Who Owns the Shelf?

After California, Texas and Louisiana fought Washington for legal title to the tidelands 20 years ago, the issue seemed to be settled. The states lost on legal principle in court, then won from Congress concessions within the three-mile limit. New claimants and new oil prospects, however, have reopened the contest over submerged lands on a grand scale.

The original cases involved territory immediately offshore, most of it within the three miles over which the U.S. claims national sovereignty. The current fight involves rights to the natural resources within the continental shelf, extending many miles from the coastline. International law recognizes any country's rights to such riches in the shelf adjoining it, but does not seek to distinguish between federal and local rights. In recent years, geologists have tantalized the Eastern states with reports of possible oil and gas deposits beneath the waters. One company, King Resources, has agreed to pay Maine $333,760 for exclusive exploration rights to 3,300,000 acres of submerged land eleven to 80 miles from the coastline.

Colonial Claims. Now 13 Atlantic Coast states find themselves in litigation with the Federal Government. Only months after Maine announced its underwater deal, Washington sued the states, asserting that they were coveting what was not theirs: natural resources beyond the three-mile limit. The U.S. Supreme Court decisions in the tidelands cases and the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, the Government contends, restrict state rights to three miles from shore.

The Justice Department hoped that the Supreme Court would quickly apply the precedents of the tidelands decisions and rule in the Government's favor. But, in a little-noticed action last June, the Supreme Court agreed with the 13 states that the case should be heard by a master before the court considers it. The Court appointed Albert Maris, senior judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, to serve as master.

When Judge Maris opens hearings next month, he will be exposed to American history as well as law. The states argue that their claims to the land precede the Union itself. King James I, according to the states, not only granted a land charter to the Virginia Company in 1606 but gave it rights up to 100 miles to sea from what is now Eastport, Me., to Cape Fear, N.C. Attorneys contend that King William was equally generous with the Massachusetts Bay Colony, granting sea as well as land rights to the colonists. The Government's answer is that such rights passed to the national government rather than the states once the Federal Union was formed.

Next week the chief legal officers for the 13 states will meet to plan legal strategy. Even if their case fails, the states will try to soften the blow with two bills currently being considered by the House Judiciary Committee. The legislation would give the states rights to submerged resources up to twelve miles from land and provide for federal-state revenue sharing of proceeds from exploitation of natural resources beyond twelve miles.

The Justice Department has not spared its strongest advocates or language in pressing the Government's interest. U.S. Solicitor General Erwin Griswold unsuccessfully asked the court to award judgment as a matter of law. At stake, the Government's brief stated, "is not a case of merely monetary importance. Until resolved, the disagreement impedes the further exploration and development of the submerged lands of the outer continental shelf for which Congress has declared an urgent need."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.