Tuna (Canada–United States, 1982): a dispute in the GATT between Canada and the United States. The facts were that on 31 August 1979 the United States prohibited imports from Canada of tuna and tuna products after some United States fishing vessels had been seized by Canadian authorities for fishing without authorization in waters regarded by Canada to be under its jurisdiction. The United States, on the other hand, regarded these waters to be outside the tuna fisheries jurisdiction of any state. The United States action was based on Section 205 (Import Prohibitions) of the Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 which required mandatory action in case of violation. The prohibition was lifted one year later following the conclusion of an arrangement with Canada, but before the dispute had been adjudicated in the GATT. From the outset, the panel did not enquire into the question of jurisdiction over fishing grounds. The main arguments in this case by Canada were that the United States import prohibition contravened its obligations under GATT Articles I (General Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment), XI (General Elimination of Quantitative Restrictions) and XIII (Non-Discriminatory Administration of Quantitative Restrictions). The United States argued that its action was justified under Article XX(g) which provides an exemption from other GATT obligations for measures relating to the conservation of exhaustible resources, but only in combination with domestic restrictions on production and consumption. It based its opinion on advice from the United States National Marine Fisheries Service that tuna stocks were potentially subject to over- exploitation and exhaustion. It also argued that the United States and Canada shared the objective of conserving global tuna stocks through their membership of relevant international arrangements, and that Canada's unilateral seizure of United States tuna vessels was likely to discourage international cooperation in conservation. It claimed that the trade effects of the import prohibition were at best nominal. The panel noted that the dispute was part of a wider disagreement on fisheries matters between the United States and Canada, and that the trade aspects had to be seen in that context. It found that the United States prohibition on the import of tuna from Canada constituted a prohibition in terms of GATT Article XI:1. The panel also found that the requirements of Article XX(g) had not been satisfied in that the alleged conservation measures had not been coupled with restrictions on domestic production or consumption. See also herring and salmon, Tuna I, Tuna II and general exceptions.