811.0145/11–2844

Memorandum by the Office of Economic Affairs

There is attached a proposed statement of policy20 for the United States with respect to the extension of fisheries conservation to certain areas of the high seas.21 This statement consists of three parts: a brief preamble, which sets forth the considerations leading to the policy decision and which for some purposes might perhaps be considerably expanded; a proposal with respect to jurisdiction over fisheries, and a proposed statement of a policy of equality in the exercise of this jurisdiction.

Strictly speaking, the procedures by which such a policy, if adopted, might be put into effect, are not properly a part of the statement of policy. Nevertheless, so significant a departure from past practices under the law of nations cannot be wholly separated from the method by which it might be put into effect. There is therefore attached to [Page 1486] the statement of policy a brief statement with respect to possible procedures.21a

[Annex 1]

Subject: Possible Procedures for Gaining International Understanding with respect to this Jurisdiction

The adoption of the foregoing policy with respect to fisheries by the United States could, if proper precautions were not taken, lead to misunderstanding, suspicion, and opposition on the part of many other countries. There are a number of procedures by which this might be overcome and the active concurrence of the countries mainly affected could be enlisted. The main consideration is a negative one: that the United States should not announce this policy without some form of international consultation with at least the countries that would feel themselves interested in and affected thereby. One such procedure might be for the United States Government to circulate the proposed statement of policy to a number of governments which have in the past had fishing interests in areas covered by the statement. In the case of countries having major interests in these areas, such as Canada, Newfoundland, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, Mexico, Ecuador, et cetera, the United States would regard the concurrence of these other countries as essential before proceeding to any announcement or action. Other countries whose interests are more minor or which for special reasons may not be in a position to express a firm position, should be informed of the proposed action and their comments invited, although it would not necessarily follow that complete concurrence would be regarded as an indispensable precedent to taking any action.

[Annex 2]

Subject: Possible Procedures for Gaining International Understanding with respect to this Jurisdiction

The adoption of the foregoing policy with respect to natural resources of the sea bed and subsoil of the continental shelf by the United States could, if proper precautions were not taken, lead to misunderstanding, suspicion, and opposition on the part of many other countries. There are a number of procedures by which this might be overcome and the active concurrence of the countries mainly affected could be enlisted. The main consideration is a negative one: that the United States should not announce this policy without some form of [Page 1487] international consultation with at least the countries that would feel themselves interested in and affected thereby. One such procedure might be for the United States Government to inform other governments (not necessarily all governments, but at least all major governments and all having an appropriate interest in the subject) of its intentions

a.
to assume jurisdiction over the natural resources of the sea bed and subsoil of the continental shelf contiguous to its coasts, and
b.
to inaugurate negotiations with neighboring states

in accordance with the principles of the statement set forth above. The communication to the other governments should indicate that before taking these steps the United States desires to receive the comments of these governments, and that it will give attentive consideration to those comments.

  1. This date is established by a marginal note indicating that the documents were received from ECA on September 23.
  2. Not printed.
  3. A similar statement of policy on the natural resources of the sea bed and subsoil of the Continental Shelf was also submitted on the same day by the Office of Economic Affairs (not printed).
  4. Annex 1. A statement of possible procedures for gaining international understanding with respect to jurisdiction over the natural resources of the sea bed and subsoil of the Continental Shelf is printed as annex 2.