8 MANAGEMENT OF HIGH SEAS FISHERIES 



Concerning its definition, Article I of the Convention on the Conti- 

 nental Shelf provides that the "shelf" refers "to the seabed and the 

 subsoil of the submarine areas adjacent to the coast but outside the 

 area of the territorial sea, to a depth of 200 meters or, beyond that 

 limit to where the depth of the superadjacent waters admits of the 

 exploitation of the natural resources of the said areas." Off some 

 coasts there is a rather distinct shelf, with a noticeable drop-off, at 

 about 600 feet. However, in other areas this is not so; the water 

 depth increases gradually. In the northern Bering Sea between 

 Alaska and Siberia, the "shelf" extends all the way across between 

 the two land masses. The Bering Sea, as well as some other areas, 

 where the continental shelf extends across international boundaries, 

 would pose difficulties for the application of a continental shelf rule. 

 Such problems deserve further consideration, but the limited scope 

 of this article does not permit their analysis here. Nonetheless, we 

 can examine profitably some of the consequences of the extension 

 of exclusive fishery jurisdiction to the edge of the continental shelf, 

 or to 200 miles from shore. 



What fisheries would be affected by an extension of claims to the 

 edge of the continental shelf? 



Halibut have been fished to a depth of about 400 fathoms (2400 

 feet) in the northeastern Pacific. Other demersal (bottom living) 

 forms of fish may be found to depths of about 500 fathoms (3000 

 feet). To include the major fisheries it would be necessary to locate 

 the continental shelf at a depth of 500 fathoms. An exclusive fishery 

 zone that includes water to such depth in the northeastern Pacific 

 would accomplish the following: reserve virtually all demersal 

 stocks of fish; reserve all pelagic (fish which live in the upper layers 

 of water) species confined in these areas; probably make uneconomic 

 the efforts by fishermen from other nations to exploit pelagic stocks 

 such as herring, which occur close to the edge or over the continental 

 shelf. In addition, the fishermen of the coastal state would undoubt- 

 edly be afforded greater protection in their investments in vessels and 

 fishing gear by such an extension. Their competition would come 

 primarily from their own coiuitrymen, and such competition would 

 be controllable by the coastal state. 



Certain other effects of such an extended fishery jurisdiction de- 

 serve notice. This type of extension would, if carried out throughout 

 the world, accrue to the advantage of those countries with broad 



