\./

AAA ae pan reheels

69

ou,

SESSION I

DONALDSON: As Merril said, some were, It was not uniform
and it was the type of contamination which we had never encountered
and have not encountered in all the years working inthe Pacific. It
was not absorbed, but adsorbed radiation, which came from dragging
the fish across the deck, This external superficial contamination or
suriace contamination was easy to measure with the usual radiation
instruments, while the internal selectively absorbed radionuclides,
so characteristic in the subsequent camples of the March |,

1954 test,

were not found in the tissues of these tuna. You have two types of
problems as far as radiation contamination is concerned,

DONALDSON: They stopped fishing and began picking up their
lines. Therefore, you don't know just how much radioactivity came
from contamination in the water and how much was from actual fallout on the deck.

BUSTAD:

With regard to your second statement relative to the crew

being in the wrong position, in Lapp's book he states that the crew felt
they had been detected by the American authorities. Iassume he abtained this information from the crew. didn't he? I mean, this feeling?
EISENBUD:

Yes.

end up in jail again.
months or so,
DUNHAM:

Well, they thought they were probably going to

You see, they had been in jail probably two

They had been in jail in Indonesia.

EISENBUD: Yes, for poaching.
Well, what happened next? Maybe, Lauren, you have better information than I do on this. It's my recollection that the American
shipping companies took the position that they would not accept any
fish for transport to the United States that was not certified by the
American Government as being acceptable for entry into the port
when it arrived on the West Coast, and this is what caused the great
tuna panic of 1954,
DONALDSON:
EISENBUD:

That was part of it,

Part of it?

What was the other pait?

nearergp cedee re see deen ale Rteeet Mera Meee

TAYLOR: With these fishes?

Select target paragraph3