Today FAO representatives are in London before an extraor- 

 dinary meeting of the International Whaling Commission to 

 present the results of our scientific assessment of the woeful 

 state of Antarctic whale populations. If I were not here, I 

 would be there to help in a search for more sensible inter- 

 national whaling policies. 



At present, the humpback whale, and the blue whale — the 

 largest animal ever to have lived on earth — are both nearing 

 commercial, if not actual, extinction. Both species are now 

 protected, but only time will tell whether this action has been 

 taken too late. 



The estimated number of blue whales in the Antarctic before 

 1940 was about 140,000. The stock size in 1954 was esti- 

 mated to be between about 10,000 and 14,000. In 1963 the 

 estimated Antarctic stock of blue whales had declined to be- 

 tween 650 and 1,950 whales. Any further whaling for this 

 species now will send it the way of the dodo and the passenger 

 pigeon. But given sufficient time to rebuild, there may be 

 still some hope that in the distant future, the world will once 

 more be able to count blue whales among its food and in- 

 dustrial resources. 



The reason that blue whales have all but vanished from the 

 seas and that other species may vanish is that the whaling 

 nations were unable to come to international agreement on a 

 common and adequate conservation policy. If a scientific 

 quota had been established and respected, the blue whale 

 would not now be commercially extinct. 



Under our Regular Program, we have sponsored and provide 

 the Secretaries with technical advice for five regional inter- 

 national fisheries commissions, concerned with marine, and in 

 some cases inland, fisheries of the Indo-Pacific Region, the 

 Southwest Atlantic, the Southeast Atlantic, the Mediterranean, 

 and the fresh-water fisheries of Europe. 



We are acting as the center of efforts to establish an inter- 

 national body for providing a scientific basis for the utilization 

 of the Atlantic tuna fisheries. 



The other kind of work we do is technical assistance. The 

 United Nations began technical assistance in 1950 with the 

 formation of the UN Expanded Program of Technical Assis- 

 tance, which we call EPTA. So far, our Fisheries Division has 

 sent experts to more than 80 different countries. Some coun- 

 tries have been served by a dozen or more expert missions. In 

 1965, 46 more EPTA fisheries experts will be sent out from 

 Rome. Technologists, economists, biologists, gear and vessel 

 experts, engineers, master fishermen — all offer their skills to 

 teach their counterparts how to solve fishery problems more 

 effectively. 



FAO also executes projects financed by the United Nations 

 Special Fund. In contrast to EPTA work, projects under the 

 Special Fund involve not single experts or small groups of ex- 

 perts, but whole teams. FAO takes on the greatest share of 

 these large projects — about one-third the total number. 



In fisheries work, the projects usually take the form of com- 

 plete fisheries institutes, usually where nothing remotely similar 

 ever existed. In these institutes, teams of internationally re- 

 cruited experts, including industrialists, biologists, economists 

 and technologists, tackle the main problems of the fishing in- 



dustry. But it is more than this. By teaching counterpart 

 national staff, we are able to muster Government support for 

 the institute. After four or more years, the international squad 

 pulls out, leaving the country a strongly founded fisheries in- 

 stitute on which to build. 



I am rather excited about fisheries work under the Special 

 Fund since I have returned only a month ago from a swing 

 through Latin America where we have several of these projects 

 in various stages. I was tremendously impressed with what 

 can be done under this plan. In most cases, we are helping 

 to make over the whole fisheries apparatus of these countries. 



In early 1965, FAO's Fisheries Division was responsible for 

 seven such projects which are now in operation, involving about 

 15 million dollars, and another eight projects worth about 20 

 million dollars which have been approved but are not yet oper- 

 ating. Five more fisher)' projects are in preparation and there 

 are 14 others under consideration. 



Before I close there is one point more which I would like to ex- 

 plain. It concerns the ratio of international work that we 

 should do as against the amount of work that we can do with 

 our present divisional budget and staff. 



The FAO Fisheries Division is at a crossroads. We cannot 

 continue on the same path that we have followed since 1945. 

 Somewhere along that traditional road, the expansion in inter- 

 national fisheries caught up with us and passed us by. Try as 

 we might, our present staff and organization are just not set up 

 to be able to cope efficiently with all the questions which de- 

 mand urgent answers. 



Within the next few years, for example, our work under the 

 Special Fund alone is estimated at a dollar volume of 20 million 

 dollars a year. To put this load on our present staff would 

 crack our operation down the middle. 



About two years ago, some action began to be taken on these 

 matters. When the ruling body of FAO met in November 

 1963 at the Twelfth FAO Conference, the Fisheries Technical 

 Committee noted that international activities related to the 

 oceans were not organized in the United Nations family in a 

 way to assure maximum effectiveness. 



A Resolution by the Technical Committee was adopted by 

 FAO's governing body. It asked the Director-General of 

 FAO, Dr. B. R. Sen, to prepare proposals for consideration 

 by the FAO Council and Conference, outlining ways to give 

 FAO and its Fisheries Division leading status among intergov- 

 ernmental bodies in encouraging rational harvesting of food 

 from the oceans and inland waters. 



The Director-General has responded with a proposal con- 

 sisting of two equal and interrelated parts. First, the crea- 

 tion of a permanent high-level advisory Committee on Fisheries 

 consisting of selected Member Nations. Second, the elevation 

 of fisheries from that of a Division in the Organization to that 

 of a Department, initially of two Divisions. The Committee 

 on Fisheries will consist of 15 to 24 Member Nations repre- 

 sented, we suggest, by high-ranking fisheries officials. The 

 Committee would advise FAO on its fisheries programs and 

 would also conduct general reviews and appraisals of fishery 

 problems of international character. 



61 



