Mr. RICHARDSON. I am not sure I know where that figure is, Senator. Senator ELLENDER. It is on mutual educational, cultural exchange activities, 1971, country program index, at page 193. You have here for Eastern Europe the use of soft currencies, apparently, to the tune of $942,000 of the amount allocated to that area. Mr. RICHARDSON. I am sorry, Senator. I have yet to find the figure. I will have it in a minute. That is the total foreign currency use for exchange of persons in Eastern Europe and would include excess currencies in Yugoslavia and Poland. Senator ELLENDER. Did you buy those currencies with the cash that we are giving you? Mr. RICHARDSON. We will buy them. Senator ELLENDER. Are you doing the same thing for Western Europe? What does it show for Western Europe? Mr. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, if I may have your permission to do so, I would like my Deputy, Mr. Irving, who has had much experience in managing this problem, to respond to these questions. Mr. IRVING. Within the $36.5 million, we intend to spend $6 million of excess foreign currencies. Senator ELLENDER. In addition? Mr. IRVING. No. Senator ELLENDER. You will use the cash we are giving you to buy those, and those are soft currencies owned by us? Mr. IRVING. Yes, sir. Senator ELLENDER. They are in excess of our needs from the countries where you purchase them? Mr. IRVING. Yes, sir. Senator ELLENDER. And those countries are only Poland and Yugoslavia? Mr. IRVING. NO. There are 11 excess currency countries. Poland and Yugoslavia are the two in Eastern Europe. Senator ELLENDER. Are you able to use any of those currencies in France? Mr. IRVING. Yes, indeed. We had, over the years, amassed pools from the conversions under the Public Law 480 authority. These pools, derived from excess currencies, are almost depleted now but we have used them all over the world, as a matter of fact. Senator ELLENDER. You use it in various areas, and it is not used solely in Eastern Europe? Mr. IRVING. No, sir. (For amendment changing the dollar amount in the foreign currency limitation for Mutual Educational Program, see p. 1081.) AMERICAN SPONSORED SCHOOLS Senator ELLENDER. I noticed an item of aid to American-sponsored schools abroad, $1,600,000, which the House allowed. What colleges are those? Mr. RICHARDSON. They are not colleges, Senator. They are schools located in a number of places in the world where American children go to school with children of the nation where the school is, and often with children from other countries as well. AID PROGRAM IN ISRAEL Senator ELLENDER. Last year we provided special funds for Israel. Have you that in here this year? Are you asking for anything? Mr. MANNINO. These are elementary and secondary schools, sir. I think the ones you are making reference to are universities. Senator ELLENDER. Are we providing more money? Mr. MANNINO. No, sir. The AID program provides money for those. Senator ELLENDER. You are not? Mr. MANNINO. No, sir. Senator ELLENDER. Thank you. HAWAII CULTURAL CENTER Senator MCCLELLAN. Have you any comment on the center in Hawaii? I note the House bill provides $5,260,000, the same amount allowed last year. Mr. RICHARDSON. I think it is adequate, Senator, for the coming year. There is, I think, a very exciting program developing there, which will, over the next 2 or 3 years, improve productivity of the money they spend. I think they will indeed need more money in years to come, but I think this year they can get by with the present amount. Senator MCCLELLAN. Sometimes we are asked to increase these amounts. That is why I am asking you about these things. Mr. RICHARDSON. Yes. Senator MCCLELLAN. I believe I have a question or two for Mr Meyer. INTERNATIONAL PACIFIC SALMON FISHERIES COMMISSION I have a letter dated May 22d from Senator Magnuson, in which he is urging an additional appropriation of $100,000 for the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission in order that the United States might be able to match a like amount supplied by Canada, to be used for the construction of artificial spawning and incubation channels on the Nadina River. I will place this letter in the record. I will also place in the record a report of the International Salmon Fisheries Commission for the year 1969, together with a copy of the "Report of The International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission, 1969," furnished by Senator Magnuson. Also a letter from the Senator transmitting a copy of a letter to Mr. John Wedin, staff assistant, commerce committee from Loyd A. Royal, Director of the Commission furnished by Senator Magnuson. Can you give us any information on that, Mr. Meyer? (The letter and report follows:) United States Senate COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510 May 22, 1970 Honorable John L. McClellan Chairman Subcommittee on the Departments of State, United States Sena te Dear Mr. Chairman: The International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission's research program has included experiments into the operation and productiveness of artificial spawning and incubation channels, as well as temperature control devices and artificial rearing areas. Such aids to salmon reproduction offer promise as a means for re-establishing depleted salmon runs as well as establishing new runs in the vast areas of British Columbia where unused water resources suitable to the production of salmon exist. Operation of the test facilities has shown that artificial spawning on a production basis is both practicable and profitable. The Commission has determined that the carefully-documented results of two years of operation of its experimental facilities justifies, on the basis of an extraordinarily favorable benefit-cost ratio, an operational program for the construction of such projects. Accordingly, the Commission has requested of the United States Government an additional contribution of $100,000 to the above-requested FY 1971 figure, such sum to be matched dollar-for-dollar by Canada. Two-thirds of the requested additional amount will be used for the construction of artificial spawning and incubation channels on the Nadina River; one-third for the development of a spawning channell for pink salmon on the Chilliwack River. It is felt that the additional U.S. contribution of $100,000, added to the earlier-requested $406,400 will assure the accomplishment of two purposes: (1) (2) Provide increased substantial economic returns to United States fishermen and the United States seafood industry; Encourage the Canadian Government to continue to preserve its Fraser River region as a source of salmon, equally available, under treaty, to both countries. I certainly would appreciate your Committee giving thorough consideration to this amendment. I feel it is absolutely vital to the Salmon industry. Your efforts will be decply appreciated. WGM:ndb CC: Harold Merrick Sincerely, MMagensne WARREN G. MAGNUSON, U.S.S. REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL PACIFIC SALMON FISHERIES COMMISSION FOR THE YEAR 1969 The terms of reference of the Sockeye Salmon Fisheries Convention, as amended by the Pink Salmon Protocol, specify that the Fraser River sockeye and pink salmon shall be protected, preserved, and extended as a mutual source of wealth to Canada and the United States. In the 1968 Annual Report, the Commission summarized the benefits accruing to date from its rehabilitation operations. It emphasized also, on the basis of extensive research, that substantial benefits might result from the construction and operation of artificial spawning and incubation channels, not only where natural spawning grounds had deteriorated from the effects of logging and land-clearing operations, but also where the available rearing capacity of certain lakes was not fully utilized because of limited natural fry production. In recent years the Commission has requested $300,000 annually for the construction, among other things, of prototype spawning and incubation channels to save certain sockeye and pink salmon populations from serious depletion due to deteriorating spawning grounds. In most instances the United States Government has restricted its contribution to approximately $100,000, thus limiting total annual expendiure for the referenced purpose to $200,000. In spite of this very limited expenditure, recent returns indicate the great potential value of artificial channels. In 1963, an artificial incubation channel, with a capacity of 4 million eggs and costing $84,000, was placed in operation on Seven Mile Creek, tributary of Upper Pitt River. After analyzing all available data, it is calculated that 97.000 adult sockeye returned from the first year of operation, producing a catch of 88,000 fish worth $211,000 to the fishermen, or $400,000 after processing. In 1969, final returns from the second year of operation were obtained. Preliminary calculations reveal that approximately 115,000 adult sockeye were produced by the channel and the catch of 98,000 taken in the fishery returned a gross income of $236,000 to the fishermen, or $447,000 after processing. Although the total escapements in the brood years involved were relatively small (because of continuing decline in the Pitt River sockeye population over the past 15 years), operation of the channel during the first two-year period resulted in the second largest and the largest sockeye run to Pitt River on record. Furthermore, these large runs have produced increased escapements to Pitt River, in spite of heavy fishing on the Pitt River run which is necessary in order to harvest the first part of the Chilko and Horsefly runs that tend to suffer a heavy prespawning mortality. Thus in spite of a deteriorating natural spawning ground and heavy fishing pressure, the Pitt River escapement is increasing after a 15-year decline, largely because of a small incubation channel costing $84,000 in capital charges, $12,000 in annual operating charges and $5,328 in interest and depreciation. The benefit-cost ratio for the second year of operation is calculated to be 14 to 1. In 1965, an artificial spawning channel, with related water storage and temperature control, was completed adjacent to Weaver Creek at a capital cost of $275,000. The channel has a theoretical capacity of 13,000 adult female salmon, but only 2,986 female sockeye, 497 female chum, and 32 female pink salmon entered the channel in its first year of operation. The first adult sockeye returned to the channel in 1969 when 59,000 spawners escaped to the Weaver Creek area, and an estimated 110.000 were caught by the fishermen for a total run of 169,000 Weaver sockeye. The escapement not only increased from 11,000 in the brood year to 59,000, but was substantially larger than any previously recorded. |