The faraway place of the ‘high seas’ is exactly what it sounds like: vast swaths of ocean that belong to no one yet everyone. Today, all nations have marine boundaries extending 200 miles from their coastline, creating an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Beyond these imaginary lines, though, is the open ocean, or high seas.
Out of sight, out of mind has so far been the governing policy for this part of the ocean: the sea and its resources are so widespread that we couldn’t possibly aim to manage all of it, so we manage what we see along our coasts and what we control within national waters. Technological advances, however, have made access to the high seas possible, whether for shipping, fisheries, or mining purposes, and economic activities are worth billions in this last lawless region.
The United Nations General Assembly decided at the end of 2017 that an intergovernmental conference will convene to negotiate an international treaty for protection of the High Seas. Abundant biodiversity can be found in these areas beyond national jurisdiction: marine mammals, fish stocks, and seabed minerals create rich resources that are largely open access–not protected or managed.
Highly migratory species would be one exception. Regional fishery management organizations (RFMOs) bring countries together to manage fish species that migrate between national boundaries, including tunas, sharks, and billfish. The purpose of RFMOs is not protection but management, to ensure fair apportioning of the stock and survival of the fishery. An international treaty dedicated to conservation of the high seas, though, would assumingly include these high value HMS fish, with the purpose of protection.
Would the protections of a United Nations treaty regarding all high seas resources impact the current workings of RFMOs? That depends on the type and strength of the regulations. If fishing were to be banned in the High Seas, as has been suggested by some, then HMS fish could only be caught in a nation’s EEZ. Upon first glance this appears to significantly reduce the area fishermen can search for HMS, however, only 10% of the catch from global fisheries comes from areas beyond national jurisdiction. In fact, most fisheries, even tuna, come from the waters belonging to a nation.
Another suggested protection for the high seas is the use of marine protected areas (MPAs) and reserves. This location-based strategy aims to protect a specific area of ecological importance by excluding particular uses, such as fishing, trawling, boating, etc. Some parts of the vast high seas hold deep water corals; other areas are important migration routes for whales; and others are breeding grounds. By protecting specific sites, management and monitoring becomes relatively easier than patrolling the entire ocean. And depending upon the locations, such reserves and their restrictions could indeed affect HMS fisheries.
Recreationally speaking, protection of the high seas will likely have little impact on anglers. The area is still difficult to reach and most vessels making the journey are commercially fishing or shipping cargo. Because EEZs extend 200 miles from national coasts, recreational anglers are largely governed by national regulations, not international.
No matter the final management approach, it will be useless without proper monitoring. There is currently an agreement to reduce illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing in the world’s oceans, but the challenge is monitoring vessel behavior on the high seas. Technology, however, is aiding the challenge as systems are tailored to fisheries. Global Fishing Watch is one useful program that utilizes vessel tracking systems to view where vessels travel, and blockchain software has been applied to seafood by tracing a fish’s journey from ocean to dinner plate.
The United Nations will begin the two-year process of negotiations in 2018 for an international treaty to protect marine life of the high seas.
