EL PRESIDENTE: Quisiera comunicarles algo que se refiere al tema 7 de nuestra Agenda, o sea a la prevención de pérdidas de alimentos, que fue el primer tema que tratamos. Como ustedes recordarán deja mos abierta una parte de la discusión de ese tema, que es la que se refería a "la constitución del Fondo para financiar esas actividades" y, sobre todo, la integración de ese Fondo. Y dejamos abierta esa parte del debate a raíz de que en el Plenario se manifestaron algunas opiniones - en algunos casos no coincidentes y en otros controvertidas - que no permitían tomar en ese momento una decisión que pudiera ser unánimemente apoyada.
Desde ese momento hasta ahora se han estado celebrando contactos. Ustedes seguramente estarán informados de esos contractos, porque se ha trabajado activamente en el Grupo de los 77 y también se ha consultado a los países desarrollados. Luego de esas consultas, se ha llegado a una solución de transacción, que yo preferiría no detallar ahora, porque creo que es conveniente no abrir ningún debate en relación con esa solución de transacción, que ha sido lograda después de trabajosos contactos. Creo que lo mejor sería, si ustedes así lo acuerdan, que esa solución de transacción la pasemos directamente al Comité de Redacción y que sea el Comité de Redacción quien la ponga a consideración nuestra, una vez que el propio Comité la haya analizado y ajustado en sus aspectos formales.
De modo tal que, si no hay observaciones en relación con esta propuesta que formulo acerca del Fondo y la integración del Fondo para prevenir las pérdidas de alimentos, resuelvo, con el acuerdo de ustedes, que pase directamente al Comité de Redacción, para que el propio Comité nos presente en su oportunidad - que será el lunes seguramente - los términos de esa transacción.
It was so decided
Il en est ainsi décidé
Así se acuerda
EL PRESIDENTE: Continuamos con el tratamiento del tema 9, que se refiere a la Evolución en el Régimen del Mar y Consecuencias para el Sector Pesquero.
R. TANABE (Japan): Mr. Chairman, it has been recognized recently that the total world fish catch is approaching the limit of production from conventional species. In order to increase fishery production, overriding this constraint, the following three steps should be taken:(i) effective management of fishery resources,(ii) better utilization of fish after capture,(iii) exploitation of unconventional species.
I will begin with the first point, effective management. For many years, global and regional fishery bodies, including FAO bodies, have played an important role in the field of management. International cooperation and collaboration, in particular the work of these bodies is likely to remain as large as ever, whatever the future ocean regime. It is particularly important where the same stock or stocks of fish occur within the economic zones of more than one coastal State.
The concept of management does not mean simply protection. Although the main purpose of management today is to preventOverexploitation, it is also the purpose of management to ensure full exploitation of fishery resources up to a level of maximum or optimum utilization when the resources are under-exploited. Where coastal States do not have the capacity to harvest the stock to that level, the access of other States to the surplus should be allowed through agreements or arrangements. This idea is seen in the provision of the Informal Composite Negotiating Text. In implementing this provision, a coastal State should not take such arrangements as prohibit in fact the access of other States, such as too high fees, obligation of unfeasible landing of fish caught and so on.
While maximum utilization is a scientific concept, the optimum utilization includes other factors as well and a very ambigious concept. Therefore this is sometimes apt to be abused arbitrarily by the coastal States. Accordingly, my delegation strongly urges that the Law of the Sea Conference should define the concept of optimum utilization objectively. The experience of FAO must be useful to this end. Again, I would like to stress that in the era of the economic zone, the responsibility of the coastal State becomes greater, both in preventing Overexploitation and in ensuring full utilization of fishery resources.
Secondly, better utilisation of fish is partly related to the post-harvest losses of food. We, the Commission I, discussed this matter fully. Likewise, in the field of fishery, the prevention of losses is an important task, but since my delegation expressed its view already at the 11th Session of the Committee on Fisheries, I am not going further at this moment.
Thirdly, exploitation of unconventional species. Krill is the most promising species. Japan, like some other countries, is participating in the exploitation of krill, but it is still at an experimental stage. The world total catch of krill is estimated to be less than 50 000 tons. According to FAO, the potential harvest of krill is probably in the order of a hundred million tons. Therefore, the level of the present harvest is negligibly low and does not have an adverse affect either on krill resources or on the whale and other predators. However, at the 9th Consultative Meeting of the Antarctic Treaty, Interim Guidelines for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources were recommended and my Government is going to observe the guidelines in exploiting krill.
I appreciate and support the FAO activities for collecting of information, compiling the statistics, disseminating information, krill resources and catching and processing technology. UNDP could help FAO in continuing these activities.
A lot of difficult problems are involved in utilization of krill as a food, such as fishing in the severe oceanic and climatic technology, promotion of consumption and marketing.To solve these problems, more study, highly skillful fishing technology and greater investment are required. Therefore, it is difficult to have an outlook on the profitability and mass utilization of krill for food at this stage.
In the light of such a situation, it is wise and effective to confine the task of FAO to such activities as I mentioned before.FAO also should make close cooperation with other organizations such as SCAR etc.
As to mesopelagic fish and oceanic squid, Japan has sufficient fishing and processing technology with which y country can cooperate with the developing countries.
Finally, I would like to touch on the problem of strengthening the capability of the developing; countries. My country is fully aware of the importance of the role to be played by the developed countries in this field and is going to intensify our assistance to the developing coastal countries as far as possible in cooperation with relevant international organizations.
The role of FAO is important; however, FAO should be careful in assisting the developing countries relating to the joint venture and similar arrangements and, since the climates concerned in establishing the joint venture are different from one country to another, F AO's promotional activities should be confined to basic and general ones.
A. DEUSTUA (Peru):La delegación del Perú, aprecia en todo su valor la buena disposición, la califi cada buena disposición de FAO por colaborar en la solución de diversos problemas técnicos y científicos que atañen a los tipos de pesquerías internacionales, en particular a aquellas que se desarrollan en las aguas soberanas de los países en desarrollo.
La delegación de Peru expresa su beneplácito por esa buena voluntad de FAO, específicamente para el potenciamiento de la capacidad pesquera de los países en desarrollo y exhorta, aun cuando sea innece sario, a dicha Organización para intensificar esa cooperación especializada.Por eso, Sr. Presidente, fue especialmente satisfactorio para mi delegación, no solamente el recibo del documento que está su jeto a nuestra consideración, el documento C 77/21, sino además la introducción que del mismo hizo el Sr. Carroz esta mañana al comienzo de nuestros trabajos, que tipificó o perfiló algunos aspectos que aparentemente o con razón no estaban muy claros dentro del documento en examen.
Y por eso también, Sr. Presidente, la delegación del Perú se felicita de que usted, al inicio de los trabajos, condujo la separación muy concreta que deberíamos tener respecto a un tema tan delicado y que es para todos conocido, que no queda exclusivamente circunscrito a la capacidad y competencia de
nuestra Organización de FAO, sino que puede invadir voluntaria o involuntariamente otras áreas de jurisdicción donde el tema viene discutiéndose desde hace verios años, concretamente seis, a través de 12 certámenes mundiales, 6 preparatorios y 6 ordinarios, con las secuencias o conclusiones transi torias y difíciles que conocemos todos los que estamos aquí presentes.
Introduciéndome concretamente en el papel que nos interesa, el documento C 77/21, preocupa a la dele gación peruana que en la descripción del Nuevo Régimen Pesquero que figura en el mencionado documento, no se haga una referencia concreta a lo dispuesto en el llamado Texto Integrado Oficioso de Negocia ción que ha sido preparado dentro de la Conferencia sobre el Derecho del Mar.
Respecto al derecho soberano, y subrayo la palabra soberano, que los países ribereños tienen en la zona de 200 millas para la exploración, la explotación, la conservación y la administración, entre otros, de los recursos pesqueros, eso tal vez puede haber llevado a que en la redacción del párrafo 11, especí ficamente se haga referencia en mas de una oportunidad a mayores responsabilidades - y recientemente lo acaba de señalar un Sr. delegado de los estados costeros - y a las obligaciones consiguientes, sin precisar que antes que ello, tales actividades constituyen un derecho soberano de los estados mencionados.
En otros; términos, hay un paralelismo entre derecho y obligación de esos estados ribereños.Esta cir cunstancia, que ha sido más o menos contenida en las palabras del Sr. Carroz, pero que no está especí ficamente mencionado dentro del documento C 77/21, serviría para clarificar que todo el proceso pes quero, desde el ordenamiento de la especies, las capturas permisibles de recursos vivos, la capacidad de explotación propia o por terceros países, etc.... es resultado de la determinación soberana de tales estados ribereños, lo que no excluye, desde luego, la cooperación entre estados para una mejor administración y un ordenamiento adecuado especialmente en el área de las especies altamente migra torias .
Esta mañana, por ejemplo, tuve la satisfacción de escuchar las palabras del Sr. delegado de Canadá, que concuerdan con esta manera de pensar. País que ha hecho una declaración unilateral respecto a esa zona especial de 200 millas, y país que con buena voluntad y con sentido de colaborador] ha logrado hasta ahora suscripción significativa de algunos pactos bilaterales con países que acostumbran a, tra dición a lmen te, enviar sus pesqueros a sus aguas dentro de esas 200 millas.
Cualquier criterio que mudiera determinarse dentro de FAO, y parece que no fuera así según las pala bras del Sr. Carroz y el contenido del documento C 77/21, trabajaría en contra de la posición defini tiva que los distintos países podrán concordar dentro de la Conferencia del Mar y se alejaría del acuerdo que se busca desde hace tanto tiempo y con tanta dificultad.Esta es una materia, Sr. Presi dente, en la que yo me permito insistir a riesgo de ser majadero.La Conferencia del Mar ha tenido el devenir que todos nosotros conocemos.Sus labores muy difíciles han estado en un vaivén constante para tratar de coordinar intereses, no solamente diferentes, sino a veces contrapuestos o totalmente opuestos, y lentamente se va acercando, al parecer, a una solución concordante donde para la cual este documento no comprimísorio, que se llama Oficioso de posición de Negociación, sobre la cual se ha es tructurado el documento que mencionamos y examinamos, constituye un punto de apoyo de gran valor.
Por lo dicho, Sr. Presidente, en nuestro criterio constituye un elemento fundamental el que las acti vidades de FAO, tan valiosas por cierto, antes de ahora y, naturalmente, mucho más aun posteriormente, se circunscriban a esa esfera puramente científica y técnica a petición del país interesado, el Sr. delegado de Chile lo subrayó en dos oportunidades, dentro de los limites determinados para no afectar las labores de la Conferencia del Mar, en el entendido de que esa cooperación no ha de prejuzgar en absoluto respecto a los acuerdos futuros de esta Conferencia y, en todo caso, hoy o mañana quedará sujeta y condicionada a los resultados que finalmente se alcancen en la mencionada Conferencia Espe cializada de tanta trascendencia en las relaciones internacionales.
Proceder de otra forma Sr. Presidente, sería en cierta forma condenar a una paralización creciente dos actividades internacionales de enorme importancia, a mi juicio de primera prioridad, que está dentro de la consideración de la Conferencia Especializada del Derecho del Mar y a las propias de la FAO dentro del ambiente de las pesquerías.
Igualmente entendido que de la mismas preocupaciones vigentes respecto al derecho de que han hecho uso hasta ahora los Estados costeros, en el caso del Pacífico Sur desde hace más de veinte años, en legí tima acción de sus derechos soberanos y en procura de un ejercicio cada vez más eficaz para el desa rrollo socioeconómico de sue respectivas poblaciones.
Es posible, aunque no sería deseable, que no coincidiéramos con la opinión de todos los señores dele gados presentes, y esto pudiera fomentar o dar lugar a un intercambio de ideas dispares.En ese caso yo le pido su venia para que en el momento oportuno me permita hacer uso de la palabra.
J. TROUVEROY (Belgique): Ma delegation ne voudrait pas s'étendre trop longtemps sur ce point de l'ordre du jour car, si ces dernières années et notamment depuis notre dix-huitième session, de nombreux Etats dont la Belgique dans le cadre de la Communauté économique européenne, ont adopté de façon unilatérale des mesures d'extension de leur juridiction nationale en matière de pêche, par contre dans le domaine de la coopération internationale matérialisée principalement, si l'on peut s'exprimer ainsi, par la Conférence sur le droit de la mer, aucun résultat définitif n'a, à ce jour, été acquis. Nous n'en sommes toujours qu'à un texte de négociation composite, officieux (pour reprendre l'expression exacte) d'un projet déjà plusieurs fois retravaillé qui doit encore être débattu lors de la prochaine session de la Conférence au printemps prochain, et qui est loin d'emporter l'unanimité. Mais cette extension de juridictions nationales en matière de pêche qui touche à la très large partie des ressources en poissons exploitées actuellement dans le monde, risque aussi de rétrécir le role des organisations régionales de pêche ainsi que, peut-être, celui de la FAO. Sans vouloir, pour notre part, penser à une quelconque limitation des activités de la FAO, nous estimons que celle-ci devrait au moins continuer à jouer son rôle de conseiller international et se spécialiser plus encore dans le domaine de l'étude scientifique des ressources halieutiques et dans celui de l'élaboration de données statistiques tout en maintenant ou même en renforçant, le cas échéant, les liens existants entre ces projets et ces organismes halieutiques régionaux.
Comme ses partenaires de la Communauté économique européenne, la Belgique a jugé indispensable, en conséquence d'initiatives prises ailleurs, de réglementer la pêche dans les limites des 200 miles, dans l'Atìantique du nord-est, pour éviter une détérioration plus grande des réserves qui s'y trouvent des principaux poissons pêches traditionnellement. Toutefois, la Communauté reste disposée à négocier des accords de réciprocité en rapport avec les possibilités halieutiques. Ses membres ont pris toute une série de mesures auto-contraignantes en vue de mettre fin au système assez désordonné pratiqué jusqu'à présent dans cette région (système dépassé de la cueillette) pour en arriver à une structure plus raisonnêe et plus planifiée des ressources en poissons.
La Belgique, pour sa part, est toujours favorable, dans la mesure des possibilités s'entend, à la négociation des accords régionaux en la matière. A ce propos, notamment, mon pays a quelques difficultés à donner son accord sur les deux dernières phrases du paragraphe 8 du document C 77/21, fort bien fait par ailleurs, où il est dit:"indispensable d'éviter toute situation dans laquelle chaque pays déterminerait de façon indépendante les captures autorisées dans sa propre zone économique exclusive". Comme je viens de le dire, la Communauté et donc la Belgique, est disposée à accorder, sur une base de réciprocité, des quotas de pêche à des Etats tiers mais n'envisage pas de les consulter avant de fixer les niveaux de ces prises totales attribuables; en anglais "total allowed catches". En outre, ce paragraphe 8 nous paraît incomplet en ce sens qu'il ne tient pas compte de l'existence du groupement d'Etats cotiers qui, tels que la Communauté économique européenne, gèrent en commun des réserves de poissons dans une large zone maritime réservée. Dès lors, l'affirmation selon laquelle il existe pour l'essentiel, des stocks communs à plusieurs aires de juridiction est inexacte en ce qui concerne la Communauté. Le chapitre du document C 77/21, paragraphes 21 à 33, sur la ''Prospection et utilisation des ressources non conventionnelles'' résume bien ce que l'on peut, en principe, attendre de ces importantes ressources potentielles composées du krill, des espèces mésopélagiques, dont le poisson lampe et les encornets océaniques. Le krill, peut-être la plus abondante de ces ressources potentielles, est surtout répandu dans les mers australes. Or, les pays signataires, dont la Belgique, du Traité sur l'Antarctique qui se considèrent compétents en matière de conservation des ressources marines vivantes dans la zone du Traité, estiment que les chaînes d'alimentation de la faune antarctique sont très courtes et très fragiles et qu'une surpêche du krill peut compromettre toute la faune de la région,baleines, phoques, manchots, etc.
Ici aussi le problème n'est pas mur; de nouvelles études devront être entreprises. Enfin, comme vous le savez, les pays signataires du Traité de l'Antarctique organisent, en 1978, une réunion spéciale qui se penchera sur ce problème. Ainsi donc, le paragraphe 32 du document C 77/21 sur le rôle de la FAO sur cette question doit se comprendre en tenant compte des dispositions du Traité de l'Antarctique.
CHANG Kl LEE (Korea, Rep. of): First of all, my delegation would like to express sincere appreciation to the Secretariat for preparing such a meaningful and valuable document as C 77/21 before us and also my thanks to Mr. Carroz who made a very detailed presentation on the document.
I would like to make brief comments on the subjects which we are discussing now.
Firstly, on account of recent developments in the regime of the sea, as pointed out in paragraph 4 of the document, the Republic of Korea as one of the long distance deep-sea fishing countries has been losing a certain part of its existing fishing ground, from which the Republic of Korea has harvested plenty of living resources, as animal protein supply both to her own nation and for world human consumption.
My delegation agrees with the new development in the regime of the sea. However, the new regime of the sea being established for fisheries will in no way diminish the fishery production of the world. In this context coastal states, as stated by the distinguished delegate from Japan, should share the surplus resources within the zone among countries concerned through agreement or another arrangement, namely a joint venture or bilateral cooperation through which world fishery development might be accelerated with proper guidance and adjustment of FAO.
Secondly, in accordance with the development in the Regime of the Sea, the function of FAO regional bodies should be strengthened. In other words, FAO regional fishery bodies should be able to present sufficient data, information and advice, etc. to the coastal state in determination of allowable catch as a survey and evaluation of the resources within the zone for the better utilization of resources for the world's human beings.
Finally, FAO's continuous active role for the exploitation and utilization of unconventional resources such as krill is most welcome.
Ms. YU PING (China) (interpretation from Chinese): At present the Regime of the Sea is undergoing great changes. During the past few years, many littoral countries have successively declared a 200 nautical miles exclusive economic or fishing zone. This has become an irresistible trend and an important part of the new international Regime of the Sea. This represents a major victory won by the Third World countries in their united just struggle to defend their sovereignty over their maritime resources and oppose the super-powers' maritime hegemonism.Although the system of an exclusive economic zone is still under discussion and being established and developed, one can see clearly that this development will provide favourable conditions for the further promotion of the national economies and fisheries of the developing coastal countries.
Document C 77/21 lists a great number of tasks to be undertaken by littoral countries of the Third World to develop their fisheries after the establishment of the exclusive economic zone. The most important of these, in our view, is to take all necessary measures to consolidate State sovereignty over the natural resources within the national jurisdiction and to uphold exclusive national jurisdiction.
Historical experience merits our attention. The super-powers have done all they could to impose maritime hegemonism and have tried in a thousand and one ways to plunder the fisheries resources of developing countries. Worst of all is that super-power which styles itself as the natural ally of the Third World yet engages in unbridled and indiscriminate fishing everywhere. It has not only done harm to the fisheries resources of the developing coastal countries but it also pursues ulterior purposes through so-called scientific research in fisheries. After the developing countries establish their exclusive zones the super-powers might change their tactics and try various new methods of infiltration, exploitation and plunder by means of their maritime power. Therefore I think that what is of first and foremost importance for the Third World countries is to safeguard their maritime rights and interests resolutely and take necessary measures, step by step, to develop their national fisheries in a planned way.
Document C 77/21 proposes the kind of support FAO can offer to the developing countries at their request. In our opinion, these support activities must proceed from the principle of helping the developing countries to maintain independence and rely on their own efforts in tapping maritime resources. In carrying out these changed activities, priorities should be decided and focal points selected in the light of the specific conditions of the developing countries. In all these activities, particularly in studying the establishment of joint ventures, great care should be taken to respect and uphold the sovereignty and interests of the countries in possession of the resources. On no account should the super-powers be allowed to use joint ventures to plunder the fishery resources of the developing countries or control their development programmes.
P.K. MUSHINGE (Zambia) : With reference to working documente 77/21, my delegation would like to join many others in congratulating the Secretariat on a job very well done, Zambia, though not a coastal State, supports the idea of extended jurisdiction from the present 12 miles to 200 miles for all coastal States because, first, there will be regulated utilization of natural resources such as oil, minerals and fisheries, our primary concern being fish of course. This is a renewable resource and food of great importance to man's survival primarily and of economic significance to the coastal States. Secondly, there will be regulated control of pollutants, especially hydrocarbons. As was stated this morning by the delegate of Nigeria, the coastal States will be expected to defend and guard the portions of the sea under their control very jealously indeed in deed.
It is Zambia's opinion that those countries sharing a common waterfront should seriously consider setting up advisory bodies for interchange of technical information among coastal States on the living and non living resources now recognized as a common heritage. Coastal States should cooperate mandatorily with landlocked hinterland nations on the utilization of essential sea resources. This should entail giving preferential rights to the landlocked nations, such as my own, on marketing and fishing quotas. It would be absurd to suggest that landlocked States should have an equal say in the control of the high seas, but this is not to imply that they have no interest in the proper management of sea resources.
With regard to the country's local situation, Zambia, being a landlocked country, has limited potential for fish production from natural waters. Most of the large producing fishery areas are on or near the peripheries of the country, which is a deterrent to efficient fish production, marketing and distribution due to unbalanced geographic relationships between producing and consuming areas. Biological research in conjunction with economic evaluation has shown that the demand for fish is increasing at a very high rate and is expected to remain above the projected supply even when the maximum sustained yield has been realized. At the moment the country produces an average of 50 000 metric tonnes per year, which is very much below the demand, estimated at well over 70 000 metric tonnes per year. Although fish farming in Zambia is quite new, this is the only area from which it is hoped that the deficit can be supplemented. So far the potential has been established on certain Tilapia fish species as being approximately 7 tons per hectare per year.
In the country's third national development plan, yet to be launched, the fish culture programme includes research and experiment with (a) different species to assess their suitability for fish farming and in some case with a view to restocking exercises inover fished natural fisheries; (b) different feed compositions and farming methods, with particular regard to the relationship between costs, nutrition content, productivity and hence financial return; and (c) induced breeding by hormone injections and other methods. Already some encouraging results have been achieved through multiculture of our local breams - Sarotherodon andersoni, Sarotherodon macroehir and Tilapia rendalii, although their prolific breeding has become a major problem and a major factor in the present production of stunted and poor quality fish. The programme I have mentioned recognizes the need for increased fish production from the present level. It also recognizes the limited fish stocks available in our natural fisheries,hence fish farming in Zambia is now receiving high priority for development.
The country intends to establish five 40-hectare fish farms which will act as models for intensive fish, farming, in which the rural communities will be induced to participate actively for their economic benefit.
We therefore feel that this is another area in which FAO should give its active support by providing technical assistance for both the construction of the farms and hatcheries and for management in the initial stages, including the on-the-job training aspects, in order to maintain continuity thereafter.
I understand at this moment in time that it has now become FAO's confirmed policy to regionalize fisheries development projects for countries with similar resources. This view is very much welcomed and endorsed by Zambia. It is my Government's intention to participate fully in all such regional projects, subject to all things being equal. However, I would like to add that country projects which can be treated according to individual needs should also be encouraged.
Since the end of the last FAO projects in Zambia, fisheries research programmes have been greatly affected mainly due to lack of adequate and qualified staff and the size of the areas to be covered.
During the first and second FAO projects, research activities were concentrated at Kariba Dam reservoir and later at Kafue River. Those are the only areas from which detailed data on various aspects of the fishery is available. Other fisheries still need some stock assessment work to be done before we overexploit our standing crops. In this regard we also need FAO assistance in the form of personnel. In brief, Zambia can be self-sufficient in fish production, given the necessary assistance in order to overcome the above-mentioned and ether allied constraints.
J.A. STORER (United States of America): Mr. Chairman, in view of the hour and your own exhortation that we should be brief, I shall try to confine myself to a few remarks on the basis of the documentation that has been presented and the presentation made by Mr. Carroz, both of which, and not surprisingly so, were substantive and constructive.Both of them indicated the significant changes and challenges that concern fisheries development and management throughout the world, as well as indicating the particular responsibilities which face FAO.
Enough has been said already this morning and this afternoon about the very striking change in the pattern of extended fisheries jurisdiction by virtue of the unilateral action that many countries have begun in advance of any resolution through the forum of the Conference on the Law of the Sea.This pattern of extended jurisdiction has obviously created new opportunities for countries that have taken this action to develop their own capability in utilizing these fishery resources. It has also given them added responsibilities for the proper management and the conservation of them.
By virtue of the peculiar nature of the fish themselves, especially their migratory nature, quite apart from the highly migratory species such as tunny fish, this characteristic requires that countries adjacent to one another or in a common region, because they are concerned with common species, stocks, must coordinate and cooperate in some fashion their own programmes for management as well as their programmes for development.
For these reasons regional fishery commissions must continue to play a very key role, although perhaps at the moment that role is not fully delineated in the achievement of any kind of viable international order in fisheries. We have noted with a good bit of encouragement the efforts that some of the regional commissions followed with FAO, such as the IPFC and the IOFC have been recently making to adjust to these new demands and to find ways to exercise their responsibilities to the member countries in that region in terms of both management and development. We would urge FAO to do everything it can to assist these bodies to carry out their responsibilities, recognizing as we well do that it is not easy, particularly from the point of view of funding, nor even from the point of view of adequate numbers of stock. None the less, those functions have to be carried on by its regional bodies, including the coordination and assessment of fish resources, collection and dissemination of data and, where it is deemed proper by those concerned, development of the elements of a managerial system itself.
In trying to meet these responsibilities, we welcome the effort mady by FAO, as pointed out in the document, to strengthen the linkage between its regional fishery bodies and the several FAO and UNDP regional fishery development projects which are now very helpfully being substantially augmented by bilateral assistance. This greater emphasis upon the linkage between management and development and between the regional bodies and the regional projects will, it seems to us, enable more progress to be made on both sides of what is the same coin, development and management. We suspect, however, that as the next few years unfold, that balance between management and development, that balance between the regional commissions and the projects, and the balance between FAO in the field and FAO in Headquarters, will not be an easy one to achieve and all elements of it will have to be observed and continuously reviewed, we feel, if anything like a proper balance is to be achieved. While in this respect noting the necessity and wisdom of decentralization in terms of the regional bodies and programmes, we would note the particular and important and unique function that F AO's own Department of Fisheries exercises here in Rome in terms of providing intellectual leadership and capability, and scientific, economic, statistical and many other technical fields, which it is called upon to provide throughout the world.
Having commented upon the leadership that the FAO Department of Fisheries has demonstrated in these fields, I cannot avoid referring to the presence of the Deputy Director-General, whose role in that development was so crucial and so helpful.
Document C 77/21 notes the responsibility of FAO to be concerned with helping LDCs develop the full potential not only for the presently exploited resources, but also for the unconventional fish species which, as has been noted, present special problems in harvesting, processing and marketing.This continuing concern on the part of FAO with UNDP assistance is certainly most appropriate, as is the attention which the Committee of Fisheries has given and will continue to give on this subject. As we all know, it is scheduled to consider this matter again in detail at its meeting in 1978.
Having made reference to the Committee on Fisheries, let me make one other further comment about that. For just as the roles of the regional bodies are changing and becoming more significant though somewhat unclear, so is the role of COFI becoming more significant and important, and also having to be somewhat rethought through, but it is the only body able to provide any kind of global review of fisheries development and management, and accordingly to provide advice and guidance to FAO in its own fisheries programmes.
The United States recognizes the burden that the servicing of COFI places upon the Secretariat and it is appreciative of the excellent quality of the documentation that has been made available to COFI, but which has had a usefulness and application far beyond the meetings of COFI itself. We feel that every possible effort should be made to maintain that vitality and viability of COFI so that fisheries administrators will be adequately aware of and understand the inter-relationships and interdependence of fisheries development and management throughout the world.
I am not quite clear about the details of the Canadian proposal but in general the request for more specific delineation of the FAO objectives, how it sees itself fulfilling them on the world fishery scene, would be useful. We are not quite sure how this differs from the request made at the last session of COFI for some documentation of this sort.
M.HAUGE (Norway): I think we would all agree that 1977 has been an eventful year for world fisheries. We witnessed the emergence of a new Regime of the Sea as regards the establishment of economic zones of 200 miles by a significant majority of the world's coastal states, a step taken in conformity with inter national law and with the broad consensus prevailing in the international community as a whole.
This development is significant and indeed has revealed a fundamental transformation as regards the entire structure of management and control over a preponderant share of the world's living resources. Substantial national authority has come to replace the traditional role and mandate of the international community in exercising jurisdiction over the living resources.
This development presents a crucial challenge - a challenge both to the fishery nations, which will be required to formulate and implement fishery policy within the framework of the new Regime of the Sea, and also to the ability of all states concerned to seek and develop new forms of international cooperation to take account of the new situation.
Extended zones of jurisdiction will provide coastal States with increased opportunities to develop their fisheries.This is particularly so for developing coastal States, many of which will, for the first time, be in a position to pursue national objectives of fisheries development based on their own fishery resources.Economic zones and the extension of national sovereignty over living resources has created a framework conducive to national planning. The planning process just now envisaged must have as a primary objective the utilization of available fish resources, the satisfaction of the nutritional requirements of the local populations, the promotion of regional development and a contribution to export earnings. At present, however, local fisheries, particularly in many developing countries, are far from developed.
There will hence be a need for substantial investment in the fishery sector of such countries. Investment should be aimed at developing a sufficient local harvesting capacity, the building up of an indigenous expertise in the fisheries sector and the general development and injection of appropriate technology, all designed to enable these countries to take full advantage of the opportunities now available to them.
To achieve these objectives, there is a need for renewed emphasis on international cooperation and joint efforts.In particular, fisheries nations already in possession of the necessary expertise and experience have a clear obligation to contribute to and participate in this development process and thus facilitate the advancement of the fisheries sector in many developing countries.
We may consider what are the appropriate means and mechanisms for such cooperation. One thing is clear, however, that substantial foreign aid from international agencies is required to assist developing countries throughout the crucial transitional phase that lies ahead, so that the level of satisfactory development in the fisheries sector of these countries can be achieved.
Of course, we do envisage that FAO itself should play an important role in this process. However, there is a need for further discussion, analysis and clarification on the particular projects to be under taken and the appropriate mechanisms of such assistance.The object of such assistance must be to strengthen and enhance an indigenous capacity in developing countries, to promote an effective fisheries policy and thus, in the long term, lay the foundation for self-sustained development and increased self-reliance.
The new Regime of the Sea provides the basic framework for consolidation and expansion of coastal States' fisheries.It must be viewed in the broader context of our shared aspiration to produce a more equitable food procurement policy on a global basis.It is thus imperative and basic to the ideals of the United Nations itself that the appropriate agencies within the UN system should assume a prominent role in this work.
T. BUSTAMANTE (Ecuador): Mi delegación ha estudiado el documento que hoy examina esta Comisión, con la atención que corresponde al preferente interés que mi país dedica a la defensa y desarrollo de sus recursos contenidos dentro de las 200 millas de sus mares territoriales, establecido con base en la declaración de Santiago, suscrita conjuntamente con Chile y el Perú el 18 de agosto de 1952 sobre zonas marítimas de soberanía y jurisdicción exclusivas.
Cualquiera que fuese el desenlace de la actual Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho del Mar, la ampliación hasta las 200 millas de la zona dentro de la cual ejercen los estados costeros derechos de soberanía, constituye un aporte histórico de nuestro tiempo de primordial importancia en la implantación del Nuevo Orden Económico Internacional, que la FAO no ha podido ni podría ignorar con todas sus consecuencias.
Entre éstas, es primordial la responsabilidad que corresponde a los órganos competentes de la Comunidad Internacional en la asistencia a los países en desarrollo para el cabal aprovechamiento, a que éstos tienen derecho de los recursos; entre ellos, los alimenticios de la pesca y de la caza sometidos a su jurisdicción exclusiva en virtud de sus respectivas proclamaciones y legislación nacionales.
A la FAO compete ciertamente participaciones muy específicas en esta nueva responsabilidad de la Comunidad de las Naciones. La FAO puede y debe ayudar a canalizar los recursos tecnológicos, los recursos financieros y la capacidad administradora de los experimentados países en desarrollo hacia el desenvolvimiento de las zonas marítimas que el nuevo Derecho del Mar ha puesto bajo la jurisdicción de los países en desarrollo.
Correspóndete, en síntesis, como viene a señalar el distinguido representante de Chile, asignar prioridad de primer orden entre sus actividades a la atención de los requerimientos específicos que le formulen los países en desarrollo, para el diagnóstico de sus problemas y la programación de esas políticas, así como para el desenvolvimiento de sus proyectos en materia de preservación y conservación cultivo, pesca y caza de sus recursos marinos, así como de industrialización y comercialización, inclusive la ampliación y creación de nuevos mercados, en beneficio ante todo del respectivo pueblo al que pertenecen tales recursos, y de la Comunidad Internacional que encuentra en ellos una de las principales fuentes de las proteínas de las que tanto está necesitando la humanidad.
Se ha resaltado en esta Comisión la inmensa tarea que tienen que cumplir los países en desarrollo en los mares de sus jurisdicción nacional. En realidad, tal tarea es enorme; pero por lo mismo, las posibilidades de la cooperación internacional, especialmente a través de la FAO, deben estar a la altura y ser proporcionadas a la magnitud de tan magna tarea. La experiencia y capacidad técnica de la FAO en estos campos resulta invalorable, per será necesario ampliar sus recursos en la medida ne cesaria para que se halle en condiciones de atender satisfactoriamente y en todo momento a los requerimientos de asistencia que le formulen los países en desarrollo.
Antes de concluir, Sr. Presidente, me permito resaltar e insistir en estos dos puntos. La necesidad de que nuestra Organización sea dotada de medios suficientes para satisfacer en todo tiempo a estos requerimientos de asistencia y cooperación que reciba de los países en desarrollo; y el singular cuidado que debe observar la propia FAO para no inmiscuirse, no interferir, no constituirse en instrumento de ingerencia o de menoscabo para los derechos soberanos de los estados sobre sus re cursos pesqueros, que se encuentren dentro de la zona marítima de sus respectivas proclamaciones na cionales, cualquiera que fuere la denominación con que tengan establecidos sus derechos sobre tales zonas y la naturaleza de los recursos de que se trate.
Insisto; la acción de la FAO sólo deberá desarrollarse en ese campo a pedido expreso del país en cuyo mar jurisdiccional se hallen los respectivos recursos para los fines específicos en relación con los cuales se hubiere requerido su colaboración, y en todo caso, en orden al fortalecimiento de los derechos marítimos del país soberano de esos recursos y al más efectivo y cabal aprovechamiento de los mismos para la alimentación de su pueblo y para su desarrollo nacional ante todo.
Por último, Sr. Presidente, mi país aprecia la cooperación que se halla ya establecida entre la FAO y la Comisión Permanente del Pacífico Sur, como órgano sub- regional en materia pesquera, y aspira al más amplio desarrollo de esa cooperación. Bien habría deseado ver en el documento que tenemos a la vista, que se mencionaba la cooperación entre la FAO y la Comisión Permanente del Pacífico Sur, así como se mencionan otros organismos regionales para otros mares, en que la FAO les viene prestando su cooperación.
I.A. IMTIAZI (Pakistan): The Pakistan delegation has read Conference document C 77/21 with interest. In this connection one point that my delegation would like to emphasize in particular is the unambiguous recognition of the fact that a coastal State has the sovereign right to determine the extent and the manner in which it wishes to explore, exploit, conserve and manage natural resources, whether living or non-living, or the seabed and subsoil and superjacent waters within the extended exclusive economic zone. So also does a coastal State have the sovereign right to determine the terms and conditions on which it will permit other states or organizations to participate in the explorations and exploitation of resources within its EEZS.
Subject to the above noted observations, Pakistan is willing to cooperate with other States and organizations, including FAO, in the conservation and management of living resources within her extended economic zone. We would welcome FAO's technical and financial cooperation in building up our administrative and managerial capabilities, as also in the formulation of a marine fisheries development master plan in consonance with the peculiarities of our own specific situation.
V. ISARANKURA (Thailand): Since this is the first time I have spoken in this Commission, my delegation would like to join those who have spoken before us in congratulating you, Mr. Chairman, on your election, and the Vice-Chairmen on their election. We should also like to extend our congratulations to the Director-General and the Secretariat for presenting a very concise and comprehensive document C 77/21.
My delegation has learned with great interest that FAO is undertakings number ofprogrammes which include the holding of regional multidisciplinary seminars on the implications of the changing law of the sea on fisheries, with particular reference to regional management bodies, bilateral agreements and national legislation and administration; direct assistance to countries in remodelling national legislation and administration; direct advice and assistance to developing coastal states in connection with the formulation of national policy regarding foreign participation in coastal fisheries, and with the negotiation of joint venture arrangements and other agreements and the preparation of general studies and guidelines on such subjects as bilateral agreements and joint venture arrangements in fisheries, the role of multistatebodies in fisheries development and the implications of the new Law of the Sea for fisheries legislation.
In addition, we are of the opinion that any coastal State with a surplus of marine fish should leave it open for neighbouring states to exploit these resources for the benefit of all mankind, particularly for an increase in low-cost protein food supply. Otherwise these resources, having a very short life cycle, will certainly be destroyed by nature.
At present, more than 50 countries have already extended their 200-mile exclusive economic zone and the effect of this unilateral move has deprived Thailand of huge benefits in fisheries. At this juncture, we are therefore most grateful for the initiative taken by the FAO in making preparations to cooperate and give advice to member nations on the impact of an extension of the 200-mile exclusive economic zone.The adverse implications of this new Regime of the Sea are a matter of vital importance to Thailand, since a substantial proportion of our catch comes from traditional fishing grounds which might fall within an extended exclusive economic zone of neighbouring countries.
My delegation would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the Organization, particularly to the leaders of the Indian Ocean and South China Sea Programmes, for approving the sending of a team of experts to my country to work with us in assessing the effects of this extended 200-mile exclusive economic zone. We welcome and look forward to favourable results accruing from this joint effort.
J. SHORUNKEH SAWYER (Sierra Leone): Sierra Leone, being one of the first states in the Eastern Central Atlantic to declare a 200-mile territorial sea, has always kept in view the responsibilities with regard to management and utilization of marine resources which such a measure entailed.
We note that FAO has very ably highlighted the problems attendant on fisheries in the new Regime of the Sea in document C 77/21, and we would like to express our appreciation.
We in Sierra Leone have no allusions whatsoever as to the magnitude of the problems regarding our capabilities and capacity to manage and exploit our marine resources. After a difficult period due to low priority rating and allied problems, we now find ourselves in a position, through bilateral arrangements, actively to embark on research and management activities in our waters. Already we have had some results which will now form the basis for rationalizing our policies, both for coastal and long-range fishing activities.
It is true that the new regime does place a lot of responsibilities on coastal States for which assistance is needed if anything at all is to be done.
There appears so far too much talk and very little actually being done to assist developing countries especially within the FAO arena. FAO could demonstrate its determination to assist countries particularly in the Eastern Central Atlantic by making CECAF the regional body much more action-orientated and allocating a vessel out of its fleet to this area on a long-term basis. Ad hocprogrammes do not and cannot suffice for adequately equipping developing coastal nations to take on their additional responsibilities within the shortest time possible.
There is at present a lot of post-harvest loss from the fishing activities of the long range fleet off the coast of developing countries, and as well noreconomic species are increasingly taking the place of intensively exploited species. Attention should be directed at handling and processing of those resources which will be more relevant to the needs of the developing nation than the resources of the southern oceans.
The problems of the developing countries are well known.All we would like to see is as many improvements as possible within the shortest time that would allow us to make the best use of the resources to which we have easy and direct access.
N. ODERÒ (Kenya): Mr. Chairman, I would go along with and join the other delegations who have spoken in congratulating the Secretariat for preparing this very good paper. This paper has helped us greatly in directing the discussion, and as we have seen, the comments made here are relevant to the point and very useful. For this we thank the Secretariat very much and those who have prepared this document.
Looking through the paper, the problems before us are well analysed. Many countries have taken action to expand their sea areas, and those countries which have not are preparing for such extension. This new Regime of the Sea offers an opportunity for the implementation of a new economic order, particularly for the developing countries to exploit their resources, or most of them. These countries have the opportunity to develop their resources for the general development of the country. For this matter the developing countries particularly require a lot of assistance to exploit their resources. These countries after all will need to know what are the resources available and in this aspect FAO has a very important role to play to assist these countries in finding out the resources that will become available to them. So that we are notmerely talking of where resources exist; without knowing the extent of the resources it would be difficult to develop and exploit such resources.
There will be greater need therefore for FAO to come in, and maybe the international community to assist the developing countries first to survey their resources and then to work out their exploitation strategy. As has been said by a number of delegations we have come to a time when we would not be satisfied with mere words, plans and proposals. We should turn plans, proposals and programmes into action. It has been stated already, that we should implement the programmes and plans which have been indicated in the paper here before us.
There are various areas where problems have been identified, and we should work out solutions to these problems and then act. In this respect FAO has done well by proposing actions that would be takento assist particularly the developing countries and in suggesting the sending of missions to assist in assessing the resources and ways of exploitation. In the past we have known of series of missions visiting developing countries and preparing documents. Many of these proposals involve several missions so that before any actual programme is worked out one may see as many as three missions. We do not have the time to spend in allthis preliminary work of missions. So we wish that FAO comes in immediately and assists the developing countries to avoid a reduction of efficient production. The developing countries are very anxious to exploit the resources available to them. We require a lot of regional cooperation and we think FAO can assist in bringing about this regional cooperation.
A number of countries will have to come together to discuss management and exploitation of their resources. Some of these extend into a number of areas and the exploitation must be coordinated.FAO should assist here as much as possible using the regional bodies that exist, which should be capable of implementing the programmes expected of them.
I wish to reiterate that we support strongly and welcome the policy of the Director-General on decentralization of the activities of this Organization, particularly those relating to Field Activities.
We would wish to see that activities relating to various regions should be centred in those regions so that people who are involved are close to the problems that they are expected to solve. In this respect I repeat what our Minister stated to the Conference that we in Kenya, in cooperation with other nations in the area of the Indian Ocean, are very happy to host the Secretariat of the Indian Ocean Fisheries Commission and also the Centre for the Indian Ocean Fisheries Survey and Development Programme.
We hope that this gesture will be taken seriously and that prompt action will be taken to push this regional commission into the area in which it serves so that it can be close to the people and close to their problems. Talking of regional cooperation, we would wish to see FAO organize seminars and workshops in the regions so that people in the regions can discuss their problems and discuss the possibilities of their development, and look for ways of implementing appropriate development programmes immediately. In saying this, and talking about decentralization we must emphasize that we are not suggesting that the headquarters should be disintegrated, nor are we saying that the Department of Fisheries at headquarters should be reduced. In fact the Department should be strengthened if it has to cope with all the programmes that have been listed here and all the assistance that will be required by the developing nations to implement the programmes.
We think in this way we will bring development to the developing countries and thus increase the fish production from the marine area.
RAM SARAN (India): Taking note of the emerging trends of the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea and that national requirements have increased food production from our marine waters India has declared an exclusive economic zone of 200 miles by the Maritime Zone Act which came into force early this year. My government has also initiated the process of demarcation of maritime boundaries with our neighbours and, in fact, agreements regarding maritime boundaries have been agreed with some countries.
Our government has fully realized that this gives us both increased opportunities as well as responsibilities.India's Minister of Agriculture and Irrigation and leader of the Indian delegation has, in a statement at the Plenary, referred to the need for exploiting the fisheries along the coastal regions of the maritime states. For this purpose countries concerned would require large trawler fleets. This will have to be accompanied by harbour development and argumentation of indigenous trawler manufacturing capacity.
In order to ensure optimum utilization of the resources, my government has already initiated steps for the introduction of about 200 deep sea fishing vessels in a couple of years. The vessels have started arriving as part of the programme. In addition, we have already introduced 13 000 coastal mechanized fishing vessels and have initiated steps for the construction of several deep sea fishing harbours on both the coasts of our country.Further, we have liberalized our programme of procurement of fishing vessels by the fishing industry.
India welcomes joint ventures in the utilization of the living resources of the economic zone in areas where indigenous know-how and equipment are not adequate.In this context the Indian fishing industry has been allowed to enter into joint ventures with foreign fishing companies for deep sea fishing, and fish processing and marketing. My delegation believes that FAO has an active role to play in assisting member countries to improve the level of production from their economic zones. The FAO could contribute substantially in this programme by exchange of information, updating of technology, provision of training for the development of technical manpower and also in the carrying out of preinvestment studies to attract funding and financing to invest in this new but important sector. We feel that FAO could also help by providing management advice on the utilization of resources that are spread out among different economic zones and also on resources that have reached a stage of stabilization.FAO has technical expertise and should help in the developing countries according to their needs.
J. GARCIA E. (El Salvador): Nuestra delegación tiene vivo interés en la discusión del tema sobre la evolución del Régimen del Mar y consecuencias para el sector pesquero. Al efecto un salvadoreño, el Dr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, ha presidido importantes eventos en la Conferencia del Mar y por la escasez de los recursos naturales renovables y su aprovechamiento, nuestro país ha establecido en términos prioritarios que los productos de la pesca constituyan una fuerte alternativa para la consecución de proteínas accesibles a la población rural.
El Salvador, como muchos otros países, establece una zona economica de 200 millas y en su aprovecha miento participa a nivel científico el programa de desarrollo pesquero dependiente de la Dirección General de Recursos Naturales Renovables y el concurso de Biólogos de la Universidad Nacional del Salvador. Esto demuestra que existe una infraestructura adecuada que permite un racional aprovechamiento de los recursos pesqueros sin permitir su deterioro; por ello no compartimos los criterios vertidos en el numeral 8 del documento C 77/21. Debe prevalecer a cualquier costo el ordenamiento jurídico de los países, el respeto: a su soberanía y jurisdicción.
Nuestra flota pesquera, ahora incipiente, no puede permitir que unidades de países tecnológicamente desarrollados que disponen de todos los equipos para las capturas en número y en calidad, invadan nuestra área económicamente productiva. Muy por el contrario nos opondremos en forma categórica a que tal situación ocurra. No deseamos parecer negativos, el asesoramiento que puedan proporcionar los Organismos Internacionales, como la FAO, siempre lo hemos apreciado, pero esta asesoría debe encauzarse dentro de límites precisos.
Dijimos anteriormente que realizamos investigación marina y cada vez ganamos en experiencias, no damos pasos apresurados; la necesidad nos ha obligado a actuar con prudencia. En nuestro plan nacional de desarrollo, 1978-82, pretendemos optimizar el aprovechamiento.de los recursos pesqueros a efectos de beneficiar el consumo interno, como por las posibilidades que ofrece el mercado externo. Los programas comprenden el desarrollo de la pesca marítima y redes de estanques piscícolas. La FAO cumple una labor encomiable, pero este rol que desempeña con eficacia no debe entrar en conflicto con los intereses de los países; apreciamos su contribución científica y estadística. En tal sentido deben proporcionarse a la Organización los recursos financieros que le permitan acudir al llamado de los países del Tercer Mundo en el momento y las condiciones que es tos lo soliciten.
W. THOMPSON (Fiji): First of all, I would like to congratulate the writers of the document for producing a very concise document. It is something that my delegation feels should be emulated by other writers of FAO documents in that it contains no unnecessary trimming or verbosity.
It has already been stressed how important the recent consensus on the regime of the Law of the Sea is to developing countries. I wanted to stress in particular how important it is to very small island developing countries such as mine and a number of others in the South Pacific.
For many years now there have been distant water fleets operating through the South Pacific Ocean travelling and fishing at will in these islands, and there has been nothing that any of the governments could do to stop it. Therefore, we particularly welcome the recent international consensus on giving the coastal states some rights in this area, and we also welcome the general consensus on the archipelago principle, which ensures that all waters within an island state are sovereign to that state.
We fully accept that the rights and privileges conferred on us by this new international understanding carry responsibilities and obligations on. our part and we in the South Pacific are making attempts to establish a regional fisheries agency that will ensure that not only is the resource properly and rationally exploited and that the countries in the region benefit, but also that this resources which has been a source of protein for the international market, will continue to provide this function. In this area we realize that our own capacity to provide the technical expertise is extremely limited and we are obtaining assistance now from our developed neighbours in the South Pacific, namely Australia and New Zealand, and we have also, through the South Pacific Commission, obtained the assistance of Japan, the United States and France in their contributions to a regional skipjack tagging programme which is attempting to establish areas of migration and the population dynamics of the skipjack stocks of the South Pacific Ocean. All of this assistance is greatly appreciated and welcome. In this area also FAO has been playing a role and we look forward in the future to a far more intensive form of assistance from FAO.
It is somewhat paradoxical that in the past the assistance we have received from FAO has only been supplied by the aegis of the UNDP Country Programme, but from the regular budget of FAO we have hot, to our knowledge, received any assistance in the fisheries field.
Finally, while I would like to support the proposal made by the delegate of Canada for the programme of the fisheries area over the next few years I am sure that the definition of the Programme of Work and Budget which has virtually been concluded will militate against establishing any additional work within the fisheries area. Therefore, I would like to end on a plea for ensuring that the fisheries sector of the FAO work for the future, when the new Programme of Work and Budget is formulated, should be given a far more equitable share in recognition of the increasing importance that the exploitation of the resources of the sea will play in future economic activity.
I.A. RONQUILLO (Philippines): Like other speakers before me, I would like to thank the Deputy Director General and the Secretariat for their excellent preparation of the document we have before us, C 77/21,
The Philippines is one of the two countries which claims a territorial sea, based on historic rights. This right emanates from treaties between world powers in 1898 delineating areas of the seas adjacent to the Philippine archipelago extending to what is known as our "treaty limits". This is some 160 miles on one side and a few miles beyond 200 miles in the Pacific Ocean, but in most areas the limit extends to just a few miles from the coasts.
The overall average width of such territorial sea is not more than 80 miles from the coasts. The Philippines has expounded this position since the first Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1958 and it makes our country one of the earliest states which realized the importance of full sovereignty over surrounding marine waters for the benefit of its people. The Philippines therefore welcomes the consen sus now obtaining in the Third Law of the Sea Conference on the extended jurisdiction of the coastal States up to 200 nautical miles. The Philippines supports the declarations made and the positions taken by countries in this and other forums in their request that the community of nations should recognize the territorial waters claimed by such States prior to the start of the Third Law of the Sea Conference
The Philippines supports the position of FAO that it is the responsibility of member States to police their territorial waters and economic zones and prevent overfishing of the area. To this extent the Philippines realizes the importance of FAO's strengthening the regional fishery bodies as the focal point for the conservation of fishery resources and along that line welcomes the transformation of the Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council into a commission. Regional action is needed for the conservation of the pelagic fisheries, especially tunas, which migrate great distances among neighbouring States.
The waters surrounding the Philippine archipelago are by and large very deep; on an avarage from 2 000 to 3 000 metres, hence such waters are biologically poor and we can depend only on the tunas that migrate through these waters. We welcome and need the assistance of FAO to help us look for unconven tional resources within our territorial waters. With the assistance of IPFC and FAO we in the regions will try to determine the allowable catch in our territorial sea and develop and adopt necessary regional management procedures, as appropriate, for the conservation of the living resources of the region. We hope that the countries in the region will recognize this need early enough and request FAO, as a group, for such assistance.
As the Philippines is one of the fast developing nations of South-East Asia in fisheries, our fishermen are about ready to venture to fish up to the limits ot our territorial seâs, the high seas and even the economic zones of neighbouring states. FAO, through IPFC, could assist member States to set up regional arrangements on equitable terms for such bilateral or multilateral arrangements.
We welcome the various FAO plans for assisting the regional fishery bodies for them to be able to cope with the necessary capabilities to the emerging regime in the ocean, to make the seas most productive, and especially the plan to mount a series of multidisciplinary missions in the different regions to assess the implication of extended zones of production. We wish to thank-FAO, the United States of America for the AID Programme, the Danish Government for its soft loans and the Canadian Government for the assistance given to us to help develop our marine fisheries. We support the position of the delegate of Canada in his request for FAO to prepare a medium-term programme for consideration of member States and of COFI in the future, if not possible at the next meeting of COFI.
A. O. TAYLOR-THOMAS (Gambia): My Minister has given, on behalf of the Government of Gambia, his full support for the work programme for the forthcoming biennium in his statement in the Plenary last week.
My delegation also congratulates the Secretariat on the production and presentation of this substantive and informative document C 77/21.
My Government increased to 50 miles its jurisdictional limits a few years ago and is now considering increasing our present limits to 200 miles in keeping with recent developments in the Law of the Sea. To this end, with the help of FAO, new and more comprehensive legislation has been prepared and passed by my Government and my Government records its appreciation to FAO for the manner in which this legislation was perfected. Our present limits are set at 50 miles, covering the extent of the Continental Shelf. The results of research made known to us indicate that there are other stocks which can add up to and go beyond the 50-mile limit.
My Government, in its new endeavour, is seriously considering applying for membership of ECAT. We agree with the context of paragraph 10 on the increased responsibility of coastal States which now have fisheries development. In this regard, our Government has recently renegotiated the details of a bilateral agreement with one of our neighbouring States and is activelypursuing the possibility of hosting the next meeting of our Sub-Regional Committee on Fisheries comprising five countries. We believe that it is only by so doing that we can be able effectively to manage and conserve our stocks of fish, the greater part of which are migratory and shared by us all.FAO is therefore right to stress the importance of regional arrangements for the obvious benefit that would be gained, and it gets our support.
We are also of the opinion that the new regime will not diminish the importance of the scientific work of regional fisheries bodies.
The delegation of my country has always participated in the Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic fishery programmes and has indicated such interest to the Committee and its desire to participate in work on specific fisheries that are shortly to be taken up. With our new fisheries legislation, efforts are being made for better management measures and greater international control through the entire industry. My Government recently acquired a new State corporation and negotiations are going on for yet another such acquisition wholly or in part.
As regards the artisanal fishing sector, approval has recently been given by EEC for a project which would create the much needed infrastructure to improve the domestic marketing and distribution of fish.
The training requirements must not be overlooked as this is one very essential ingredient which will enable our States to meet the new responsibilities that will be brought about by the new regime.In this connection we express sincere gratitude to Canada for the training courses it has organized with FAO and CECAF in our region, one of which the Gambia recently hosted. Such workshops, seminars and other meetings, to be organized by FAO in conjunction with other agencies, to improve the standards of development planning in those areas requiring priority assistance, assist not only fishery personnel but also those involved in policy making, legal matters, economic planning and development.
B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil):As regards the subject which is being discussed, it might be useful to remind the Commission that a specialized international conference, the Conference on the Law of the Sea, is still going on. In the view of the Brazilian delegation, it is important that the work which is being carried out by FAO on this subject does not prejudge the results of that Conference.
My delegation would also like to indicate at this stage that we feel that regional fisheries agreements have an important role to play.
B. SUSSMILCH (European Economic Community):With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I will now speak on behalf of the Member States of the European Communities concerning the document Developments in the Regime of the Sea and their implications for Fisheries.I would like to describe the steps recently taken by the Community in the area of fisheries, both in their international and internalaspects. Regarding the international aspects of Community fisheries policy, the Council of Ministers of the European Communties decided in November 1976 that the Member States of the Community would, by concerted action, extend the limits of their fishery zones to 200 miles off their North Sea and North Atlantic coasts as from 1 January 1977. The Community took this step, one which has far-reaching implications for traditional fishing patterns in the North East Atlantic, because of the threat to its own fisheries resources posed by the extension of fisheries jurisdiction in other areas of the Atlantic, in particular Norway, Canada and the United States. A shift of fishing activity by non-Community countries excluded from these new 200-mile zones to the already depleted fish stocks of the North Sea would have been an irreparable disaster.
In parallel with the decision to extend its fishing zone, the Community charged the Commission with a series of negotiations with its fisheries partners concerning mutual fishing rights.Long-term framework agreements, which will govern the Community's bilateral fisheries relations, have now been signed with the United States, the Faroe Islands, Sweden, (and Norway), and negotiations with many other partners, notably Spain, Finland, Korea, Japan, and Canada, are still proceeding.
Because of the serious deterioration of some of its principal fish stocks, the Community has been obliged to regulate fishing by non-member countries during 1977 on an autonomous basis, pending the outcome of negotiations. Fishing effort by the most important non-EEC countries which have traditionall fished in the North Sea have been significantly reduced, in conjunction with measures taken to restrict fishing by Community vessels. Until the recently-taken conservation measures taken by the Community are reflected in a recovery of stocks, it is the Commision's view that fishing rights in the Community zone can only be granted to countries which are in a position to offer reciprocal rights to the Community in their own waters.
The creation of 200 mile zones by a number of coastal States has resulted in a re examination of the existing framework for multilateral cooperation in fisheries. The Community still believes that this cooperation is essential to sound management of fishery resources, and in this spirit has contributed to the debate now going on concerning the future functions of such organizations as NEAFC (North East Atlantic Fisheries Convention) and ICNAF (International Convention for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries).In order for such cooperation to be fruitful, however, the Community's participation as a single coastal State is both desirable and inevitable.
As far as the internal aspects are concerned, in spite of the political difficulties involved in imposing a programme of fisheries restraint, the Community has in the course of 1977 taken a number of steps to reduce the fishing effort deployed in its dwindling fish stocks. These measures which are only the preliminary stages of a programme to cover all types of fishing and all species fished in the Community zone, may already have reversed the downward trends of recent years.
The most important of such measures have been: a standstill on fishing for all species, which limits catches to those of 1976; a reduction in the permissible level of by-catches or industrial fishing; a complete ban on herring fishing in the North Sea; and a seasonal restriction of the areas in which certain industrial species may be caught, in order to prevent damage to spawning grounds.
The Commission has now presented a comprehensive package of measures to the Council of Ministers intended to regulate fishing activity by Community vessels in 1978. It is proposed that quotas be established for all species fished in the Community zone, and, perhaps more important in the long run, that structural aids be granted to facilitate the conversion and elimination of surplus fishing capacity The Community is now well aware that it must make a major effort to mitigate the social, as well as the economic consequences of a rational conservation policy.
The European Community is now facing up to the implications of the enormous transition in fisheries, from a hunting to an agricultural activity, that is implied by the present scarcity of fishery resources This transition, of course, will not be easy, involving as it does the livelihood of entire, coastal communities. Nevertheless, in the view of the Community, some sacrifices made voluntarily now will bring undoubted benefits in the not -too distant future, not for the Community alone, but for other interested countries.
Finally, please allow me to make on remark on the documentation elaborated by the Secretariat of FAO. As my Belgian colleague stated, as far as paragraph 8 of document 77/21 is concerned, we are not able to accept it as it stands and we would therefore like to reserve our position.
Y.I. MEDANI (Sudan) (interpretation from Arabic): The delegation of the Sudan would like to express its support for document C 77/21 as regards its content, because it has dealt with the subject of the development of the Law of the Sea very clearly and explained the impact of the new regime on fisheries.
We think that the establishment of this new regime is one of the most important events that has taken place since the last session of the Conference, because it has introduced some vital amendments asregards the policy of marine fishing in some of the coastal countries in the world.
The expansion and extension of territorial waters and economic zones has enabled coastal States to benefit from new fishing resources, and, therefore, with the exploitation and the implementation of these fisheries, to guarantee an increase of their fisheries' production and a supply of nutritional protein to the populations.
But this extension in fisheries has also imposed new burdens on these countries, burdens that may exceed their technical capacities in some cases. In addition, the extension of these shores may also involve the presence of some common fisheries - common stocks - between countries which would render exploitation very difficult.
This leads us to consider the role of FAO and its specialized organs in order to fill in the gaps which might ensue and to step up the efforts exerted by coastal countries in order to complement the shortages they are facing.
The FAO can consolidate the efforts of these countries in the following fields.First, by assisting them to formulate their policies in order to benefit from fisheries and to draw up proper programmes for their exploitation.Secondly, by cooperation in the exploitation and conservation between countries which share certain common fisheries.Thirdly,by their training of local technical cadres in order to arrive at the stage of enabling these countries to rely entirely on themselves and on local capacities. Fourthly,by providing experts to undertake a survey in order to guarantee the rational use of these resources and their conservation. Fifthly, and finally, the exploitation of these fisheries would require an increase in investment and FAO has to help to provide the necessary financing from the appropriate financing agencies. This initial responsibility would call for reconsideration of the question of the specialized organs of the FAO, whether as regards Headquarters or as regards the regional levels.
As regards the regional level, they will have to step up the structures of these organizations by supplying them with the necessary know-how and by a practical programme that would determine long-term objectives. The delegate of Canada alluded to this fact. At regional level we also have to set up this machinery and to guarantee their effectiveness. With regard to some of these organs, I would like to mention as an example, the Committee on Fisheries for the Indian Ocean, Its activities cover an extensive area which comprises a large number of countries with coastal zones extending for thousands of miles.
This Committee, with the responsibilities thrown at its shoulders, cannot respond to all the requirements emanating from a new Regime of the Sea. In the Red Sea we do not actually feel the presence of this Committee, and therefore the proper way would be to reduce the number of these functions by reducing the area of fisheries supervised by these Commissions so as to create an independent Commission which would take into consideration fishery matters in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden area. In his address before the Plenary meeting, the Minister of my country mentioned this fact. This situation may also apply to some of the other fishery organs in other fields.
D. RICHTER (Germany, Fed. Rep. of) (interpretation from German): With respect to the international and internal aspects of fisheries rrom the point of view of the European Economic Community and its Member States, the representative of the EEC Commission has already expressed his views. This is why I would confine myself to just a few comments relating to the promotion of fisheries in the developing countries,
The Federal Republic of Germany can fully support the guidelines submitted in document C 77/21. These guidelines are largely in accordance with the ideas which are of decisive importance for our bilateral cooperation in this area.
A considerable contribution to world food security is in our opinion an intensification of fishery activities in waters which have not so much been exploited so far near the coasts of developing countries, as well as the development of fishery resources of a non-conventional type.
My government, therefore, attaches great importance to the worldwidedevelopment of fisheries within the framework of the guidelines contained in this document which is now under consideration. My government is quite prepared, within the framework of its possibilities, to aim for the achievement of these objectives. The development of fisheries in developing countriescoversa vast area including the building of fleets and the provision of infrastructure facilities. This is why cooperation between partners in developing and developed countries within the framework of joint ventures is a suitable measure.
The Federal Republic of Germany therefore believes that the FAO should make a special effort through its participation to ensure that such joint ventures can be established wherever possible.
A. ANDERSON (Sweden): First, my delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for an excellent piece of work. Their presentation in document C 77/21 is briefandconcentrated, just eight pages and thirty-four paragraphs - a good model for other FAO documents.
Secondly, my delegation agrees to the ideas in the Norwegian statement and gives them our full support. We fully understand the importance of close cooperation between the FAO and the authorities in the developing countries now when a fundamental transformation as regards the entire structure of management and control over the sea is taking place.
Thirdly and lastly, my delegation wishes to stress the great importance of developing countries making full use of the resources originating in the new economic zones or fishing zones. It will be a responsibility and hard work for FAO, as we see it needing much ability and attention, to assist those countries in formulating fishery plans and adopting new technology. However, this is a task with a distant aim which will last for a long time. Now measures must be taken to solve nearer problems, and here I will mention especially the urgent need to regulate the possibilities for foreign fishermen to fish inside the boundaries of the economic or fishing zones. In this area FAO can play a very important role,
I. OROZCO GUZMAN (Mexico): Nosotros consideramos que el documento bajo examen por la Comisión I nos advierte acerca de un marco eventual de actividades que la FAO desarrollaría en atención a las modificaciones que se han producido o que han estado en proceso respecto del antiguo derecho del mar. Nosotros alentamos también, como lo han expresado otros oradores, el reforzamiento que lleva a cabo la Organización de los programas concernientes al sector pesquero en beneficio de los países en desarrollo. Consideramos también, como asimismo ya ha sido señalado, que está dentro de la jurisdicción de los países que han establecido zonas económicas exclusivas el determinar el ejercicio de derecho soberano, los usos y arbitrios que mejor convengan para un mejor aprovechamiento de sus recursos pesqueros y la conservación de los mismos.
Nuestro interés en el documento C 77/21, tan bien elaborado por la Secretaría, no significa adoptar posiciones al respecto por parte de mi país, ya tendremos oportunidad de examinar con mayor cuidado y más base de juicio en la próxima o próximas reuniones del Comité de Pesca, al que mi país recientemente se ha reincorporado. Tendremos, digo, oportunidad de examinar detenidamente toda la implicación en el ámbito de FAO del nuevo derecho del mar que se está desarrollando respecto de áreas de gran interés mundial y consolidado en uno de sus principales elementos la zona económica exclusiva.
Permítame, señor Presidente, unas pocas palabras más en lo que se refiere a la explotación de los recursos pesqueros no tradicionales. Consideramos que es un tanto prematuro el pretender reforzar dentro de la FAO actividades que tienen que ver con la explotación de los recursos pesqueros en alta mar, pues se estaría prejuzgando el resultado de negociaciones finales acerca del régimen de alta mar en lo que toca a las actividades del sector de la pesca. Ciertamente los beneficios de esta empresa serían desiguales; pues tal vez se alentaría con estas nuevas actividades sugeridas las añejas desventajas de los países en desarrollo frente a los países desarrollados en la explotación e industrialización de la pesca, que poseen todos los recursos frente a los primeros tradicionalmente desprovistos.
P. HALIMI (France): A cette heure tardive je serai bref. Je voudrais simplement exprimer deux brèves remarques en complément de l'intervention du représentant de la Communauté économique européenne.
Tout d'abord, comme l'indique de manière excellente le document du Secrétariat, il nous paraît nécessaire que soient intensifiées les recherches de stocks de poissons jusqu'à présent négligés, ou sous-exploités surtout si l'on tient compte de l'évolution actuelle en matière de droit de la mer et du redéploiement des flottes de pêche que cette évolution implique.
En second lieu, nous voudrions souligner le role irremplaçable que joue la FAO en matière de collecte et de diffusion de l'information dans le secteur de la pêche. C'est pourquoi nous souhaitons que la documentation réunie par l'Organisation sur les évaluations de stocks des régions mal connues fasse l'objet, dans l'avenir, d'une diffusion élargie.
S. PADMANEGARA (Indonesia):Indonesia being an archipelago has a great stake in the sound development of marine fisheriss. It welcomes the extension of national jurisdiction on territorial waters and the establishment of an exclusive economic zone. Such extension of national jurisdiction provides governments and the people of coastal States with increased opportunities for fishery development to accelerate and expand the economic exploitation of their marine resources and thereby improve the economic well being of their fishermen. At the same time my country fully recognizes the increased responsibilities such extension of national jurisdiction places on our Government and our people.
Aware of such opportunities and responsibilities, a comprehensive and integrated programme for fishery development has been prepared and initiated by my Government. Such programme includes (a) the strengthening of infrastructural facilities such as the building and improvement of fishing harbours, extension and improvemement of fish handling and storage facilities, the expansion and modernizing of the fishing fleet, and the setting up of various kinds of fishery training centres;(b) while the accelerated increase of fish catch both for domestic needs and exports is being given top priority, the Government is also fully aware of the need to ensure that such modernization and expansion of the fishery industry should not be detrimental to the interests of the small fisherman, but that on the contrary, every effort should be made to provide as many opportunities as possible for .these small fishermen to fully participate in the development process and thus benefit from the fruits of progress.
The expansion of fishing activities includes also the promotion of fishing industries and the improve ment of fish products both for domestic and export markets.
The increased exploration of fish resources in our territorial waters has been conducted with valuable cooperation from foreign partners.The research and exploratory vessels used for this purpose are also used for regional activities (outside our territorial seas) such as under the South China Sea, the Fisheries Development Programme, the Indian Ocean Programme etc.
The FAO, as the highest international organization in the field of fisheries, is expected to play a prominent role in the coordination and fruitful handling of the many problems arising from the adoption of the new Regime of the Sea.Such a role is seen by my delegation to cover the following fields: (1) the maintenance of a proportionately balanced role of the developed and developing countries in the useful exploitation of fishery resources, both for meeting the food requirements of mankind as well as for improving the standards of living of the people; (2) the provision of positive guidance and assistance to increase the capabilities of the developing countries in exercising their expanded responsibilities under the new regime; (3) the exploration for new fishery resources in waters not yet exploited, including the increased catch of unconventional marine species, with the aim of expanding the scope of world fisheries.
Bearing all this in mind, my delegation suggests that it should be only prudent for FAO to reorientate its activities on the new responsibilities that will arise out of the adoption of an exclusive economic zone.
We fully recognize FAO's capabilities to provide valuable assistance to developing countries in the field of exploration, exploitation and management of fisheries resources.Such a system should take full account of the need (a) to increase the national capacities of individual countries and lessen their dependence on foreign countries, (b) to promote regional and sub-regional cooperation, and (c) to increase the action orientation of FAO's programme.
I may add that in the region of South East Asia regional cooperation in the field of fisheries has been progressing in an encouraging way. In particular, cooperative efforts among the ASEAN countries are expanding.Such efforts include studies on management of fisheries resources and training of techniques and fishermen. FAO is expected to play an increasing role in these cooperative programmes.
The meeting rose at 18.05 hours
La seance est levee à 18 h 05
Se levanta la sesión a las 18.05 horas
