52 



thermore, the Panel agreed that the cost and possibility of developing an all encom- 

 passing management plan for the entire marine ecosystem was prohibitive and un- 

 attainable. 



Qne of the most difficult issues yet to be resolved at the Conference is the balance 

 of rights and duties between coastal States and OWEN'S. As this Committee is well 

 aware, efTorts to balance these competing interests was a contentious issue in the 

 United States for years. Until recently, the United States did not claim jurisdiction 

 over highly migratory tunas because it was acknowledged that tunas could not be 

 effectively managed or conserved on a unilateral basis. As a result of this policy, 

 the United States was instrumental in the creation and maintenance of the inter- 

 national tuna management regimes which were formed to monitor and maintain the 

 major tuna fisheries of the world. 



Although the United States now claims jurisdiction over the tunas that traverse 

 its exclusive economic zone (EEZ), it still supports the scientific principle that efiec- 

 tive management and conservation of tunas requires the international cooperation 

 of all relevant Coastal Nations and OWEN'S. The United States continues to support 

 the need to manage this highly migratory fish species throughout its range. There 

 can be no effective management if it is limited to the high seas or the EEZ's of rel- 

 evant Coastal Nations. 



Many Coastal Nations believe that any attempt to impose international manage- 

 ment measures inside their EEZ's is an infringement on their sovereignty. They ig- 

 nore the fact that in many cases, international treaties or multilateral arrange- 

 ments do infringe on a nation's absolute sovereignty. In these cases, the infringe- 

 ment is normally weighed against the benefits to be derived from participating in 

 such an international treaty or arrangement. 



I have always viewed the sovereignty issue regarding tunas to be more economi- 

 cally based than conservationally based. It is a false premise to believe that a Coast- 

 al Nation actually owns the tuna that enter its EEZ. Tunas travel tens of thousands 

 of miles during their lifetime. They know no boundary or jurisdiction and move con- 

 stantly from the high seas to the EEZ's of Coastal Nations and back to the high 

 seas. Ownership cannot be traced over the life cycle of the migratory tuna. 



EiTective unilateral management of highly migratory fish stocks, such as tuna, is 

 not possible. Sovereignty over these fish stocks, if there is such a thing, merely 

 means that when the resource enters the EEZ of a nation that nation controls who, 

 how and at what price the resource can be taken there. The same fish can be taken 

 by any nation once it exits an EEZ and appears on the high seas again. 



It is both scientific fact and common sense that highly migratory tunas can only 

 be efTectively managed and conserved if the management measures are applied 

 equally on tne high seas and inside the EZZ's that are a part of the range of the 

 resource. In other words, tunas must be managed and conserved throughout their 

 entire range if the management regime is to be effective. 



The South Pacific Tuna Treaty was repeatedly referred to at the UN Conference 

 as an example of the type of international cooperation that is necessary to maintain 

 an effective management regime for highly migratory fish stocks. While this Treaty 

 involves only one DWFN (United States) and all of the Coastal Nations of a region, 

 it is proof that effective management can be maintained in a region without unduly 

 infringing on the claims of sovereignty over the resource being managed. 



The Treaty provides for the monitoring and gathering of data from the entire 

 range of the resource in order that proper regional management decisions can be 

 made. Under the Treaty, management measures, which have been termed, "mini- 

 mum terms and conditions" for operating in the area, apply throughout the range 

 of the resource. While it has not been explicitly stated in the Treaty, there is an 

 implicit understanding that the Coastal Nations and the DWFN (United States) 

 must work cooperatively to insure that the agreed upon management measures are 

 applied whenever the resource is found. 



Since neither a DWFN or a Coastal Nation has an established international right 

 to dictate management measures for highly migratory fish stocks found on the high 

 seas, it is incumbent on both parties to reach a mutually agreeable set of manage- 

 ment measures. This should not raise a sovereignty concern since each Coastal Na- 

 tion must agree to a management measure before it becomes effective within the 

 EEZ of that nation. In addition, the Coastal Nation maintains sovereignty over the 

 highly migratory resource while it is in the EEZ, thus, assuring that the actual har- 

 vest of the resource there can only occur with the Coastal Nation's permission. 



In summary, it is critical that the international fisheries community work coop- 

 eratively to establish effective management and conservation measures that will 

 sustain in perpetuity the world's renewable fisheries resources. Unilateral efforts to 

 protect or manage highly migratory fish stocks, such as tunas, will ultimately fail. 

 Both Coastal Nations and DWFNs must recognize that a highly migratory fish 



