DOCSLIB.ORG

Archipelago Concept of Limits of Territorial Seas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Archipelago Concept of Limits of Territorial Seas 328 ARCHIPELAGO CONCEPT OF LIMITS OF TERRITORIAL SEAS John R. Brock INTRODUCTION writing on this subject are also covered. The necessary future action of the The oceans of the world are the free United States seems clear, and the sug­ world lifelines. Operational mobility for gested procedure is set forth in this free world naval and air forces is being thesis. drastically reduced by encroachments on the high seas by nation-states in a I-BACKGROUND unilateral try at extending territorial waters in various ways. The purpose of The Seas Are Our Strength. The this study is to review the efforts of freedom of navigation on the high seas certain nations to try to extend their means the essential liberty of maritime internal and territorial waters through transportation. The importance of a unique method of measurement mobility which the seas provide us was referred to as the archipelago concept eloquently stated by Hanson W. Bald­ or archipelago theory of territorial win as follows: waters. This not only restricts severely The days of isolation are the mobility of the fleets but also ended: the world needs us; we greatly narrows the commerce and free need the world. Our strategic con­ trade routes of the world and is thus cept must meet a threat as varied limiting upon all nations, large and and as complex as any in our small, rich and poor. history. If we would lead from The legal status of the unilateral strength, we must emphasize declarations by Indonesia and the Phil­ those elements of power in which ippines is reviewed in this paper. The we excel: our developed economy U.S. position established in connection and great wealth, our industrial with the archipelago concept through power and our technological ex­ decisions of the courts, by legislation, pertise, our sea and air power, and and by diplomatic action is reported. our nuclear delivery capability. The present status of the archipelago We must utilize the great waters concept so far as can be determined by and the skies and space above us the decisions of the International Court for the flexibility and mobility of Justice and by the international which the United States, more conventions is carefully surveyed. The than any other world power, can opinions of international lawyers exploit. 1 329 Certainly today seaborne mobile territorial sea at that time. In the period forces remain the key to any eonsidera­ from 1930 onwards the permitted extent tion of land hostilities-in offense or in of this narrow breadth of territorial sea defcnse. Since the United States is a has been in increasing controversy, seapower-a maritime nation-and Russia largely because of concern for access to is basically a land-locked nation, the fisheries and because of danger, from a U.S.S.R. would like to see the United security standpoint, of permitting the States dcnied as much as possible the blocking-off of large areas of water as frecdom of the use of the great oeean territorial sea.5 highway covering three fourths of the The United Nations Conference on earth's surface. Russia and its satellites as the Law of the Sea concluded at Geneva well as some of the new and irresponsible on 28 April 1958 adopted four interna­ nations would favor limiting the high seas tional conventions on the law of the sea. in any way conceivable. The archipelago The United States joined with Canada in concept just happens to be another en­ proposing a six-mile territorial sea and an croachment on the high seas that favors additional six-mile exclusive fishing zone. the Russian philosophy. This proposal was submitted to the 14th Plenary Meeting on 25 April 1958. 6 The Freedom of the Seas: History and U.S. proposal narrowly missed obtaining the Position. The historical record of free­ necessary two-thirds majority. While this dom of the seas is familiar. The oceans of proposal indicated that the United States the world were at one time claimed for was prepared to depart from its tradi­ exclusive use of a limited number of tional adherence to the three-mile limit in states. Venice, Denmark, and England order to aehieve conference agreement, claimed broad rights over portions of the Arthur H. Dean, chairman of the Ameri­ high seas during the medieval period. The can delegation, made it clear that the" promulgation of Papal Bulls of 1493 United States would continue to adhere purported to demarcate Portuguese to the three-mile limit unless the con­ righ ts t<1 the east and Spanish rights to the ference agreed on a change in the tradi­ west of an imagina7 line 100 leagues tional rule. Dean made the following west of the Azores. Hugo Grotius, a closing statement at the conference: Dutch jurist, subsequently rationalized We have made it clear from the the freedom of the seas on the ground beginning that in our view the that since the sea was not divisible it 3-mile rule is and will continue to could not be appropriated to individual be established international law, to use from the common ownership of 3 which we adhere. It is the only mankind. Concern for the more general breadth of the territorial sea on interest of the whole community of which there has ever been anything states ultimately succeeded in freeing the like common agreement. Unilateral larger expanse of the oceans for relatively 4 acts of states claiming greater terri­ unhampered use of all. torial seas are not only not sanc­ After a prolonged balancing of inter­ tioned by any principle of interna­ ests between coastal states and other tional law but are, indeed, in con­ states of the world community as to flict with the universally accepted authority on the seas, the principles of principle of freedom of the seas. the freedom of the seas and of a narrow breadth of territorial sea became ac­ Furthermore, we have made it cepted. By 1900 the three-mile or one­ clear that in our view there is no league limit had been positively adopted obligation on the part of states or acknowledged as law by 20 of the 21 adhering to the 3-mile rule to states which claimed or acknowledged a recognize claims on the part of 330 other states to a greater hreadth ment on the areas of high seas is the of territorial sea. And on that we unilateral attempt of such archipelagic stand.' nations as the Philippines and Indonesia The United States has always heen one to extend their territorial seas and in­ of the world's foremost advocates of the ternal waters in an exaggerated fashion doctrine of the freedom of the seas and and to the great detriment of other has vigorously opposed all efforts to members of the international com­ restrict the free navigation of its war munity. The Republic of the Philippines vessels and merchantmen. and the Republic of Indonesia hoth The concept of the freedom of the archipelago states, have claimed'sover­ seas likewise applies to the freedom of eignty over all waters around, between, the airspace ahove the seas.8 Because of and connecting the different islands of this and other reasons, the United States the respective archipelagoes. Sealanes Government, including the Navy De­ used throughout maritime history partment, has always advocated the would be taken out of areas of the high three-mile limit of territorial waters seas by these unilateral actions. The delimited in such a way that the outer claim of the Philippines was outlined in a note of the Philippine Foreign Office limits thereof closely follow the sinuosi­ 11 ties of the coastline. Sovereign claims of on 12 December 1955. The Indo­ nesian claim was contained in Act No.4 waters of the high seas restrict the range of war vessels and merchantmen. By of 18 February 1960.12 The major claim sometimes made in reducing sovereign claims to the narrow three-mile helt, the range of these ves­ connection with midocean archipelagoes is to delimit the territorial sea from a sels is therehy expanded. The time­ honored position of the Navy is that the line connecting the outermost islands and to include all waters within the line greater the freedom and range of its warships and aircraft, the hetter pro­ as part of. internal waters. The primary counterclaim asserts that an island in an tected are the security interests of the United States hecause greater use can he archipelago does not differ from any other island and that each should have made of warships and military aircraft.9 only its own belt of territorial sea; in Not only international prosperity hut also international well-heing has he en this view, there would be no question of straight baselines or of internal waters. enhanced in suhstantial measure In the archipelago concept an insular through preservation of the oceans as a type baseline adapts the idea of a common storehouse of riches. Equality perimeter around an island or group of of nations has had its fullest exemplifi­ cation in the fact that all states irre­ islands. (See Figures 1 and 2 for ex­ spective of relative wealth and ;ower amples of midocean archipelagoes and coastal archipelagoes.)13 Such a line position, have heen largely free to utilize the oceans. Solidarity and ex­ aro~nd an island would touch on capes, panding loyalties have heen furthered as pemnsulas, offshore isles, or other the oceans have heen made to function prominent points along the coasts. Such a line around a group of islands or not as ~arriers hetween peoples, such as mountams, hut as easily availahle links archipelago, would box in the ensem'ble of communication and transportation the straight baseline normally touchin~ fostering a cosmopolitan sense of iden­ at the more prominent geographic tification hetween peoples of otherwise features of the outermost islands.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • This Keyword List Contains Indian Ocean Place Names of Coral Reefs, Islands, Bays and Other Geographic Features in a Hierarchical Structure
    CoRIS Place Keyword Thesaurus by Ocean - 8/9/2016 Indian Ocean This keyword list contains Indian Ocean place names of coral reefs, islands, bays and other geographic features in a hierarchical structure. For example, the first name on the list - Bird Islet - is part of the Addu Atoll, which is in the Indian Ocean. The leading label - OCEAN BASIN - indicates this list is organized according to ocean, sea, and geographic names rather than country place names. The list is sorted alphabetically. The same names are available from “Place Keywords by Country/Territory - Indian Ocean” but sorted by country and territory name. Each place name is followed by a unique identifier enclosed in parentheses. The identifier is made up of the latitude and longitude in whole degrees of the place location, followed by a four digit number. The number is used to uniquely identify multiple places that are located at the same latitude and longitude. For example, the first place name “Bird Islet” has a unique identifier of “00S073E0013”. From that we see that Bird Islet is located at 00 degrees south (S) and 073 degrees east (E). It is place number 0013 at that latitude and longitude. (Note: some long lines wrapped, placing the unique identifier on the following line.) This is a reformatted version of a list that was obtained from ReefBase. OCEAN BASIN > Indian Ocean OCEAN BASIN > Indian Ocean > Addu Atoll > Bird Islet (00S073E0013) OCEAN BASIN > Indian Ocean > Addu Atoll > Bushy Islet (00S073E0014) OCEAN BASIN > Indian Ocean > Addu Atoll > Fedu Island (00S073E0008)
    [Show full text]
  • Part 11. the Corfu Channel Question 313
    Part 11. The Corfu Channel question 313 “3. The instrument for the Free Port of Trieste ; ject of a dispute between the United Kingdom and and its acceptance of the responsibilities devolving Albania, h upon it under the same.” “The Security Council “Resolves: THE CORFU CHANNEL QUESTION “To appoint a sub-committee of three members INITIAL PROCEEDINGS to examine all the available evidence concerning the above-mentioned incidents and to make a report By letter dated 10 January 1947,1T3 enclosing copies to the Security Council, not later than 10 March of an exchange of notes between the United Kingdom 1947, on the facts of the case as disclosed by such and the People’s Republic of Albania regarding an evidence. incident in the Corfu Channel in which two British warships had been mined on 22 October 1946, the “The sub-committee is empowered to request United Kingdom submitted this question as a dispute further information as it deems necessary from the under Article 35. parties to the dispute, and the representatives of the United Kingdom and Albania are requested to give At its 95th meeting on 20 January 1947, the Secu- every assistance to the sub-committee in its work.” rity Council included the question in the agenda.‘74 Decision of 25 March 1947 (122nd meeting): Rejec- The Security Council considered the question at its tion of draft resolution submitted by the repre- 95th, 107th, 109th, lllth, 114th, 120th to 122nd, 125th sentative of the United Kingdom and 127th meetings between 20 January and 9 April 1947.175 At the 120th meeting on
    [Show full text]
  • Range Expansion of the Whitenose Shark, Nasolamia Velox, and Migratory Movements to the Oceanic Revillagigedo Archipelago
    Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, page 1 of 5. # Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 2017 doi:10.1017/S0025315417000108 Range expansion of the whitenose shark, Nasolamia velox, and migratory movements to the oceanic Revillagigedo Archipelago (west Mexico) frida lara-lizardi1,2, mauricio hoyos-padilla2,3, james t. ketchum2,4 and felipe galva’ n-magan~a1 1Instituto Polite´cnico Nacional, Centro Interdisciplinario de Ciencias Marinas, Av. IPN s/n. C.P. 23096. La Paz, B.C.S, Mexico, 2Pelagios-Kakunja´ A. C. 1540 Sinaloa, C.P. 23070, La Paz, B.C.S., Mexico, 3Fins Attached, 19675 Still Glen Way, Colorado Springs, CO 80908, USA, 4Centro de Investigaciones Biolo´gicas del Noroeste, Playa Palo de Santa Rita Sur, 23096 La Paz, B.C.S, Mexico Current literature considers that Nasolamia velox has a limited distribution along the coastline of the Eastern Pacific with sporadic sightings in the Galapagos Archipelago. This study provides evidence of the occurrence of this species at the Revillagigedo Archipelago (18899′186′′N 112808′44′′W), Mexico, using acoustic telemetry and videos taken from 2014 to 2016. We report here movements from a coastal location (National Park Cabo Pulmo) to a group of oceanic islands (Revillagigedo Archipelago) by one single individual, supporting the idea of the potential connectivity of sharks between the Gulf of California and the Revillagigedo Archipelago. This report extends the known distribution of N. velox to 400 km off the mainland coast of the Americas, thereby increasing the knowledge of the distribution of a species commonly reported in fishery landings of the Eastern Pacific.
    [Show full text]
  • South of Hanko Peninsula
    2013 5 CT JE RO SEA P C I T BAL Oceana proposal for a Marine Protected Area South of Hanko Peninsula INTRODUCTION Hanko Peninsula, located at the entrance to the Gulf of Finland, is the southern-most part of the Finnish mainland and boasts an archipelago and long sandy beaches. Salinity is relatively low, ranging from 5.5 to 7.5 psu, and the waters in the shallower coastal areas are limnic1. Upwellings, a common occurrence in the area wherein nutrient-rich sediments are brought up to the surface, cause a rapid increase in the salinity in areas at 35 meters, and a small increase in salinity in the surface water2. The inner waters of the archipelago freeze every year, while the more open waters freeze regularly, but not every winter3. Parts of the coastal area are protected under EU Natura 2000 network, and the area is classified as a sea area requiring specific protection measures. Wetland areas are also included in the Ramsar network. Because of the special characteristics of the area (changing salinity, archipelagos, wetlands), there are a lot of different zones that are able to host a wide variety of different species and communities4. Oceana conducted in the spring of 2011 and 2012 information from the area with ROV (Remotely Operated Vehicle), bottom samples and scuba dives. 1 5 South of Hanko Peninsula DesCRipTION OF The AREA Low salinity limits the amount of marine species in the area. Species composition changes completely from the open waters to the coast; with marine species being more common further from the coast and limnic species getting more common closer to the shore.
    [Show full text]
  • The Abandonment of Butrint: from Venetian Enclave to Ottoman
    dining in the sanctuary of demeter and kore 1 Hesperia The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens Volume 88 2019 Copyright © American School of Classical Studies at Athens, originally pub- lished in Hesperia 88 (2019), pp. 365–419. This offprint is supplied for per- sonal, non-commercial use only, and reflects the definitive electronic version of the article, found at <https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2972/hesperia.88.2.0365>. hesperia Jennifer Sacher, Editor Editorial Advisory Board Carla M. Antonaccio, Duke University Effie F. Athanassopoulos, University of Nebraska-Lincoln Angelos Chaniotis, Institute for Advanced Study Jack L. Davis, University of Cincinnati A. A. Donohue, Bryn Mawr College Jan Driessen, Université Catholique de Louvain Marian H. Feldman, University of California, Berkeley Gloria Ferrari Pinney, Harvard University Thomas W. Gallant, University of California, San Diego Sharon E. J. Gerstel, University of California, Los Angeles Guy M. Hedreen, Williams College Carol C. Mattusch, George Mason University Alexander Mazarakis Ainian, University of Thessaly at Volos Lisa C. Nevett, University of Michigan John H. Oakley, The College of William and Mary Josiah Ober, Stanford University John K. Papadopoulos, University of California, Los Angeles Jeremy B. Rutter, Dartmouth College Monika Trümper, Freie Universität Berlin Hesperia is published quarterly by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Founded in 1932 to publish the work of the American School, the jour- nal now welcomes submissions
    [Show full text]
  • Canada's Sovereignty Over the Northwest Passage
    Michigan Journal of International Law Volume 10 Issue 2 1989 Canada's Sovereignty Over the Northwest Passage Donat Pharand University of Ottawa Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil Part of the International Law Commons, and the Law of the Sea Commons Recommended Citation Donat Pharand, Canada's Sovereignty Over the Northwest Passage, 10 MICH. J. INT'L L. 653 (1989). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol10/iss2/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Journal of International Law at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CANADA'S SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE NORTHWEST PASSAGE Donat Pharand* In 1968, when this writer published "Innocent Passage in the Arc- tic,"' Canada had yet to assert its sovereignty over the Northwest Pas- sage. It has since done so by establishing, in 1985, straight baselines around the whole of its Arctic Archipelago. In August of that year, the U. S. Coast Guard vessel PolarSea made a transit of the North- west Passage on its voyage from Thule, Greenland, to the Chukchi Sea (see Route 1 on Figure 1). Having been notified of the impending transit, Canada informed the United States that it considered all the waters of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago as historic internal waters and that a request for authorization to transit the Northwest Passage would be necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • COASTAL WONDERS of NORWAY, the FAROE ISLANDS and ICELAND Current Route: Oslo, Norway to Reykjavik, Iceland
    COASTAL WONDERS OF NORWAY, THE FAROE ISLANDS AND ICELAND Current route: Oslo, Norway to Reykjavik, Iceland 17 Days National Geographic Resolution 126 Guests Expeditions in: Jun From $22,470 to $44,280 * Call us at 1.800.397.3348 or call your Travel Agent. In Australia, call 1300.361.012 • www.expeditions.com DAY 1: Oslo, Norway padding Arrive in Oslo and check into the Hotel Bristol (or 2022 Departure Dates: similar) in the heart of the city. On an afternoon tour, stroll amid the city’s famed Vigeland 6 Jun sculptures—hundreds of life-size human figures Advance Payment: set in terraced Frogner Park. Visit the Fram Museum, showcasing the polar ship Fram and $3,000 dedicated to the explorers and wooden vessels that navigated the Arctic Sea in the late 1800s and Sample Airfares: early 1900s. The evening is free to explore Oslo Economy: from $900 on your own. (L) Business: from $2,700 Charter(Oslo/Tromso): from $490 DAY 2: Oslo / Tromsø / Embark Airfares are subject to change padding Take a charter flight to Tromsø, known as the Cost Includes: “gateway to the Arctic” due to the large number of Arctic expeditions that originated here. Visit the One hotel night in Oslo; accommodations; Arctic Cathedral, where the unique architecture meals indicated; alcoholic beverages evokes icebergs; and peruse the Polar Museum, (except premium brands); excursions; which showcases the ships, equipment, and services of Lindblad Expeditions’ Leader, seafaring traditions of early Arctic settlers. Embark Naturalist staff and expert guides; use of our ship this afternoon. (B,L,D) kayaks; entrance fees; all port charges and service taxes; gratuities to ship’s crew.
    [Show full text]
  • The Finnish Archipelago Coast from AD 500 to 1550 – a Zone of Interaction
    The Finnish Archipelago Coast from AD 500 to 1550 – a Zone of Interaction Tapani Tuovinen [email protected], [email protected] Abstract New archaeological, historical, paleoecological and onomastic evidence indicates Iron Age settle- ment on the archipelago coast of Uusimaa, a region which traditionally has been perceived as deso- lated during the Iron Age. This view, which has pertained to large parts of the archipelago coast, can be traced back to the early period of field archaeology, when an initial conception of the archipelago as an unsettled and insignificant territory took form. Over time, the idea has been rendered possible by the unbalance between the archaeological evidence and the written sources, the predominant trend of archaeology towards the mainland (the terrestrical paradigm), and the history culture of wilderness. Wilderness was an important platform for the nationalistic constructions of early Finnishness. The thesis about the Iron Age archipelago as an untouched no-man’s land was a history politically convenient tacit agreement between the Finnish- and the Swedish-minded scholars. It can be seen as a part of the post-war demand for a common view of history. A geographical model of the present-day archaeological, historical and palaeoecological evi- dence of the archipelago coast is suggested. Keywords: Finland, Iron Age, Middle Ages, archipelago, settlement studies, nationalism, history, culture, wilderness, borderlands. 1. The coastal Uusimaa revisited er the country had inhabitants at all during the Bronze Age (Aspelin 1875: 58). This drastic The early Finnish settlement archaeologists of- interpretation developed into a long-term re- ten treated the question of whether the country search tradition that contains the idea of easily was settled at all during the prehistory: were perishable human communities and abandoned people in some sense active there, or was the regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal State's Jurisdiction Over Foreign Vessels
    Pace International Law Review Volume 14 Issue 1 Spring 2002 Article 2 April 2002 Coastal State's Jurisdiction over Foreign Vessels Anne Bardin Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pilr Recommended Citation Anne Bardin, Coastal State's Jurisdiction over Foreign Vessels, 14 Pace Int'l L. Rev. 27 (2002) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pilr/vol14/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace International Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES COASTAL STATE'S JURISDICTION OVER FOREIGN VESSELS Anne Bardin I. Introduction ....................................... 28 II. The Rights and Duties of States in the Different Sea Zones Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ............................. 30 A. Internal W aters ............................... 30 1. Jurisdiction Over Foreign Merchant V essels ..................................... 30 2. Jurisdiction Over Foreign Warships ....... 31 3. The Right of all Vessels to Free Access to P ort ........................................ 32 B. The Territorial Sea ............................ 33 1. Innocent Passage in the Territorial Sea .... 34 2. Legislative Competence of the Coastal State ....................................... 35 3. Implementation of its Legislation by the Coastal State .............................. 36 4. Criminal Jurisdiction of the Coastal State ....................................... 37 5. W arships .................................. 39 C. The Contiguous Zone .......................... 39 D. The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) ........... 40 1. Rights of the Coastal State in its EEZ ..... 41 2. Artificial Islands and Scientific Research .. 41 3. Rights of Foreign States in the EEZ ....... 43 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Article 9 ATT a Law of the Sea Perspective
    Article 9 ATT A Law of the Sea Perspective ATT Working Group on Effective Treaty Implementation Sub-Working Group on Article 9, Meeting of 27 April 2021 Prof. Dr. Anna Petrig, LL.M. (Harvard) [email protected] Article 9 ATT Why law of the sea? Article 9 – Transit and trans-shipment Each State Party shall take appropriate measures to regulate (…) the transit and trans-shipment under its jurisdiction of conventional arms (…) through its territory in accordance with relevant international law. Who has Only land or jurisdiction at also sea? sea (inter alia Limits on over foreign regulation and ships)? enforcement? ATT WGETI Anna Petrig Law of the sea The basics Law of the sea Where is to be found? customary international other treaties law United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) UN Security Council Resolutions … and so on! ATT WGETI Anna Petrig United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea What is it about? UNCLOS jurisdictional substantive provisions provisions “all issues relating to maritime zones the sea” resources, crime, categories of states environment, … ATT WGETI Anna Petrig Jurisdictional provisions of the UNCLOS Maritime zones and categories of states categories of maritime zones states internal waters port / coastal states (ports) Which state(s) can do territorial sea flag states what where? exclusive economic zone high seas ATT WGETI Anna Petrig Article 9 ATT Internal waters Internal waters (ports) Maritime zone Source: <https://sites.tufts.edu/lawofthesea/chapter-two/> ATT WGETI Anna Petrig Internal waters (ports) 9 ATT: «territory»? Definition and importance in ATT context . waters on the landward side of the baseline (art.
    [Show full text]
  • Places on Deer Isle Open for Public Use
    “The mission of Island Heritage Trust is to conserve significant open space, scenic areas, wildlife habitats, natural resources, historic and cultural features that offer public benefit and are essential to the character of the Deer Isle area.” Places on Deer Isle open for Public Use IHT’s Conserved Lands on Deer Isle Bowcat Point – On Little Deer Isle side of Causeway. Causeway Beach – Along Causeway between Little Deer Isle -Deer Isle. Reach Beach at Gray’s Cove – At far East end of Reach Road, Deer Isle. Lily Pond – Parking area off Deer Run Apartments Road, Deer Isle. Settlement Quarry – About ½ mile down Oceanville Road, Stonington (not on Settlement Road). Shore Acres – Off Greenlaw District Road (between Sunshine Road & Reach Road). Tennis Preserve –At end of Tennis Road off Sunshine Road, BPL land co- managed by IHT. Scotts Landing - North of and across from Causeway Beach, Deer Isle. Pine Hill – Off Blastow Cove Road, Little Deer Isle. Land owned by The Nature Conservancy maintained by IHT Barred Island Preserve - Near end of Goose Cove Road, Deer Isle. Crocket Cove Preserve - Off Whitman Road at Burnt Cove or off Barbour Farm Road, Stonington. IHT’s Conserved off-shore Islands open for day use Bradbury Island – Large Island in Penobscot Bay, West of Deer Isle. Carney Island – SW of Causeway Beach, IHT owns North half of Island Eagle nesting site, Island closed March –July. Mark Island (landing not recommended) – SW of Crotch Island. Millet Island – In Archipelago, NE of Spruce Island. Polypod Island – In Deer Isle’s Southeast Harbor. Round Island – In Archipelago, between McGlathery & Wreck.
    [Show full text]
  • Petition to List the Alexander Archipelago Wolf in Southeast
    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR PETITION TO LIST THE ALEXANDER ARCHIPELAGO WOLF (CANIS LUPUS LIGONI) IN SOUTHEAST ALASKA AS THREATENED OR ENDANGERED UNDER THE U.S. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT © ROBIN SILVER PETITIONERS CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, ALASKA RAINFOREST DEFENDERS, AND DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE JULY 15, 2020 NOTICE OF PETITION David Bernhardt, Secretary U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 [email protected] Margaret Everson, Principal Deputy Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 [email protected] Gary Frazer, Assistant Director for Endangered Species U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1840 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 [email protected] Greg Siekaniec, Alaska Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage, AK 99503 [email protected] PETITIONERS Shaye Wolf, Ph.D. Larry Edwards Center for Biological Diversity Alaska Rainforest Defenders 1212 Broadway P.O. Box 6064 Oakland, California 94612 Sitka, Alaska 99835 (415) 385-5746 (907) 772-4403 [email protected] [email protected] Randi Spivak Patrick Lavin, J.D. Public Lands Program Director Defenders of Wildlife Center for Biological Diversity 441 W. 5th Avenue, Suite 302 (310) 779-4894 Anchorage, AK 99501 [email protected] (907) 276-9410 [email protected] _________________________ Date this 15 day of July 2020 2 Pursuant to Section 4(b) of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §1533(b), Section 553(3) of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553(e), and 50 C.F.R. § 424.14(a), the Center for Biological Diversity, Alaska Rainforest Defenders, and Defenders of Wildlife petition the Secretary of the Interior, through the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”), to list the Alexander Archipelago wolf (Canis lupus ligoni) in Southeast Alaska as a threatened or endangered species.
    [Show full text]