I NTERNATIONAL LAW 9 



continental shelves, such as the United States off the coast of Alaska 

 and in the (iuU of Mexico. It would not accrue especially to the 

 benefit of coastal states with narrow continental shelves such as Chili, 

 Peru, Ecuador, and the United States off the coasts of Oregon and 

 California. It ^vould have only slight effect on the fishing for pelagic 

 species on the high seas, outside the continental shelves, such as 

 salmon. In some cases, it might result in inefficient management, 

 where one management program might be instituted inside the 

 coastal state's jurisdiction and another program for the area outside 

 that jurisdiction. Lastly, off the coasts of Alaska and British Cohnn- 

 bia the various stocks of bottomfish might not be fully exploited in 

 view of the lack of interest in these fish shown so far by United States 

 and Canadian fishermen, and by the North American public, unless 

 these t^\ o countries issued licenses to foreign fishermen to operate in 

 such areas, under management programs devised by the coastal states. 



Extension of United States and Canadian exclusive fisheries j mis- 

 diction to 200 miles would have a somewhat different effect. In the 

 northeastern Pacific virtually all the continental shelf ^vould be 

 brought within the jurisdiction of these two countries. Depending 

 on exactly ho^v the line is drawn, a section in mid-Bering Sea ^vould 

 still be excluded. Off the coasts of California, Oregon, Washington, 

 and British Columbia, a "200-mile" line w^ould be located far be- 

 yond the shelf and ^vould encompass substantial portions of the high 

 seas. Such an extension would eliminate foreign fishing from all 

 demersal stocks and also from the pelagic salmon fishery as well as 

 from the above-mentioned pelagic species which live closer to the 

 continental shelf. Free fishing would then be confined to such high 

 seas species as are regularly taken in the open ocean. 



Undoubtedly any such extension of claims by the United States or 

 Canada ^vould bring strong protests from Japan and the Soviet 

 Union, and from other countries. At the same time, it would en- 

 courage other nations to extend their own claims over similar areas 

 off their coasts. Obviously, such a move Avould give additional 

 Tveight to the extended claims of Central and South American coim- 

 tries over adjacent high seas, and w^ould thus impose further burdens 

 on the U.S. tuna and shrimp industries already harrassed in their 

 efforts to fish off those coasts. 



At the present time, there is little chance that the United States 

 will extend its jurisdiction over any significant part of high seas 



