26 



• promote efTective compliance and enforcement with international fisheries regu- 

 lations and thus provide a level playing field for our fishermen; 



• provide for transparency and for participation by industry and nongovern- 

 mental organizations; and 



• promote the long-term profitability of substantial public and private invest- 

 ments in fishing. 



We have argued in the formal and informal meetings of the UN Conference that 

 coastal nations and distant-water fishing nations must work together to deal with 

 these resources common to EEZs and the hirfi seas. These negotiations are an exer- 

 cise of our rights and our responsibilities; their successful result would encourage 

 the kind of responsible fishery conservation and management arrangements the 

 world needs. 



Thank you Mr. Chairman. I would be happy to answer any questions. 



Senator Kerry. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. Your re- 

 marks will be made a part of the record in full, as if read. 



Let me ask you both, at the end you took pains to say that our 

 international fisheries efforts will not infringe on fishing rights in 

 coastal areas and the ability of the management to make choices, 

 nor on distant-water rights, et cetera, et cetera. If it does not in- 

 fringe a little bit, what is it going to accomplish? 



Mr. Martin. I think the infringement that I was referring to was 

 the infringement on the prerogative of management within the 

 EEZ of resources that are exclusively within that EEZ. As to strad- 

 dling stocks and highly migratory stocks that are the subject of the 

 conference, there will, of course, be some responsibilities. 



Part of the tension of the negotiations has been to determine 

 whether these responsibilities will be imposed exclusively within 

 the high seas, or will be shared between the high seas and within 

 the EEZ's. It has been the position of the United States in these 

 negotiations that the straddling stocks and highly migratory spe- 

 cies should be managed throughout their range, so that it would be 

 a responsibility both within and without the EEZ, not only on the 

 high seas, but also with the coastal nations. Some of the nations 

 within this negotiation have resisted that concept. 



Senator Kerry. We can understand the resistance in terms of 

 coastal sovereignty — we see it here, we see it there. What do you 

 think it is going to take to break through the resistance and begin 

 to achieve a consensus about the need to move to a binding regi- 

 men more rapidly than we appear to be? What will it take to per- 

 haps eliminate some of the tensions that exist, which I think are 

 based on very parochial, narrow interests usually, beginning with 

 economic interests? 



Mr. Martin. Senator, I think that the key issue is the one that 

 I have just referred to, the so-called compatibility issue, and I do 

 think that significant progress was made on that issue in the infor- 

 mal meeting in Buenos Aires this past month. If we can solve that 

 issue in a way that provides for an effective and meaningful regu- 

 latory scheme throughout the range, then I think that we will have 

 solved the problem and be on our way to achieving a binding trea- 

 ty- 

 One of the reasons that we have now moved toward a binding 



treaty is our confidence that we are on a track that might lead to 

 a meaningful and substantial document, and not just, as Ambas- 

 sador Colson was referring to in his statement, a lot of words. 



Senator Ki«:rry. Do you believe that that document will deal with 

 reduction of effort sufficiently? 



