing the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone. In achieving the purpose of the legislation the 1964 convention would be implemented by marking on large scale charts the baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea pursuant to article 3 of the convention, and that in localities where the coastline is deeply cut in its immediate vicinity the method of straight baselines joining appropriate points would be employed in drawing the baseline, pursuant to article 4. Along with other legislation, a 2-day hearing was held. However, because of adverse departmental reports, no action was taken by the committee on the legislation. S.J. Res. 29-Survey of coastal and fresh-water commercial fishery resources S.J. Res. 29 would authorize to be appropriated $200,000 for the purpose of conducting a survey of the character, extent, and condition of the coastal and fresh-water commercial fishery resources of the United States, including both those resources now being utilized by the United States and foreign fishermen, and those potential resources which are latent and unused. Hearings were held on this legislation August 24, 1966. No action was taken by the committee. H.R. 11967, and identical bills, H.R. 12429, H.R. 12630, and H.R. 12722-Overprinting of duck stamps The primary objective of H.R. 11967, and identical bills, is to encourage the preservation of waterfowl breeding habitat prairie provinces of Canada. To carry out this objective, the legislation would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to increase the value of some "duck stamps" from $3 to $5 through overprinting. The purchaser would be given an option of buying either a $3 or $5 “duck stamp." Further, the bill would require that all money from $5 duck stamps would be deposited in the migratory bird conservation fund and the Secretary would be directed to use 40 percent of these special receipts for grants to public and nonprofit organizations for the purpose of acquiring lands anywhere in the North American Continent, including Canada, to conserve migratory waterfowl. Along with other legislation, a 2-day hearing was held on this legislation beginning May 3, 1966. Because of the Interior Department's recommendation against enactment of the legislation, and in view of the fact that Canada has just recently begun its own broad migratory bird conservation program and is not receptive to financial assistance from the United States at this time, the committee decided against taking any action on the legislation during this session of the Congress. H.R. 13495, and identical bill, H.R. 14906—Wetlands Acquisition Act The Wetlands Acquisition Authority Act (16 U.S.C. 715k–3–k5) was passed in October of 1961. To promote the conservation of migratory waterfowl and to prevent the serious loss of important wetlands and other waterfowl habitat essential to the preservation of such waterfowl, the act authorized to be appropriated for the 7-year period beginning with fiscal year 1962, not to exceed $105 million, such funds to be treated as an advance without interest. Further, the act provided that beginning with fiscal year 1969, funds appropriated shall be repaid to the Treasury out of the migratory bird conservation fund, such repayments to be made in annual amounts comprising 75 percent of the moneys accruing annually to such fund. H.R. 13495 and H.R. 14906 would continue the program for an additional 8 years, and would extend to fiscal year 1977, the date for beginning repayments to the Treasury. Beginning May 3, 1966, 2 days of hearings were held on the legislation. In view of the fact that the program would not terminate until June 30, 1968, the committee decided not to take any action on the legislation. MERCHANT MARINE H.R. 11625-Foreign-built midbodies H.R. 11625 would have two effects. First, it would make Americanflag vessels rebuilt in the United States with foreign-built midbodies ineligible for 3 years to carry the share of cargo preference cargoes that is reserved to "privately owned U.S.-flag commercial vessels." Second, it would in substance change the existing provisions that at least 50 percent of U.S. military cargoes be transported in "privately owned U.S.-flag commercial vessels" to a requirement that 100 percent of such cargoes be transported in "privately owned U.S.-flag commercial vessels," or in vessels belonging to the United States which have not been built abroad, or rebuilt abroad, and were not under foreign documentation, within 3 years. The bill would do this by amending the Cargo Preference Act, to provide that vessels rebuilt in the United States with foreign-built midbodies shall not be considered "privately owned U.S.-flag commercial vessels" until they have been documented under U.S. laws for 3 years, and by defining the term "vessels of the United States" in the 1904 military procurement statute (10 U.S.C. 2631) in the same way as the term "privately owned U.S.-flag commercial vessel" would be defined in the cargo preference law as amended by the bill. Two days of hearings were held on the legislation, beginning June 20, 1966. Six departments and agencies reported on the legislation. The State Department and General Services Administration deferred to the views of the Department of Defense. The Department of Agriculture and the General Accounting Office offered no comment. The Department of Defense, speaking through the Department of the Navy, opposed the bill, and the Department of Commerce recommended against favorable consideration. No action was taken on the legislation by the committee. COAST GUARD H.R. 2137-Vessel "Janice Vee" The purpose of H.R. 2137 is to permit the vessel Janice Vee to be documented for use in the fisheries and coastwise trade. The Janice Vee was constructed in Denmark in 1961 for Mr. Russell Veeder, a resident of the State of Florida. He was planning to use the vessel for charter sport fishing and commercial fishing. Under existing law, a foreign-built vessel is not eligible for these privileges. A 1-day hearing was held on this bill, July 14, 1965. No action was taken on the legislation during the first session of this Congress. On October 6, 1966, the subcommittee considered the legislation and ordered it reported to the full committee without amendent. On the same day the bill was considered in executive session by the full committee and although no unfavorable reports were submitted by the departments, it was tabled. NONLEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE (HEARINGS, MIGRATORY WATERFOWL REGULATIONS On Thursday, August 11, 1966, the Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation held a 1-day hearing on the subject of wildlife conservation and its relationship to migratory waterfowl regulations. Emphasis was placed upon the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which is administered by the Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife of the Department of the Interior. The administration of that program, especially the determination of season and bag limits on migratory waterfowl, has generated considerable controversy in the past several years among the States, wildlife conservation organizations, and sportsmen. The hearings coincided with the time of the year when season and bag limits for the hunting season, together with the recommendations of the flyway councils and national conservation organizations, were about to be considered. The hearings were scheduled at that time in hopes that testimony produced would aid the Secretary of the Interior and his staff in making a final determination. One particular problem, which was of interest to the committee, centered on complaints made by Wisconsin representatives. Witnesses from that State contended that proposals to reduce both the season and quota for geese in that area were unrealistic and unfair. All parties interested in migratory waterfowl regulations were given an opportunity to be heard. Although no action was taken, the testimony produced was extremely informative to the subcommittee members, and this valuable information was referred to the Secretary of Interior, before his Department made a final determination on season and bag limits. PREDATORY MAMMALS The Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation, which is vitally concerned over the preservation of all species of wildlife native to the United States, held 4 days of hearings on the subject of predatory mammals. The hearings were called because some predator control techniques-practiced by both governmental and private organizations— constitute a threat to the continued existence of certain predatory mammals. While the committee recognizes that some control over predators is necessary, it is also aware that indiscriminate trapping, shooting, and poisoning has resulted in overcontrol and overkilling in many instances. During the hearings, testimony was presented from public, private, and governmental witnesses, including the Department of Interior. Representatives of the latter Federal agency indicated that the Interior Department would set up guidelines as far as possible-to follow the recommendations of the Leopold Committee, an advisory board on wildlife management, which was appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. The subcommittee decided not to take action on the knowledge it gained from the hearings; instead, it has elected to await the results of the program being initiated by the Department of Interior. Committee members, who are vitally interested in the proper control of predators, intend to watch closely the results of this new program, and will resume their investigation if such action is deemed necessary. MARITIME MANPOWER SHORTAGES During the second session of the 89th Congress, a total of 11 hearings was held by the Special Subcommittee on Maritime Education and Training, which conducted an intensive investigation into the problems of manpower shortages in the American merchant marine. A cross section of the entire industry was represented at the hearings. Labor and management, Federal and State academies, the Maritime Administration, and other Government agencies all produced witnesses who provided helpful testimony. Although no legislation evolved from the hearings, testimony produced definitely documented that the American merchant marine is threatened by a chronic shortage of qualified seamen. Testimony also revealed that the current shortage-which has been emphasized and aggravated by the Vietnam conflict is not simply a serious problem in relation to the present. |