The Environment
Our Oceans: The Tragedy of the Commons
The world once believed that the oceans were an endless resource, with an infinite supply of fish and natural resources unaffected by man. But recent decades have shown otherwise.
To maintain the environmental health of its territorial seas, the United States has already enacted some of the most comprehensive regulations in the world, and American fisheries are some of the most productive and best-managed.
But the unprotected high seas that all countries share are suffering the effects of poorly managed important fish stocks in other nations, as well as the effects of water and air pollution. Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty would allow the United States to use the Treaty’s comprehensive legal framework to protect the waters beyond its own borders, rather than passively watching as other powers lay claim to shared resources and irreparably harm the global commons.
Environmental Risks on the High Seas
Fishing—The Law of the Sea Treaty codifies U.S. sovereignty over its own waters, which include the 200¬mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and, in some areas, to the edge of the continental shelf. The Treaty legitimizes U.S. rights to protect its fisheries and coastal regions from pollution and from illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. Depleted fish stocks in coastal nations are forcing fishing fleets further into the poorly regulated international waters. Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty would give the United States a stronger voice in the development of international law regulating fisheries on the high seas for tuna and other highly migratory species that are particularly sensitive to overexploitation.
The current lack of strong international regulations for the high seas leads to dangerous fishing practices, including the use of longlines and nets that ensnare and kill other untargeted species as “bycatch.” Equally hazardous to deep-sea ocean ecosystems is the destructive practice of bottom trawling. Vast vessels tow weighted nets along the ocean floor, wiping out everything in their path. The catch from bottom trawling contributes very little to global food security, though the practice causes irreparable harm to precious ocean ecosystems.1
The international community has not yet sufficiently protected the high seas from overfishing. Populations of large predator fish have declined by up to 90 percent, with some populations fast approaching commercial extinction.2 Overfishing of this magnitude poses a major threat to ocean ecosystems and to global food security. The Law of the Sea Treaty addresses this by requiring states to cooperate to conserve the living resources of the high seas.
Pollution—Ocean pollution originates from a variety of sources, including mineral exploitation and transportation. Oil spills are a major threat to ocean health, notable examples being the discharge of 1.6 million barrels of oil from the Amoco Cadiz in 19783 and 257,000 barrels in 1989 from the Exxon Valdez.4 The 2002 sinking of the oil tanker Prestige in the Bay of Biscay occurred after various European governments refused entry to the damaged ship, and the United States should be part of the international body that will make decisions on how to deal with such incidents.5
The U.S. Coast Guard has an active port state control program to prevent substandard ships from entering U.S. waters, and the Law of the Sea Treaty would protect this right.6 The Treaty also requires that states take measures to prevent and reduce marine pollution from any source, and that they not pollute the seas near other nations.7
Climate Change—Climate change affects the planet without regard for international boundaries. By increasing temperatures and melting polar ice, greenhouse gas emissions render the seas uninhabitable for many organisms by affecting ocean salinity and contributing to ocean acidification. This problem can be addressed by requiring all states to reduce pollution through Treaty negotiations, as the Treaty addresses both air and water pollution.8 Nations are already competing for access to expected new navigation routes across the Arctic as sea ice melts, and these new shipping lanes are likely to lead to yet more pollution from transportation. The Law of the Sea Treaty promotes international cooperation in dealing with these global problems, and establishes U.S. sovereignty in huge areas of Arctic waters.
Cooperation through Research
To address the growing problem of global warming, states must share scientific information. While the Treaty codifies and protects U.S. sovereignty, it also guarantees the rights of scientists to conduct peaceful research in foreign waters without undue delay.9 The Treaty also contains provisions for states to exchange scientific information and statistics necessary for establishing the best possible allowable catch limits in fisheries.10 The high seas, especially their deep-sea ecosystems, are in urgent need of greater study. Home to incredible levels of biodiversity, very little is known of these regions.11
Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty
The oceans are a vital component of life on Earth. Ocean currents and temperatures regulate climate patterns. Its waters contain 90 percent of the planet’s biomass; its organisms sustain countless species of plants and animals; and humans obtain almost 20 percent of their animal protein from the sea.12
U.S. environmental regulations already meet or surpass international requirements, and it’s time for the rest of the world to catch up. The Law of the Sea Treaty will serve as the basis for future international solutions, and U.S. ratification would ensure that the rest of the world does its part to meet the global challenges of climate change, pollution and overfishing. More than 150 nations have already ratified the Treaty. Action by the Senate would signal commitment to ocean health and a readiness to lead the world in protecting our most valuable global resource.
1 Gianni, Matthew, “High Seas Bottom Trawl Fisheries and Their Impacts on the Biodiversity of Vulnerable Deep-Sea Ecosystems: Options for International Action, Executive Summary,” IUCN, 2004, http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/ hs_bottomtrawling_execsumm.pdf.
2 Myers, Ransom A. and Boris Worm, “Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities,” Nature, 423. May 15, 2003, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v423/n6937/full/nature01610.html.
3 Department of Energy, “Annual Oil Market Chronology Energy Data, Statistics and Analysis,” July 2008, http://www.eia. doe.gov/cabs/AOMC/7079.html.
4 Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, “Questions and Answers,” http://www.evostc.state.ak.us/facts/qanda.cfm.
5 Cox, Joseph J., “Hearing on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea,” United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, http://foreign.senate.gov/testimony/2003/CoxTestimony031021.pdf.
6 Brooks, Arthur, “Statement of Rear Admiral Arthur Brooks, Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard District, to the Alaska House State of Affairs Committee on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,” Mar. 23, 2009, http://www.uscg.mil/cgjournal/message.asp?Id=121.
7 UNCLOS, Part XII, Section 1, http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm.
8 Doelle, Meinhard, “Climate Change and the Use of the Dispute Settlement Regime of the Law of the Sea Convention,” Aug. 31, 2005, http://law.dal.ca/Files/Climate_Change_and_the_use_of_the_Dispute_Settlement_Regime_.pdf.
9 Browne, Marjorie Ann, “The Law of the Sea Convention and U.S. Policy,” CRS Issue Brief for Congress, Feb. 14, 2001, http://www.cnie.org/nle/crsreports/marine/mar-16.cfm#_1_8.
10 UNCLOS, Part VII, Section 2, http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm.
11 Gianni, op. cit.
12 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, “The State of the World Fisheries and Aquaculture: 2008,” Rome, 2009, http://www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0250e/i0250e00.htm.
