B-4 



There are a nuir.ber of functions, some listed in the 

 EIS, to De performed oy the regulatory oody. We would see 

 among tnese, in applying the conservation standard, the 

 identification of any species or group of species which re- 

 quire measures and then recommendation and development of 

 such measures by the organization. It is our view that the 

 organization should not operate on the basis of unanimity; 

 it should operate on the basis of a qualified majority. The 

 conservation measures should be final and binding. 



This leads us into the question of scientific data and 

 of scientific advice. One of the purposes we have always 

 felt would be served by the development of a regime would 

 be to establish a mechanism for acquiring the right kind of 

 data with regard to the Antarctic ecosystem and its marine 

 living resources. This would involve both catch data and 

 statistical data on any harvesting that's going on by na- 

 tions that are engaged in such harvesting, as well as basic 

 scientific information on the resouces themselves — and on 

 the ecosystem as a whole. 



The regime needs to make provision for the receipt, 

 compilation, and analysis of data. It would include basic 

 scientific data; it would include catch statistics. 



On the basis of such data, the regime requires a body 

 for making independent assessments on the basis of objective 

 criteria of the status of any given stocks, the marine 

 living resources in the area, the ecosystem as a whole and 

 the effects upon the ecosystem as a whole, and the stocks 

 of proposed conservation measures. 



We don't have a specific answer at this stage of the 

 game as to how that scientific body would be constituted; 

 but it should perform those functions. Further, it should 

 be insulated, as far as possible, from the political de- 

 cision-making process in the Plenary Body of the Commission, 

 or what we call the Commission itself. We believe it's 

 essential to assure that the Commission — which will actu- 

 ally formally adopt any conservation measure- -- wxll have 

 as independent scientific advice and as independent assess- 

 ment of the ecosystem and the components of it, as is possi- 

 ble to provide. That will be the standard we will be seek- 

 ing to apply in the development of the organizational 

 machinery. 



There are a number of possible ways of achieving this 

 objective. To cite two examples: there are a number of 

 fishery conventions with provision for scientific advisory 

 committees in which all participants in the organization, 

 in the regime, have the right to be represented -- to have 

 scientific representatives. That's one example. 



