Page History

...

Our solution attempts to address a global problem--a problem that will affect billions of people--so we needed an implementation scheme that sought international concensus. Therefore, we are proposing a treaty, as opposed to introducing a new intergovernmental body, specifically because the infrastructure to enact it already exists, thereby increasing the credibility of our solution and the probability of international implementation.

Provisions of the Treaty

The Agreement for the Introduction of Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the Preservation of the Oceans will include the following aspects of our solution:

∑ The Marine Protected Areas "ten percent plan" requires that 10% of the world oceans should be covered with No-Take Marine Reserves within fifteen years
∑ Aquaculture:
∑ Technology restrictions:
∑ Environmental restrictions (Emily)
∑ Climate Restrictions (Sean)
∑ Signatory States will agree to uphold the articles of this Treaty and thereby enforce them within their territorial waters. A signatory State will not allow fishing fleets to register under the State's flag if that same fleet is registered under a non-signatory State's flag that has been found to violate the Law of the Sea, the Agreement on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, or this Treaty.
∑ Additionally, signatory States agree to stop all import of fish or fishery products that were caught unsustainably as found by this Treaty and the aforementioned UN law.
∑ Enforcement

...

regulation of IUU fishing (to be discussed under "Enforcement")
∑ Funding
∑ To reduce and contain overfish, a two phased plan for quotas and taxes will be implemented, requiring first that Individual Transfer Quotas (ITQ) be assigned and assessed by regional councils (to be discussed in latter sections) until such a time when fish stocks have recovered sufficiently, we will implement an international tax scheme based on regions and stock depletion. The proceeds of these taxes in the EEZ will go to  that respective country---this treaty will encourage using the funds to subsidize fishermen transitioning to sustainable fishing practices.

...

How to Introduce the Treaty

To implement this Treaty, a Convention of the United Nations must be called, upon which time member states will discuss and debated the merits of the Treaty until a concensus can be reached, as occurred in the Third Convention of the Law of the Sea (Koh).  

The Structure, Operations, and Enforcement of the Treaty

The structure of this Treaty calls for the introduction of Regional Assessment Councils (RAC), as well as Regional Tribunals. The RACs are comprised of marine scientists and economic advisors and serve the same purpose as the current Regional Fishing Bodies in use, but will hopefully be more effective.  RACs are responsible for regions based on the following criteria:
\[if they aren't then they can be party (if they sign LOS, if they dont they can be observers) under part XI, section 4, article 156, Part XVII, article 305, Annex 9, article 1. they can be a part of the LOS under Part XVII, article 305 and annex 9 article 1\]
RACs assist countries with the implemenation of the Treaty: the Treaty calls for several national measures to be taken, with guidelines for how these should come about. The RACs tailor the Treaty's provision to its member states' capabilities.
Regional Tribunals correspond to the RACs and will be an intermediary for the Tribunal established by LOS. The intention is for the Regional Tribunals to settle disputes more quickly and efficiently because boards will be more familiar with the region's conflicts. If a member chooses to appeal the Regional Tribunal's decision, or if a conflict is inter-regional, then the case will go the Tribunal.

The enforcement of this Treaty to deter IUU practices is two-fold: disputes and suspicions of illegal activity are settled through the Tribunal system, while international enforcement to deter IUU fishing is the responsibility of member states. This Treaty calls for the implementation of regulatory fleets (similar to the U.S. Coast Guard) to patrol the EEZ of a member State. The Treaty encourages the strict enforcement through boat confiscation and freezing of assests. On the high seas, it is any member State's responsibility to report illegal activity to the Tribunals of other member States. If a non-member is found to be defying the regulations outlines by this Treaty or other UN laws relating to the seas, then it is the responsibility of each member State to stop all commercial agreements with this party (as per the aforementioned provisions of the Treaty).

The Argument for a new Treaty

The current Law of the Sea and other maritime legislation governing the international community is simply not effective enough. The current version of the Law of the Sea has been in effect since the early 1980s, but global fish consumption has not decreased, and the ecological degredation to the oceans has only worsened. New action is necessary to save the globe's largest natural resource. Provisions of the LOS are suggestive--on "fair and reasonable terms"--without firm mandates and lacking the newest research.

Tommy T.B. Koh, President of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, said that the Law of the Sea was a "monumental achievement, second only to the Charter of the United Nations" (Koh). Our proposal is equally progressive in an age that may doubt the ability of the international community to take action---but it is possible, and even more importantly, it is necessary.  

Our solution is innovative, integrating the newest research, fresh perspectives in international governance, and a true desire to save the oceans. This Treaty is unique in that it attempts to ensure the welfare of the oceans, not just the fisheries.

Membership

Nations with any interest in preserving a resource that billions of people depend on daily will be obligated to sign this document, as it is the only measure currently capacble of addressing the global crisis. This Treaty is modeled after science and policy currently being researched and implemented all over the world. In most cases, this Treaty simply improves upon the actions already being taken by states in an attempt to progress existing initiatives.
Additional incentive for member states to join is trade and economic benefits. Precedent shows that major fishing states, such as Japan, Russia, China, the European Commission, Iceland, Indonesia, India, the Maldives, and Malaysia (the United States is preparing to vote on the ratification of the LOS), support UN efforts to preserve the oceans. If these states also sign this Treaty agree to refrain from trade in illegally caught or unsustainbly caught fish, which encourages nations with economic interests to sign.
Also important to consider is that proposed treaties are debated and modified in Convention, allowing for more international concensus. The Third Convention on Law of the Sea took nine years to complete.
Though one One of the primary issues with establishing an international regulatory board or commission is gaining enough countries to acknowledge and commit to make the decisions of the body effective. One of the primary goals of the Mission 2011 team has been developing creative incentives to encourage maximal international support. Yet , we are also prepared to acknowledge that full compliance is unrealistic and most unlikely. Skeptics may claim that without support of a few key states, such as the United States, Japan, or China, the organization would fail, as the International Court of Justice has. There is evidence, however, to suggest that if public awareness and education campaigns are successful, that we could effectively achieve the aims of the organization without the support of a given nation. After the U.S. government rejected the Kyoto Protocol, considered by many to be a "death warrant"(Borger, 2001), the individual states and cities in America responded with force: nine Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states are currently leading the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which is developing a cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gas emissions that they hope other states will join (RGGI, About RGGI); California recently passed the Global Warming Solutions Act in 2006, which will require major industries to cut emissions 25% by 2020 (Doerr, 2006); and the mayor of Seattle, Greg Nickels, has made "climate change a cornerstone of his administration," reducing Seattle's emissions 8% below 1990 levels (Cornwall, 2007). Nickels also hosted a global-warming conference of U.S. mayors in mid-October and has succeeded in getting more than 650 mayors from across the states to take the pledge to reduce emissions (Cornwall, 2007). Clearly, political support on the national level is not the deciding factor in an initiative's efficacy. We hope to acheive the same public fervor and rally of support as yet one more means to our end: saving the oceans.

Other considerations include land-locked nations and the polar regions. Under the Law of the Sea Treaty, "land-locked States have the right of access to and from the sea and enjoy freedom of transit through the territory of transit States \[and\]... have the right to participate on an equitable basis in exploitation of an appropriate part of the surplus of the living resources of the EEZ's of coastal States of the same region or sub-region." This would not change under our proposed treaty.

...