1118 
There is a trenchant difference between obtaining access to, and managing the 
use of, living resources of the land and fossil fuels on the one hand, and the 
living resources of the ocean on the other. Substantially all land resources, 
including those of the continental shelf, are the property of some person, entity, 
or group of people organized into a government. In contrast the living resources 
of the high seas (which cover more than 3% of the earth surface by any definition 
now used) are the common property of all sovereigns, and first become private 
property only when reduced to possession; 
This characteristic of marine living resources, plus their highly migratory 
nature, gives rise to economics of activity respecting them, national and private 
policies toward their management and use, international implications growing 
out of their management and use, and aspects of access to them quite different 
than those applying to land resources. 
Aside from maintaining continuing access to this major primary source of 
organic material for the nourishment of its industry and people, the international 
character of these high seas resources require that the general policy and 
strategy of the United States respecting the use of the ocean must take their 
use by it into account. 
Such a general policy will require to include the following as major goals at 
the present stage of history : 
1. To use the ocean to stabilize world order by providing for food and other 
natural resources, by keeping the oceans open to navigation by all, by preserving 
the seas as a source of recreation, and by using the ocean to mount ventures 
with truly international objectives, particularly in advancing the frontiers of 
planetary knowledge; 
2. To promote the economic and social interests of the United States by pro- 
viding the means and safeguards to profitable investments and a more effective 
use of the ocean ; 
3. To use the ocean in manners designed to maintain the validity and credibility 
of a nuclear deterrent so long as that is needed for promoting peace; and 
4. To provide the capability of effectively deterring any attempt by other 
nation states, jointly or severally, to enlarge their sphere of influence by sub- 
version, or wars of liberation, in manners substantially threatening world order. 
Within such general ocean policy goals a fishing industry can contribute to the 
support of the domestic economy and its food desires, to enlarging foreign trade, 
to balancing the foreign exchange flow, to providing programs of technical assist- 
ance, and, at least in times of stress, to conduct auxiliary functions useful to 
the military. 
A. U.S. fishery activity 
1. In terms of volume of production the catch of fish and shellfish by U.S. flag 
vessels was about 2 million short tons in 1967. This was a little less than produc- 
tion in 1934 and 1947, and there has been no persistent trend up or down in 
total catches during this thirty-five year period. 
In terms of round weight the proportion of supply of fishery products to the 
United States provided by U.S. flag vessels has dropped steadily. In 1948 it was 
80%, in 1957—_67%, and in 1967—28.6%. 
2. The export of domestic fishery products was valued at $82 million in 1967. 
This was a little more than double the annual level during the previous decade. 
This was about three-tenths of 1% of total exports by the United States in 1967. 
3. In terms of value the cost of imported fishery products was $687 million in 
1967. This was second only to 1966, and 1968 record will be higher than either. 
This value has increased steadily in the post-war period and sharply in recent 
years (1965—$601 million). They were valued at $198 million in 1950 and $299 
million in 1957. The value of fishery product imports has grown to a ponderable 
proportion of the United States negative balance of international payments, and 
provides about 3% of the value of all imports. 
4, The United States gave bilateral technical assistance in fishery development 
in terms of tens of millions of dollars in the period directly after World War Ii, 
but in the last decade this has tapered off to nearly nothing. U.S. flag fishing 
vessels have not been used in such work for a number of years, nor have fisher- 
men. Such bilateral technical assistance in marine fishery development as now 
exists in United States policy is pretty well restricted to modest scientific, admin- 
istrative and advisory services, and training and travel grants. The U.S. fishing 
industry is little involved with this remnant. 
The United States provides budgetary, moral and advisory support of a modest 
nature to multilateral fishery technical assistance projects of consequential im- . 
