Bridging the Gap to International Fisheries Agreement: A Guide for Unilateral Action

The proposition advanced in this Article is undoubtedly an over-simplification. It could even be unworkable. Yet it is, I think, something that needs to be considered as we approach the scheduled time for the 1973 Conference on the Law of the Sea. The proposition is this: In view of the apparent trend toward overexploitation of certain stocks of the world's commercial fishes, and in light of the proven incapacity of the international community to come to effective agreement on any important topic in anything like a timely fashion, coastal nations ought to be allowed - even, perhaps, encouraged in some instances - to take emergency resource - protective action in the high seas within the following guidelines: (1) The protective action must be a response to a demonstrable conservation crisis.

(2) The protective action must be concerned solely with protection of the endangered resource. (3) The protective action must not unreasonably discriminate on the high seas against nationals of other nations. (4) The protective action must carry an automatic termination time. (5) The protective action must be accompanied by a clear call for international agreement.