18 



regional fishery management agreements and with regard to our statements of con- 

 cern for the health of the marine environment and the sustainable use of fishery 

 resources. Major fishing nations, such as Japan, Russia, Poland, and now South 

 Korea, whose vessels fish in both the Donut Hole and the NAFO Regulatory Area, 

 note regularly the inconsistency of our position. For example, we pressed hard to 

 establish a regional regime in the North Pacific to conserve and manage straddling 

 fish stocks, while failing to participate in the regional fishery management organiza- 

 tion of the same type for the Northwest Atlantic region. 



Fish stocks in the NAFO Regulatory Area ofi" Newfoundland are at all-time low 

 levels of abundance. Moratoria are in effect on many species for stocks both within 

 and outside Canada's EEZ. Canada has mounted extraordinary diplomatic initia- 

 tives within NAFO, and through the United Nations, to halt the decline of these 

 valuable fish stocks. Canada has even taken the unprecedented step of declaring 

 that it will exercise "custodial enforcement" over the portions of the rich Grand 

 Bank fisheries which take place in the NAFO Regulatory Area outside the Canadian 

 EEZ. We strongly oppose Canada's threat to take unilateral fishery enforcement ac- 

 tions on the high seas as inconsistent with the Law of the Sea. Canada's action has 

 been effective, however, in deterring refiagged vessels and "stateless" vessels from 

 remaining on the fishing grounds. In fact, on a number of occasions in recent weeks, 

 the only active fishing in this portion of the NAFO Regulatory Area for NAFO-regu- 

 lated species was being carried out by U.S. vessels. 



Some U.S. interests still resist accession to NAFO in the hope that they can fish 

 on NAFO stocks without restriction. Amendment 5 to the Northeast Multispecies 

 Plan has imposed effort limitations on our fishermen in our waters, but we cannot 

 expect that the international community simply will accept a move by U.S. vessels 

 to transfer fishing effort to NAFO waters to fish on stocks of even greater conserva- 

 tion concern. Other countries grow increasingly impatient when our vessels fish on 

 stocks they are sacrificing to conserve. The bottom line is that if U.S. vessels are 

 to participate in this fishery it is incumbent upon our government to join the rel- 

 evant international conservation organization. We can not argue for conservation 

 and responsible fishing in one place and deny it in another. The House of Represent- 

 atives has already adopted implementing legislation for NAFO contained in H.R. 

 3188. 



A review of the status of U.S. participation in NAFO follows. On May 3, 1979, 

 the President transmitted the NAFO Convention to the Senate, which gave its ad- 

 vice and consent to ratification on July 27, 1983. The United States has not yet de- 

 posited its instrument of accession because no implementing legislation has been 

 adopted to require U.S. fishermen and vessels to comply with the Convention. Thus 

 we are in the unusual position where the Senate approved a treaty more than 10 

 years ago but we remain outside of it. 



NAFO is the kind of organization we encourage others to ioin. We encourage par- 

 ticipation in ICCAT, lATTC, NPAFC and a number of adaitional regional fishery 

 conservation and management organizations. By remaining outside NAFO, we leave 

 ourselves open to the accusation that we are not participating efiectively in an inter- 

 national fishery conservation agreement which regulates a fishery in which the 

 United States has an interest. This is the wrong signal to send if we are really in- 

 terested in the sustainable use of the fishery resources of the high seas. 



It is deeply important if we are to use commercial fisheries on a sustainable basis 

 that all fishermen who fish outside their national zone fish pursuant to rules estab- 

 lished through the relevant conservation and management organization for the re- 

 gion. 



LARGE-SCALE fflGH SEAS DRIFTNET FISHING 



I am pleased to report to the Committee that the Administration has just submit- 

 ted its annual report to the United Nations on implementation of the global morato- 

 rium on large-scale high seas driftnet fishing. As you are aware, the United States 

 was a major proponent of the United Nations General Assembly resolution on large- 

 scale high seas ariflnet fishing and the global moratorium on such fishing. 



Toward this end, last December we concluded an agreement with the People's Re- 

 public of China to ensure effective cooperation and implementation of the morato- 

 rium. The Coast Guard is currently carrying on-board one of its cutters patrolling 

 in the North Pacific a PRC enforcement official who would assist in any boarding 

 of a PRC fiag vessel using or equipped to use large-scale driflnets. To date this year, 

 the Coast Guard has not detected any large-scale driflnet fishing in the North Pa- 

 cific. We believe and remain generally pleased that the moratorium is being effec- 

 tively implemented in the North Pacific. 



