1175 
TABLE XI.—SUPPLY OF FISHMEAL AND SOLUBLES, 1957-67 
U.S. production ! Imports 
Year Tons Percent Tons Percent Total, tons 
NG SY Peep ieee MI Ake DEL 2 325, 221 79.0 86, 414 21.0 411, 635 
NOs i LN ia ee ee Ce eee 313, 228 74.3 108, 167 25.7 421, 395 
GIES) ag JSS Se al A coe 2 389, 231 72.5 147, 392 27.5 536, 623 
HUGG (ane ake gente Le EI ie is 339, 601 71.8 133, 349 28.2 472, 950 
NOG ieee eee a Ee ee ene ee a ee 367, 392 62.3 221, 923 Sye7/ 589, 315 
119 6 2a eee soe ike S28 Meant ee 374, 583 59.4 256, 320 40.6 630, 903 
19639 Sees ae a eS ees 309, 608 44.9 380, 132 59. 1 689, 740 
ING (GY SE ay ae RR a 281, 900 38.9 443, 154 61.1 725, 054 
GY) = 22 See oe a ees eee 301,471 5282) 275, 804 47.8 577,275 
LOG Geert: ERT EE er ee eae ee 265, 541 37.0 452, 091 63.0 717, 632 
19 G7 ere hs sh PRN he Eee ee 248, 842 27.5 2655, 155 72.5 2903, 997 
1 Includes homogenized condensed fish for 1957-63. 
2 Record. 
Note: Wet weight of solubles and homogenized condensed fish have been converted to dry weight by reducing their pound- 
age ls. 
TABLE XII.—SHELF AND SLOPE AREA ADJACENT TO VARIOUS REGIONS AND FORECASTED YIELD POTENTIALS 
(ALL VALUES IN THOUSANDS) 
; Slope Demersal/ Shellfish Pelagic Demersal Pelagic 
Region area (N.M.) area (N.M.) fishes(T) (tons) (tons) CSA CSA 
New England___________ 77.6 22.5 S200 he sae 1, 000 11585 12.9 
Middle and South 
Atlan ticueenn eee 79.0 143.0 +1, 400 +1, 740 +1, 440 17.7 18. 2 
Gulf of Mexico_________- 112.0 45.0 2,500 1, 900 4, 160 22.3 37.1 
Eastern Bering Sea______ 145.0 14.0 1, 500 1 200 750 10. 3 5.2 
Gulf of Alaska 60. 0 15.0 450 1 250 750 75e) 12.5 
Transitional___ 27.9 12.2 400 @) 400 14,3 14.3 
Californias nee een 23.0 5.6 300 (@) 1,500 13.0 65. 2 
Hawaii see e eee 3.9 4.3 () @) DEA SOS Es Gila RUC Sees 
Ota eee ate 528. 4 261.6 8, 540 4,090 10, 000 16.2 18.9 
1 Crustaceans only. 
2 Unknown. 
THE OCEAN REGIME OF THE REAL WORLD 
(By Wilbert McLeod Chapman, Ralston Purina Co. ) 
This Panel deals with the National Interest in the Ocean. Except for a narrow 
rim around its edges the ocean is international and free for use by all nations, 
subject to international law. Accordingly the nature of this international millieu 
will affect materially, if not determine, the accomplishment of the National 
interest in the ocean. 
It will be my purpose to examine some of the more widely mooted points said 
to require change in the governance of the use of the ocean in the light of new 
developments in the application of science and technology to the ocean’s use, and 
in the light of the international political and juridical structure in which those 
applications are taking place, and will take place, in the near term. 
Public speculation on these questions has been rife in the past few years. It 
will not be my purpose to trace in any detail the origins of this speculation, nor 
the activities of its promotors (although that would be a fascinating subject for 
a thesis in Political Science). I will only indicate some of the highlights along the 
recent trail for purposes of orientation. 
In 1965 there was a White House Conference on the subject (1). In 1966 the 
17th Report of the Commission to Study the Organization of Peace treated the 
issue of the sea-bed in considerable detail (2). In 1967 Arvid Pardo, Ambassador 
of Malta to the United Nations, made far reaching proposals on this subject to 
the First Committee of the General Assembly (3) which led, in course, to the 
establishment by the General Assembly of an Ad Hoc Committee to Study the 
Peaceful Uses of the Seabed and the Ocean Floor beyond the Limits of National 
Jurisdiction (4). In 1968 U.S. Senator Claiborne Pell proposed before the United 
States Senate a “Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the 
