564 
I think there are some eight or nine nations that have present decla- 
rations in national policy that would indicate that they have claims 
which most of us would not support. 
So that I think there is a need to keep the pressure on and keep our 
position being pressed. f : | 
Senator Prey. In response to your point and in line with the 
exchange with Congressman Pelly concerning whether two adverse 
points make a right, I am struck here by the fact that it was the Tru- 
man Proclamation of 1945 which firmed up the notion of coastal State 
jurisdiction over adjacent Continental Shelf resources, This proclama- 
tion contained no preuse limit for the Continental Shelf boundary ; 
then a couple of years later this action on the part of the United States 
caused those countries which simply have no Continental Shelf to 
come out with their own claims. Some including jurisdiction over the 
water column and extending seaward for 200 miles. 
I think there is a direct relationship between these actions. I would 
hope in this connection, Mr. Chairman, you might see fit to have your 
staff look at the statement of Mr. Wilkey, the general counsel of Ken- 
necott Copper. He wrote a technical paper on this issue which explains 
the problem more clearly than anything else I have read. 
Mr. Lennon. Do you have a copy of that that you could furnish our 
counsel ? 
Senator Prut. I will submit it for the record. 
(The statement of Mr. Wilkey follows. The technical paper was 
placed in the files of the subcommittee. ) 
STATEMENT OF MALCOLM RICHARD WILKEY 
Senator Pell’s Senate Resolution 33 postulates in the Preamble: “. . . progress 
towards international cooperation in the exploration and exploitation of ocean 
space and its resources and the development of the rule of law in this area of 
human endeavor is of comparable importance to that achieved in the field of 
outer space.” It is therefore timely that these hearings on ocean space take place 
after our astronauts have completed the first human landing on the moon and 
returned to earth only yesterday. 
I am particularly grateful to have been asked to present a private industry 
viewpoint on Senate Resolution 38, because, while so far mankind’s launch into 
outer space has been entirely accomplished by government propulsion, it has not 
been so for man’s venture into the ocean deep. Historically the oceans have been 
the broadest highways of commerce. Historically the oceans have been a principal 
source of food. Other private uses of the deep sea are rapidly assuming im- 
portance today, for example, recreation. Activity in oceean space has been and is 
largely private, individual activity, and will doubtless continue to be so. It is 
essential, then, that “basic principles” seeking to govern the activities of both 
nations and private persons and organizations in ocean space should recognize 
this fundamental fatt. Otherwise the “basic principles,” if in conflict with existing 
fact, will have difficulty of acceptance. 
Senator Pell is to be congratulated for his foresight in placing this Declaration 
of Principles before the Senate for analysis and discussion. Foresight and 
preplanning many years ahead to match technological development with legal, 
political, and economic progress are required if we are to make the most of our 
opportunities in ocean space. Y 
In the interest of both time and space, I shall spend far more time pointing out 
sections of Senate Resolution 33 which in my judgment should be changed, rather 
than endorsing in detail those sections on which I have no suggestions. I don’t 
want this to indicate an overall criticism of the Declaration of Principles, but 
this procedure is I think necessary and desired by this Subcommittee. This Res- 
olution gives thoughtful consideration to many noncontroversial aspects which 
easily could be overlooked in the drafting of an overall approach to ocean space, 
