Fisheries relations in the Gulf of Maine Implications of an arbitrated maritime boundary

In 1984, the International Court of Justice drew, “in accordance with the principles and rules of international law”, a single maritime boundary dividing the maritime jurisdictions of the US and Canada in the Gulf of Maine. The nature of third-party adjudication meant that the allocation of regional fish resources occurred solely through the geographic delimitation of a line. The lack of prior agreement on fisheries access and management greatly hindered the opportunity of obtaining a functional boundary in the context of international arbitration. As a result, US and Canadian administration of the boundary has been protectionist in nature, focussing on its function as divisive line. This has limited effective bilateral cooperation in the management and conservation of shared fish resources. The maintenance of incompatible fisheries management approaches on opposite sides of the boundary has contributed to overfishing and stock depletion in the region. In addition, the disruption of historical fishing patterns in the area has created a serious violation problem along the boundary. Since 1984, there have been numerous incidents of illegal fishing in Canadian waters by American scallop vessels. In response, Canadian fisheries management policy has focussed on the deterrence of US boundary violations through various means of surveillance, detection, and enforcement.