182 



That is all. 



Dr. Cain. Mr. Chairman, with respect to that specific request, cer- 

 tain historic or traditional rights have been agreed upon with certain 

 conditions and certain places. This is not agreed upon by departments 

 or representatives like myself. This is always international negotia- 

 tion. It goes to either existing international law or steps in the creation 

 of international law or understandings between governments and 

 treaties. 



The meaningful answer to that question would have to be given by 

 the State Department, We know conditions in which traditional rights 

 have been recognized that relate to resources that Interior is interested 

 in. We can tell you this sort of thing. 



Mr. Fulton. Rather than take the time now, will you put it in the 

 record ? 



(The information requested follows :) 



TRADITroN.^x Fishing Rights ix the U.S. Contiguous Zone 



Public Law 89-658. approved October 14, 1966, established a 9-mile fisheries 

 zone contiguous to the territorial sea of the United States in which the United 

 States "will exercise the same exclusive rights in respect to fisheries in the zone 

 as it has in its territorial sea, subject to the continuation of traditional fishing 

 by foreign states within this zone as may be recognized by the United States". 



An agreement between the United States and Mexico in which each recognized 

 certain traditional fishing rights of the other country was concluded September 

 19, 1967. In the near future, the United States expects to begin talks aimed at 

 negotiating a similar agreement with Canada. 



The United States has not recognized traditional fishing rights of any other 

 country, although certain fishing privileges within the U.S. contiguous zone have 

 been granted the U.S.S.R. and Japan. 



The privileges granted the Soviet Union are covered by the Agreement on 

 Fisheries : Northeastern Part of the Pacific Ocean ofC the United States Coast, 

 effective February 13, 1967. for one year. That agreement allows Soviet vessels to 

 continue trawling in a limited area inside the U.S. contiguous zone off Alaska. 

 That privilege was granted in exchange for a Soviet agreement to place limita- 

 tions on their fishing operations off the U.S. west coast outside the U.S. 12-mile 

 zone of fisheries jurisdiction. 



Japan refused to recognize the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States in 

 the 9-mile contiguous zone established by P.L. 89-6.58. Nevertheless, Japan and 

 the United States both agreed to set aside their legal position on this issue and 

 work out a practical solution to deal with established Japanese fisheries inside 

 the U.S. contiguous zone. This was done in a series of agreements concluded 

 May 9, 1967, by an exchange if notes between the two countries, which are effec- 

 tive, with one minor exception, until December 31, 1968. Under these agreements, 

 Japan agreed to refrain from fishing in the U.S. contiguous zone except for cer- 

 tain fisheries in specified areas. The areas where Japan is allowed to continue 

 some fishing inside the U.S. contiguous zone include certain waters off the coast 

 of Alaska, the Pribilof Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and some smaller is- 

 lands of the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea. These agreements with Japan 

 state that they shall not be "deemed to prejudice the claims of either Govern- 

 ment in regard to the jurisdiction of a coastal state over fisheries." Thus the 

 United States has not recognized any traditional fishing rights of Japan, although 

 the United States has allowed Japan to continue fisheries in certain areas of the 

 contiguous zone where Japan had conducted operations in the past. 



Mr. Fascell. Let's see if we can finish now. You hare covered two 

 points of present U.S. policy. Are there others? 



Dr. Cain. With respect to the resources of the seabed, the deep sea- 

 bed, I think that you will all remember that when the Oeeonogrnpher^ 

 a i-esearch vessel, was dedicated by President Johnson in July of 1966, 

 some 15 months ago, he said : 



