The Barents Sea Loophole Agreement: A "Coastal State" Solution to a Straddling Stock Problem

1999 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 467-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin R Churchill
Keyword(s):  
Barents Sea ◽  
State Solution ◽  
Fishing Rights ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Unregulated Fishing ◽  
Conservation And Management ◽  
High Seas

AbstractIn May 1999 Iceland, Norway and Russia signed an agreement (the "Loophole Agreement") designed to resolve a six-year dispute over unregulated fishing by Icelandic vessels for straddling stocks in an enclave ("the Loophole") of high seas in the central Barents Sea. The Agreement, which gives Iceland fishing rights in the Norwegian and Russian EEZs in return for ceasing fishing in the Loophole, is an example of direct co-operation between coastal and high seas fishing states over the management of straddling fish stocks on the high seas which the 1995 UN Agreement on the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks envisages as a possible alternative to management through a regional fisheries organisation. The article explains why the parties have chosen this model rather than utilising the existing regional fisheries organisation or establishing a new regional fisheries arrangement; and compares the Loophole Agreement with arrangements for some other high seas enclaves.

Maritime Delimitation in the Arctic: Implications for Fisheries Jurisdiction and Cooperation in the Barents Sea

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-147
Author(s):  
Irene Dahl
Keyword(s):  
Barents Sea ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Conservation And Management

After 40 years of negotiations, Norway and Russia entered into the Barents Sea Treaty in 2010. The treaty fixes the delimitation line in the Barents Sea. During this period the parties succeeded in developing a body for cooperation on conservation and management of the shared/straddling fish stocks: the joint Norwegian-Russian Fisheries Commission. This article examines the effect of the treaty on fisheries jurisdiction and future fisheries cooperation between Norway and Russia.

scholarly journals Comparison of the biophysical and trophic characteristics of the Bering and Barents Seas

2005 ◽  
Vol 62 (7) ◽  
pp. 1245-1255 ◽  
Author(s):  
George L. Hunt ◽  
Bernard A. Megrey
Keyword(s):  
Bering Sea ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Single Species ◽  
Atlantic Water ◽  
Walleye Pollock ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Eastern Bering Sea ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Shelf Seas ◽  
Bottom Waters

Abstract The eastern Bering Sea and the Barents Sea share a number of common biophysical characteristics. For example, both are seasonally ice-covered, high-latitude, shelf seas, dependent on advection for heat and for replenishment of nutrients on their shelves, and with ecosystems dominated by a single species of gadoid fish. At the same time, they differ in important respects. In the Barents Sea, advection of Atlantic Water is important for zooplankton vital to the Barents Sea productivity. Advection of zooplankton is not as important for the ecosystems of the southeastern Bering Sea, where high levels of diatom production can support production of small, neritic zooplankton. In the Barents Sea, cod are the dominant gadoid, and juvenile and older fish depend on capelin and other forage fish to repackage the energy available in copepods. In contrast, the dominant fish in the eastern Bering Sea is the walleye pollock, juveniles and adults of which consume zooplankton directly. The southeastern Bering Sea supports considerably larger fish stocks than the Barents. In part, this may reflect the greater depth of much of the Barents Sea compared with the shallow shelf of the southeastern Bering. However, walleye pollock is estimated to occupy a trophic level of 3.3 as compared to 4.3 for Barents Sea cod. This difference alone could have a major impact on the abilities of these seas to support a large biomass of gadoids. In both seas, climate-forced variability in advection and sea-ice cover can potentially have major effects on the productivity of these Subarctic seas. In the Bering Sea, the size and location of pools of cold bottom waters on the shelf may influence the likelihood of predation of juvenile pollock.

scholarly journals Snow Crab in the Barents Sea: Managing a Non-native Species in Disputed Waters

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (0) ◽  
pp. 108
Author(s):  
Tore Henriksen
Keyword(s):  
Native Species ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Snow Crab ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
Fishing Vessels ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
A New Species

The introduction of a new species to the Barents Sea raises questions as to the rights and duties of states under the law of the sea to exploit, manage and conserve the species. This paper discusses three of them. The first question is whether the snow crab qualifies as a sedentary species. The entitlements and competence of states in respect of living marine resources depend on the location and the characteristics of the species. If it qualifies as a sedentary species under the law of the sea, it is subject to the sovereign rights of the coastal States. Otherwise, it is subject to the sovereign right of the coastal States as well as the freedom of fishing, dependent on its distribution. The second question is what, if any, obligations Norway as a coastal State has in respect of conservation and management of the snow crab and how Norway is complying with these obligations. This includes a discussion of whether the snow crab qualifies as an introduced, alien species and the possible implications for the obligations of the coastal State. The area of distribution of the snow crab includes waters within 200 nautical miles off Svalbard, raising a third question as to the implications of the 1920 Treaty concerning Spitsbergen (Svalbard Treaty) and in particular whether fishing vessels of Contracting parties have the right to participate in the harvest on an equal footing with Norwegian vessels. The Norwegian Snow Crab Regulations effectively reserves the harvest of snow crab for Norwegian fishing vessels. The paper discusses the implications of a recent decision by the Norwegian Supreme Court on dismissal of an appeal by a Latvian vessel and its captain convicted for illegal harvest of snow crab within 200 nautical miles off Svalbard.

Hot Pursuit and the Exercise of Enforcement Jurisdiction beyond the EEZ

2021 ◽  
pp. 295-337
Author(s):  
Camille Goodman
Keyword(s):  
Coastal State ◽  
Black And White ◽  
Exclusive Jurisdiction ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
Community Interest ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
Effective Conservation ◽  
Conservation And Management ◽  
High Seas

This Chapter considers the enforcement of coastal State fisheries laws and regulations beyond the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) following a hot pursuit. While the general framework for hot pursuit established in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is clear, its substantive content and operation—particularly in situations that do not fall neatly within the black and white terms of the framework—is less clear. This Chapter considers the key challenges to this framework, and the extent to which—and the ways in which—coastal States have implemented, developed, or departed from it in practice, focusing in particular on the domestic legal basis for conducting hot pursuit, the use of technology in the conduct of hot pursuit, and cooperative approaches to hot pursuit. While recognizing that the hot pursuit doctrine must strike an appropriate balance between the sovereign rights of the coastal State to enforce its laws and the exclusive jurisdiction of the flag State over its vessels on the high seas, the Chapter argues that there is also a broader community interest to be balanced on both sides of this equation: to ensure the effective conservation and management of living resources, and preserve the freedom of navigation on the high seas. This is reflected in the Chapter’s examination of practice, which reveals that States have adopted and implemented a functional, contemporary approach to hot pursuit within the framework of the existing doctrine, which itself has proved to be at once flexible and remarkably enduring.

The combined effect of transport and temperature on distribution and growth of larvae and pelagic juveniles of Arcto-Norwegian cod

2005 ◽  
Vol 62 (7) ◽  
pp. 1375-1386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frode Vikebø ◽  
Svein Sundby ◽  
Bjørn Ådlandsvik ◽  
Øyvind Fiksen
Keyword(s):  
Barents Sea ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Trophic Levels ◽  
Direct Effects ◽  
Climatic Parameters ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Effects Of Temperature ◽  
Pelagic Juveniles ◽  
Pelagic Juvenile

Abstract Temperature has been identified in field studies as the physical parameter most influential on growth and recruitment of Arcto-Norwegian cod. However, it has been pointed out by many authors that temperature in this context has not only direct effects on the cod, but also indirect effects through lower trophic levels. Moreover, it has been said that temperature might also be a proxy for other climatic parameters. The present paper analyses the direct quantitative effects of temperature on larval and pelagic juvenile growth from spawning in Lofoten until the 0-group fish settle in the Barents Sea. The approach taken is that of a modelling study, supported by analysis of existing data on fish stocks and climate. It is shown that transport and temperature alone can reproduce key features of the 0-group weight distribution and concentration in the Barents Sea for two consecutive years. The extent of the dispersion of the larvae and pelagic juveniles, as well as the ambient temperature they experience on their route, are shown to depend upon their depth in the water column and, to a lesser degree, the time of spawning.

scholarly journals Integrating spatial and temporal mortality from herring on capelin larvae: a study in the Barents Sea

2009 ◽  
Vol 66 (10) ◽  
pp. 2183-2194 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. P. Pedersen ◽  
T. Pedersen ◽  
K. S. Tande ◽  
D. Slagstad
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Data ◽  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Barents Sea ◽  
Field Surveys ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
The Barents Sea ◽  
Spatio Temporal ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Important Fish ◽  
Temporal Overlap

Abstract Pedersen, O. P., Pedersen, T., Tande, K. S., and Slagstad, D. 2009. Integrating spatial and temporal mortality from herring on capelin larvae: a study in the Barents Sea. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 2183–2194. Barents Sea herring and capelin are commercially very important fish stocks. We investigate the spatial and temporal mortality rate of capelin larvae in 2001 as a function of herring predation. Our methods are based on Lagrangian modelling, field surveys, and experimental data. The impact of juvenile herring predation on capelin recruitment is corroborated, in particular the importance of the integrated spatio-temporal overlap between the two stocks. Capelin larvae were reduced to 20–50% in two weeks in accordance with different simulation scenarios. Hamre advanced a hypothesis in 1994 that juvenile herring are important predators of capelin larvae and a main cause of poor capelin recruitment in years when herring are very abundant in the Barents Sea. This hypothesis is supported through the results of this work.

Governing Fishing Stocks in Northeast Asia’s Disputed Waters: Preventing a ‘Tragedy of the Commons’?

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyun Jung Kim
Keyword(s):  
Tragedy Of The Commons ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
The Commons ◽  
Unregulated Fishing

Abstract This article examines fish stocks in Northeast Asia’s disputed waters in the context of the ‘tragedy of the commons.’ For fishing purposes, these waters are in an interim condition between free and closed seas; the absence of a specific coastal state governing them could trigger a tragedy of the commons unless appropriate institutions involving all the concerned states are established. This article discusses the extent to which the apparent weaknesses in texts of relevant bilateral fisheries agreements have been overcome in this region through practical implementation and states’ efforts to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. It also reveals inducements and obstacles to the prevention of a tragedy of the commons.

scholarly journals Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing Control in the Exclusive Economic Zone: a Brief Appraisal of Regulatory Deficits and Accountability Strategies

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (75) ◽  
pp. 39-68
Author(s):  
Mercedes Rosello
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Role ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
Iuu Fishing ◽  
State Accountability ◽  
Primary Responsibility ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zones ◽  
Economic Zones ◽  
Unregulated Fishing

Abstract The conservation of fish stocks in the world’s exclusive economic zones (EEZs), which collectively harbour the vast majority of marine-living resources, is the primary responsibility of coastal States. As the effects of failures by coastal States to protect those stocks from the impacts of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing may extend beyond domestic boundaries, this paper questions whether and how coastal States may be made accountable in respect of their regulatory deficits. With the proliferation of non-legal conduct rules to guide the regulatory role of States and their agencies, non-judicial mechanisms have the potential to foster coastal State stewardship of domestic fisheries. Outlining a number of international, transnational and domestic approaches, this paper gives consideration to the opportunities and limitations they present in order to strengthen coastal State accountability for IUU fishing control deficits.

Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing on the High Seas: The Port State Measures Agreement in Context

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 290-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Witbooi
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Coastal Communities ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Unregulated Fishing ◽  
High Seas

Despite stepped-up efforts to tackle illegal, unreported and unregulated (iuu) fishing on the high seas, it is flourishing. The threats that it poses, ranging from adverse effects on fish stocks to the destabilisation of coastal communities, warrant renewed urgent concern about its proliferation. There is general agreement amongst commentators, regulators and those on the ground alike that a multi-pronged approach to tackling iuu fishing is required which creatively employs the complementary legal tools currently available. The potential power of port state controls, as a relatively simple and economic means of hitting at the profitability of iuu fishing has recently received attention, in part due to the adoption of the 2009 fao Agreement on Port State Measures. This article provides input into the potential of this Agreement to meaningfully advance current efforts in tackling iuu fishing, particularly from an enforcement perspective, in combination with other existing regulatory efforts towards this end.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document