504 
Because of the apprehension about dealing with an international body, 
some businessmen, I think, would prefer to deal with individual coun- 
tries. Also, the officials of the developing countries in particular are 
sometimes more easily persuaded than officials of an international 
organization. In addition, businessmen are more accustomed to deal- 
ing on this basis. Yet businessmen have dealt with international au- 
thorities be it the IBRD, be it IMCO, or be it some other international 
agency. I think overall we have found that relations have worked out 
pretty well and that U.S. national and business interests have pros- 
pered, and this would happen in my view if we moved ahead in the 
direction which I have outlined. 
Here I would like to bring in another point with regard to limita- 
tion of the Continental Shelf. I have recommended the idea of 550 
meters or 50 miles. The reason for 550 meters is that, with the know]- 
edge we have today, the edge of the shelf is not known to occur at a 
depth greater than 550 meters. As the committee knows, the edge of 
the Continental Shelf is the dividing line between the shelf proper 
and the continental slope. 
With regard to the continental shelves of islands, I have sought to 
place a limitation on the size of any one shelf by stipulating that the 
total shelf area may not be larger than the land mass to which it apper- 
tains. This strikes me as a fair and reasonable limitation, and it elim- 
inates the problem which might arise of continental shelves were de- 
limited on the median-line approach, which would mean that a small 
island, such as San Pietro or the Falkland Islands, could claim a conti- 
nental shelf area many times greater than its own size. 
This is a commonsense thought or idea that I think makes so much 
sense that if repeated sufficiently might secure a degree of interna- 
tional acceptance. 
I would welcome any questions. 
Mr. Lennon. Thank you very much, Senator, for an informative 
and a most interesting statement. 
The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Mosher. 
Mr. Mosuer. Mr. Chairman, I don’t think any of us is surprised at 
the tenor of the Senator’s remarks today because we have all known 
for a long time his profound interest in this subject, but it is great to 
have him here in person to say what he has said, and I think his com- 
ments that have just gone well beyond the printed testimony before 
us are particularly fascinating. 
However, I suppose that this matter of the need for a new regime of 
the seas, even though this committee has to be extremely interested 
in this, Is really outside our jurisdiction and a little bit beyond our 
ee concerns in these hearings which have to do with H.R. 
13247. 
Therefore, to bring it back to that bill, I am delighted to have the 
Senator indicate his support for the creation of a new agency, whether 
it is NOAA as described in the Commission report or some modifica- 
tion of that. It is good to know of your support for that, Senator. 
Is it a fair question—and maybe it isn’t fair—to ask whether in the 
support you have indicated in your testimony here this morning for 
an organization such as NOAA, do you think you speak for a con- 
siderable sentiment over on your side? Do you think that if and when 
we os ulti proposal over there, it is going to have a friendly, positive 
reaction ? 
