FA

Report of the thirteenth session of the

's Fisheries Repors 1 22

C1WiITTEE N FISHERme, 842 Octob r 1979

F]LJ IR22S(E)

F O FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

«q ?

Fisheries Re rts No. 228 FID R228 Ei

REPT OF ThE THIRThENTI SES$ION OF TEE

CQMMITJ FISHERIES

Rome, 8-12 Ootober 1979

OD .AND AGRICUL'rtJRE ORAIZATION OF TEE UNITED NATIONS

Rose 1979

The designations employed and the presentationof material in -this publication do not implythe expression of any opinion whatsoever on thepart of the Food and Agriculture Orga.nization ofthe United Nations concerning the lega], statueof any country, territory, city or area or ofits authori'ties, or concerning the delimitationof its frontiers or boundaries.

M-40

IS 92-5-100877-9

The copyright in this book is vested in the Food and Agriculture Organization othe United Nations, The book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, by anrmethod or process, without written permission from the copyright holder. Appli-cations for such permission, with a statement of the purpose and extent of thereproduction desired, should be addressed to the Director, Publications Division,Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Via delle Terme diCaracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy.

© FAO 1979

This is the fina]. version of the report as approved by the Thirteenth Session of the Committeeon Fisheries.

Distribution

Al]. FAO Member Nations andsociate Members

Participants in the se8tionOther interested Nations andIntornationa]. Organitions

FAO Department of FisheriesFishery Officers in FAO Regional

Offices

PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT

For bibliographic purposes this documentshould be cited as follows:

FAO, Committee on Fisheries Report of the1979 thirteenth Session of the

Committee on Fisheries. Rome,8.-12 October, 1979. FAO Fish

(228):44 PG

ORGANISATION DES NATIONS UNIES POURL'ALIMENTATION ET L'AGRICULTURE

-

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATIONOF THE UNITED NATIONS

VU ciii Terne di CaracBiI, ci1OO-AOME CobOs: FOODAOR ROME Tejex 011731 FOO)AGflÌ ro;ep'ono: 5797

f&. FI 5/4.13

flflT i q 1979

I hve in hoioux o tíiuiv to you herewith the po of thePhireenih Session of th Coiiiittee on Fiaherie whìch wa held inorne from 8 to 12 October 1979e

toa.rs faihfu.11y

ORGANIZACION DE LAS j'IAÇIONES UNIDASPARA LA AGRICULTURA Y LA ALIMENTAÇION

. ivoChainiian

Cornmitee on Fisheries

Dr, Buka ShaibLponLnt CliaireanCouncil of FAO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MATTERS RDUIRING ATTENTION BY THE COUNCIL ix x

OPENING OF THE SESSION

ADOPPION OF TEE ACND& AND ARRA.NGEMENTS FOR TEE SESSION

CON EHi{SI Vi PROC.ANME OF ASSISTANCE IN THE ELOPNENTAND MANAGE4ENT OF LS}LERIES IN ECONOMIC ZONES

AQUACUU11rJE BEVELO1ENT

TUNA MNAC2NT WOBL]S

THE WORK OF FAO IN FISHERIES JRINC 1980-81

LJ.S CONSIIIERED BY 1E COUNCIL OF FAO

ANY CIPHER M4!iTiiaS

DATE AND PLACE OF THE NEXT SESSION

AIXJPiYION OF THE REPORT

Appendix A Agenda

B List of delegates and observers

C List of documents

D StEvteiuerrt by Dr Edouarci Seouma, Dire or-OocraiFood and Agriculture 0r izatio of The United Natioxe

Statement by His Excellency Jthbassador Jens nenChairman of the Norwegian Deletion 10 the UnitedNations Conference ori the Law of the Se

66

1- 3

4-. 5

6 .- 35

36 44

45 - 51

52 - 62

63

64

12

13

29

30

34

MATTERS RUIRINO ATTEITION BY THE COUNCIL

A0 MATTERS FOR DECISION

None

o MATTERS FOR INFORMATION

rarnrne of assistance in the devi ornent of fisheries in economic zones

The Committee considered thai the proposals presented to it provided an excellentframewoi for the planning and execution of a comprehensive Programme to assist de-.voloping coastal States in managing and developing fisheries in their economiczonec arid expressed unanimous support for the Programme0

The Committee particularly welcomed the key role accorded to the FAO regional fisherybodies as instruments for the execution of the Programme, hut recognized that it might beneceasaxr to nke adjustments in their present structure so that they could better re-tient sueh factors as shared stocks or fisheries, common problems or opportunities andother natural affinities among the coastal States concerned0 The Committee also expressedthe opinion that small-scale fisheries should receive special attention in the i.mple-.mentation of the Programme0

The Committee endorsed the efforts being made by FAO to mobilize financial and othertonne of assistance for the Programme, not only from existing contributors such as UNDP,Nordic countries and others, but also from other potential sources such as the Interna-.tional Fund for Agricultural Dwelopment, the European Economic Comnwnity, OPEC SpecialFunda the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), the in-teniatiorial and regional banks and the new interim fund for science and technology aboutto be created0

(Paras0 6 - 35)

uacultura develont

The Committee expressed strong support for the Organization's present and proposedprogramme in aqwculture development, which would help meet the special needs of rura].oonmiunities0 t was suggested that continued efforts should be made to improve co..oordination among the different organizations and experts involved in aquaculture de-velopment prOgrammes s.,

(Paras0 36 - 44)

maiantThe Comrnitt.se noted with satisfaction that the Indo-.Paoific Fishvy Commission and

the Indian Ocean Fishery Comxnission sera giving urgent attention to proposals for short-and long-term tuna manag nent0 The view was expressed that FAO has a vital role to piayin assisting developing countries to weigh options for the development of their tunafisherios and. the Committee emphasized the importance of all regional tuna bodies ad-dressing the groviing problems and. opportunities resulting from extension of fisheriesjui.sdict.ton. by coastal States0 As to discussions of tuna management problems, the

opinicii z held that they should talco place within the relevant regional bodies andneed not be brought to a future session of the Committee0

(Paras., 45

The work of FAO in fjheries during 1980-81

The priorities nd thrust of the Programme of Work received general support endthe reorientation of the programme to meet the new ohallenges of fisheries management anddevelopment wa iveicomed.

(Paras0 52 62)

OFNING OF PEE SESSION

The Committee on Fis rise held its Thirteenth Session in Rome from 8 to 12 October1979v The sebsion was attended by 74 of the 96 members of the Committee, by observers from 3other FAQ }ember Nations, by the Permenewt Observer for the Holy See, by representatives ofthe tini-ted Ntions Development Prograane, the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission,the International Trade Centre U (YTiD/(JA1'] and the uropean Economic Coniminity, and byobservers from the Qonunonwealth Secretariat, the Inter-Ameriosn Development Bank, theInternational Baltic See Fishery Commission, the International Conunission for the Conservationof Atl.szrtio the International Commission for the Southeast Atlantic Fisheries, theInternational Union for the Cozuaorv-ation of Nature and Natural Resources, the 1,tin AnericanEoonomio Syetem, the Orgwiiation for Economic Cooperation gmd Development, the PermanentCoiswicn for -tus South Pacif io, the Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center and. the¿rub Union Qf Fish Producers, The list of delegates and. observers is given in Appendix B to

this report.

Dr, ?. iivo (Portugal), who had been re-elected by the Committee on Fisheries at itsTwelfth Session, was in the their0 The members of the Committee were welcomed by theDirector-General, Q'j, 1tjc,ird owna, The text of hie address is reproduced in Appendix L)to this report0 Delegations expressed their great appreciation of the address, which -they

r,prdecl as e olo,,r, timely and. ounoreis demonstration of the leadership he is providingM this crucial ise of interna.-tional ocean affairs.

3. The Guest Speaker was His Excellency Ambassador Jene Eveneen from Norway0 He dsliveredan address M the invitation of the Direc-tor..Gen.ral of FAD on the experience of Norway in

establish and implementing a 200-mile soonomic zone, The text of Jite ExcellencyAmbassador Jens Evensen is reproduced in Appendix E to this report,

ADO?I'ION OF TEE AGENDA AND AR GERWNTS )R THE SESSION

4, The Co t-tee adopted the agisnda shown in Appendix A. The documents which were beforethe Committee are listed in Appendix C to this report.

5. A Drafting Committee was ppointed consisting of representatives of Algeria, Belgium,

Brazil, Chile, Egypt, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand andthe United. Sietes of rioa. The Drafting Coimnittee elected as i1s Chairman

Mr, J.-P Wa1nidt (Belgium)0

QQ r SIVE Pl)Q OF ASSISTANCE IN TilE DßIVEWPMENT ANDMANAGEMENT OF FISHERIES IN ECOM)NIC 7ßNES

6 The Orgina-tiwi, in response to the request made by the Committee on Fisheries at its

Eleventh Session endorsed by the FAD Conference in November 1977, undertook -te establish

a pro 5lN of assistance 10 developing ceastal States in the development and wanement ofthe fisheries in exclusive economic zones (BEZ). A preliminary proposal for suche prograiwne of

aasit Q4 was submitted to the Twelfth Session of the Committee on Fisheries in Jurie 1978,

List the Comeittee felt that the documentation provided a uefl general framework forthe elaboration of this prograimne, ii consid*red that the programme oÍ' assistance needod tobe forimle-ted in iro precise and comprehensive manner, with more clearly defined object-'ives d priorities. The Conittee, therefore, requested the Secretariat to prepare edetailed document ou this matter for consideration at its Thirteenth Session.

7. In response to this request and. the subsequent recommendation of the FAO Council at iti

Seventy-Fourth $aiOfl in November-December 1978 that such a programme should receive thehiest priority, the Director-General submitted to the present session of 'the Committee ad.oent (coii'i/ 79/4). Phis document reviews 'the opportunities and challenges created bythe extension of jurisdiction over fisheries and the need for the improved ine4emeflt and.

dsvelo'-.4t of living marine resources, describes the role which FAO can play in assisting

developing coastal States to tackle these isueo and elaborates proposals for a comprehen-'sive plan o± action by the Organìea'tion as a basis for its special programme of assistance.

- 2

8, The Secretariat drew attention to the oornple and unprecedented impact of the now legaLiregime of the aea For coastal States it i provìd.tng the opportunity to improve weja inwhich resources can be managed and. utilizedQ It has brought into sharper focus the exiotnoeof the national benefits which can be derived from the better management and development ofresources falling within na-tional juriadic-tion. It wee noted that many coastal States dono-t presently have sufficient ineane nor adequate expertia to take advantage of the opportu-nities created by the establishment of exclusive economic zones0

9 The objectives of national policies may well vary from country to oountry depending onthe prevailing social and economic oond.itions and other special factors0 The new oceanregime should stimulate an op-timal and more rational use of the fish resources in exclusiveconomic zone, but this will require not only new developments in harvssting but alsoimproved prooesing and marketing tiachniqucs, in order to permit the acploitation of stillunder-utilized. resources and the reduction of yost-hex-vest losaos The need for en integratedand comprehensive approach, covering all asots of fishery man uiint and doveiopmnt, wasrecoize, Some delegations stressed. that national fishery dovoiopmant plane should fullytake into account the potential yields available in each economic some, as a basis fordeciding the allowable fishing effort0 The need. was also stressed of avoiding a furtherexcess in fishing capacities or risk that certain fishing flsts operate illegally in thesxcûusivs zones of other countries.

1O £ttticn wa also drawn to the new sud. difficult proble fcd kj iy ooatai Stateein developing management and r ulatory eohems and in setahLihing th . -r:trative and

legal frwnework for implementing and enforcing m iagemant Tho Czi uittee icvieedthe framework Í'or action pa'opoeed to aesist developing ooae. tats a wsll s thoso St&cethat are encountering special difficulties in their efforts to develop or maintain theirfisheries to acquire the expertiee experience and capital required to beuf it fully fromthe living r ources off their shores0 The two major elements of ths propoeud. programme

a plan of action to meet the immediate needa, on request, of voloping Sta:e enda oomplementary series of basic studies desíied to fo'nn.ûate priiciples d hods for thedevloprnent and meni of fisheries in economic zones- were supported0 IjF immediateaction plan wa accorded priority0 In reviewing the legal and institutional inplicatione ofthe new ocean regime, the Committee identified, five main topics on which cearch and technioaiaasiwtanca could be concentrated, as natione]. legislations eurveilianco and enforoennt,fisheries development corporations and other parastatal bodies joint ventures and bilateralagreements, and small-scale fisheries development0

11 The Committee thoroughly examined the document COFI/79/4 submilted by the Secretariatend. considered that it provided an excellent framework for the planning and execution of theprogramme of assistance by the Organization. There was unanimous support for the proposedprogramme of assistance. Many delegations expressed. appreciation of the high priority thatthe Director-Osneral was according to the new programme This programme would mean thecontinuation and strengthening of activities long undertaken by FAO but with reorientationso as to serve the demands of the now situation, Ii was requested that in implementing theprogramme there should be flexibility so as to increase its effectiveness and that theprogramme should. be endowed with the necessary resources to meet the requests of developingcoastal States.

12 The Committee requested that priority assistance be provi.d to Nicaragua for therehabilitation of its fishing industry. It was noted that a 1ICF (Teohnicl CooperationProgramme) mission was already being mounted -to assist the Nicaraguan fisheries.

1 3. In this connection, it was proposed hatcountries as well as FAO with the informationa broad programme, the Committee on Fisheriessubmitted by each !ember country on the statethe different sectors of the fishing industryand. evaluation of th resources, exploitationexpressed support for this proposal0

in order to provide developing and .valoed&d, the required incentives to initiate uh

should take am a basis detailed reports toof its fisheries, in which the priorities inwould be epaciÍ'ied this should cover recarohprocessing and marketing. Several delotion

14 Tho w t uoz 1a 1 Ìw c awi cjj oiu o i ci-i coi1i thcJir of1o1c c uct tic oiou cl io Opiii'i by t1

loLL gLz ç Co1.toQ u1Q ;fQoc1 Í»y cxcL ojowc c1 U1) ouuui . o utnhuiin of t obi1itot of tic * . rop of cxic 'oLk1 47 CiIVO1Qp f1'GioJ; t12c pLJ4ifL of iuicÇi 'o thu ±\U. uiu bythi v1on of ior .

tho offuxtw of vo1op. ov.00, io u cvçi o ooìU. io000to O&dvz to í 1v of io Uvj xiic

i 5 i2 OOLtttOÇ cOO1 IGt iithi. t ovc'21 íut uf o p»*yJhQ?u11 bq oco2d.o to ih i tifuz ¿i ? Jo ooIciikiin uiun3. juiootio :: thoce í,tocu ty o ia tioo I oi-i;c1 'tiw fur to &p;o J:t of 1uuta o o1 ut' hciotox L upøì tb.o tthg of toa1 cìc1 b'o Loo

::n hoo offort orc rbivo o1 uy u ¿Wioo Gu'too of ipt c 1b- ueoucRo'oh (AOWnE) wou1 b of to F!L 'sL orib UtOQi 6 Coitttce iuod thet iai of toi c othorciiblu fo th: iunnt c o1oit of figioio i cwiy ciuricw ftdrtt noo& wv r000io that ith wuN iro of w,tioLctipport a wcU );tuaJ. ibizoo, :i cio oiod ìviibio 10

ppoxt WhLoh houU b i ox by .bAD o ¶?(DC ( c1ïu.oU Coo pr 10 . ., Dvoui Gou1 tx i .& h nooity to fÑ hc thuiì xoquixi w'i1tzc ocnioi1 cie-ift owc of th tv1opi oowitrio in ih iip1onttioi of 'the prOgThnO0

i 7 Th v:ta1 &M'31 Of introducing oi vc].opLng appropri tooiìioiogieMU2y &1egattoui øo;d to pYtoxìtt1 v1uo o jQi VOL1Z rflÌi1QTïtbiatrI emnt to hio <mcL FAD oould JTuiy C.001 t thin iu1CL by zovidi1g vieici prpaing id1Ln upon tchniva. t 1oï of sv.o int

18e, Thu Oonimite pí;WtioulLu'iy W)1OQflLL 11O ky FO1 OÇQ& b3 hO Oiiitioi totxengthnin nd r-orintio ot thc FQ xegi1 fiithozy bodi. o tiiiio for ;u

exOçutiorA Of' ths prowumno ui1 he iaìpoar ttotìo QJ ib Rogiou&. Offioeí ThLdu1ivry of the powm hou1d. b onti'iioc1 by porictt îo uor of tw1mwi.gerent lu2it which ohouit rooivo tha ¡ory 1t'iic1 iiirt Tho itiu 'azïthwt tt uat be to uo j xttg izì thu jt&r cf ucuc fi1wy bod.ietuo thse irnitu thou]. r loot uuçth frtor w utouho or fith prob1om

al opportunib.o nd. o1wr 'Uo uun thu cow& ov Thc wiwould bu pzirr vuhiolc for oorutcii rn' bvolopi iio u1 ouic lit d

of fozcc zuto thu outhut i& Oo L1 thu t of , i 2O 3 tx1 Iça-in thu IrnLi Ooo t thc .cGÌ of :; tl tcro tho :owiizocl thu

wL io prov±d, t ;.iuol t.prt to ivo ig t; 1Jio Ofl(3in prep Gion of suto irojootw ìu oiio ¿U czàitio of thtuiw&xl9w Tu Co iuo cßìc&4 tvo

th pio ;vio2Q it .ff U1IQ iJ4+ to tW)iitu-pi rtIiod of oy puoo Iihi 1tOtiQ'Lt, ° °'° O IQ L of riui2g q.iy

Of fltûL OÇbXJtW 'Q 1O 1 UO O2JL tQDQ21 Co ts p1w -t i -voUioo of

fl1 'h) OC4\7J wQu cLÍtQ ]Qb1gU Q1' f UJ JMX ? ! tht) OO(' 'ij10 Wu tø iti ÑW1try il,io A 1M ) J: . hcou try u no1 o tv1y i- c í :°fljj1 of kpiciio uf X) Qb\

of pblioizing enforcement probleme wae supported br a number of delegions The Committeerequested. that the suggestion be studied. by the Secretariat ..L/

The Go ttee welcomed the sisien to be provided, wider the px'ogramno in legal and.institutional zpecte of economic zone man: ment, and. in particular the establishment ofregional law advisory progr:s and the preparation of guidß].ines for nation legislationand. regulations0 So delegations stressed. the importance of the foz'imilation of oomprehonsivefisheries policies before embarking on the d.rawing up of legislation and. welcomed the avail-bility, ori request, of a istance from FAD in this area.

The priorities for progr: u aotivitie8 su:-eted by the Secretariat and. the criteriaproposed for project request evaluation were ierally supported. At the saine time, -the

sovereign rights of cowitries should always be olearly recoi izad and the activities of theprogru should. be carried out In strict aocordiee with the wishes of the countriesconcerned., Some delegations suggested that it would. be desirable for the coastal countriesto grant other states, in the application of the programme, access to the surpluses ofauthorized. caichos in accordance with international law and the principle of optimal utilizar-tion of fishery resources.

24. The Committee ed that a system for ,muiitoring the progress, achievements and problemsof the progr of assistance through its various st:s of planning and implementation weeof :at importance, It considered. that auch a function should be carried out internallywithin FAD and pro as reported to the Committee at its future sessions.

25 The Co r ttee aleo considered. that the programme should be reeponsive to the diversityof .nd.ividual oountrieu needs and be capable of adaptation, I-b wae felt that great careshcnld. be taken in ensuring the oloseet oensultation with the Governmexrtl3 oonoerned regardingthe suitability of the sistance offered. to national r$Crairefl!Cnts and aspirationec

The proposal that an FAD Tocbnicl Conference on the 'u 'ti and. Development of

Fisheries should. be held in 1982 was supported, I-t was fol-b that such Conference would.

provi ti ly forum for the exch of' worldwide e ri in -the iì;iagemant and. develop-.

t of fisheries in economic zones0 hilat a few dslctions cuggested that a final decisionregarding such a Conforen .might best be delved. until 'the next meettag of the Committee,the con aus was that early start to the preparation l'or such a Conference was vital, and'that 'the effeo'tiveness of such preparations and of the Conference itself would. tlyfacilitated. if t'ti was preoed.od by a cerios of regional seminars or pro atory tin oitopics related to the generLti objectives of 'the Conference0

So rai delegations brought the attontion of the Co'tte to 'tho situation of geogr:phically or otherwise disadvantagod. States iho uer not n a position 'to benefit directly fromthe nøz legal z'egl. of tho soa and. roqucs'tod bhct PILO should oicl attention to their

problems,

Roproson'ta'btves of orgeniztions od 1odios in the United I tiens and. observers

from intergovernmental orgonicstio rrade statontonto ing their s.utivi.l4os in thefisheries sector, The ohm'oi:.r' from 'the J4in Acrican Juonoinic System (sELA) explained 'thejoint position . p'ted. by countries of its Action Couit'toe on Seafood cl Fresh Water

Products at its third ord.inery session held, in Lima in relation to the matters dealt with at'the present session of the Conmi-ttoe oia Fisheries, In 'the first plac3 these coinitrios

oonsidiered that FAß ould. support the iinationa3. proj c'te undiartsk by developingcountries, particularly 'those included in the .gT;ru4 of activities of th Action Committee.

j The delegation of Uniguar mc an express reeerva'tion to the tect of paragraph 21 which ttioi red. nbiouu It wished. to iìi thai the wurv'oillanc of exclusive economic

cl 'the application of rigulatory me&sures introduced. by 'the coastal State was

strictly a tier within the ooupotenoe of that State.

Seoond.ly, they requested FAO end. UNDP to a.11ooate and. channel increased. rosouroes andteolmical and financial isianos to this end., in a manner responding to the needs end.interests as defined by the oonntriee thernae].Ves, Thirdly, they considered it necessary to

give priority 'to the requests of developing countries in oases of emergency, The observerfrom the Permanent Commission for the South Pacific provided, information on the tchniol,oientifio arid. logaJ. activities carried, out by his organization arid on the contacts initiated

with FAD to implement an aaeistanoe programme for the development of fisheries in the eoutheastern Pacifia. The observer from the Southeast Asian Fisheries Devolopmen't Centre (SEAFDEC)informed. the Committee of his organization's eoiivities in fishery development and. managementarid aasired. FAO of his ovganization' s willingaess ead. desire to continue to collaborate withFAD in matters of nutual interest to member countries, The observer from the CommonwealthSecretariat drew pertiouler attention to the s ooial problema of the small island andarohipelagic States, which comprised -the majority of the Commonwealth Secretariat' s membership,She expressed the hope that au.ch States migh't be eneour d end if necessary assisted. 'to have

an opportunity to plar an activo vole in the Committee in the Í\ture and thai their rieedwould. be fully reco,nized in any future development of FAD's regional fishery bodies, FAO

was requested to report progress in this connection at the next session oÍ' the Committee on

Fisheries, The observer from 'the International Union for the Conservation of Nature arid NaturalResouroOs expressed his Or.ization's great interest in efforts to be made under the FAOprogrwitu of assisisrice to build. a atablo base for fisheries developnent and. to avoid the

dangers of' over-fishing0 The representative of' the International Trade Centre (uNcTAD/GA'J)advised the Committee o± hie Organization's continued willingness to collaborate olose].y withFAD, especially in matters relating 'to 'the promotion of trade in fish end. in developing

market information 5ys'teme

29 The Committee wan infer d. o± the progress made in marshalling 'the xtrabudgotaryfinancial and other asuitanoe required to enable the Organization -to plan end. execute 'theESZ progrnmm and. to provide the necessary tobriical support to the proposed. network o±nt-ural fishery management areas. It was no'ted 'that in addition to FAO' s contribution fromits Regular Frogr extrabudgetiwy funds were being sought amounting to approximatelyUS$ 35.-40 million for the first three years of' the progr. w of assistance, The especiallyfruitful discustons with the Uuited. Nations Development Programme, which has agreed toprovide substantial special assistance to Z programme activities1 was particularlyacknowledged.

30, The Committee was informed. by the Secretariat of 'the discussions 'that the FisheriesDupa.rbiucnt have had. with UND? and other organizations and. donors, discussions which have sofar reached a firm agreewen't on the provision of' nearly U.S4 13 million to finance the Zprogrsam during the 1980-81 bienniwa. Further support to the extent of some U.S. 8.9million was under active discussion with several donors.

31 ., Special note was made of the rapid and early response to 'the needs of the programmewhich had be*n extended by the Government o± Norway, through a pled of U.S.$ 3,6 million

faz' an umbrella projecrt, This is enabling FAD to act quickly and. effectively 'to the urgent

requests o± developing countries for Z assistanoe Some U.S$ i .5 million of this -total

had already been committed in providing preliminary assistance in 1979 under the EBZ programme.Many delegates expressed their warm appreciation and 'thanks to the Government of' Norway forits prompt initia'tivsQ

32. The Secretariat informed, the Committee thai preliminary estimates foi' 1982-84 indicatedthe need for a further U.$$ 14 million to finance 'the proposed long-term, basic, globalactivities envisaged under the programme plus some U.S. 39-40 million to finance the technical

support activities of 'the existing ci' proposed. fishery namagement units through which themedium-term action progrwms would. be delivered. The Organisation would continue to inves-tigiito the possibilities el financial and. technical assitazi" not only with existing contri-tutors of the UNDP, Nordic countries arid others, but also with other potential ecu-roes suchan the International Fund for Agricultural De'elo t, the 1uropeam ]oonomic Comnvnity, theOPEC Special Fund, the Consultative C}zwp on International griculturai Research (cClAR)'the international end. regional banks end the new interim fund for science and 'technologyabout to be created,

33V. tenl,ion i3.o to lio fifl 'i t 1ii iiw nioi. noii axi1b ficio1c1 th Ji ii onfl@ for io cM oihr 1v1p

ocj c pii o TCC woU. 1opcL tn.t v1opingIn siio oion re bot1 vcpd ncl teveloping ntionBihct tJ11(:orJu 'to cin1 ¿rd oih)x iiiao (o:oci rol ocr c! oto y io1, oqui&t joix 'r'rctur

o vopt c'Lut2oo oLtg

'i'o oprv o ho Utot NJon Bvo2.o*oii Porc informo. iih ConijuittUD? 1wt owr ttc 1977-431 qyoo 70 rii:Llio for th

f hLo H 'tho COL 'ttoe of i2c) pnoo of national c1.)-sg-.Q(' OÍ' hO 'UDP ovoiix Couzlo1l b Jw 1980e nd

'o' ,hori, dovolopi froa t10 UDP

35 u o Ij Ip I3zk no'tod th't 3ii; 'iio ppod.o hcoìo to oio ovcxr tho ish o fcn griou1-

tho ¡o1st thu't 'tao prblo w not o xiucth

osLì in ojocrs puo o' uaion u th ici c3. cisi impaot of theof &.pc ela IW 'to tatto i'to l].bor'tion withjj b::i cu.x xt1 isu O iLic' to L L' volop1ng oou'triw injì too of pojo't it iflo i45 Oi'thOZ th wji diroct thri th

io24ii' o uìoio t o tioz of tloo on thi iipox1itTho Coittoo o:co tLo oro b2- 'w' 1?) to .obi1tc from ll u ib10

o' ooic ttco roqii -o oxeto tho

Thj:i: I3o

'thcÑ 'tho 'J' tO tho pz'%.o 't10 Ocluc?3ive onoc'J-o 'ou wotl nQÇ thO qu

jo 1J lo!co cnci iso hoi' cia). 'ioci to d voploou joQ6. )5O or

qi\)L.2'tu fo cciL c of vic2it wu c2!1 ootiv'ì omployzisOu'tifl3. Iii UCi) i.CIO LOiiO isiM2't uC 1on-'toi v1ur' whoL i,fi'tc tYi!1 5K b) i1iZ) ?O' E? iiiE

3? iì& QoiwLio c'oL tio r.ut 1QoacJ Q? i1 4 vili' co xiutic, foriJt.::. fi. 1 cli 'tho Q'i VO121I' tL '1.O pio

u :ii ptLu' vç to 1Poiio üyco oucli ao tho1o: iih fto. Zitth pciio o ti'th veiou orop

:[i ti .ii o o' uLlu\) wO wfl iui'e to ni&-1¼lt Q(1tiOC) Ooou. tIoi ui that nycrtoríi b'. pnOtod.u co olcc lty yi.blc cd rride thoonu

7)3, ç4 uLi6 aO 1cr O(&Q 7OiOi1y-d ji vol.p t o. oic buic, oci &oo bonÍ'ut thr,or OiÑo' nr p:2r q1Lu.htu'o pojo1a

cto pxojQQ1&oc tIwt tbQ Vici;t3 Qf iii 7crt ifl t1i' I'1ctiVO'T)c) cjo o J':L,k. tO fOO!. '.o o

bn/q çctuo )L ') Of c &.1cbQ QJO u O ii

wiiit giving fir8t prioi'ity to ruraJ development needs, most de1egatiox feu th& FADniut aJ8o oontinue to give assitwce to the development of oornmeroia. and lar. -oa1e aq-culture, not only those cultures which prodoe high-valued. products wd contribute to foreignexchange ea'nings, but also those that, because of the efficiencies of larger-scale systems,can cohieve highest productivity levels, and hence 'the best chance of meeting growing globald.emands for fish production, It was also stressed 'that the establishment of cooperatives inthis sector should be enoour -d.. The importance of salt end bre.ckisb water aquaculture wasalso emphasised by nìszty de].e ins,

The various workshops, training programmes, and consultations organized by FAO,especially those organized -through ho various regional bodies and in oor'xiecton with theFAD/UNDP Aquaculture evelo ut nd Coordination Programms were frequently mentioned saeffective and appreciated mechanisms for the exchange of experience and expertise in aqua-culture e,rr«ng member Oountri5s! It was noted, however, that there was not always sufficientcoord.tha'tiou among the different organizations and experts involved in these programmes andwithin regions, expertise of sufficient depth oÍ' experience was often unavailable in somedisciplines, Thus, while the differences among regions in the kinde of culture systems mostappropriate to regional neo.. d,ictate that every effort be made to develop intra.-regionaJ.exchange, inter-regional exchsn of expertise should not be neglected.. In this connectionthe advantages of utilizing national institutions for regional activities were corn ended,

40, On the utter of aquaculture statistics, e.0 delegations were - sed that better data9including economic an well as production statistica, were a priority area of work, I-t w.snoted, however, that good. statistics were expensive to obtain and -thai help from FAO wouldbe welcome in d.esigniug appropriate and economical statistical collection systern FAO wasalso asked to provide guidance on the kiide of statistics to be collected,

41 The Committee noted with favour the appreciable increases in field programme activitiesin aquaculture, but regretted the reduction in available funde for inter-regional activities,It was noted, however, thai the reduction was less than that for inter-regional activities inthe EZ programme. The need for enhanced asaistanoa by FAD in achieving the otentia.l foraquaculture development in the member countries was emphasized, Mamy delegations specificallyrequested assistance in the preparation of national development plans and the formulation ofinvestment projects., Others listed, a number of specific aspects in which assistance isrequiral, The Committee noted. that pilot-scale projects are being established to teat thetechnical and eoor*omic viability of aquaculture under different conditions and -to provide thebasis for investments, It was suggested that FAO should work cioseiy with financing agenciesin this

The importance of training, particularly that oriented to practical work, was stronglyunderlined., It was recommended that assistance should, be provided for training of personnelat all levels, including study tours and refresher courses. Several dele:tions noted. thatthe kind. of trai.ning available ui the past was oft i' of limitad value cud. it d,id. not applyto the looal problems of the trainee, These delegations ve firther support to FAD's strategyfor regional training e utres, ¿nid requested that sub-regional and. national centres beestablished as soon as funde and facilities became available.

The global network of .. iaculture 's tras now being established. would, it was recognized.,act as a significant mechanism for inoreing the exchange of e. 'nias the developingcountries, with both the regional. sud. inter-regional dimensions needed. to facilitate TODOactivities, However, the used for fin;.oial assistance for mere effective TODO arrange- te

emphasized..

44 Some delegations eu s'ted that PAL) examine the desirability of reviving the activitiesof the ACNRR Working Party on Aquaculture sa perhaps the simplest and, least expensive wayof activating -the Advisory Cominitte on Aquaculture recommended by the Kyoto Conference onAquaculture.

PUNA PROBUS

45 The Committee dioußsed this item on the bai of document ooFt/?9/6 Bupplemented byoral presentatiors by the Secretariat on tne status of world tuna stooks, problems of

collection of tatistio 8fld on the need fo improvement in institxticrna1 arrangements for

tunc miaement Th Secretariat noted that FAO hd a special responsibility in twia activ-

itie Within the framevo of its regional flehety bodie9 the Iwlo-Paoific Fihexy Corn-misio (xpic) anci. the Indian Ocean Fisheiy Corninision (loFe) in the Ocean and partof bhe Wetn ?aoific. In other partB of the world other oriaizations tuoh a the Ditez'.-

American Topical Tw Corjnisìon (I-ATTC), the International Commission for the Conser-vation of Atlantic Tas (bOAT), the South Pacific Forum Fisheries ency (SWFA), theSouth Pacific Commission (sec), arid the Permanent Commission for the South Pacific (cpps)were playing leading roles.

46, The Cosuittee supported the role of IPFO and bOFO in pressing for international co-operation with respect to the tuna fisheries in the Indian Ocean anc). part of the 4eeternPacific and noted. with satisfaction that the Joint Meeting of the IOFC/IPFC Thzia Manage.-ment Committees, scheduled. to be held In Perth, Australia, in Febrtaxy 1980, would begiring tuent attention to the development of proposals for both short and long termmanagement. Those proposals would be considered later by the two Commissions at the 1980sessions, The Secretariat drew the attention of the Committee to the fact that present

membership on the Puna Management Committees was rather limited and should be reviewed..It was the Committee's hope, however, that in the light of the importance of the meetingparticipants from as many developing coastal countries as possible would attend the Perth

meeting.

A number of delegates from developing countries described recent developments in theirlocal tuna fisheries, sosie of which had been assisted by FAO. The view was expressed thatFAO had a vital role to play in assisting developing countries to weigh options for thedevelopment of their tuna uitheries and, where appropriate, to provide advice on fleetdevelopment, processing arid marketing and on formation of joint ventures- It was pointedout by sorne delegations that an expanded participation of developing countries in tunafisheries is appropriate and being a complex matter should be considered only after takingdue account both of the interests and requirements of the coastal countries as well as thoseof other states participating i tuna fisheries. The proposed establishment of naturalmanagement areas, with support staff in sub-regions, such as the southwestern Indian Oceancould facilitate suoh technical assistanoe, even though some management problems wouldhave to be dealt with on an ooeaii-wide basis through the relevant international organic-ations.

Regarding FAO's role in oolleotion and dissemination of tuna statistics,, mostdelegates who spoke believed that existing regional organizations should be the foou forthe coordination of the collection and dissemination of detailed statistics for the tunafisheries iii their areas of interest, Aside from its involvement in IOFO and IFFO,however, FAO could play ari important coordinating role by encouraging cooperation betweenregional organizations. Such cooperation should be aimed at avoiding unnecessaryduplication of ooverags and at ensuring that statistical collections for all sigti.fioanttuna fisheries are covered. by one organization or another.

The Committee emphasized the importance of all regional tuna bodies addressing thegroing problems and opportunities resulting from extensions of fisheries jurisdiction bycoastal Stwes. Several delegtions stated that there was a need for coastal Statesto consult and compare experienoes to form adequate collaboration and for all Statesinvolved in the tuna fisheries to adopt measures needed for conservation and. optimumutilization and to excmine the problems of allocation of resources. Suoh activities wouldbenefit from attention at the regional or even sub-regional level because the particularproblems to be faced were likely to vary from area to area. One delegation stressed thatthe determination of guaranteed allocation in favour of coastal States should be based onthe total concentration of the resources in their exclusive economie zones and on the fullexercise of their sovereign rights upon these resources.

8

Several delegatea expressed the view that disoussionw of tuna management problemsshould take place within the relevant regional fishery bodies iand need not be brought to afuture session of the Committee. One delegation pointed out that it was inappropriate todiscuss the validity of fishing fee ratee under a standard applicable to all regions sincefishing conditions vary considerably from region to region. Several delegations consider-ed that access to markets by coastal States should be facilitated as an important means ofassisting the development of their fishing industries. One delegate pointed out that thelast world-wide conference on the biology of tuna had been held in 1962 and that the timemay be ripe to hold a similar conference in the near future. This point of view wassupported by other delegations.

The Committee noted with interest the commenta by the observer from the Intox'-national Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas on the Commission's pro-gramme particularly with respect to an experimental skipjack fishery developmentproject.

THE WORK OF FAO IN FISHERIES DURINO 1980-81

In introducing document COFI/79/T, which provided a brief account of the FisheriesDepartment's proposed Programme of Work for the coming biennium, the Secretariat drewthe attention of the Committee to the fact that the major aspects of the ?rograimne hadalready been discussed at length under Item 3 - Comprehensive Programme for the Developmentand Management of Fisheries in Economic ZcfleB, as well as under Item 4 - AquacultureProgramme, and. hence did not require any extensive elaboration.

It was pointed out that the major part of the budgetary resources in the 1980/81bienniwn had continued to be allocated to Programme 2.2.2 Fisheries Exploitation andUtilization. While the activities under this Programme are primarily geared to the overallpriority given to the EEZ programme, considerable attention continues to be given to suchmatters as small vessel improvement, establishment of fishing community centrea extensionsreduction of waste, sto.

The other major allocation is for Programme 2.2.3e Fishery Policy which has beenstrengthened through the transfer of resources and by a programme increase. ThisProgrue inoludes the planning and coordination of the EEZ progrme, assistance inpolicy and plan formulation, servicing of FAO Regional Fishery Bodies and developingliaison With international organizations and economic groupings concerned With fisheries.

Another important aspect of' the Fisheries Department's work is the Field ProgrImeQThe Regular and Field Frogroe are closely integrated in fact the majority of theRegular ?ro activities reinforce and support the Field ProgrwneG While the natureof the activities in the Field Progriiie is affected considerably by the emerging regimeof the seas, with the spscil dem 's countries are making on FAO for assistance9 thetraditional activities of FAO tu the technical assistance field will also continue withemphasis on the small-scale fisheries - marine and fresh water.

IPJtO'e effort therefore has to be seen as a composite one - a unified programmecovering studies, regional mechanisms, inter-country cooperation and practical projectsat national t... regional levels, at Headquarters end in the field - as well as fundingfrom all sources, Regular Programme, UND? and Trust Funds.

The Committee was informed orally that the fisheries programme includes approximately150 projects with a total funding of approximately USS 100 million covering all regionsand mamy subject matter areas such as national poliqy formulation, legislation, institution

building, joint ventures, training, resource surveys aquaculture and feasibility studies0

Actual project delivery in 1978 was US 21.4 millions, representing an increase of 21 pez'-

cent over 1977, sud was expected to increase by another 30 percent in 1979e In 1978,

the total budget of field projects has been approximate].y allocated as follows z

- io -

Africa 25%, Latin inerioa 13, Asia 21%«Near East - Lirope 23%, Thter-regionej. 15%.The Committee was also infozned that in implementing field projects, emphasis is placd. oripromotion of TODO by utilizing local expertise and by making the fullest ue of' nationaland regioral inetitutions

The priorities and thrtat of the Pxgraume of Work received general support andappreciation was expressed of the reorientation of the pxvgramme to meet the new challengesoÍ' fisheries management and development Several delegations requested that future pre-sentations should contain more in±'oiwation on specific sub-prcgraaimee and shifts of re-sources or structura]. changes, as compared with the previo biennium, as well as informationon trends and the likely nature of the future Field Pograiwae.

one delegationß expressed concern that there would be a reduction in the resourcesboth in funds and personnel available to the technical divisions and stressed that thesedivisions represented the core of FAO'e work in technical assistance.

sveral delegations complimented the Fisheries Dep.rtment for the extremely valuableinformation contained in Information Papers 4, tRoview of 'the state of world fisheryresources", Irif.5 "Fishery commodity situation and outlook 197879tt, and Inf.7,"Aetivities of re4onaJ. fishery bodies and other international organizations conoernedsith fisheries". Some delegations encouraged FAO to con'cìnue and intensify collaborationwith other bodies concerned with environmental aspects or ecological or biologicalinvestigations such ea the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (loo), the Scienti-fic Committee on Oceanic Research (SQOR)7 the Scientific Committee ori Anta'otio Research(sc..i) and the )n'ternational Association of Biological Oceanography (lABO) It wasrealized that ACÎdJRR could play an increasing role in this respect.

6i. One delegation volunteered assistance from his country to the technical assistanceprogrammes cl' FAO through the provision cf consultants in specific fields up to twomonths free of charge.

The representative of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (100) notedthe various examples of collaboration between FAO and IOC and the new obligationsarising from the creation of Zs on both bodies. He infoiied the Committee that100 was ready to promote the international cooperative mai'ine research and monitoringin oollaboraton cind coorth.nation w.th the Fisheries Department of FAO9 i. t}iiis called for by the eiaber States. He also referred to the tivities of 100 iii thefield of oceanography and marine pollution control which are of particular interest toFAO and stressed the role of' the i'teIo3ecre'tariat Committee on Scientific Prgrammes re-lating to Oceanography (TOSPRo) as a mechanism for strengthening coordination among -theaenoiee concerned with ocean affaireb

!.ÁTTE1 CONSIDERiD BY THE COUNCIL OF FAO

The Committee rioted the action taken by the Council of FAO at its Seventy-FourthSession (Rome, 27 November - 7 IDecember 1978) on 'three matters which the Committee hadreíerred to the Council for deoision These matters concerned the proposal to createa fishery commission for the Near 1ast, 'the possible extenSion southward of the southernboundary of 'the Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic anl the status of theEuropean Eeoncaiio Community within FAO regional fishery bodies.

AW! OTHER MA?I'1L'R3

64 No other matter s raised0

DATE ¡D PIACE OF ThE NEXT SESSION

It was agreed. that the Conmiit tee should meet in Rome duri. the early part of 1981,the exact date to be determined by the Director_ e l in consultation with the Chairman.

AlO PI'ION OF THE REPORT

This report adopted on 12 October 1979.

11 -

- 12

AGENDA

t, Opening of the session

2 Adoption of the agencia afld. arrangements for the session

3, Comprehensive progrrme of aaistanoe in the development and. management offiherie in economic onee

4 Aqcultnre development

5, Tuna management problems

6 The work of FAO in fisheries durirg 1980-81

7 Matters considered by the Counoil of FAO

8 Any other matera

9, Ite and place of the fow'teenth session

1O Adoption of the report

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

A]ge ria

MOCKTARI, H.Mnietre-CoxiaeillerReprésentant permanent eupp1éntaupr de la FAO

lunbaasade de la République algériennedémocratique et populaire

Via di Villa Ricotti 2000161 Rome

BJAAR, E.Directeur du Projet FAOSecrétariat d'Etat ft la peche2, rue BezierAlger

Ano la

JABDIM, Me F.Directeur Centre des Recherches MaritiMinietre dee pohesLuanda

PEREIRA, Ji.Directeur du Cabinet du PienMinietre dee pchoeLuanda

MORAlS LOPES, Ma P.M.Ministerio Relaoea EstertoresLuanda.

ALMEIDA, PF.Premi.r SecrétaireAmbassade d'AngolaVia Filippo Bsmardini 2100165 Rome

Azgent inn

¡OELLIER SARMIERTO, Excmo. Sr. Dr. CarlosMinistre PlenipotenciarioEsbajada de la Rep(iblica. ArgentinaPiazza dell'B.uilino 2, 40 piso00185 Roa.

BORASCA, Srs. ILE.bajada de la Repiblica Ati

Fiszza dell'Bequilino 2, 40 piso00185 Rosa

13 -

LISP OF DELEGAP AND OBSERVERS

Australia

GURTIN, P,B.Assistant SecretaiyManagement and Development BranchFisheries DivisionDepartment of Primary Induati'-Canberra, A,C,P. 2604

SAINSBURT, J.C.Counsellor (AgricultureAunt ralian &ibaeayVia Alessandria 21500198 Roem

RAILLAN, His Exoeii4 cy ShanmurAmbassador of Bangladesh to Italy

and Permanent Representative ofBangladesh to FAC)

Via A. Boric ioni 1400197 Rome

HA.BIJL RUE, Q,MinisterEnbaesy of the People's Republic of ;..ladenhVia A. Bertoloni 1400197 Ro

Belgium

BAE!ERS, Son Excellence Monsieur HugoMbaseadur de Belgique supre de la FAOReprésentation pe . ente dc la Belgique

aupré de la FAOVia dei Monti Panoli 12Palass . B, mt. 700197 Rome

Bolvis

W.. 1IMONT, J.-?.O. Représentation rente de la Belgique

auprr de la FADVia dei Mnti Panoli 1200197 Rome

D1' FREITAZ, AOFOM.Min tcrPo « . et Repreeentwtivo of Brazil]baeey of' the Fede tive RepublicPiazza Navou 1400186 Reine

ROSA, H. .Jnr.ieoeor para uutoe Intereacionaio

Sup intond cia do Deeenvolvi into da PciAvmid 3 )iorte

x'a 5069 Bloco C70 000 Braeilia, D.F.

Di' BARROS CRVAILH0 E MELLO M' Q, G.Altexnate c*5nent R'::attivoof Biil to FAObrinv of th' Fod.orativí Republic of Braail

PLzaa Navova 1400186 Rono

IL'i, G,I.'S Rilnio Sto,, rtvo

3 I ilna Street

eroon

Con

CAIPB11J.I, A.

Dire onora1Intexatioual DirectorateDuipartir3nt of Fioherioe and OosanaOttya, 0ntriO

Warm. Technical Advìt2orTroth ond Devolo.'.tDiroctoratoFichexico cud Oceane

O, R.WOD.Alteraate Prmanont Ropreeentat iv. ofC'aÑ. to FAQ

CL&ian JbaeijVia d.e' Roawi 2700161 Rome

to FADof Brazil

- 14

Brazil Cap. V

B1CJRT SMTOS, H.Directeur gnral des pcheaiC.?. 30Praia

zal Africen Rpublic

Chile

BACICI&LUPO, Excmo. Sr. D. Eliobajador, Representante Permanente deChile to la FAO

Representaci6n Permanente de la Rep(iblicade Chile ante la FAO

Via d,i Santa Prioa 15, B/800153 Roma

CASTILLO, J.Subsecretaría de PescaTeatinos 120

MORA BRU tri. J,

Pxi r SecretarioRepreritainte Pmwiente Alterno de

Chile ante la FAORepreoen'taci6n Permanente de la República

de Chile ante la FAOVia di Santa Prieca 15, B/800153 Roma

Colombia

ROYOS, Excmo. Sr. Dxi. Gonzalojador de Colombia ante la FAO

bajada de la República de ColombiaVia G. Pin"villi 400196 Rc

CcNCHA, Sx'. li.

bejads. da la República de ColombiaVia G. Pleitnelli 400196 Ro

DI PRI!A, Srta. P.

b.jada de Colombia,Via Ci. Picainelli 4

00196 Roma

to la FAO

GODIN, J.IflDl.ER, Dx. A.W.R. &i ada de la República de ColombiaSpnota]. Advieer to the Mini ter of ishurisai Via G. Pisane].li 4P,O,Bo 481 00196St Nc' r Bwewick

Ocote. Rice.

cuAril'LA LVAPADO, F03.,Reprna,'te one c3 Goate.

ELY la FAO3e la Roblica tie Gosta Rica

Vi FF, ns 35/100197 !aCALVO Aq LSeirdo Si'retarioribaje. d phiice. tie Cote. Rica

Via P.?, Rt'hno 35/100197 R.a

Otth3

Tj R.DirrorCenMt' d' Iv acont»jfl3tViQ &, la Indri% Pe'IUOraire.. 4tY1, Mw'ar, P).yaLa 1iatee.

ARIS PRFIL, C.P.Percr $,arioReprt-L Pernauor1te de la ReiibiicaC" rnte la FO

Via Lici.ie. 13a00153 oa

SANOZ 1AH014, Lic. JMîuit4erio R'1,an4c'se erioxLa !'a

L

Czechoalovakia

5CWARZ J.Couzisellor and Foraneit Repretativi!, to FAO

banay of the Czec)oElova Socialiat RepublicVia dei Colli cella P reiiia 14400194 Rnu

X.IS?UPCowieUor wczd Pe'naz'xit Repieentat ive to FAOThe Roaj Doiieh PbaieyVia dai Ir*j Panoli 600197 ln!q

15

Ecuador

LOOR LR00PE, Srta. T.Sub rearía do Reouso PeaquereMin±serio d R cireos e.turaleo y rgticoV.1!. Redon 1006 y 5.nta ElenaEdtficto Hvw!loa, 3er piso

Rica

ESpI0A, Dr. F,Prer Bvet ario

jaa &tl Fkmaor en ItaliaVie. 4' ti9 Arezzo 1400193 R'a

EAOEAN, Dr. E,. 'r &t la Siheecz'etarfa do ReouroosFe emo roo

Minl.e1erio ì, Recursos Ne.turaleCalle VCr,1or uel Rtndoncat-pirii1

ZAALOUX7 S.E.First U S'netaxy of State for Aqiatic

WeaUth tffiraWni1rr tf

Cairo

KALLINI, A,Controller Cra]ì.Deie.rtrneut of Aquatic WealthNtristry of A«riculture4 Teya'i Sroet, Naor CityCat ro

-SREIUF, Dr. R.Jaer.2 3:et.xyIxurtitute of Oceanography eid iheriesAcatiery of Sci,itific Reeearch and Pec}nolog101 X'er E'ai. S+,e

E]. Salvador

DAVID GARCIA, J.M,Reproitante AltaliLo de El Salvador

3e.Eriibe.jada de le. República da El SalvadorPjazal, tielle 33,11e Arti i0O16 Roa

Finland

NISKAN1N P.

Winietxy of Agriculture and ForestzyHalliatukatu 3A00170 Helsinki

Franco

LABROUSSE, B.Sous-directeur dois pohesMinistere des transporte21 rue de DanzigParis

CARRAZCO-SAULNIERT N.Repreentant permanent adjoint de laFrance aupre de 1VOAA

Rsprsontation permanente de la Francoaupres do l'OA.A

Piazza Farmese 10500186 nome

abon

CSAY, S.TJnder3eretayMinietxy of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesCentral Bank BuildingBuckle StreetBanju].

KING, Ms H.Acting DirectorFisheries DepartmentMiniatiy of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesCentral Bank BuildingBuckle StreetBan jul

JOBE, B.0.Chargé dtiffaireaFnbaasy of the Republic of The GambiaRue Joseph n 5-71040 BrusselsBelgium

0ennanyFederal Republic of)

ThLING, R.MinieteriairatFederal Niniatxy of Food9 Agriculture and

Foreet ry5300 Bonn

16 -

SARHÀ(, Prof, D.Di rector

Institute for Sea FisheriesRedorai Research Centre for FisheriesPa.lmaille 92000 Hamburg

Ghana

DS, H.Minister Counsellor (Agriculture) and

Permanent Representative of Ghana to FAOubassy of the Republic of Ghana

Via Ostriana 400199 Rome

Greece

PAPAGORGICYU, Son Excellence M, !4tchel-Akiaivoy extraordinaire et Ministreplénipotentiaire aupres de la FAO

Repreantation permanente de la Republiquehellénique auprès de la FAO

Viale Liegi 3300198 Ro

Guinea

CAM.BA, J.S.Ministre conseillerReprsantant rmanerit adjointAznbaasade de la République populairervolutionnaire de (ine

Via Luigi Luciazzi 41

00197 Ro

Honduras

BANEGAB, A.Representante Permanente de Honduras

ante la FAOEnba jada de la Repiblica de HondurasVia Antonio Baiamonti 4/1900195 Roma

DOBRAX, Dr. L.Deputy Head. of DepartmentMinitxy of Agriculture and FoodKo5suth Lajos t6r 11Budapest

FPIJJHLI H.Alternate Permanent Representative of theRepublic 01' Iraq to FAO

Via della Fonte di Fauno 500153 Borne

SCOTT, S.iatant to Alternat Poxinanont

Repraeentative of the Republic of Iraqto FAO

Via delle Jnte ti Fauno 500153 Ro

- 17-

Ic1xmHANE, J.

AdministratorDepartment of Fisheries and ForestxrDublin 2

WALSH, R.Deputy Permanent Representative

Ireland to FAO1inbausy of IrelandVia dol Pozzetto 10500187 Rome

sr. 4 E.

Permanent Repreeentatìve of Israel to FAOEnbaasy of IsraelVie. M. Mercati 12

00197 Rome

DE LEON, Dr L.

Directeur Irai des pohss maritimesMiniiitrc de la marino marchandeViale Ar4a00144 Rome

GIORDANO, Dr. L.Directeur gnfral adjoint dea pohesmariti mes

!Uxiistra de la marine niachandaViale Asia00144 Rome

1LAGI0 APRILE, Dr. G..

Directeur de sectionDirection gnrals des pachos mritimeL3Mini ati rs do la rarine marchan de

Viale i

O01 IWI

Jaioa

ROTER, E.Director of FieherisaFishorios Divisioni1irry of AgricultureP,0,Box 470KiugErton

THURMISZKY, Dr. Z.Senior OfficerMinietry of Agrioulture and FoodKowuth Lajoa t&r 11Budape st

Ice land

India

RAADHARCowieollor (Agriculture)&ibaeey of the Republic of IndiaVia XX S.tt 'ubre 500187 Romo

Ind.one mia

SOESANTO, VoDirect orFioherise Living RemourceeDirectoIG:eral of liez-les

Department of cultureJalan Salemba Ra 16

Jakarta

ILART0JWIRYO, A.Permanent Repreaentat ive of Indonesiato FAO

Thibar of the Republic of IndonesiaVia Piemonte 12700187 Roms

SUNYOTO D.Directorate G of FisherjeaJalemba Raya 16Jakarta

via .Peimanent Rsprsen-ative of Japan to FAOnba&ey of Jjan

Via Quirino Sella 6000187 Rouie

MOR KiTO M.Alt ernaie Perafl6nt eprta-íveJapan o FAO

Eaoaezy cl íapnVia Quiniir4o Sei.la 6000187 Rore

SAXUi, KTechnical OfficerInteznationai Affairs DivisionOceanic Fisheriee Depar'criontFiehey gGrlcyMinistry of ricuiture, Iioreatcy and

Fi she t'io e2-i KaswgaekiChyoöku, iokyo

Mi3U1ATBhï, Iis Exoellemcy (hKOPermanent Rep resent at ive of Kenya to FAOPermanent Represent at ion of the Republicof Kenya to FAO

Via dei Circo suo 900153 Rorue

OBERO, i'hDirector of isheriesMinistir of Pourf em and WildlifeP,OBox 58187ai robi

(eu1jo of)KIM KflÌN RYUNIniea'national Fisheries 0omcillorOffice of FisheriesDad-Woo 1ui1ding 19thYang-Dong, Chun-KuSeoul

KIM JEE DAEishexr Attach

Alternate Permanent Reprsenttive of theRepublic of Korea to FAO

Embassy of the Repblic of KoreaVia Barnaba Orient 3000197 Rom

18 -

Liberia

WCS ïdIs D.A.Senior Agrieultumi EconomistMinistry of griouitureioniacA1.rv&LL, Ms I.Secreaa7

of Minisiy 0f A'ricfùtureP.O.Box 9010Non ¡o a

aarRAVLOJAONA E,(ionseiLÌer conomtque

baeeae de la Rpuoligue dmocratiq-usde iaag&soar

Via R. donai 84/A00194 Romo

aiawi

iYiBO, A.J.Chief Fisheries Officeri)eparïnent of FisheriesP.0.box 593LiLonvte

Malbia

UU..LLÁif, T.Direeox-Gnerl of FisheriesFishexíes DivisionMinjs2y of ri cultureKua].a Luaur

ABÜBÂ Ba.N iA}MiJD

Altex'nate Pexìnnewt Representative ofMalaysa o FAO

Einbasey of MalaysiaVia Noment ana 29700162 Rome

7cyJr:f £. 71 OVQ1opti

n

MOSKOIflTS, Dr I.,Coellor d Peimanent Repi'en iirc of

ìja 'o FJ0:hy oi'the Ropub:i.c oPLz iarzio 12OOibu i-on

co

1TRIA Zi0, oiiO. X. 140. A1iOajad.0c de ix to J.a FAO

Repieseraoi6i P iaente do los aáoIJuidos ìexiosos sits la FD

Viale Ps-eur 65 iM .800144 Rorna

L0PZ ChUZ, A0Díreeior ie'ai e A itc' P qeroo

IM iDp4Mo e reca

Ooóui 269, 3e piooMéxico, D.F0

SOLMiO, v.M.Subdircoi' (jeneral do ra-taaooecr'eia ue RelaoioAeo Ectorioreo

FïorEe 'L,Oi 1, p.8o 14te:Lo1co 1X,LcO I),F

oiozoo 1zA, I.gaci ¿con iraicieroRepieoeación Peiuorito de loo ados

Unidos ieioncs eMe la FADViale Pa1eur 65, int,800144 Rorna

Morocco

JLTJJI, i1le Faiicraiir daisade

Rep peixioM jointauptK. do la F0

àLi'?LW) du. Royau .u.

Sciacj 32

19

E:colicy TJ C ....

oî i;ho'

Vj doue ieriie Dooiue 600153 Roie

FRLThG, A,C0e.ss Geentry çi ijculture ani Fisheries

Fbiis 204012500 ¿i he gue

R1jÂiJS, L,iîe int Repoeentat ive

Peiaio- Rep oeMat ion oÍ the Kingdomof the Ne erldo to FAO

Via doii rne )ooie 600153 We

Vi C7j'T 77V o ç,

Thpr Dîrecio -uora1 of Fisheriesr of krt(F

C1J3GiAM, B..rscìo of Fisheries Mi& erneut

of Mriculture and FisheriesP.O,Bcx 2298Weiliii4on

AkkBI, J,O.Peianext RepeseMative of the Feder.i

Repabuic of Nria to FAOEubasy of the FedeL Republic of' Nigori.Via Oizio 141600193 Rouie

uient of Ii'ìo12529

ØSTvTJ):L', O.JRosoarch DirectorIstituto of Narine ResearchNordrpaz'ken 2Bergon

ULNES,, D.M,Altoxnwbe Pozinanent Representativo of theRoyal No wegian knbasy

Via delle Toxine »eciane 1000153 Rome

HWGE2 M0Counselloriinistxy of FisheriesDrammenavejen 20 oOslo 2

Pikietan

1ASUD P,.1tornato Pe'ent Representative of

istan to FAOInbassy of the Islanio Republic of PakistanLungotevere dei le Armi 2200195 Rome

OVICH DE AR0SEMNA, Sra. Dra, M.Lnhjadorcp:cutn-o Permanont de Pan

: i.o;.i&i Permanente de la EepblicaPr ante la FAO

29/10(0i9 toìa

p:\)t%Qi6n Po ente do la RepúblicsPnìi ante la FAO

Via Iono 29/1000196 Roma

ChAFE, Capitzi de Navío T.Ministerio de .ueríaAvenida Javier Prado Este 2465Lima 30

20

VALDIVIA AVALOS, Excmo,Sr. L.H.nbajador dei Pera ante la FAO

Reprosentaci6n Porma.nente de la Repúblicad.ei Pez,i sn-be la FAO

Via Cristoforo Colombo 181/400147 Roma

RAMIREZ LITUNA, Dr A.Legal AdvisorMinistzr of FisheriesSalamanca 176 Pueblo Lib

SALAZAR, Ing. A.

Ministerio de PesrueríaJr. Manuel Segi.tra 361 - LinceLima

VILLALOBOS, Ing. C,

11'!inisterio de Pesqu.rfaLima

Philipoines

UONZALES, Felix R,Director of FisheriesBureau of FisheriesArcadia Building860 Qzon AvenueQue zon City

d Aquatic Rosource

WISNIEWSKI, E.Deputy MinisterMinistiy of Foreign Trade and I4arit

EconomyUi. Wiejalca 1000-.950 Warsaw

PJ.NE, D.B.Aasis-an1 Service ChiefLegal ServiceMinisbxy of Natural ResourcesVisas Aveiue DilimanQuezon City

SA0N, Sra. E,D,

Eecutive DirectorFishexy Lidvsiy Devloiuent CouncilPhilippine Heart Center for Asia BuilriiQußon City

Poi d.

ANDERS, F,Dire etorMinistxy of Fore Prado and. Shipping111. Wiej'. 1000-950Wa wi

MUSZALSICI, C.Cowiseilor aid Deputy Penanent Representative

of Polaud to FtOEmbaegy of the Polish Peoplee RepublicVia P,P. Rubxs 2000197 Rome

SzczRB0wSKr J,DirectorIn].nd lieries Int'ute0lsztyn Korto 5Warsaw

RUIV0 Dx'. M.Ad.vieor on Science end Tethnolor to theNiriister of' Science arid. Culture

o/o Portuguese National FAO CommitteeMini$txy of Foreiçi AffairePalacio das NecesidadeLisbon

PAULINO REIRA, LSecretariat of State for FisheriesAvenida 24 de Juiho, 80Lisbon 1200

R.Pereanent Repreesritative of' Poxitigal to FAObasy of the Portuguese Republic

Via Giacinta Fez.azia 9

00197 Home

GONÇLLVS Ms N.H.Ji.uiñSecretariat of State for FisheriesPraia Duque da Parce ira, 24-3ELisbon 1200

Qatar

21

Saudi irabia

BUKHMtI, His 1ce1lency Atif Y.ambassador of' the Kingdom of Saudi Arabiato FAOPanenerit Representation of the Kingdomof Saudi Arabia to FAO

Via della Piranide Cesti.a 63

00153 Rome

BAcDADI2 I.Direo;orAximal Research DivisionMinietly of Agriculturo and WaterRiyadh

MADBA-SY, Son Ice1lence M. SambaAmbaasadeur du S&iga] aupr*s de la FAOReprésentation permanente de la Rptb1iqie

du S&igal auprs de la FAOVia Nessiva 3000198 Rome

DIOUF, 2.Directeur de p&he maritinNinietre du dveloppoment rurali rue JoncDakar

Sierra

FAI1, T.E.C.Eknbaeay of the Republic of Sierra LeoneVia Aernara 3-500199 Rome

SHOHUlAWYIRR, F.JChief Fisheries OfficerFisheries DivisionPrivate Mail BagFrsetoici

Somalia

1CRZA, J0Sb crtrfb de Peizo

±z c A].aro&n 1

Mirid 14

rsuu,Direcc&ón Onera1 de FesoRiiz de J&laroon iMadrid 14

MM*UT1, N01,3horat,orio dBalreIxtixo Ep'iol d'4 OcnugfaMte1e d.e Pe.a1r. s/nPa1a de M 1orc

xmirn4. IE LARRà, J.Pxnerite de apanr

ViE di. Noe Thrienzo 5600186 Ro'

J?ATNE9 A.Secrea!y

»'y of horieP0OBox 1707GlCoÇç'o 3

FfRUiTD09 AOMJOViro; So etay (Coirotal) and Alternate

Pernent Re?..tative to FADÑiby of bhe oorat.ic SnctaliLt Roiuhlic

of riVia Onboni 6-800197 Ror

ILANNERZ1, L.Direct ox'-Gezie mlSdtnh Board, of therieiP0O3cr 25655-.403 17 Çothiu

LIL.JE13RG, e E.Hea4 of Section

d.ieh Inteiational Devclo5-105 25 Stockholm

't Authority

22 -

aite la FAQ

DE 1P.E, S.Head of DivtioNtr cf AgrieFackS1O3 a Sto kholm

ECES!L, LAcri ctltral CosellorThe Roy1 Sdiith Eba

,aa Ro de Janirc 300161 Ro

MB!, T,W.Chof Fiaheriet OfficerNtxy of Natural Resou.rce ¿ß Tourism

0dox 2462

Thail d

CllE9!!P0L, Coander SDio eera! of Fisheries

heries Departmentof Áure d Cooperatives

ajadanex. Avenuei3kok 2..0'LL\I9 P..(i riltu)Epictative of Thaiism to i'AO

Royal ThM ßbVia Zara 900198 Roue

LAOW..PEAN. Th LFirs-b Seortaxr and Àternats Perea

Rrtativ, of Thailsnd to FAORoyal tVa 900198 Roe

SURA5W1I P.,Senior Fieriee BtoloistFxeIiwater Fteheriee DivisionDepatmeit of rieNati»uL In1nd Fishoriei I!letituteBanken, ioart Uivority Gern 0

HON(Wtfl, V.

ii* Fitheriee 1,boratoiyrùprtme't of Fi ries89/1 SapaPla, tBarukok 12

sia

GROUZE, L.uDimoevr do la productionLa vula flation

Dire4iou do pkthee309 X$ £1in Sava,iy

íLLi3, E.Directoie-C t'ra1. of Water Product ejxjetzr of Food., ciUiure sud.Aniia1 band.i'

Muli MdJaf Cs.d.. 20/11, Yanisehiràzkars

BAYW, S.Alternate ?er en Representative of

'irkey o lA0Eknbasrr of the Republic of TurkeyVia ltro 2800185 Roro

SI:8Wk.JNNTA, M.da Research Station

P00.Box 7005Kw4pa.a

United Ara1niz'atee

, A.J.Po t Representativo of the United

to FADBritish b eyVia XX Setl ambre 80/A00187 Rom'

BACCAR, C.Ió$ jip principalDireotin dies f chesMinist'e de l'a.ricultureBoulevard.. 13b Bnat

- 23

NICHOLS, Honourable BOILD-Ire or of Agriculture and FisheriesAdvier - United. ICindom

et dc Office 393, Canton RoadKowloon, Hcz cn

Unit Snt of erbaWALLACE, D.H.Director0ff ie of lut eiationaJ. Fisheries AffairsNations-i Marine Fisheries Sevics3300 Wh eha'cen Street, LW.Wash,iuc, D.C. 20235

3r.rtffJR, J.A.DirectorOffice of International Fisheries a-i roBurean of Oeoa s and Ini ernational

ronesutal and Scientific LffairDep :ent of StateWthwton, D.C.

IDYLL, C.P.Office of International hones AffairsNational Narine Fisheries ServiceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric

AdministrationDepartment of Cosneroo330) Whitehursi AvenueWashisgion, D.C. 20352

R0EDEI, P.M.Senior Fisheries Adviseragency for International DsvelopmWaehintcn, D.C. 20523

SNEAD, L.L.Dput DirectorOffice of International Fisheries AffaireBureau of Oceano end International

jrnn,e1 and Soiritific AtTainsDarnent of stateW.ehiston, D.C. 20352

YOUNG, W,B.Alternate Peraan-.t Representativo of the

United. States of i'rica to FAOba of the United. States of rica

Via Vittorio Veneto 119/A00187 Roeo

31 JE, Th. P..Aquauliure Coordinato rNational Marino Fisheries ServiceNational Ocoanic and Atmospheric AdministrationDOpant.. t of Co rooWaahingion, D.C. 20235

S7Q , J.Fi ries Mvieer0v-aree alop t A iniirt rxtion

d. Houe.Placo

¡ondora SW1E 5 t:

ola

PRiZ TJWDirector Ge raiInstituto Nacional da Pesca (INAJ)Cor.stityenta i49799Moni vi. deo

AMATO UB4 Dr R CLRepentante Per anente Alterno del

ante la FAOde la Repbiioa Oriental

del UruguayVia Vittorio Vieto 183e 5 pico

00187 Rora

prkuz?Representante Alterno del Urugiey

ante la FAOìbajada de la República Oriental

UugueyVia Vittorio Veneto i83

50

00187 Roma

Venezuela

MOR0 FLORES Dr FDrctorInvestigaciones PacquerasDirecci&i C-ancrai de Desarrollo Peaauoro

ele Agricultura y CriaP0O0Box 2578Caracas

FULVEIS MAUREL? J0-FAscorJefc Divisi6n del !arDirscciôn ele FronterasMini otario de Relaciones xtarìoresCaaa Miar! liaEsquina PrincipalCaracas

SPNOREZ Bantaciòxi Permanente de la Repblica

do Veneoueia ante la FAOVia A (icansci 14/6

00197 Roma

U ruguay

24

CifJC BCounsellor for Economic Affairsabasey of the Socialist Federal Rapiblicof Yuoslavia

Va dei Nonti Panoli 2000197 Rome

KASEIA BIN XENBOLOD1gI gêntralOffice national de p8cheB?0 8087Kinrthasa

MAPEL1., Nga MaReprsent ant permaient supDiant du Zafre

aupÑs de la FAOAmbassade de la République du ZareVia Mecenate 24.3O00184 Rome

Zambia

MUYANA EDDeparioent of FisheriesPOBox 100Chi.la

PuRI, B0EAlternate Psuansnt Representat ive

of Zambia to FAOof the Republic of Zambia

Via EQ Visconti B00193 Rome

OBRVERS FRON IiEtBER NATIONS NOT MEMBERS OFTHE C0I1ITTEE

China Peo le

TIAN CHENO-SHANDeputy Division lcaderBureau of Forei AffairsSt at e O'sie rai Admini et rat i on o f Aquatic

Pro duct a

ZIW DSHANDirectorFisheiy Resources LaboratoyYelìo Sa Aquatic Producta Research InirtituteStas O eral Auinlstration of Aquatic

ProductsPelthig

JTh TALI, Thlut erpreterState Gener1 A3sinieatioia of qjuatic

ProductPeking

lee

1OEF.LINDepartment of Agri. cultureP.OBox 54Victoria, Mahe

WALLACE SAMS00DIN M

Sp4cialite an pches mtime?.O,Box 471Nahe

Viet Nazn

VP SINB LEPremier SeortaireAmbaead.e dc la Rpbliq socialite

du. Viet NemPiazza Barberirii 1200187 Rome

PMT OBSERVER TV FAO

BUQiRDI L

e/o u io :Lco 2o.x ? ¿tu.

Palzo h:i :--00120 C

u I.I;;I ::. îiiSFCILIZARO FWS

25

?rlFi nhe xioDivicion for (ilobal en( In iomi

Qiw Uuid vionu PIuNe York, NX lOOl? USL

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY

B3CHMIDT, ;-i EAdiminictratcur urincipal

200, rye 2:. Loi1040 Br:, B].giquo

cxri r-1ooti'(O ::') 'c i ï4r

1040 icr Bolgiqu

JîA)t.' :-co'oa r

1040 Belli, BclG'ic:w'

oosooì n( Dev

ILlborov3b EcuocT?ll ii

SWVt' 5W lond

cove nantal 0cczuo ic CooionGRIFFITHS R ,C

ietcni; SecretaxyI0 (Unesco)7 Placo o Fornoy75700 Paris Ftnco

:ntional T*rad n-rr TCJ

0JS,Scnior arket D3valoplulent OfficerMarket Development ServiceTechnical Divi zionITC/UCTD/GTTP0,Box 30i 211 Guova 21 zerind

IA.MISI sChi.of Prcjct OfficerToohxical i2c6 xoupCoonweaih 3ecra ariat

1b IIQU5Pali MaliLortdcrn Sill! 51X 1and

Fishrie 0O1U1tWAtod Production and Rural DevelopmentDiviio

Coieûonwealth ScxaxiatMarlborough HousePail MaliLoriton Sill! 51D, ig1and

lut or iouìevelntLU1A, J.Chief, herieProject Aria]yeie1DBWasnington, D.C.

KOWALEilSKI, Dz'. B.J,Secre-baxyIBSFCtu. ucati 200-483 War2aw, Poland

rnationai Conttiaeiou for thof Atlantic Pmias

ROD IQUEZ-MARTIN, Dr. O.Secretario Eje ci.tiv-oCICA.Canera]. Mola9 17Nath'id.1 Eapana

Intonioial Goi ieion for the SouthoasAtlantic i'iee

TERR, J.Aasi-tant oecu-tive Seo-taxyICSEAFPeo de la Habana, 65Madrid 16, Spain

SectionThpar mat

20577, TJ.3.A.

Conserv-abion ARBIAci M0SQ.TER, Dr. LSubsecretario Cient{fjcoSecret aria Gene raicPPsSiuchi Reca 2699, LtnceLima !4 Por

26

Lttiena.. Union £o' the Coner,rabiçm ofNature en's Nat'ral Rocourcee

ÑCE, P.Senior utivOffi of 'the Director-GeneralIUCN1110 o'gee SwiteriaM

i ca Ecuomio &em

CARDEUAS RQNCO, Dr. J,J.SeorearioJmnt de Aoc.&'i de rodm-os Ks]. Mar

y ¿a Th.iiceSELAvenida Aviaci6n 2555-ASan LuteLima, ThÍ

o.i fr oie Cooixa't ion and_'A)AM, P.Heai, Piaci-isa PiviaionI)iroctorate for Food, Agriculture and

FitheriesOECD2, rus Andr-Pasal75775 Paris Cedex 16, ranoe

Southee,et Aian Fisheries Develo ment Ceirter

MNAS7ETA, D,Secretaxy- Gene raiSEAFDEC

0,Po' 4, Phrapra4ueiu'Sitprcai-u, Thailand

Permanent Comiesion for the South Pacific

International Bal1ic Sea Fiehe Co il Bi

0BERVERS FROM INPERNATIONAL 0ROEMIZATI0NS

Arab Union of Fis1 Pxducsrs

BASIM, Dr. A1.i3niScreary.' eralArab tnon of ?ish ProducersP.O,Box 15064, Al Yanmk

dad, Iraq

BURAIR B]R MI-HSSI MAssistazit Secrary(kera1Arab Union of Fish ProducersP.,O,Box 15064, A1-'Yarrnk

hdad, Iraq

O?JrICERZ OF ThE COTL1 AT TH THIRTEENTH SESSION

Chairman M. Ruivo (Portugal)

Pirat ViceChairman N. Odero (Kenya)

ViceChairinon Representatives ftm: Au8traliaCubaKorea (Republic of)Poland

DRAFPING CONNIT2

AlgeriaBelgiumBrazilChile

ptJapanKenyaMexicoNigeriaPeruSpainSri LankaThailand

tinited Staten of An rica

SECR7.L'ARLAT

Secretary J.E., Carroz

Meetinga Officer Myrha Poblete-de la Fuente

Appendix C

LIST OF DOCUNPS

COFI/79/1 ?viional anda2 Ao-tated provisional agenda

3 Provieional timetable

4 Comprehancive programme for the development andmiagement of fiuheries in economic zonee

5 Aquaculture development

6 Puna management problems

7 The wo xc of FAO in fi eherice durimg 1980-81

8 Mattere considered by the Council of FAO

coFI/79/Inf1 List of documerÏt2

2 Information for participante

3, Rev,1 List of delegates and observers

Review of thes tate of world íishey reeou'ces

5 Fiuhez7 commodity situation and outlook 1978-79

6 United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea(itmth SesEliOn)

7 Activities of ' onal fis ry bod.tes and othermt exiiational oganizat ions concerned 4th fi sheri e s

7, Sup.1 Col].aboratiou with IMCO and. ILO on Safery of Fiehiig Vessele

S Address by His Excellency Jens Everisen, Chairman of theNorwegian Delegation to the UN Conførence on the Law of the Sen

- 30 -

STATEMENT BY lE, EIUARD SAOUNDIRECTOR-GENERAL

FOOD AND ACUCULT(JRE ORGANIZATION OF THE UIEL NAPÏOS

!Ie1O''ms to some, to 'the Headq"ir'ters of FAO, enr to ;he Thirteerrh Seeiion of theCommittee on Fisheries.

I am not pet-.aiarly superstitious about xwmbera so I Í'enl no trepidation about meetingthe Conwiitee f rmally for the first time at the thi teenth session. sven if I were super- -

titiu T O11U wixii to adress this gathering beouee I believe it ma1y be the most impor-.tent se'ston to bave convened since FM) became involved in world fiaberies development workthirty years ago.

Urgnt atcere ait your att,er.tion so I will noi- tk much of your time in theseut :g do went to touch on some of the main items on the Aenda,

The 4'irst substantive inatt.er is the new rogrw for development and management offisheries in economic zones. Later I will return to this item in more detail. Ai thispoint let me just sey that I have aesij ed it an extremely hi* priority among the aotivi-.ties o' the Organization. The EEZ Programme ranks with Worll ?ood Security, Prevention ofFood Losses, the fight against animal trypanosomiasis, and Seed Improvement as one of ourspaoiel action pro 'ammes.

Item Number Foui' deals with the development of Aquaculture. This is a sector which,although it is not nf±'ected by extended fisheries jurisdiction, is growing quickly and hassome urnt man ment naect, We are particularly interested in getting your views on therslat4,vs priority that should be assigeet3. to small cc'mmunity fish ferme and larger commer-cial operations0 There is an opportunity in this field 'to benefit from the sharing of tech-nology, skills and eçperienoe among member nations.

The world' s ttna stocks are also on the Agenda. Th' complications of managing anddevel'ping these iiih1y migratory species present a. perticuierly difficult problem forfishing natiois, We hope that at this session we can .i least lay the groundwork for Aitureaction, par-ticu.a.rly as regards the involvement of our regional fisheries bodies in tunamanagemen in the Indo-.Paoific area end the increased participation of developing coastalStates in tuna. fisheries.

Ai we tackle these and other items let us not he dc-ivsd by the superficial resemblanceof this Agenda to those of sessione past. The world fl.sheries are not what they wer3 icyears or tven five years ago. The challenges and the oporiuriities have both come of Í..

and. both are gits. As of the middle of' this year 90 nations claimed fishing zones widerthan 12 miles - moat of them out to 200 miles, Ninety nine percent of the world's totalco rejal fish catch is taken within 200 miles of the shove.

now bave zz opportunity to begin building fishing industries in developing countrieson solid foundations. Frihermore, these countries , as never before, select targets fortheir fisheries 'that fit best with their own interests and perceived development needs.

31 -.

The task is urgent becaues fish c food ene. bscue this is 1979 time when worldpolation pressures make the penalties of foo9. waste e food shortfall more tragic theneVer

As fi.ahories s,perts you biow the figurei You know ihnt twenty percent of the animalprotein that humans consume cornos in the form oif fih0 You know too that these f igare aredeceptive; that they conoeal a much greator dsp 'snoe on thiE resource in the Third world0You know that for mny people of developing i'utio ixiludiri corns who live on the edge offasu.ne, floh make uc ovor 40 porrarit ci a p'iliv ccnnc prote.n .ntnke i say thieto counter a misconception common in rich nations Fish is essential, not a lury item forthe rich. Work done hure is noi ione to refine otill further the merm of expensive restau-raxits This is work on the very front line of the fight against hunger0

But fishery dsvolopmont means much more than helping th hungry0 It provides hope ofemployrisnt and higher inoome among sorne of the poorest of the poor -. rural populationsliving in remote and isolated plaoes Literally millions of people eke out a living from thesear riki.ng life arid limb in frail craft to rup a meagre harvest. Countries cari now allo-cate their fish resources in support of those email-scale fisheries end encourage fishermenand. thix- fasiilies -to stay in the rural areas

I see the dvelopmen-t of fisheries under the new regime as part of the struggle to strikea saner balance between poverty and plenty It i.e part of the effort to build a NewInternational conomic Order0

It would be riaivo to think that developing the fihoriss will determine the outcome of-this wider struggle0 T3ut i-t te a sector in which measurable chnnges end improvements ceri bediscerned end we can hope for something more t&iible than wishful thinking0 As you ooriultthe papera supplied for your use at this seeeion you will find one prepared by our MarineResources Division on the state of world fisheries, Esre we can find grounds for reasonableoptimism.

The total world. catch for 1977 was 735 million tone and proliminary figures for 1978,as you will see in the Commodities report, toil us that last year saw an al].-'time recordcatch of 75 million tons We also know that even without moving away from stocks of morefamiliar species, wo can expect en increase of as much as 50 million ions,. Some 20 millionof 'that ean cierne simply by better rnanagomeivt0 The rest we cari get by using existing stocksmore ffotivsly0 Ne are going tu need every kilogramme cl' that total if we ars to meet thedemand anticipated. at the erid of this oritury0 Three quarters of the additional demand willbe from people of rhwelop&ng nations0

You can see the shape of some other, potentially less cheerful developments in the report.In sorne oases foreign fishing fleets have departed but have not yet been repiacd so that onefinds a UroD in loc.l oatohse. In tho.r fishing by foreign fleets continues urider licenceor oihe ax'rengorncrte Among devloct rc,'1. evci hc Untoc ,t 0tci rr rada bone-fits of the 2O0'-'isíe sono have been aiic E:rport eoniirigs have clirnhd; d.tooke have cqoe back rapidly through enforoenwut of cirorig mingemsni !hoasurce,

Nntou li:o u:.th -.oí.r c.:. ;; xprtise hive ben able togiouno.uorl ci in... t,- chci of ' iL't -"J.1 r wntch

of courie, involve uoh moro ihuL timly rc iment they bave the advoutage ofe'rporthno p'r' nc1 ç-ip+ o FiC for uiany dcvloi, oastal

tb f Of flu oloud on the horizon 'the troublingchaya of what the future could h Thto bring me izaok 'to the beginning cif the Agenda to'the 3Z P'ogvoiese

coed .:, :':. ì:. o..ci t,. 'tural bases for coorwmicdevelopment, Eut owoerohip Low wiil .... 1 :Lû useful to remeu.ber that the

venen't 'to s ezidud fichurtoc 1u'iíi.O'tic?u cft .,'ed 'cause ooaetul uWti.ori learnedthrough o i.çnco hc minoai' sbn',s ci o inc dcÙ.itc, Threw the f hor.es operito all ooicere let the stocks manage themcelvo end 'ttt roo'lt, ai hect is en industry that

- 32 -

a eperate gamble as catches fluctuate npreictabl:r i: . to year end costsnpwerd, At worst the s-books are left in a state of ruin c.c1 fieherien bankntpt

T.:L no-b a matter of biological or economic theory., Il; :L; L;1fd ib is recorded.hítozr

What neoda to be done to avoid a repetition of this history is also not a matter to bedtcd These exclusive fishing zones muet be managed by the ie:tioas that have setabliehedth Only in this way can they become the great national sts that it is their potentialto bome.,

This management responsibility is likely to become a matt'r cf .....tornational law TheIn±'ormel Composite Negotiating Text worked out a-t the current Law of thz $ea Conference saysthat coastal States decide the Total Allowable Catches in 'their exclnsivo economic zones,The Ta::L ssyo the-b whore coastal States cannot catch ali of 'thia amount they must share the

rplue They must chaTo stocka, under certain conditions, which move from one zone tosnottier or which straddle the lines of jurìsdiction0 Coestal States moreover are required.-to help assess stocks and allocate them, All of these are managemsn'L tasks of the first

Fisheries mamment is therefore essential., It is also en incredibly oomp:lex imder-tJing0 Management means -the basto gathering of reliable scientific daa about the resourceon thi.oh to bs national policy and law0 Management means cision.m&dng about fleet siseaad. pocsssing plt capacity; decisionmaking about the licensing of foreign vseselsMnûagement impinges on questions of techno1or, in catching, in handling in storage1'hniagement calls L'or distribution and marketing structures - it calls for mastery of thehallmgo of enforcing fisheries jurisdiction0 Given this kind, of iuont the fisheries

of daïeÏopthg nations can become selfreliant contributors to their li..tional economies and.bo woric, food supply.,

The diffioulty is that the expertiso, the skills, the technology needed for managemente themselves very rare and costly resources, These resources exist but 'they aro scattered.

diffused and. uncommitted, They need to be mobilized. and focused FU with its decades ofçx.perience in fisheries development, with its commitment to fostorin selfreliance in the

ieve1opingorld, hua the olear responsibility to lead -the way in the mobilization of theseesouross., Its task is to focus, The FZ Programme you are considering hors is the lens,

t will not describe 'the programme -to you in detail -- that hd of explanation isavailable in the documents., Instead I warrt to talk about th pzinciplos on whichttie :ogTeeime is based.

First « the prograrnie will go forward through the isedia of strang'bhensd R gular endFi1cì ProgTammes, with changes of omasis to match the new situations,

Sacc.nd. -- FAOs regional bodies will play key roles in the programmes. They will register

..'-icoai differences in the problems of man*ment, They will allow us 'to edjut to changesth-t occur over i;ime, This is an essential function, No wiiversaiJ. fisheries managosiont

:.c'L.' o:ists, Scenarios and theories that apply in the North tisiti for example, are not- iiy transportable to the South China Sea0

itegionai cooperation - collaboration among neighbouring countries is in this case notn matter of brotherhood but of biolor, Regional coopera-bion is imposed upon nations

by -bbs fish themselves as they move with indifference across lines on the Stocks whichhared by more than one nation cannot be managed pieoemsal On the other hand the basis

f cooperation among nations exploiting them can be provided lAOa regional bodies,m.:.. dies must, therefore, reflect these needs and FO's rcgìo., dsploymsnt will beajt:d with that purpose in view,

The EEZ Programme will cot mony - USQ 35 million in its initial ctages Pbe need

has baca formally noted by the iTh' General Assembly Committeooftho«h1hole which laart Marchurged donor nations to give their support to these efforts0

- 33 -

We intend -to work in clooe aociation with the World. Bank, with regionai developmentThnding iliiti vtion with UNDP ao long a strong supporter of world ficher-cc developnent

. with other seurcee of ífunding We also £nterLd. to work hand in hand with the greatregional groupingn o± the world.: suoh a-c the OAIJ, the Association of Southeact Acian Nationz

West African Eoonomio Coumïunity, the Economic Comcunity of West African Stavtecr the LatinAmerican Economic yetom and. the European Eoonomi.c Community, and. with ail other rgioLorganizatiomi which wish to join uc in this groat encteavour.

We need theec nliie Rhetoric and. resolutions will not clear awar a single oria r -the

obstacles in our path cor will they us any closer to the great benefite which can cc:'uo

to the world's people through -the success of hece efforts0

The chalicage we face is to provide a setting for something better than a new colonialmof -the sea0 New finheriec can be built as indigenous industries on traditional bases, partt--cularly the small-scalo or -ticanai fisheries, They can grow without socia-]. disruptioi,without poliution without most of the painful aide effects associated with over-zealous

industrial d.eveloprnent The chills are available, the technology is within reach, the oppor---tunity neede only to b3 graspd Let us do so now

Thank you

34

TAPIHiT BY HI EXOELLENOY A115BOR JENS EVJN3CHAIRMAN OF TiTE iODWC-AN DEL1!ATION

p rjjt UNITED NATIO1S OOFIR]NCE ON ThE LAW OF

Mr Chai.rman, 1r DireotoxGnsri, Excll ei Ditïìtihd D1ge

It ie with a deep aenee of dììation wt peot I add es thie (( itte onof FAO

Few, if any, organizations wi-hin the United Nations family have to the same extent ethe Food end rioulturc Orgami tio of the Tjnited Jationa oowtribvted to the improvementof the lot of kind.

Through £ta practica], work, through the sharing of knowledge and the transfer of tech-nology F'AD h«a .ven a glimmer of hope to untold mil1iona givs farmere and fishermen iiithe developing world. a feeling of achievement and. pride in their work end. toi.10

I atheorely hope that through the efforts of thin Orgenìzation and other like-mindedorganizations, we shall finally succeed in alleviating the glaring quitina in our worldof tody1

In nr atith-sea I shall concentrate seine attention on the experience ga.nod by Norway inimplementing a modern international fisheriea policy based on the work of the UN Law of theSea Conference and the principle of the 200 miles Exclusive Economic Zones

The UN Law of the Sea Conference shall embark upon its ninth sssion in March 1980 inNew York hopefully its last working eeeeion

The f mdamen-tal chans and developments which have occurred in relation to the marineenviromnent, technologically, eco mica3.ly, politically and legally especially after thesecond. world war, have bean so rapid.? even dramatic, that it is reasonably eorrec't to dee-cribe them aa ravolutionary. Fortunately, up to now it has been a peaceful revolution, buta revolution nevertheless. These developments created an unbrid.geable gap between theincreased. importance and changed. uses of th oceans on the one aide, and the traditionalralee and. principles of international law and forei policy on the other.

Through the Law of the Sea Conference we are in the midst of a gigantic attempt toforrrnüate a modern international constitution for the world oceans. It is the most iiifi-cant and the moat comprehensive ].egislattve attempt ever made in the annals of internationallaw. In this attempt the developing world plays a major role And. the developing world hasleft its imprint on the reeults of the Conference to such an extent that it is bound toinfluence and change -the course of the Iorth/South dialogue in the future,

The ConÍerence is aleo the most comprehensive legal and political undertaking performedby the United Nations in its 34 years of existence,

The informal draft of a Law of the Sa Convention which we have elaborated during eightprevious sessions, tite so-called Informal Composite Negotiating Thxt/evision

- 35 -

(L/Conf.62/WP 1O/Rev0l April 28, 1979) is a veei document consisting of hundreds of articles,paragraphs arid. sub-paragraphs in the text proper and in annexee I-t is a pioneering work oflaw as weil as of policy planning and. economic pianning

I shall not dwell upon the traditional rules end principles of the law of the sea whichwe have lived with for centuries. These principies end. the u denying doctrines of foreiipolicy were mainly formed, over the centuries by the traditional world powers and by the otherestablihsd powers of JThrope; later including the United States and. Japans This governingsystem me-t first and foremost -the special interests and needs of these powere,

One of the corners-tones of this syeiem wars their right io fish freely and. uncontrolledall over the oceans up -to three miles from the coe-tuine of other States d deeply into thefjords and. bsye of others. That is up to the very threshold. of th cotai States ooncerned.

Thece traditional doctrines and freedoms really reflected an eoonoriìo9 technological andpolitical syniem which bscame increasingly outdaed from the turn of this century, After thetechnological revolution and. the compie-te r. a'aval of the existing international order fol-lowing in -the wake of the second world wa thLL2 system and this age of innocence were hope-lessly d.00mecL

1speoially the revolution in marine science and. technology alter the conci world waropened up the oceans and. the ocean bede for modes of end a rats of exploitation heretoforeunheard. of0 At the same time this new iechnoïor exposed the marine areas to abuses end.over-exploitation both of the living -esouroes and the minerai reeouroes to an extentmank.nd had never sod. of

¡nother factor was, of course, the acoiihmsri-t of colonialism and. the emergence of soinshundred new States with their dreams and aspirations anchored. in concepts entirely differentfrom those of the industrialised and westrnìzed world,0

One main aspiration of the thvelopthg countries is their aspiration toward full nationalcontrol and. utilization et' their natural resources on lend and. in the seas washing theircoasts0 In this respect they shared -the aspirations of some developed countries like Norway7Iceland, Canada, New Zealand. and Australia. These two oupe of States looked with dismayand apprehension upon the devastating resulta of the tïad,itional regime which allowed anybodywith sufficient technological and economic capabilities to overexploit and ravage the livingresources of the seas. The freedom to fish the seas as it was traditionally understood ini-lied that the living resources of the seas could be exploited unrestrictedly and without rea-ponaibility toward, anyone based. on the outdated concept that total freedom rei'ied and thatthese resources were inexhaustible0 The technological revolution proved otherwise within avery short time-span,

In the 1950s and even more in the 1960e it became apparent -that the modern fishingnations of the world., including Norway, followed. a course w'asreby within a few decades thesea would be barren arid empty of living resources, The whales - the king- of the animalworld - were depleted to the point of extinction, The vast stocke of herring and mackerelhave almost vanished from the North Sea due to over-exploitation, unfortunately to a largedegree because of the effectiveness of the modern purse-seining fleets developed by Norway.The Atlanto-Soandiari stock of migrating herring which the North Atlantic fromNorway to Iceland, Spitaborgen and. back with millions of toris of catch every year, hastotally vanished, from the oceans. This is a sad reminder of human stupidity and greed.We are likewise at a crossroad with regard to cod, haddock and. capelin n the North Atlantic.Hopefully the fishing nations of Western Europe and the U.S,SH have learned a lesson so asto mice it possible to ave these invaluable species from extinction, Ve are ali aware ofthe similar predicament of the tuna, both the Pacific and, the Atlantic schools, Thesehighly migrating species are continuously and. mercilessly followed. by modern fishing fleetseven into the 4editsrranean where they are osught not only by the local fishermen but byfar-away fishing fiet,

36

In faot all tock of fish, be it migratory or stationary, largo or mo11 are poter-tially threatened with extinction by the modern fishing toc nology

Those facts are the main underlying reason for one of the most important dolopmonioord aohievements of the UN Law of the ea Coriferenos I refer of course to the introductionof the .xcluive economic Zone of 200 nautical miles as one main feature of the new law ofthe sea regime

This is a new concept of interna.tionaJ. law and foreign policy. ;'e ali Iccow the basicfeatures of -the economic zone concepts as contained La Par-t V of the informai draft conven-tion. Consequently I shall not examine these issues in detail, 1x't draw atteation to a f e-main s'tarting points, Art. 56 oí' -the draft provides -that within the economie zone of 200miles the ooaetal Siate has inter alia the exclusive sovereign rights:

"for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving- end reenaging the natural

resources, whether living or non-living".

It has also the exclusive rights with regard to:

other activities for the economic exploitation and exploitation of -the sono ouch asthe production of enery from the water, currents ox' windo"0

A most interesting end relevant provision in view of the ener' crisis with hich -the

world, io faced today.

On the other hanil, Art. 58 of 'the informal d.ratt provides that in th waters of the

xoluiv economic zone all States enjoy the freedom of navigatior ov::x'flight the J.ayirg

of subsat'ine cables end. piplthes, as has been the -traditional. rste for the so--called

high seas. In th'afting the baaio features of the Exclusive Economic Zoc have tried ioa balance between the sovereign rights of the coastal States i 'i vavd to sources

d the rights of other States to enjoy the freedoms of navigation? orcr-flight end.other freedoms. We have found this balance in a system whereby the Exclusive Economic Zonoon neither be considered a the territorial sea of -the coastal States nor as high. seas. It

;ï1oi. be considered an a zone sui erieris and as a novel concept in the regime of the law ofthe sea,

let us revert to the living resources and to the control resource c; nnont endoc1sv use which a coastal Siate will enjoy in its soononìic zone under Fart 1 Át. 55follo'thg in the informal draft conv'ntion.

The Sariing point is that the coastal State has the soveroi righto to':ïrc'. the living resources of the zoneD According to Art. 61 the co tal Hi

-the sovereign right to determine the total allownhlo evtch o the l.win; reos

of its 200-mile zones The Article also established ortain oh) gatoae for r;

The coastal State lias the obligation to ensure relying on the bftcvi'onc available thai 'the living resources in the economic mono is rot :.: by

r\re;'onpIoi-tation, It has the obligation to maintain and restore the pol; of har-

'eted soies "at levels which can produce the maximum sustainable yield". It shall also

keep ailable possible scientific informMion fisheries statis'tics sad other relevsxìt data.

Art. 62 contains farther details as to the utilization of the living reeouroes It

follows from this Article well as other articles of Part V thai; the coastal e-tete mcy

'eeei-vo the fisheries in the economic zone for its own riationnis,, -Jith one roe.va'tion

however, that if and to 'the extent

"the coastal State does not have the capacity to hervest the entire allowable catch,

it shall, throu cemente or other arrange.nto, give other Statec noceio to

the surplus of the allowable catch ..."

37 -

it o1low from the provisione of Art. 62 that it is up to the coastal State to stipulte tctal 1iowahle oach of the living resources in its economic zone, to decido 012 itsown htin opacity to doide whether there is a surplus to which other States may havw

se tc cide which othor States shall be given access to such surplus and to stipulatethe terms and ooditionc und.sr which such surplus fisheries may take placo.

The article also contains citabi guidelines for the coastal States' decision-makingprooess It may, for ezanpie, take into account its national interests other than fishingthe requir eni of davioping countries in the subregion or region, the need to minimizesoonomie d lo ien in other Sta-tos whose nationals have tradìtionally fished iii the area;end the r uiremsn-t of the lexzdlocked end geographically disadvantaged countries.

3ut the conetal Stales bayo been endowed with substantial discretionary powers in i;efields,

It has been alleged by certain circles that the principle of exclusive economic zoneswill primarily benefit the developed oountrios especially those with extended coastlines0Phase views have been especially vociferous in university circles in the U.S.A. and in otherhigMy developed 000.ntrien that have traditionally advocated the indiscriminate freedomof fisheries0 I do not entirely grasp the underlying reasons for such assertatione, Theynay be caused partly by idealism, partly by eggheadedness, perhaps also by a touch of resent-meat toward the novel regime in general.

in my view these allegations ars basically incorrect, I sincerely believe that theexclusive economic zones will prove to be of benefit for the great majority of the developingcountries end, contribute vastly to a more modern and, effective resource management by theseStaten. In giving them sovereign rights to the living resources of the zone the possibilityof developing their national fisheries industries will be vastly enhanced. Although the seazaccording -to the traditional regime theoretically were open to all countries to fish up to

the threshold of other coastal States it was solely the vast fishing fleets of the developedcountries that really bemiofitted from this old. system. The developing countries, duo to-their lack of capital, tec}uiology end ocean-going fishing fleets? were not able to exploitoven the narrow belts of waters adjacent to their oi shores, let alone exploit the richesof the oceans including the ooawtal waters of other States0

Allow me now to give a brief analysis of Norway as a case study in relation to thethe implementation end the enforcement of a 200-mile exclusive economic zone

for ficheries purposes,

Norway has embarked as early as in the fall of 1974 on the road toward establishinga 200-mile economic zone for fisheries purposes.

At thal time the questions pertaining -to the exploration for end the exploitation ofour minorai racouross in the continental aholf had already been effectively regulated byour continental shelf enao-tmen-tz of 1963. These enactments provided inter alia that theseabed and msubno,l of the Norwegian continental shelf are subject to:

UNorweginn covoreign-ty in respect of the exploration and, exploitation of' the naturaldeposits as far cut as the depths of the superjacen-t waters admits the exploitation ofthe natural resources" (see Royal Decree of 31 May 1963),

The oxploite,tion criterion was here introduced for the delimitation of our continentalshelf regardic-e cf the de;îtho of -the superjacent waters.

Norws- roagated. itn son'tinental shelf legislation in the firm conviction 'that therights of a ooaal State to i-te continental shelf is firmly established in prevailing prin-ciples of international law on the bais of the 4th Geneva Convention of 29 April 19589 onthe con'tinon'tal shelf and the extensivo practice of States which had. developed bôth beforeend. after the signing of this Convention,

38 -

As to the establishment of the exclusive economic zone Norway approached. this cruestionin stages. As early as September 1974 the Government issued a proclamation on principleswhereby it declared that the Norwegian Government intended to establish an economic zone of200 nsutica.l miles as soon as developmen-ts legal as well as political - warranted such astep, It must be borne in mind, that the areas of the seas which would comprise our economiczone consist of the most delicate marine areas in the world, Economically beoaue3e for almosta century i-t has been main fishing areas not only for the Norwegian fishermen but for themajor fishing fleets of Northern Europe with the inevitable result -that these seas have beenover-exploited and seriously depleted. Politically becanee these waters from -the North Seain the south through -the North Atlantic to the Barents Sea in the north and. north-east arestrategically some of the most delicate marine areas in the world,.

On 17 December 1976 w found, that sufficient preparations had been made o enact ourlegislation relating to the exclusive economic zone of Norway. By that time the NorwegianGovernment was convinced that the concepts of a 200-mile exclusive economic zone had acquiredthe force of international law. The legal reasoning behind this assumption may perhaps besomewhat unorthodox although legally valida Many elements have played a part in securing forthe economic zone concept the force of international law. Doctrinal international law wouldprobably maintain that too short a period of time has elapsed for alleging that the principleof exclusive economic zones had become customary international law, But a number of otherelements have obviously played a role in the lawm&cing process, The urgency of the situa-tion end the need. for new approaches to meet the challenges of the technological resolutionsin thi field have been overwhelming, Thus the principle of economic zones may to some extenthave its basis in an emergency law concept. Furthermore technolo,r has been running wild tosuch an extent that it became a foregone conclusion that coastal States had to protect theirmarine living resources and to defend themselves against over-exploitation and avoid totalextinction of main mame sioies, n ele nt of natural law entered the picture.

Firthermoro during -the UN Law of the Sea Conforence a consensus of opinion hss developedat least among a majority of the participating States, a consensus which contributes sub-stantia.11y to the law-meking processo State practice has likewise developed to such anextent over the las-t few years per-taming to economic zones that these facts alone willwarrt the assumption that the principle of exclusive economic zones already is part of theestablished. international law of the sea. The overwhelming majority of coastal States haveestablished 200-mile zones, both main developing oowitries an well as developed countriesinclu&i.ng the two su.rpowers. It also seems somewhat politically naive to assume thatStates would now be willing to give up the concept of 200-mile economic zones. Too much hasbeen invøstsd by coastal Stat a in legislative efforts, in menagemznt and. supervision offisheris, in estsbl.shing effective coastal pa-trole and coastguards, to expect that theclock could be turned back,

1t is my firm conviction that any coastal State which has established an exclusiveeconomic zone or intends to do so in the future has a solid legal foundation to build ozi ininterna-tional law, ßnd my conclusions stand whatever be -the final outcome of the UN Law ofhe Sea Conference.

But it is my firm belief that the Law of the Sea Conference will be a uccenQ lu thenot too distant fu-turs we el b la to present to the world . modern oomprehuiv'vention on the law of the sea where -the principle of a 200-mile exclusive economic zoneone of -the main pillare

I have mentioned that in el1........v; -eoucio zQn: NQJwise procedure, The reason therefore was that at the -tir in the fall of 1974it eonewhat unrealistic in the iit of o- .:...: :t.:1 -Uat±e to oo: cutwith i exclusive economic tone of 2C v. .

of the UN Law of the Ses Conference warrant riich a .t'p at -that tins0

Through oousul-to4;tci - t1e

bilateral and iy - - lu. ç': -.

futurs LOOShU of í-- "i -

- 39 -

dealing with the conservation and. distribution of joint stocks, Norway established a networkof concrete bilateral relations and. ag'reernervts -that efficiently and peacefully prepared theground. for our final general legislation on exclusive economic zones datod 17 December 1976

But long before the 1976 enactment as early s.s January 1975, we were able to promulgatean ac-t of the groates-t importance to Norwegian fisherrnen namely the Act of 17 January 1975,relating -to trawling-free zones outside the Norwegian 12-milo fisheries zone0 The Act wasunique at the time of iLs promulgation, because the proposed trawling-free zones ex-tended upto 50 miles seaward from the Norwegian baselthea

Prior to the enactment we had intense arid protracted consultations with the countriesinoet directly affected by such steps such as the UOSSORW, U0K0, Franoe the Federal Republicof Germany end. the JiC Commission in Brussals. Norwey mai.ntained that such conservationmeaeuree were consistent with the prevailing rules of international law and that we couldunilaterally take such legislative steps 1e reached understanding with our neighboursand. the Act of 17 January 1975, relating to trawling.-Í'reo zones cised no diplomatic contro-versiee.

The feature of this Act is that Governent is anthorized to prohibit the use oftrawl and. similar gear in specific areas outside our 12-mile fisheriso zone and for certainperiods of the year0 By regulations ieaued. on the stime date three siificant areas off theooaste of northern Norway were declared trawlin'-free zones for the five winier months,October to Waroh. Thees regulations have proved highly effective in protecting the urteresteof the ooa-t3l fishoreen using stationary gaar such a bugimos and nets0

The aytm with trawling-free zonee ha been mainteined even after the oetabiisunent ofNorwegian economic sono of 200 miles0 11 protects the local fisherman in maintaining a

ir tioxial lifestyle and traditional fishing gear from too brutal an onslaught by the medern,but omoti s alien teoimologr, It may be en interesting feature for other cowntries whenthey contemplate the adoption of a comprehensive new fisheries regi1re based on the conceptof exoluive eoonomic eonee

In our preparations for the establishment of an exclusive economic zone we wore facedwith four main problem areas:

I Th recoi ition by other tatea of our right to establish a 2Omibo zone legallyd politically0

2. The bo-uns. questions0 Tha-t is to reach agreement with neighbouring states whereto tha;w the boundaries between our respective 200-mile zones,

3. Certain basic fisheries questions such a

a Re source managen-nn-tb Fishing rights of other countries and mutual fishing rio Management and. distribution of joint stocks

4. Supervision arid nforoanent of the 200 ube voue

These four problems are oloiy interlinked, Epeoially the last three questions, vizthat of draiing the boundary lirio that of certain fisheries manugemeni questions end thatof uperviion and. eníorcsmsn-t will arise for the vast majority of coastal ta-tes when theyintroduce 200-mile economic zones.

The first problem area - tha of the recciition by other states of our right to estab-lish economic zone is to some extent a special Norwegian problem. Both becauoe thesewaters from the North ea and northward traditionally have hee tho fishing grounds of thsophisticated fishing fleets in the world and because of -the unique strategic importance ofthese waters. We also felt that the marino aroas failing under a Norwegian economic zonewere so vas-t that reasonable accommodation uith other States was necessary in order to mekeit possible for us to supervise and enforce our new fisheries regime.

The diviîng lino in tite Sc givee cxi conowio conc. of Lí thaì WO c 1o:yed 1í: :h., In the North 5eg the pe-tiv ocono-c caao ei' Io:.y «'i. io

Kingdom uo 180-190 niitioal i1es

40 --

ThQ bowidary guei-bione will irzeviiably arie ihonever . ct. li2iz2GO 'i1e :colueive economic zone., Due to the wide varioty f :':c :ìl-,

c, iLly th political climate which exioti at z ivo . ..1r:g couni;rioe oí -their reepeotive economic zono :i.i - 1-.: eu' cally nvc.vo undertakLng. It requiro n.oJ orpjgraphic o:ç rtiu but above all political tact nd will to fii 'i I1tc 'okn :Lo--tj elova-tion eeern invariably -to b oomplioatiug

The moot eubatantial difficulty lies in the fact thnt thc te 'o uimplevocal principle of in-terna-tional law applicablo to the uq::? ad. fticüt thatari in oonneion with these delimitationo Naturally ciow'» c»-- '.' - i: uc.0 theeocçtioal peculiarities so varied and rich in munco -u

¿uidig legaJ. pr]rclplGs are urstendablc., The et' c'--" I JL appJ -.

oalï to the doliraliation of 'the economic onee wd the L-' h proved, toh one of the moro difficult irta at 'the Law of the ;cc. i.e. the in'ormaldraft we bave identical tentative forrrla-tions in Articloc 7 :ai. 3, (o- 'rtori-al seassee Art0 i5)

Ar1 74 a it now stende proTides, with regard to econot:Lc oncc that

"-the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone between adjacent or opposite Statesshall be sffec'td. by 'eement in accordance with equitable principles, employingwhere appropriate the dit. or equidistance line, and. 'taking ocount of all -the rebe-vent ciroumrrtanoes"

The .rtiole abo givee a dfini-tion in No., 4 of the torn o eciditence lineI shall refrain both from oo&.iing on the tort d from :1:YCrpr)t.tiOfl thereof

bat rather revert to Norrcy a a cate stady ?araraph 2 of í1cri o: Jot of17 Decenber 1976 provided that "the owter limit of the economic at adistcnce of 200 naatical miles from the applicable bazelinc9 bat io ïc tho median lineir relation to other States"0 It also p'esupposee thai the div ta liuo rh.íi be byagreomeirt botween the two tate concerned not by a wülateral

L the ares of the North Sea and the Scaw we were faced wiU tc- i,ç/ C lÇji±Pi;i.i.both with regard to neighbouring adjacent States, nioly wc1-m cae ra.dto States lying opiiiio io Norwy7 nemely Denmark nd Un ca 1i23e Thu ci'.-o O L(

oone ceparating Norwe and Don k d Norway and the Uniic. KingIem re leec then 400milo which of conree creates d.ifficalties for any oliine of full 2C0-milo -ouo by either

Fortunately no difficulties aro' with regard to thuo - o3y at in1964 ath 1965 we concluded boundary entente with -the thoveitii,,.. ite.ìri's pertainingto o'a,inentctl sheivoa b d on the median or equjdi'ioe hn:riec

woically applied. also to -the respective eoonor:ii.e ec'e.. ';;'. -

ioing f\rthox' north into the North Atlntie wo hv çj ',full 200-mileri). we reach the Barents Sea where the ectio of the uiíthloth with regard to economic ones and conti-.

'ou-h no fcul-t ei' either party we haïe not vt 'be :ua on thed1' tu.-' lxu. between our economic ono szact L'

41 -

rj:1.. diTh 1iog ou: two prtise have s ountered end the provisional arrangenient wehave on ing the Îin! drawing up of the boundary lins offer interesting illue--ttio ae oae study,

Our iifficulty in aohing reemsnt on a dividing line with the U.$.SORß is due tothe lao-b thvb 'wo oount'te have different approaches on priuoiple Norway maintainsthat the di aivicLing iins appiio:3 while the U0SSR advocates the so-called sector lire;that is a line dawn fron the ostc,most point of' the Soviet ooasb as a straight line tothe North Pole (with oertin att.r:2t)

The area in qutien (nlled thc, çrey zone) consists of su.bstuntial expenses of watei-i.nclucling eoue very inp tnt Í'it'thirig bnk and also interesting continental shelf aroesIt is limited :. th et by th alleged. sector line; in the east by the alleged median

o' dii)lo1a-tio n -ti.ations have taken p1ace No results hv\re

Howovo nM.o he not been entirely frnitleas We have arrived at sii iterimfisheria w:y b of in rest to others that have out etaxiclung issues per.taixiing to rin)

The thtorsite3 spcvi.11i that lying inaid the 200-mile lt of the mathlenclhc.s oifIl, I ..i i .n' ftsung srea of our ouuntr.00 and third oountries a.well. ei p'r ;ial 'to find interim aolution to the fisheries tsaaeeinvo1J. it oçid I:' i uible to prohibit fisheries until the boundary questiosshad 1....m. :aally c;&, O' t other hand it would have *en equally impossible -be bava

s a of O tO..) 'Cac:. I loseire wide open to overybody The stocks of codeh1os c o'y i..c cw well worn in a very precarious tate0 ffeotive c-lationc mc:.<.; czmr. i L -he b.ishmemT of total allowable catcheE, quotas i'o:.

,ion.. ...;::: ;'f i and olfeo-tive supsrision

cït ;.:ohcì» of :ttre of 11 January 1978 with attached protocols a provisionalfisheries rimc, mz tablinhed providing for effective resource management and ooni.voi..n th p (rçi r t( i TI pzclmL"..r) arrangement has many interesting features nd floa-i ions tmL3 nra

oub: .... ít' own laws and regaiatione as national euint;.BW ...... :trouce unifors fisheries reg'tilationo t med at oofl-o ii;

. .. -r:i. operations" in the Grey Zone, They ha1l o:; oh ..honcn from the USSR end Norway, as well as fish'rnafta ?;r m oh ': the prescribed quotas and the agreed coordinated f iihry

the i;o mien shall refrain from enforcement of the uniform ti..cg-T . ocmrying the flag of the other party"

to -ft.m. sa :'ic sach ei' the parties may give licences to the fishermenof ouch ooi'i''.'f, based on ovm;-;',bl quotas allocated to third States. Only the party that hasissued such a lionoo a ìhì:z' country vessel has the right to enforce the fisheries regu-lations in respect of such third party vessel.

The iempor,r nd)rti.pï-eju.dìoial saturo of this interim arrangement has been stressedio various proic oac . . Of

For various :cc.:.me.c iho auno did. not fully correspond to the zone delimited by the sectora ci mc ice-ut Lne

- 42 -

In Norway the arrangement received with praise by some and heavily criticized byothers, Although I am hardly a neutral arbitrator in the matter, the arrangement ham in myopinion served its purpose in avoiding bittr conflicts and tension, end. in establishingorderly conditions of the fisheries in the area, It may d.eeerve a careful etudy by othersfaced with -.'nsettled bo'ndary issues in areas rich, in fish,

An appropriate conservation and. management system which ensures the maintaining andrestoring of fish stocks and, at the same time promotes the o1jective of macimum s.istainableyield, is of course one main underlying reason for the establishment of an economic zone

But how to fit all the pieces and elements together into a cohesive and, comprehensiveconservation end. management system is a].moet mindboggiing any of the mai11 elements arecomplicated end elusive questions pertaining to the most difficult corners of fishery bio-logy The scientific recommendations to be relied on must be based on years of prior studiesand research,, As often as not the recommendations must be based on responsible scientificguesswork instead of on hard end fast evidence

Fortunately Norway has had. at its disposal a corps of fisheries scientists with a longtradition. We benefi-tted enormously from their 1iowleago in working out our conservationend. management regimes One additional advantage these scientists offered was their longarid close cooperation with the ecientisto of neighbouring countries, both colleagues in theU.S.S0R, the other Scandinavian countries; the EEC couritries arid Cenada and the U.SA., tomention a few.

One problem that has proved especially persistent arid elusive is the manL'ment anddistribution of joint tockm,, Norway meets this problem iii the North Sea as well as in thearents Ses. and. North Atlantic, Important stocks like cod., haddock, saitho,capeliu, herring,

mackerel end Norwegian pout belong to these problem children of the oceans, Effective manage-ment of such stocks mus-t be based on agreements arid close 000peration end coordination ofconservation measures with the other States; the co-owners,, The so-called mixed fisheriescommissions which we have established with our neighbours have proved a highly useful arid

flexible instrument for such purposes0 These mixed commissions are composed of fisheriesoffioisla and fisheries scientists, They deal with questions like stipulation of totalallowable catches for the various species, quotas and distributions between countries aridrelated questions, They meet whenever necessary end at a minimum once or twice a year,

The elements that mus't be taken into considration in managing and distributing jointstocks between the countries concerned. are numerous, contradictory and, confusing. A speciesmay be spawned and. bred in the waters of one country? grow up in the waters of' others; partof the year it may be here, other periods there,, It may be most economically fished in oneplace while biologically it seems more reasonable to concentrate fishing activities somewhereelse,, 5ci,e-tific facts may give some guidelines0 But in the end it is a political decisionwhich will prevail, based on the negotiating skills or relative clout of -the parties, theirwill 'to find fair solutions, their will to cooperate and to live in peace and friendly rela-tions with each other, My country has had very good experiences in this difficult task0This does not mean that we have not. had long and arduous negotiations or that al). questionebave been solved, end certainly not solved loo percent to our satisfaction0 .And such nego-tiations will as often as not become yearly occurrences0

The question of' the fishing rights of other countries in cur economic zone has provedespecially complicated0

I-t is a fact that the waters which now comprise our economic zone have bonis the bruntof' the fishing fleets of' the industrialized world and have consequently suffered heavily fromthe technological revolution and from the subsequent overexploitation. Furthermore in noother developed countries except Iceland and the Farces is the population so dependent onfisheries as their main source of lìvelihood. as in northern 1'orway0 It goes withou-t saringthat the main purpose in establishing our economic zone was to bring to a halt the uncon-trolled invasion from the trawling armadas of the industrialized world in our waters1, and toreserve these areas to Norwegian fishermen to the extent poeible,

- 43 -

In preparing our regime we actually operated with five categories of foreign fishermen

Those fw countries where we were interested in rLutual fishing rights. Thesecountries were U.S.S.R., United Kingdom arid to a lesser degree Greenland/Denmark.

Countries that had. a certain practico of fishing incur waters without any appre-ciable interest on our part to fish in theirs.

A special category consisting of our Scandinavian neighbours - Sweden and Finland.

Countries that had. only recently appeared. in our waters like Spain and Portugal.

5, Possible newcomers like Bulgaria, Romania, Yugoslavia and Japan, Cortain land-locked. countries might likewise be included in this group.

With regard to the last category of States "the Newcomers" we had. to advise them thatit would be impossible to grant them fishing rights The eivation in the Norwegian econowiczone would not give any available surplus. On the contrary the situation was such that thecatch capacities of the existing fishing fleets were at least twice as large as the naturalresources available. A drastic reduotion in fishing activities was thus required includingdrastic reductions in Norwegian fishing activities,

With the other four categories of countries, Norway embarkedupon a series of diplomaticnegotiations resulting in four basic types of fisheries agreements.

Category one consists of two framework agreements with countries with which wo havemutual fishing interests,

On 15 October 1976 Norway signed an agreement with the Soviet Union, It provided thatin their respective 200-mile zones the fishermen of the other country should be allowedto fish. The coastal State concerned had the right to lay clown provisions on quotasfishing gear, seasons arid. other relevant fisheries regulations., The fishermen of theother country had to comply with auch regulations and are subject to enforcement measuresby the coastal State in case of violations.

The picture is somewhat more complicated with regard to the mutual fisheries in Britisharid Norwegian waters. According to the EEC system the economic zones of EEC countriesaro considered joint EEC waters. And it is the Connisaion in Brussels that has theauthority to negotiate fisheries agreements.

We were able to arrive at en interesting arid useful draft agreement with the EEC almosttwo years ago. It has boon initialed but not yet signed. The reason is that the MemberStates cf the EEC have not beeri able to establish a formal fisheries regime among them-selves, The siature and ratification of the agreement with Norway i left in abeyancepresumably until such internal agreement has been reached between the members, In themean-time the provisions of our draft agreement is applied in practice. The system laiddown in this draft agreement accepts in principle that fishermen of EEC countries willbe admitted. to Norwegian waters in return for Norwegian fisheries in British waters.In practice this would imply thai British, French and German fishing vessels will begranted Norwegian fishing licences for quotas which in principle will balance withNorwegian quotas in British (and Irish) waters.

Both the agreement with the U.S.S.R. and the draft agreement with the EEC have an i.xii-tisi duration of ten years.

In the second. category of States where no mutual fisheries interests are involved,we have concluded two agreements; one with Poind, the other with the German DemocraticRepublic. The basic features are the same in the two agreements. Both agreementsph e out the fisheries in Norwegian waters over a four-year period (with possible ex-ceptions for surplus stocks). By 31 December 1979, East Germen arid Polish fisheries

44

shall be phased. out in the inner 50-mile zone measured from the Norwegian baselines.By 31 December 1980 th fishing activities of these two countries will in principle bephased out from the outer 150 miles of our economic zone.

In the third category we have concluded agreement with Finland and Sweden for e.duration of ten years giving -them limited fishing rights in our economic zone in theNorth Sea.

We have likewise concluded agreements with 1ortuga1 and. Spain giving them limitedfishing rights in the outer 150 miles of our economic zone up to 31 December 1980.

In order to supervise effectively and enforce the new fisheries regime in our 200-Smilezone, a number of measures have been taken. Foreign fishermen are not allowed to fiSh inthe Norwegian economic zone without a special permìssiozi (licence) issued for each vessel0In addition they are under strict obligations to report their whereabouts, the dates whenthey enter and. leave the Norwegian economic zone. They are further obliged to give weeklycatch reports to the Norwegian Fisheries Directorate0 They must of course comply strictlywith our fisheries regulations with regard to quotas, fishing geas', mesosize, stipulationsconcerning the minimum size of fish and a great number of other conservation measures. Theyare never allowed -to fish inside our traditional 12-mile zone nor allowed to trawl intrlingfree zones during closed seasons,

All those protective measures would come to nanght if we did not maintain an eífectivefisheries supervision service. However the areas wider surveillance consist of some onemillion square kilometres of some of the roughest ocean aseas in the world. Thus te maintainthat our enforcement procedures are foolproof would be an overs-ta-tement.

Wo have however established a combined air and ship patrol service We aro making sub-stantial efforts in improving these services by building modern faat coastaj. patrol vesselsnd batter air service facilities. We have further installed in the Fisheries Directorate inBergen the most modern and comprehensive computer system in the world. to keep cons-tuit tackwith fishing activities anywhere in our economic zone.

The economic burden and the burden on personnel and ar in orde.t to mainbain en effec-tive fisheries surveillance in our economie zone must not be underestimated0 Thoy ontai:L .

dxaizi on the state budget that for many countries would be very serious indeed0

In concluding allow mo to express the opinion that our enfore io-ve problemn infacilitated by the fact that we made it our policy to negotiate and oaneul 'ñ.bh thorç- eoi-tries that would be directly affected by the establishment of the oregin economie oo.We aleo gave a grace period, however brief, to some cowrtries in ordeto grnadjust to the new circumstances, I feel that this policy has paid. off in as uro oi

mile zone was generally respected from the outset,

At no stage did, it become a mere paper zone.

M-40ISBN 92-5-100877-9