208 



the riglit of free navigation beyond tlie 3-mile limit over the con- 

 tinental shelf. So it is like that old theory of property rights that 

 they represent a bundle of interests, and that these are a few of the 

 sticks of the bundle that fall one way and a few fall the other way. 



Mr. Fascell. I don't know what that means, if the gentleman will 

 permit me to say, but I know what title is and I know what sov- 

 ereignty is. 



Mr. Fraser. I mean that property rights represent an assortment 

 of specific rights. 



Admiral Hearn. There is a big distinction between title and sov- 

 ereignty and jurisdiction. The first paragraph in article II of the 

 Continental Shelf Convention reads as follows: "The coastal State 

 exercises over the continental shelf sovereign rights for the purpose 

 of exploring it and exploiting its natural resources." 



Mr. Fascell. You have a limitation on sovereignty in the interna- 

 tional convention to which the United States has already agreed? 



Admiral Hearn. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Fascell. You have an entirely different concept when somebody 

 goes out and plants a flag at the mid line of the deep ocean and says that 

 under international convention we have a right to do that because we 

 own it. That is an incorrect assumption, is it not ? 



Admiral Hearn. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Fascell. It is an incorrect legal position, as a matter of fact, 

 because the United States has already agreed to the contrary. There- 

 fore, if the Congress were to act on language which said "oppose vest- 

 ing control of the resources of the deep sea," we uiny not be accom- 

 plishing anything. 



Admiral Hearn. Say that again ? 



Mr. Fascell. "Resolved that the Congress of the United States 

 memoralize the President" — I would want to question that language 

 some other time^ — "to instruct American representatives of the United 

 Nations to oppose any action * * * to vest control of the resources of 

 the deep sea beyond the Continental Shelves of the United States." 



That is the proposal to "close the door and stop us from giving every- 

 thing away." I am just wondering how effective it really is. 



Admiral Hearn. Of course, I think if you have an international 

 convention which would turn over to the United Nations jurisdiction 

 over the resources or control over the resources, they would have the 

 exclusive right to exploit them by license to those who the}' wanted 

 to grant licenses to. 



Mr. Frosch. I see another problem with the wording, Mr. Chairman, 

 that I hadn't seen before. That is, that it is phrased "any action at 

 this time to vest control of deep ocean resources in an international 

 body would be premature and ill advised." 



I am not sure what the legal meaning of deep ocean resources is, but 

 to this nonlawyer it does not mean only the sea Iwttom, it means all 

 resources in the deep ocean. That includes fish. The United States al- 

 ready is a signator to a number of international conventions that deal 

 with the control and conservation of fish and fishing resources. 



Mr. Fascell. It also means water. It means whatever you can ex- 

 tract from the water. 



Mr. Frelinghutsen. Since we are analyzing the resolution in such 

 detail would you comment on the language "any action at this time 



