time when the United States is applying pressure on 
Japan to reduce its exports of key articles such as 
automobiles, electronics, and steel, thereby cutting 
that nation’s large trade surplus. 
Fishing quotas for Japan within the United States 
200-mile fishery Zone-have-ro-be-set in_ accordance 
with critetia_in_the Fishery Conservation and Man- 
agement . The underlying fact is that in the past 
Japan has relied on United States waters for one- 
seventh of its worldwide catch. Japanese have taken 
significant quantities of Alaska pollock and bottom 
fish as part of a total catch in the United States 
averaging 1.5 million tonnes. As shown in table 3-3, 
the 1978 quota for Japan in the Pacific is about 1.1 
million tonnes and only 8,000 tonnes in the Atlantic. 
This reduction has not been easy for Japan. At the 
same time, its allocation far exceeds that allowed any 
other nation. 
Relations with the Soviet Union may also be 
affected by what the United States does within its 
fishery zone. Russia has been the second leading 
nation in exploiting the rich fishing areas of the 
United States. While Japan has concentrated on the 
Pacific, Russia has major fishing activities in both 
the Atlantic and the Pacific. As of January 1978, 
Russia had obtained 182 vessel permits for fishing 
in the United States waters, second only to Japan’s 
426 permits. Russia’s total catch in United States 
waters has in the past been nearly 1 million tonnes, 
nearly one-tenth of its worldwide fishery harvest. The 
current, 1978, allocation for Russia will cut its take 
to half of its 1975 catch; but since the United States 
contribution to Russia’s overall fishery intake is 
under 10 percent, the reduction is felt to be manage- 
able. The major part of this reduction is in the 
Atlantic. It nonetheless has to be taken into account 
in the overall nature of relations between the two 
nations. 
There are sensitivities involved with the fisheries 
of many other nations. In the past, disputes have 
flared with Latin American nations over the U.S. 
tuna and shrimp fishing off their coasts. 
Relations with both Mexico and Canada involve 
major fishery issues. Mexico,.i - 
mile economic zone, over which it intends to exercise 
jurisdiction not only over fisheries, but over other 
possible resource development as well. It became 
necessary for the United States to initiate negotia- 
tions with Mexico for the continued access of United 
States fishing vessels to Mexican waters. 
In an agreement made in November 1976, the 
United States consented to limit access of domestic 
vessels to fish within 12 miles of Mexico. The United 
States also accepted quotas on certain species tradi- 
tionally caught between 12 and 200 miles which will 
represent the surplus not taken by Mexican fishing 
vessels. This is fund ach to 
Tacs 
foreign fishing that the United States established in 
its Fishery Conservation-and Management Act. ~ 
The shrimping restrictions are extremely tontro- 
versial am iistryand its supporters. In the 
past as many as 1,000 U.S. shrimping boats have 
plied Mexican waters. For 1977, during the transition 
to a zero catch after 1979, the United States agreed 
to cut the shrimp boats using Mexican waters by 
two-thirds to 318. 
The United States and Canada have a number 
of fishing issues to be resolved between them. Both 
nations now. have declared 200-mile fishin zones, 
Fe or aera Eee 
the nations on the East Coast. Canada advocates a 
boundar at would allow it ac ion 
of rich Georges Bank fishing ground; the United 
States advocates a boundary north of Georges Bank. 
On the-West Coast an agreement has to be reached 
on the extent to which salmon off one country can 
be caught by vessels of the other. There is also the 
question of the extent of Canada’s access to the 
halibut off the Alaska coast. U.S. access to North- 
west groundfish is also at stake. 
Negotiations broke down in Spring, 1978, leading 
to a temporary halt in fishing by the two countries 
in each other’s territory. 
Another illustration of the complicated interrela- 
tionships of fisheries in the international arena is in 
Antarctica. The discovery of valuable resources in 
the Antarctic Continental Shelf and waters raises 
numerous potential conflicts. The waters of the 
Southern Ocean contain a number of potentially im- 
portant food resources such as_krill, and squid. 
The krill resource is underused. The declaration of 
extended jurisdictions by all of the major fishing 
nations and growing world requirements for food 
have heightened interest in development of krill 
fishing. 
The Soviets and the Japanese are already market- 
ing krill-based products, and many nations are ex- 
perimenting with krill. Krill are small crustaceans 
that float in large masses near the surface of Ant- 
arctic waters. They are the basic food of many higher 
life forms in the area such as birds, fish, seals, and 
whales and are an important potential source of 
high-quality protein. George Bertrand of the Council 
on Environmental Quality has estimated that a 
70-million-tonne annual harvest of krill would equal, 
in protein value, the entire fish catch from the rest 
of the world’s oceans.?" Only Japan and U.S.S.R. now 
use krill for human consumption. As a result, less 
than 1 million tonnes are caught each year. West 
*1 American Association for the Advancement of Science. 
“Antarctic Problems: Tiny Krill to Usher in New Resource Era,” 
Science. April 29, 1977, p. 504. 
I-19 
