35 



along, we have have sought protections and details that we have 

 not sought as part of the nonbinding agreement. Now, will we seek 

 to add tne protections that should be in this binding agreement in 

 the August negotiations? I am particularly concerned because the 

 Bering Sea agreement was a negotiation to protect the pollock 

 stocks and I would not like to see us entering a binding agreement 

 that undercuts existing conventions, such as the Bering Sea con- 

 vention. Can you tell us what is going to be your goal for the Au- 

 gust negotiations? 



Ambassador CoLSON. Let me ask Mr. Martin to address that 

 more specifically. But as I mentioned earlier, I will guarantee you 

 that we will not bring you a binding agreement that undercuts the 

 donut agreement. That is certainly not in our interests. 



To the extent that this global U.N. agreement will touch upon is- 

 sues that are implied or within the donut agreement, I think that 

 they will be entirely consistent with the donut agreement, or that 

 they will supplement and help add on to other principles that 

 maybe we were not able to negotiate in the donut agreement, but 

 that will add to, maybe stronger enforcement provisions, or some- 

 thing like that, that will help us additionally in the Donut Hole 

 area. 



Let me ask Mr. Martin to speak to that. 



Senator Kerry. Mr. Martin. 



Mr. Martin. Senator, I would second what Ambassador Colson 

 is saying, and I would also point out the current state of the docu- 

 ment. Currently, we have one document, which is the chairman's 

 negotiating text. It is neither a treaty nor a nonbinding document, 

 although it is really drafted more toward the nonbinding shoulds 

 and ought-tos rather than the must type of imperatives that you 

 would find in a treaty. 



The move now will be in August to produce a new negotiating 

 text for a treaty. We think that will occur after the first week of 

 the session, so we do not have anything at this time to make the 

 comparison to which you are referring. There have been some dis- 

 cussions among countries, and one of the things that we have been 

 very concerned about is that our industry and environmental 

 groups who are most interested in this outcome have not been able 

 to be a party to these discussions, so what we see unfolding in the 

 future woula be the production of a negotiating text of a treaty and 

 a nonbinding resolution to accompany that. That will occur in Au- 

 gust. 



Then, there will be future sessions to negotiate the content of 

 both of those documents, and we certainly would want to follow 

 your thoughts here about making certain that the binding docu- 

 ment contains the protective measures that we would seek and 

 that the nonbinding document plays a role in this, but does not un- 

 dercut or deviate from the objective that you outlined, so that is 

 how we see things unfolding. It will take several sessions to accom- 

 plish this. It will not happen in August. 



Senator Stevens. Well, I welcome that statement, Mr. Chair- 

 man. I really hope that we proceed from the base that we have. I 

 think we have achieved substantial protection in the Pacific of sev- 

 eral stocks. I wish we had the same success as far as your area, 

 New England. 



