30 



regularly the inconsistency of our position: on the one hand 

 to establish a regime in our area to conserve and manage 

 straddling fish stocks, while we fail to participate in the 

 regional fishery management organization of the same type for 

 the Northwest Atlantic region. 



New England fishermen argue that they have fished without 

 restrictions on what are now straddling stocks off 

 Newfoundland -- those stocks currently of great concern to 

 NAFO for generations. They wish to continue this fishery. 



Fish stocks in the NAFO Regulatory Area off Newfoundland 

 are at all-time low levels of abundance. Yet some U.S. 

 interests resist accession to NAFO in the hope that they can 

 fish on NAFO stocks without restriction. When the measures 

 contemplated under Amendment 5 to the Northeast Multispecies 

 Plan impose effort limitations on our fishermen in our waters, 

 the international community simply will not accept a move by 

 some U.S. vessels to transfer fishing effort to NAFO waters. 

 The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council has endorsed U.S. 

 accession to NAFO. The New England Fishery Management Council 

 will consider the matter at its meeting today and tomorrow. 

 Accession to NAFO is supported by many, but not all, U.S. 

 fishermen and fishing interests; it is consistent with our 

 global fishery interests; and it is the responsible thing to 

 do in regard to the protection of the marine environment and 

 the promotion of the sustainable use of fishery resources. 



Recent reports, however, of U.S. vessels fishing for 

 flatfish in the areas referred to as the "Nose" and "Tail" of 

 the Grand Banks are disturbing. NAFO members have sharply 

 curtailed their own quotas for cod, yellowtail flounder, 

 American plaice, and witch flounder. Yet our government has 

 no means to regulate the activities of these vessels. 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 relevant 

 international conservation organization. We can not argue for 

 conservation and responsible fishing in one place and deny it 

 in another. Congress can assist by adopting the implementing 

 legislation for NAFO contained in H.R. 3058. 



The NAFO Convention Area extends westward from the 

 southern tip of Greenland to the east coasts of Canada and the 

 United States, north of 35 degrees north latitude. The NAFO 

 Regulatory Area consists of that part of the Convention Area 

 that is outside national zones of fisheries jurisdiction. 



The Convention applies to all fishery resources of the 

 Convention Area, with the following exceptions: salmon, tunas 

 and marlins, cetacean stocks managed by the International 

 Whaling Commission, and sedentary species of the Continental 

 Shelf. 



The NAFO Convention establishes an organization that 

 consists of four components: the General Council, the 

 Scientific Council, the Fisheries Commission, and the 

 Secretariat. The Organization is headquartered in Dartmouth, 

 Nova Scotia. 



Negotiations toward adoption of the Convention began in 

 October 1976 and were completed in May 1978. We were an 

 active participant in the negotiations. The Convention was 

 opened for signature at Ottawa from October 24 to December 31, 



1978, and we signed it. It entered into force on January I, 



1979, but not for the United States. 



On May 3, 1979, the President transmitted the NAFO 

 Convention to the Senate, which gave its advice and consent to 

 ratification on July 27, 1983. The United States has not yet 



