Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T00:58:11.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transitions in the management and distribution of international fisheries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Francis T. Christy Jr
Get access

Extract

The United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea marks the threshold of a major transition in regimes governing the use of ocean fisheries. After 200 years of operation, the principle of the freedom of the seas for fishing is being abruptly dismantled and replaced by extended zones of national jurisdiction. The new acquisition of authority by coastal states will, in many situations, greatly facilitate the adoption of improved management techniques. But in most regions throughout the world, the authority over numerous stocks of fish will continue to be diffused among neighboring countries because of the migratory patterns of the stocks. Arrangements for the distribution of yields from these shared stocks, for the provision of information, the adoption of regulations, and enforcement will be extremely difficult to achieve and may become significant sources of conflict and waste for many years into the future.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , Spring 1977 , pp. 235 - 265
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For a discussion of these characteristics, see Christy, , Alternative Arrangements for Marine Fisheries: An Overview, RFF Program of International Studies of Fishery Arrangements, Paper No. 1 (Washington: Resources for the Future, 1974)Google Scholar.

2 Marr, John C., Fishery and Resource Management in Southeast Asia, RFF Program of International Studies of Fishery Arrangements, Paper No. 7, (Washington: Resources for the Future, 1976)Google Scholar.

3 It is a unique situation in which it might be said that “one can have his hake and eat it, too.”

4 FAO, Yearbook for Fishery Statistics 1973, Tables C1-C4, (Rome: FAO, 1974)Google Scholar.

5 The Soviet catch from the West African Coast is about the same as the total catch of all the West African countries above the Congo.

6 “Soviets Ready to Trawl at 1000 Fathoms,” National Fisherman, Vol. 51, No. 10 (02 1971): 21-BGoogle Scholar.

7 “Excerpts from Muiato Shimbun, April 17, 1975, Fisheries White Paper Special Edition,” Translated by Language Services Division US National Marine Fisheries Service, p. 8.

8 NMFS, Fisheries of the United States, 1974, p. 17Google Scholar.

9 Crutchfield, James A. and Lawson, Rowena, West African Marine Fisheries: Alternatives for Management, Paper No. 3, Program of International Studies of Fishery Arrangements, (Washington: Resources for the Future, 1974), p. 2Google Scholar.

10 US House of Representatives, Marine Fisheries Conservation Act of 1975: Report No. 94–445,94th Congress, 1st Session, p. 35Google Scholar.

11 Ibid., p. 36.

12 “Revised Single Negotiating Text,” Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, A/CONF.62/WP8/Rev.l/Pait II, 6 May 1976, hereinafter referred to as RSNT.

13 Stevenson, John R. and Oxman, Bernard H., “The Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea: The 1975 General Session,” The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 69 (1975): 778CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 An example of an exception would be Georges Bank haddock, which would fall under the jurisdiction of both Canada and the US if the boundary is drawn on the basis of the median line principle.

15 A useful compilation of the various proposals can be found in “UN and the Sea,” UNITAR News, Vol. 6, No. 1 (1974)Google Scholar.

16 Where stocks are shared, as noted below, the situation is quite different and control is diffused among the sharing states.

17 “Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, Dr. Eric Williams, as he addressed the First Session of the Western Central Atlantic Fisheries Commission,” Press Release No. 442, (White Hall, St. Clair, Port-of-Spain, 10 20, 1975)Google Scholar.

18 Saila, Saul and Norton, Virgil, Tuna: Status, Trends, and Alternative Management Arrangements, RFF Program of International Studies of Fishery Arrangements, Paper No. 6 (Washington: Resources for the Future, 1974)Google Scholar.

19 Stevenson and Oxman, p. 780.

20 Ibid., p. 778.

21 Kasahara, H. and Burke, W., North Pacific Fisheries Management, RFF Program of International Studies of Fishery Arrangements, Paper No. 2 (Washington: Resources for the Future, 1974)Google Scholar.

22 Oda, Shigeru, “Japan and International Conventions Relating to North Pacific Fisheries,” Washington Law Review Vol. 67 (1967): 43Google Scholar.

23 Miles, Edward, Organizational Arrangements to Facilitate Global Management of Fisheries, RFF Program of International Studies of Fishery Arrangements, Paper No. 4 (Washington: Resources for the Future, 1974), p. 15Google Scholar.

24 Ibid.

25 Crutchfield and Lawson, p. 14.