VI 



other country would have to demonstrate that they are 

 "clearly inconsistent" with the Agreement's broad manage- 

 ment principles. This requirement thus builds in a pre- 

 ference in favor of the measures developed by the country 

 with primary management responsibility. 



For all or part of the management measures for four 

 species, Category A procedures would apply. These involve 

 the greatest degree of management cooperation between the 

 two countries. Management measures under Category A would 

 be developed jointly in the Commission. 



The Agreement also provides for conciliation and 

 arbitration of disagreements over management measures for 

 Category A and B stocks. This will assure that 

 disagreement between the Parties will not result in 

 deadlock and leave the stocks unprotected. As noted 

 however, an objecting Party would have to meet a 

 substantial burden of persuasion in seeking a modification 

 of management measures developed by the country with pri- 

 mary management responsibility for Category B stocks. 



The need for coordinated fishery management arose 

 with extended jurisdiction and presumably will prevail 

 indefinitely. For this reason, the Agreement undertaken 

 with Canada has no termination provision. However, once 

 the maritime boundary between the countries is delimited. 



