203 



organized. Discussion of this subject at the Conference will focus upon the means 

 for incorporating environmental considerations into the comprehensive planning 

 and management of natural resources, including in this context living as well as 

 non-living resources. We expect that the status of marine mammals and their 

 role in ihe marine ecosystem will be discussed by the Conference, and the United 

 States tlans to par'dcipate fully in these discussions. 



In addition to the discu.ssion of the conservation and management of resources, 

 the Conference may take action to protect endangered species. AVe are considering 

 the desirability of opening the wildlife conservation trealty for signature at the 

 Stockholm Conference by those states which did not sign following the negotia- 

 tions in Washington in April, 1972. 

 3. Efforts to strengthen the authority of the International Whaling Commission. 



The authority of the Whaling Commission derives, of course from the Inter- 

 national Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. 1946. The only changes which 

 have been made in the Convention are those provided by the Protocol of 1956, 

 which entered into force in 1959. The Protocol made two changes, one adding 

 helicopters and other aircraft to the definition of "whale catcher" and the other 

 adding "methods of inspection" to the areas in which the Commission might 

 regulate. The latter provision was intended, among other ithings, to enable the 

 Commission to establish a system of international observation of enforcement, as 

 had been proposed by Norway in 1955 with respect to factory ships in the 

 Antarctic. 



The Convention itself is not greatly dissimilar to other international agree- 

 ments for the conservation of living marine resources, although it does place 

 more emphasis on the interests and well-being of the industry and consumers 

 of products than is generally the case. This emphasis derives from the fact that 

 at the time of the negotiation of the treaty there was considerable concern over 

 the world shortage of fats and oils and other foods and over the condition of 

 the whaling industry. Perhaps the greatest difficulty with the operation of the 

 Convention has stemmed from the provisions i)ermitting .any of the Contracting 

 Parties to object to a recommendation of the Commission within a si^ecified 

 time. The use of this right to object, or the obvious intent to u^e it, has at times 

 prevented the adoption of desirable conservation measures and the substitution of 

 compromises not adequate for the purpose at hand. This follows from the fact 

 that most members consider some controls, even though inadequate, as better 

 than none at all, and the lodging of an objection to a recommendation, for ex- 

 ample, on the Antarctic quota would have created a .situation in which no quota 

 was in effect. It is easily understood that, in the highly competitive circumstances 

 of the whaling industry, if one Government were to exempt itself from the appli- 

 cation of a propo-sed regulation, other Governments concerned would immediately 

 foUow suit in order not to be placed at a disadvantage. 



However, the same type of provision is present in practically all other marine 

 conservation agreements, since governments have not been prepared to surrender 

 their sovereign rights to an international conservation commission and to accept 

 automatically whatever recommendations such a body might make. While such 

 provisions have not caused nearly so much difliculty in otner conservation 

 commissions, the impact of one regulation or another may be much more serious 

 in the case of the whaling industry where such large units of capital (as regards 

 the pelagic fleets) are involved and where there is such a high degree of com- 

 petition. So far as the operations of the Whaling Commission are concerned, 

 therefore, it becomes a matter of persuading all member governments whose na- 

 tionals might be affected by a i^articular regulation that the proposed course 

 of action is required in the light of the scientific evidence available and is in 

 the best long-term interests of all. 



The efforts of the United States toward strengthening the .authority of the 

 Commission have accordingly been directed toward building up a scientific 

 case which would, to the extent possible, provide inescapable conclusions as 

 to actions which the Commission should take. In this effort the United States 

 has taken or supported several initiatives designed to persuade the Commission 

 to face up to its conservation responsibilities. For example, after some years 

 of disagreement among the Commission's scientific advisers as to the status 

 of baleen whale stocks in the Antarctic, the Commission decided in 1960 to 

 establish a si>ecial committee of three (later four) scientists expert 

 in population dynamics and drawn from countries not engaged in Antarctic 

 pelagic whaling' to examine the status of the Antarctic stocks and to report 



