Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Water and Marine Animal Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Farm Animal, Wildlife and Food Safety Law

  • 1008 Accesses

Abstract

While there are several serious issues affecting the world’s fish populations, unsustainable fishing has long been pointed to as chiefly responsible for declining wild fish populations. While the pace of overexploitation of fisheries has slowed since 1990, and progress has been made in reducing exploitation rates and restoring overexploited fish stocks and marine ecosystems, the world’s fisheries remain in bad shape. More than half of the world’s fish populations are at, or very close to, their maximum sustainable production levels as of 2009. Among the remaining stocks, close to 30 % are overexploited, producing lower yields than their biological and ecological potential. The declining global marine catch over the last few years, the increased percentage of overexploited fish populations, and the decreased proportion of non-fully exploited fish populations has led the United Nation’s Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) to conclude that the state of world’s marine fisheries is growing worse. This chapter covers some legal regimes aimed at preventing overfishing, including the international Law of the Sea treaty and teh United States’s domestic law, the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Management and Conservation Act. It also discusses national and international attempts to curb other threats to fish populations such as marine water pollution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Turnipseed et al. (2009), pp. 5–7.

  2. 2.

    Food and Agricultural Organization (2012), pp. 11, 13, 53.

  3. 3.

    Id.

  4. 4.

    Id. at 12.

  5. 5.

    Id.

  6. 6.

    Id. at 13.

  7. 7.

    Id.

  8. 8.

    Buck (1998), p. 83.

  9. 9.

    Buck (1998), p. 92.

  10. 10.

    Osherenko (2006), p. 339; citing Juda (1996), pp. 212–243.

  11. 11.

    Two implementation Agreements followed: Part XI (Seabed) in 1994 (the Agreement Relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, July 28, 1994, 36 I.L.M. 1492) and Fish Stocks in 1995 (the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, November, 1995 34 I.L.M. 1542) Osherenko (2006), p. 339; citing Juda (1996), pp. 256, 284.

  12. 12.

    United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Dec. 10, 1982, Article 2(1)-(3), 21 I.L.M. 1261.

  13. 13.

    Id. at Article 77.

  14. 14.

    Id.

  15. 15.

    Buck (1998), pp. 93–95.

  16. 16.

    United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Dec. 10, 1982, Article 56, 21 I.L.M. 1261.

  17. 17.

    Christie (2004), p. 2; quoting Christie (1999), p. 396 (quotation marks omitted)).

  18. 18.

    Osherenko (2006), p. 342; citing Kalo (2002), p. 421.

  19. 19.

    Juda (1996), p. 235.

  20. 20.

    United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Dec. 10, 1982, Article 192, 21 I.L.M. 1261.

  21. 21.

    United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Dec. 10, 1982, at Article 61.

  22. 22.

    International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (2009), p. 23.

  23. 23.

    United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Dec. 10, 1982, Article 61(2).

  24. 24.

    Osherenko 371 (citing Encyclopedia of Public International Law (1992)).

  25. 25.

    Gorina-Ysern (2004), p. 675; citing United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Dec. 10, 1982, Articles 117 and 118.

  26. 26.

    Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas, Nov. 20, 1993, 33 I.L.M. 968.

  27. 27.

    Id. at 680; citing Juda (1996), pp. 109–144.

  28. 28.

    Id. at 683–685.

  29. 29.

    Gorina-Ysern (2004), pp. 669–671; citing McLaughlin (2003).

  30. 30.

    Christie (2004), p. 3.

  31. 31.

    International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (2009), p. 5 (citing United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Dec. 10, 1982, Article 61(2), 21 I.L.M. 1261).

  32. 32.

    Gorina-Ysern (2004), pp. 671–674.

  33. 33.

    For a comprehensive look at its conservation provisions applying in the continental shelf, EEZ and high seas, see Gorina-Ysern (2004), pp. 673–675.

  34. 34.

    Food and Agricultural Organization (2012), pp. 11, 13, 53.

  35. 35.

    Id. at 13.

  36. 36.

    A full 166 countries have ratified the treaty. The first 60 nations to do so were as follows (in alphabetical order): Angola (5 December 1990), Antigua and Barbuda (2 February 1989), Bahamas (29 July 1983), Bahrain (30 May 1985), Barbados (12 October 1993), Belize (13 August 1983), Bosnia and Herzegovina (12 January 1994), Botswana (2 May 1990), Brazil (22 December 1988), Cabo Verde (10 August 1987), Cameroon (19 November 1985), Costa Rica (21 September 1992), Côte d'Ivoire (26 March 1984), Cuba (15 August 1984), Cyprus (12 December 1988), Democratic Republic of the Congo (17 February 1989), Djibouti (8 October 1991), Dominica (24 October 1991), Egypt (26 August 1983), Fiji (10 December 1982), Gambia (22 May 1984), Ghana (7 June 1983), Grenada (25 April 1991), Guinea (6 September 1985), Guinea‑Bissau (25 August 1986), Guyana (16 November 1993), Honduras (5 October 1993), Iceland (21 June 1985), Indonesia (3 February 1986), Iraq (30 July 1985), Jamaica (21 March 1983), Kenya (2 March 1989), Kuwait (2 May 1986), Mali (16 July 1985), Malta (20 May 1993), Marshall Islands (9 August 1991), Mexico (18 March 1983), Micronesia (Federated States of) (29 April 1991), Namibia (18 April 1983), Nigeria (14 August 1986), Oman (17 August 1989), Paraguay (26 September 1986), Philippines (8 May 1984), Saint Kitts and Nevis (7 January 1993), Saint Lucia (27 March 1985), Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (1 October 1993), Sao Tome and Principe (3 November 1987), Senegal (25 October 1984), Seychelles (16 September 1991), Somalia (24 July 1989), Sudan (23 January 1985), Togo (16 April 1985), Trinidad and Tobago (25 April 1986), Tunisia (24 April 1985), Uganda (9 November 1990), United Republic of Tanzania (30 September 1985), Uruguay (10 December 1992), Yemen (21 July 1987), Zambia (7 March 1983), Zimbabwe (24 February 1993).

  37. 37.

    Turnipseed et al. (2009), p. 30; citing Kalo et al. (2002), p. 388.

  38. 38.

    Id.; Ashfaq (2010), pp. 358–362.

  39. 39.

    Turnipseed et al. (2009), p. 30; (citing Proclamation No. 5030 (located at 48 Fed. Reg. 10,60 (March 14, 1983)).

  40. 40.

    Id.

  41. 41.

    Id.

  42. 42.

    Id.; citing Proclamation No. 5928, 54 Fed. Reg. 777 (Jan. 9, 1989).

  43. 43.

    Id.; citing Proclamation No. 7219, 64 Fed. Reg. 48,701 (Aug. 2, 1999).

  44. 44.

    The International Court of Justice has stated that for a treaty rule to acquire customary status, it must have (1) a fundamentally norm-creating character such as could be regarded as forming the basis of a general rule of law; (2) a very widespread and representative participation in the convention, including that of states whose interests were specially affected; (3) extensive and virtually uniform state practice, including that of states whose interests are specially affected; and (4) the passage of some time, short though it may be. North Sea Continental Shelf, Judgement, ICJ Rep. 3, at paras 72–74 (1969).

  45. 45.

    As evidence, another author points to the fact that the United States is a party to the 1964 Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, which, like the Law of the Sea, precludes states’ absolute claims to unlimited territorial seas and creates rules to restrict some forms of passage within their territorial seas. Ashfaq at 364 (2010). The author also argues that the imposition of affirmative environmental and pollution-reducing obligations parallels the 1966 Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas, to which the United States is also a party. Id. Finally, the author argues that the revenue-sharing provisions and dispute-resolution mechanisms, which are the source of great controversy, were founded upon the “common heritage of mankind” principle are “customary law” supported in part by its widespread ratification. Id. Under general principles of international law, customary law is binding on all states, including the United States. Id.

  46. 46.

    Turnipseed et al. (2009), at 70 n.169; citing Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law § 514 comment. a. (1987).

  47. 47.

    International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (2009), p. 39.

  48. 48.

    For a comprehensive look at IFQ programs internationally, at least as they existed in 1999, see National Research Council (1999).

  49. 49.

    Its name has changed over time, but it will be referred to in this chapter as the MSA for simplicity’s sake.

  50. 50.

    See Daniel Pauly, Letter to the Editor, Apr. 17, 2011, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/opinion/l21fish.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0, last accessed 16 April 2016.

  51. 51.

    See Eagle et al. (2008), p. 649.

  52. 52.

    90 Stat. 336, Pub. L 94–265, Sec. 101 (April 13, 1976) (codified at 16 U.S.C. § 1811).

  53. 53.

    Id. at sec. 102; (now codified at 16 U.S.C. § 1811).

  54. 54.

    16 U.S.C. § 1821(d) (2012).

  55. 55.

    Territo (2000), p. 1369; citing Decker (1995), p. 335.

  56. 56.

    16 U.S.C. § 1852.

  57. 57.

    Id. § 1852(b).

  58. 58.

    C & W Fish Co. v. Fox, 931F.2d 1556, 1557 (D.C. Cir. 1991).

  59. 59.

    The Secretary can also develop an FMP under specific circumstances. See 16 U.S.C. § 1854(c) (2012).

  60. 60.

    16 U.S.C. § 1854(a), (a)(3) (2012).

  61. 61.

    Id. § 1853(c) (2012).

  62. 62.

    Fishing Co. of Alaska v. Gutierrez, 510 F.3d 328, 330 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (citing 16 U.S.C. § 1854(b)(1)).

  63. 63.

    Id. (citing § 1854(b)(1)(B)).

  64. 64.

    id. (citing § 1854(b)(1)(A)).

  65. 65.

    Id. (citing § 1854(b)(3)).

  66. 66.

    16 U.S.C. § 1854(b)(1)(B), (c)(7) (2006).

  67. 67.

    90 Stat. 351, Pub. L 94-265, tit. III. sec. 303(April 13, 1976) (codified at 16 U.S.C. § 1811).

  68. 68.

    16 U.S.C. § 1853(a)(1)(A).

  69. 69.

    Id. § 1853(a)(7).

  70. 70.

    Among other things, FMPs also are required to describe the fishery in detail, 16 U.S.C. § 1853 (a)(2) (2012); assess and specify the condition of, and the “maximum sustainable yield” and “optimum yield” from the fishery, and include a summary of the information utilized in making such specification, id. § 1853 (a)(3); and assess and specify the capacity of the fishery, including the extent to which fishing vessels of the United States and foreign nations, can and will be able to annually harvest the fishery’s optimum yield. Id. § 1853 (a)(4) (A)-(B). Finally, FMPs must include a fishery impact statement that analyzes the likely effects, if any, including the cumulative conservation, economic, and social impacts, of the conservation and management measures on fishermen and fishing communities. Id. § 1853 (a)(9).

  71. 71.

    Id. § 1853 (a)(11).

  72. 72.

    Id. § 1853(a)(9).

  73. 73.

    Id. § 1854(e)(4) (2012).

  74. 74.

    NRDC v. Nat’l Marine Fisheries Serv., 421 F.3d 872, 880 (9th Cir. 2005).

  75. 75.

    Hooks and Baylor (2009), p. 194; citing Id. § 1853 (a)(15).

  76. 76.

    Maine v. Kreps, 563 F.2d 1043, 1047 (1st Cir. Me. 1977) (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 445, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 48 (1975).)

  77. 77.

    Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. Daley, 209 F.3d 747, 754 (D.C. Cir. 2000).

  78. 78.

    50 C.F.R. § 600.310(f)(1)-(7).

  79. 79.

    Id. § 600.310(g)(1)-(3).

  80. 80.

    Article 61(2).

  81. 81.

    See, e.g., Or. Trollers Ass’n v. Gutierrez, 452 F.3d 1104, 1120 (9th Cir. 2006).

  82. 82.

    See Commonwealth v. Gutierrez, 594 F. Supp. 2d 127, 132 (D. Mass. 2009) (collecting cases).

  83. 83.

    Midwater Trawlers Coop. v. DOC, 282 F.3d 710, 720 (9th Cir. 2002).

  84. 84.

    16 U.S.C. § 1851.

  85. 85.

    The “cap” in the United States, it is called a Total Allowable Catch or TAC.

  86. 86.

    Carden et al. (2013), p. 51.

  87. 87.

    National Research Council (1999), p. 169.

  88. 88.

    Rieser (1997), p. 823.

  89. 89.

    The House Report for the 1996 SFA reports: “Recent efforts by [NMFS] to promote … [ITQ] systems above any other type of limited access system concern the Committee and are inappropriate… . Because ITQ systems have the potential to fundamentally alter fisheries management in the U.S., the Committee believes they must be used with great caution.” H. Rept. No. 104-171 at 36 (1995).

  90. 90.

    See National Research Council (1999), pp. 173–174.

  91. 91.

    Bromley (2008a), pp. 4–5.

  92. 92.

    See National Research Council (1999), pp. 142–143.

  93. 93.

    Bromley (2008b), p. 13.

  94. 94.

    Id.

  95. 95.

    Bromley (2008a), p. 3.

  96. 96.

    Food & Water Watch (2011), pp. 8–9.

  97. 97.

    As the National Research Council indicated: “[I]mplementing an IFQ regime may favor some technologies over others. If [such programs] typically involve more bycatch, bycatch rates can rise in the absence of enforcement.” National Research Council (1999), p. 177.

  98. 98.

    See National Research Council (1999), p. 177.

  99. 99.

    Pew Ocean Commission (2003), p. 44.

  100. 100.

    Rieser (1999), p. 405.

  101. 101.

    See The Sustainable Fisheries Act, Pub. L. No. 104-297, sec. 108(e), § 303(f), 110 Stat. 3576 (1996).

  102. 102.

    S. Rept. No. 109-229 at 9 (2006).

  103. 103.

    Buck (1998), p. 95.

  104. 104.

    Pew (2003), p. 4; citing National Research Council (2002).

  105. 105.

    Id. at 60.

  106. 106.

    Id. at 60; citing National Research Council (2000).

  107. 107.

    Id. at 62.

  108. 108.

    Id. at 59 (citing Goolsby et al. 2014).

  109. 109.

    Id. at 62 (citing Howarth et al. 2002).

  110. 110.

    Id. at 63.

  111. 111.

    Davies (2014).

  112. 112.

    Buck (1998), pp. 96–97.

  113. 113.

    Pew (2003), p. 66.

  114. 114.

    See http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/What+is+Ocean+Acidification%3F, last accessed April 18, 2016.

  115. 115.

    As another example, Titles I and II of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, 33 U.S.C. 1401–1445 (2012), also known as the Ocean Dumping Act, regulates ocean dumping and incineration at sea of materials other than vessel sewage waste. Id. (citing 33 U.S.C. 1402(c) Under this act, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issues permits for ocean dumping of dredged materials, while the EPA has permit authority for the dumping of all other materials. Id. (citing 33 U.S.C. 1412). The U.S. Coast Guard regulates garbage disposal of from vessels pursuant to the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act of 1987. Id. (citing 33 U.S.C. 1412).

  116. 116.

    See 71 Fed. Reg. 37,744 (June 30, 2006).

  117. 117.

    Food & Water Watch v. United States EPA, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174430 (D.D.C. 2013).

  118. 118.

    Available at http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aalexander/SJ%20decision.pdf, last accessed April 18, 2016. Non-profit organizations have also recently sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for failing to implement water quality standards for nutrients in the Mississippi watershed in the face of states’ failure to do so. See Gulf Restoration Network et al v. Jackson et al, 2:12-cv-00677-JCZ-DEK, Order and Reasons (Doc. 175) (September 20, 2013).

  119. 119.

    Pew (2003), p. 66.

  120. 120.

    Buck (1998), p. 97–100.

  121. 121.

    Id. at 98.

  122. 122.

    Ghorbi (2012), p. 483; citing Hunter et al. (2002).

  123. 123.

    http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/LCLP/Pages/default.aspx, last visited April 19, 2016.

  124. 124.

    Id. at 484 (citing 1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, Nov. 7, 1996, Article 4).

  125. 125.

    http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/Pages/1996-Protocol-to-the-Convention-on-the-Prevention-of-Marine-Pollution-by-Dumping-of-Wastes-and-Other-Matter,-1972.aspx, last visited April 19, 2016.

  126. 126.

    Sielen (2008), p. 52.

  127. 127.

    Id.

References

  • Ashfaq S (2010) Something for everyone: why the United States should ratify the law of the sea treaty. J Transnl Law Policy 19:357–362, 364

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromley DW (2008a) IFQs in the West Coast Groundfish Fishery: Economic Confusion and Bogus Reasons! Testimony before the Pacific Fishery Management Council 3–6 (Oct. 14, 2008a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromley DW(2008b) The crisis in ocean governance: conceptual confusion, spurious economics, political indifference. Maritime Stud 13 (MAST 2008, 6(2))

    Google Scholar 

  • Buck SJ (1998) A global commons, an introduction, Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 83, 92, 93–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Carden K, White C, Gaines SD, Costello C, Anderson S (2013), Ecosystem service tradeoff analysis: quantifying the cost of a legal regime. Ariz J Environ Law Policy 4:39–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie DR (1999) The conservation and management of stocks located solely within the exclusive economic zone. In: Ellen Hey (ed) Developments in International Fisheries Law. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 395, 396

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie DR (2004) It don’t come EEZ: the failure and future of coastal state fisheries management. J Transnl Law Policy 14:1–3

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies R (2014) Houston Oil Clean-Up on 25th Anniversary of Exxon Valdez Spill, ABC NEWS, Mar 24, 2014, available at http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2014/03/houston-oil-clean-up-on-25th-anniversary-of-exxon-valdez-spill/ (last visited 17 April 2014)

  • Decker CE (1995) Issues in the reauthorization of the Magnuson fishery conservation and management act. Ocean Coast Law J 1:323–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagle J, Sanchirico JN, Thompson Jr BH (2008) Breaking the Logjam: environmental reform for the new congress and administration: protecting aquatic ecosystems: ocean zoning and spatial access privileges: rewriting the tragedy of the regulated ocean. N Y Univ Environ Law J 17:646–649

    Google Scholar 

  • 1 Encyclopedia of Public International Law 692 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  • Food And Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture, 11, 13, 53 (2012), available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i2727e/i2727e.pdf (last visited 10 April 2014)

  • Food & Water Watch, Fish Inc. (2011) 8–9, available at http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/tools-and-resources/fish-inc/ (last visited 1 May 2014)

  • Ghorbi D (2012) There’s something in the water: the inadequacy of international anti-dumping laws as applied to the Fukushima Daiichi radioactive water discharge. Am Univ Int Law Rev 27:473, 483–484

    Google Scholar 

  • Goolsby DA, Battaglin WA Hooper RP (2014) U.S. Geological Survey, Sources and Transport of Nitrogen in the Mississippi River Basin. American Farm Bureau Federation Workshop, St. Louis, Missouri 14, July 15, 1997, available at http://wwwrcolka.cr.usgs.gov/midconherb/st.louis.hypoxia.html (last visited 10 April 2014)

  • Gorina-Ysern M (2004) World ocean public trust: high seas fisheries after grotius - towards a new ocean ethos? Golden Gate Univ Law Rev 34:645, 673–675, 680, 699–671, 683–685

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooks AM, Baylor E (2009) Recent developments: natural resources: fishery conservation and management after reauthorization of MSA. Tex Environ Law J 39:193–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Howarth RW, Boyer EW, Pabich W, Galloway JN (2002) Nitrogen use in the United States from 1961–2000 and potential future trends. Ambio 31(2):88–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter D, Salzman JE, Zaelke D (2002) International environmental law and policy, 2nd edn. Foundation Press, New York, p 735

    Google Scholar 

  • International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Towards Sustainable Fisheries Law. A Comparative Analysis (Gerd Winter ed. 2009) 5, 23, 39, available at /portals.iucn.org/library/efiles/edocs/EPLP-074.pdf, last visited 20 May 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • Juda L (1996) International law and ocean use management: the evolution of ocean governance In: Smith HD (ed) pp 212–243

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalo JJ (2002) Coastal and Ocean Law 388, 421 (W. Grp. 2nd ed)

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin RJ (2003) Foreign access to shared marine genetic materials: management options for a quasi-fugacious resource. Ocean Dev. Int Law 34:297

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (1999) Sharing the fish towards a national policy on individual fishing quotas. National Academic Press, pp 142–143, 173–174, 177

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2000) Clean coastal waters: understanding and reducing the effects of nutrient pollution. National Academic Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2002) Oil in the Sea III: inputs, fates, and effects. National Academic Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Osherenko G (2006) New discourses on ocean governance: understanding property rights and the public trust. J Environ Law Litig 21:317, 339, 342, 372

    Google Scholar 

  • Pew Ocean Commission (2003) America’s Living Oceans Charting A Course For Sea Change, 4, 44, 59–63 (May 2003), available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Protecting_ocean_life/env_pew_oceans_final_report.pdf, (last visited 17 April 2014)

  • Rieser A (1997) The ecosystem approach: new departures for land and water: fisheries management: property rights and ecosystem management in U.S. fisheries: contracting for the commons? Ecol Law Q 24:813–823

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieser A (1999) Prescriptions for the commons: environmental scholarship and the fishing quotas debate. Harv Environ Law Rev 23:393–405

    Google Scholar 

  • Sielen AB (2008) An oceans manifesto: the present global crisis. Fletcher Forum World Aff 32:39–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Territo M (2000) The precautionary principle in marine fisheries conservation and the U.S. sustainable fisheries act of 1996. Vermont Law Rev 24:1351–1369

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnipseed M, Roady SE, Sagarin R, Crowder LB (2009) The silver anniversary of the United States’ exclusive economic zone: twenty-five years of ocean use and abuse, and the possibility of a blue water public trust doctrine. Ecol Law Q 36:1, 5–7, 30

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Food & Water Watch, Washington, DC, USA

    Zach Corrigan

Authors
  1. Zach Corrigan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zach Corrigan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Food Law International, LLP, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Gabriela Steier

  2. Food Law International, LLP, Washington, D.C., USA

    Kiran K. Patel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Corrigan, Z. (2017). Water and Marine Animal Law. In: Steier, G., Patel, K. (eds) International Farm Animal, Wildlife and Food Safety Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18002-1_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18002-1_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18001-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18002-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation