49 



ing the primacy of coastal states with regard to straddling stocks throughout their 

 range, then the problems for the Central Bering Sea convention are manageable. If 

 the U.S. secures a reaffirmation of the driflnet ban in the straddling stocks/highly 

 migratory stocks agreement, as well as in other international agreements including 

 any documents concluded in relation to the ratification of UNCLOS, then the 

 driflnet issue is manageable. However, if the United States does not secure such af- 

 firmations, then many of the gains we have made in the last 5 years or so will be 

 severely undermined. 



Mr. Chairman, thank you for your kind consideration in allowing me to present 

 this testimony to you today. 1 will be glad to answer any questions you or the other 

 members of the Committee may have. 



Senator Kerry. Thank you very much, Mr. Benton. Mr. Bumey. 



STATEMENT OF DAVID G. BURNEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

 UNITED STATES TUNA FOUNDATION 



Mr. BuRNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



As I pointed out in my written testimony, Mr. Chairman, I rep- 

 resent U.S. processors and all of the U.S. purse seine vessels that 

 fish pursuant to the Western Pacific Tuna Treaty. We do not fish 

 on bluefin tuna, I might add. And we do not fish in the Eastern 

 Tropical Pacific. 



There are two things that came up in your conversation with 

 Ambassador Colson that are worth mentioning. One was the state- 

 ment, a kind of an inadvertent statement by Ambassador Colson, 

 that the United Nations conference should not infringe on existing 

 fisheries policies. 



I disagree with Ambassador Colson's statement, the United Na- 

 tions conference should infringe on existing policies of 

 nonmanagement and should infringe where there is no manage- 

 ment of the fishery over the number of vessels that are allowed to 

 participate in a fishery. This is the major objective of this con- 

 ference. 



I share the same concerns as Senator Stevens about dispute set- 

 tlement. I also was privileged enough to be involved in the Law of 

 the Sea negotiations. At that time I was representing the American 

 Tuna Boat Association. We all recall how difficult those negotia- 

 tions were. You had most of the countries in the world trying to 

 decide what should be done with the common marine resources and 

 the oceans of the world. It was not an easy task. 



The present United Nations conference, which is directed toward 

 the management of highly migratory fishery stocks and straddling 

 fish stocks, still faces a monumental task. I am encouraged, how- 

 ever, that some resource management principles have been agreed 

 to at the conference to date. The acceptance of a precautionary ap- 

 proach to fisheries management is a step in the right direction. 



I am not saying that marks the end of the conference debate. The 

 biggest issue facing this conference is the compatibility of effective 

 management measures that will be applied on the high seas and 

 that also must be applied inside the EEZ's of all of the relevant 

 coastal states. 



We lose sight every once in a while of the fact that over 90 per- 

 cent of the world's fisheries hai^est occurs inside of 200 miles, not 

 on the high seas. We are always talking about trying to manage 

 these resources on the high seas, while forgetting that each rel- 

 evant coastal state dictates management strategies for the same re- 

 source when it is inside their zone. This may work in a country like 



