160 



The first of these was the passage in 1906 of legislation establishing a 12- 

 mile fishing limit for the U.S. As was anticipated, this has led to an increase 

 in the number of nations making similar claims ; also to a further erosion of 

 the 3-mile territorial sea to the 12-mile limit by other nations (for instance, 

 Nigeria and Mauretania, recently) ; and to an expansion of claims to even 

 broader territorial limits — up to 200 miles in some cases — together with en- 

 hanced activities to enforce them. 



The second action was the adoption by the UN General Assembly, on Dec. 8, 

 1966, of a U.S. -sponsored resolution concerning the resources of the sea. This 

 resolution set up procedures for making an international survey of everything 

 that is now being done with respect to the utilization of ocean resources. 



It also requires the Secretary-General of the UN to formulate proposals for 

 ensuring the most effective arrangement for expanded programs and interna- 

 tional cooperation in reaching a better understanding of the marine environ- 

 ment. This would be accomplished through research and the exploitation of 

 marine resources, with due regard to the conservation of fish stocks. 



In view of the resolution, we must now re-examine the whole subject of how 

 ocean resources are to be utilized. Regarding the jurisdiction of nations, we 

 now have three possibilities : 



Divide the ocean into numerous national lakes. 



Turn the entire high seas over to the UN to lease out and make revenue from. 



Preserve the status quo. 



Obviously, the Pandora's box of the law and mastery of the sea has been 

 opened to a greater extent than even President Truman was able to do in 194.5. 



Just who in the U.S. government has visualized the international consequence 

 of these recent actions on the posture and general interests of the U.S., and 

 the world, is a puzzle. 



It is to be hoped that the Vice President and his National Council on Marine 

 Resources &, Engineering Development might take these matters under review 

 before we lose access to the ocean and its resources to a degree for which our 

 grandchildren vdll suffer. 



Dr. Cain. A rather lono;time international nnderstandinp; of the 

 3-mile limit is quite correct. It is beine^ eroded away by unilateral action 

 of nations. There must be .somewhere in the order of 15 or 20 nations 

 that already have moved to the 12-mile limit and have done so, most 

 of them, in advance of any action by the United States. 



Tliere must be at least 15 different kinds of unilateral national 

 claims to the outer limits of territorial water now in existence. I can 

 provide the statistics and identify the nations if you would like them. 



Mr. Fascell. We would appreciate your supplying: that informa- 

 tion for the record. 



Dr. Cain. The move is clearly in the direction of extendino; terri- 

 torial waters beyond the 3-mile limit. This is related to security and it 

 is related to the developable natural resources. 



Mr. Fascell. As you said, many countries took action prior to tlie 

 United States. Our action was in 1966, wasn't it? 



Dr. Cain. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Fascell. Was ours restricted to fishinc? 



Dr. Cain. Between the 3- and the 12-mile limit it was restricted to 

 fishing. 



Mr. Fascei.l. That was the extent of our claim of jurisdiction? 



Dr. Cain. That is correct. 



(The following information was subsequently provided:) 



Breadth of Territorial Sea and FishijVG Jitrirdiction Claimed by Members 

 OF THE United Nations System 



The following information is based on the synoptical tables concerning the 

 breadth and juridical status of the territorial sea and adjacent zones prepared 



