Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1939, General, The British Commonwealth and Europe, Volume II

711.008 North Pacific/444

Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Leo D. Sturgeon of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs

[Washington,] January 19, 1939.

After obtaining the concurrence of Mr. Bland, Chairman of the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, Mr. Moore⁷ asked Mr. Dimond⁸ to come to the Department in order that he might be given certain information assembled in the Department with regard to the problem of protecting coastal fisheries.

Mr. Moore mentioned that the Department had received from Mr. Bland a letter⁹ in which a report on Mr. Dimond’s bill (H. R. 883, a Bill to Protect and Preserve the Salmon Fisheries of Alaska, etc.) was requested and that he had obtained Mr. Bland’s consent to discuss the matter orally and informally with Mr. Dimond; that Mr. Bland had further assured him that this procedure would satisfactorily take the place of a written reply.

Mr. Moore stated that he was familiar with the purport and scope of Mr. Dimond’s bill and had noted that it was identical with H. E. 8344, introduced by Mr. Dimond during the last Congress. He then briefly referred to the understanding concluded with Japan on March 25, 1938,¹⁰ mentioned that the Japanese had thus far honored the assurances given to this Government with regard to the salmon fishing activities of Japanese nationals in Alaskan waters, and stated that by the terms of the understanding it continued in effect.

Mr. Moore then informed Mr. Dimond that the Department has continued to give study to the problem of coastal fisheries, and that the Department of Commerce had been asked to prepare data showing the extent of American interests in the offshore waters of other countries. He said that he thought it important that we give careful attention to this phase of the fishery question, in order to determine how American fishing interests would be affected should we afford other countries a precedent for the extension of their territorial jurisdiction. Mr. Moore then asked Mr. Dimond to glance over the data supplied by the Department of Commerce.

Mr. Dimond said that the data shown to him clearly indicated that American fishing interests in foreign coastal waters were extensive and that he realized that the Department must give consideration to this phase of the problem. He thought, however, that it had been established that the situation of salmon fisheries was in fact different from that of the general run of fisheries, and that his bill could be defended on that ground. Mr. Moore said that we were agreed that the Alaska salmon fishery could be distinguished from most other fisheries but that there was the question whether other countries would accept the distinction as material. He said that the point with which we were especially concerned was that there might be serious repercussions from unilateral action. Mr. Moore also mentioned that certain existing fishery treaties might be jeopardized—especially the Bering Sea fur seal treaty.¹¹ Mr. Dimond was informed that the American share of the fur seal catch for 1938 totaled $293,512 net.

Mr. Dimond said that he understood the reasons for our concern, and that he appreciated the Department’s position, but that the preoccupation of Japan in China caused him to believe that now would be an admirable time to enact legislation. He said that if the Department did not oppose his bill he believed that Congress would pass it, and cited in support of this statement the fact that Senator Copeland’s bill, of a more drastic nature, easily passed in the Senate during the last Congress.¹² Mr. Dimond stated, however, that he was thinking of revising his bill to eliminate a. “loop hole” in it which had been called to his attention; that in view of this it would suit his convenience if the Department refrained from making a report until it had been submitted in revised form. Mr. Moore stated that we would be glad to keep in touch with Mr. Dimond’s efforts.

The question of the Canadian attitude toward the proposed legislation was briefly discussed. Mr. Dimond said that he was doubtful about what that would be. Mr. Moore stated that the Department had kept the Canadian Legation generally informed of our efforts in the fishery matter, and that we should continue to do that. Mr. Sturgeon suggested that the views of Canada with regard to ways and means of protecting coastal fisheries may not be entirely in line with some of the views held here, and that therefore it might be well to consider how we could assure ourselves of Canadian cooperation toward our general objectives. Mr. Moore suggested that we might at an early date have a general talk with some one from the Canadian Legation.

7. R. Walton Moore, Counselor of the Department of State.
8. Anthony J. Dimond, Alaskan Delegate to Congress.
9. Not printed.
10. See telegrams No. 201, March 25, 1938, 2 a.m., from the Ambassador in Japan, p. 186, and No. 105, March 25, 1938, 6 p.m., to the Ambassador in Japan, p. 188.
11. Convention between the United States, Great Britain, Japan and Russia, signed at Washington, July 7, 1911, Foreign Relations, 1911, p. 260.
12. Royal S. Copeland, Senator from New York, introduced S. 3744, “To assert the jurisdiction of the United States over certain portions of the Bering Sea and the submerged land thereunder”, which passed the Senate on May 5, 1938; Congressional Record, vol. 83, pt 6, p. 6297.