Volume II - Appendixes, annexes and figures

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
_____________________________________________
ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SOVEREIGN RIGHTS AND MARITIME SPACES IN THE CARIBBEAN SEA
(NICARAGUA v. COLOMBIA)
COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA
VOLUME II
APPENDIXES, ANNEXES AND FIGURES
17 November 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME II
APPENDIXES
Appendix A Colombia’s Alleged Events in the Caribbean Sea -Technical and 3
Humanitarian Assistance Events
Appendix B Examples from States which have enacted domestic legislation 13
concerning the Contiguous Zone
ANNEXES
I.
OFFICIAL STATEMENTS
Annex 1 Press release from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with regard to the 25
Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, 30 August 2013.
II.
LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS (COLOMBIA)
Annex 2 Colombian Institute for Agrarian Reform, Resolution No. 206 27
of 16 December 1968.
Annex 3 Presidential Decree No. 2324 of 18 September 1984. 29
Annex 4 Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development, 31
Resolution No. 107 of 27 January 2005.
Annex 5 Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the San Andrés, 41
Providencia and Santa Catalina Archipelago – CORALINA,
Agreement No. 021, 9 June 2005.
Annex 6 Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the San Andrés, 51
Providencia and Santa Catalina Archipelago – CORALINA,
Agreement No. 025, 4 August 2005.
Annex 7 Presidential Decree No. 1946 of 9 September 2013, as modified 77
and amended by Presidential Decree No. 1119 of 17 June 2014
(composite version).
i
Annex 8 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Resolution 87
No. 350 of 10 October 2013.
Annex 9 Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, 91
Resolution No. 977 of 24 June 2014.
III.
LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS (NICARAGUA)
Annex 10 National Assembly of the Republic of Nicaragua, 95
Law No. 613 of 7 February 2007.
Annex 11 National Assembly of the Republic of Nicaragua, 125
Law No. 753 of 22 February 2011.
Annex 12 National Assembly of the Republic of Nicaragua, 127
Law No. 836 of 13 March 2013.
Annex 13 Decree No. 33-2013, Baselines of the Marine Areas of the 131
Republic of Nicaragua in the Caribbean Sea, 19 August 2013
[English and Spanish versions].
Annex 14 Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquaculture – INPESCA, 139
Executive Resolution PA-No. 001-2015.
Annex 15 Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquaculture – INPESCA, 143
Executive Resolution PA-No. 001-2016.
Annex 16 National Assembly of the Republic of Nicaragua, Law No. 923 147
of 1 March 2016.
IV.
TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS
Annex 17 Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine 153
Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region (Cartagena Convention) [English and French versions].
Annex 18 Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife to 179
the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region (SPAW Protocol)
[English and French versions].
V.
DIPLOMATIC NOTES
Annex 19 Diplomatic Note DM No. 94331 from the Minister of Foreign 217
Affairs of Colombia to the Secretary-General of the United Nations,
23 November 2012.
ii
Annex 20 Diplomatic Note DM No. 94365 from the Minister of Foreign 221
Affairs of Colombia to the Secretary-General of the Organization
of American States, 23 November 2012.
Annex 21 Diplomatic Note DM No. 78634 from the Minister of Foreign 227
Affairs of Colombia to the Director-General of the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization – UNESCO,
23 November 2012.
Annex 22 Note Verbale No. E-16 from the Embassy of Colombia in Managua 231
to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Nicaragua, 14 January 2013.
Annex 23 Note Verbale No. MRE/SCPE/014/01/13 from the Ministry of 233
Foreign Affairs of Nicaragua to the Embassy of Colombia in
Managua, 14 January 2013.
Annex 24 Note Verbale No. MRE/DGAJ//0014//13 from the Embassy of 235
Colombia in Managua to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of
Nicaragua, 17 January 2013.
Annex 25 Diplomatic Note No. S-GACIJ-13-044275 from the Minister of 237
Foreign Affairs of Colombia to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, 1 November 2013.
Annex 26 Note Verbale No. S-DISTD-16-013262 from the Ministry of 239
Foreign Affairs of Colombia to the Embassy of Nicaragua in
Bogotá, 10 February 2016.
Annex 27 Note Verbale No. MRE/VM-AJ/0079/02/16 from the Ministry 241
of Foreign Affairs of Nicaragua to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
of Colombia, 11 February 2016.
VI.
COLOMBIAN NAVY DOCUMENTS
Annex 28 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 2175 – MD- 243
CG-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-OFAIN-29.80, 17 December 2012.
Annex 29 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 101/MD- 249
CGFM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFSUCA-CMR-JDIMR-
29.23, 22 December 2012.
Annex 30 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 0080 – MD- 257
CG-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-OFAIN-29.80, 16 January 2013.
Annex 31 National Navy of Colombia, Navigation Log, A.R.C. “Almirante 265 Padilla”, 19 February 2013.
iii
Annex 32 National Navy of Colombia, Chief of Naval Operations Summary 267
Report, A.R.C. “20 de Julio”, 2 February 2013.
Annex 33 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 024 – MD- 269
CG-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMA,
5 February 2013.
Annex 34 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 0877 – MD- 279
CG-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-OFAIN-29.80, 30 April 2013.
Annex 35 National Navy of Colombia, Maritime Travel Report, A.R.C. 289
“Caldas”, 19 May 2013.
Annex 36 National Navy of Colombia, Chief of Naval Operations 291
Summary Report, Helicopter A.R.C. “203” and A.R.C. “Caldas”,
23 July 2013.
Annex 37 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 375/MDN- 293
CGFM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CCESYP-JEM-N3,
6 August 2013
Annex 38 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 162 – MD- 295
CG-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNCCFSUCA-CMA,
17 August 2013
Annex 39 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 1693 – MD- 303
CG-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-OFAIN-29.80, 21 August 2013
Annex 40 National Navy of Colombia, Chief of Naval Operations Summary 305 Report, A.R.C. “801” and A.R.C. “San Andrés”, 24 August 2013 /
4 September 2013.
Annex 41 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 427/MD- 307
CGFM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CCESYP-JEM-JNECESYP, 13 September 2013
Annex 42 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 677/MD-CG- 309
CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMB, 5 October 2013
Annex 43 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 678/MD-CG- 311
CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMB, 5 October 2013
Annex 44 National Navy of Colombia, Maritime Travel Report, A.R.C. 313
“Cartagena de Indias”, 11 October 2013
iv
Annex 45 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 059 / MD- 315
CGFM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMK-JDOMK-29.60, 16 October 2013.
Annex 46 National Navy of Colombia, Maritime Travel Report, A.R.C. 321
“20 de Julio”, 21 October 2013.
Annex 47 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 201 / MD- 323
CGFFMM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMC 29.57,
29 October 2013.
Annex 48 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 202 / MD- 327
CGFFMM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMC 29.57,
29 October 2013.
Annex 49 National Navy of Colombia, Maritime Travel Report, A.R.C. 331 “Independiente”, 6 November 2013.
Annex 50 National Navy of Colombia, Navigation Log, A.R.C. “Antioquia”, 335
7 November 2013.
Annex 51 National Navy of Colombia, Clavegrama No. 152023, 337
8 November 2013.
Annex 52 National Navy of Colombia, Attestation of Good Treatment to the 339
Crew, A.R.C. “Almirante Padilla”, 17 November 2013.
Annex 53 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 304 – MD- 345
CGFFMM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMW-29.57,
20 November 2013.
Annex 54 National Navy of Colombia, Chief of Naval Operations Summary 351 Report, A.R.C. “Almirante Padilla” and A.R.C. “Caldas”,
26 November 2013.
Annex 55 National Navy of Colombia, Maritime Travel Report, A.R.C. 353
“Almirante Padilla”, 5 December 2013.
Annex 56 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 2525 – MD-CG- 357
CARMA-SECAR-JIONA-OFAIN-29.80, 9 December 2013.
Annex 57 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 2572 / MD-CG- 361
CARMA-SECAR-JONA-OFAIN-29.80, 12 December 2013.
Annex 58 National Navy of Colombia, Protest Attestation No. 027 – MD-CG- 365
CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMB-81.4, 9 May 2014.
v
Annex 59 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 070824 / MD-CG- 367
CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMB-2CMB-JDO-81,
7 June 2014.
Annex 60 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 2016004223005 369
9101/MD-CGFM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-OFAIN-3,
9 February 2016.
Annex 61 National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 241000R / MDN- 371
CGFM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CAVNA-CGANCA-CEANCAR
29 60, 24 June 2016.
VII.
AFFIDAVITS
Annex 62 Affidavit by Mr Landel Hernando Robinson Archbold, 373
18 October 2016.
Annex 63 Affidavit by Mr Wallingford González Steele Borden, 379
18 October 2016.
Annex 64 Affidavit by Mr Ornuldo Rodolfo Walters Dawkins, 385
Annex 65 Affidavit by Mr Ligorio Luis Archbold Howard, 19 October 2016. 389
Annex 66 Affidavit by Mr Jonathan Archbold Robinson, 19 October 2016. 397
Annex 67 Affidavit by Mr Alfredo Rafael Howard Newball, 21 October 2016. 401
Annex 68 Affidavit by Mr Orlando Eduardo Francis Powell, 21 October 2016. 407
Annex 69 Affidavit by Mr Domingo Sánchez McNabb, 21 October 2016. 411
Annex 70 Affidavit by Mr Eduardo Steele Martínez, 24 October 2016. 415
Annex 71 Affidavit by Mr Jorge De la Cruz De Alba Barker, 25 October 2016. 419
Annex 72 Affidavit by Mr Antonio Alejandro Sjogreen Pablo, 31 October 2016. 425
VIII.
MEDIA REPORTS
Annex 73 El 19 Digital, President Daniel meets Juan Manuel Santos in 429
Mexico, 2 December 2012.
Annex 74 Radio La Primerísima, Daniel ratified to Colombia his vocation 431
for peace, 2 December 2012.
vi
Annex 75 Radio La Primerísima, Nicaragua exercises peaceful sovereignty 435
over its waters, 5 December 2012.
Annex 76 Radio La Primerísima, Powerful interests want a confrontation 437
with Colombia, 21 February 2013.
Annex 77 El 19 Digital, Daniel meets with delegation from Iceland, 441
18 November 2014.
Annex 78 El 19 Digital, President Daniel receives letters of credence from 443
the ambassadors of Colombia, El Salvador, Germany and Italy,
6 November 2015.
IX.
OTHER DOCUMENTS
Annex 79 Church v. Hubbart, 6 U.S. 187 (1804). 445
Annex 80 U.N. Doc. A/AC.138/66 and corr. 2, 24 March 1972. 499
Annex 81 United States v. F/V Taiyo Maru, CIV. No. 74-101 SD, 511
Cr. No. 74-46 SD. 395 F.Supp. 414 (1975).
Annex 82 S. Ghosh, Law of the Territorial Sea: Evolution and Development, 519
1988.
Annex 83 R.C. Smith, The Maritime Heritage of the Cayman Islands, 537
Gainesville, 2000.
Annex 84 Central American Integration System, Regional Unit for the 539
Fisheries and Aquaculture, Regulations OSP-02-09 on Regional Management of Caribbean Lobster Fisheries (panulirus argus),
21 May 2009.
Annex 85 M.J. Jarvis, In the Eye of All Trade: Bermuda, Bermudians, 541
and the Maritime Atlantic World, 1680-1783, Chapel Hill, 2010.
Annex 86 National Administrative Statistics Department of Colombia 543
(Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística – DANE), Postcensal Studies No. 7, National and Departmental Population Projections 2005-2020, March 2010.
Annex 87 National Administrative Statistics Department of Colombia 545
(Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística – DANE), General Census 2005 Bulletin - Profile Archipelago Department
of San Andrés, 13 September 2010.
vii
Annex 88 National Administrative Statistics Department of Colombia 547
(Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística – DANE), General Census 2005 Bulletin - Profile Providencia and
Santa Catalina, 14 September 2010.
Annex 89 Proposed areas for inclusion in the SPAW List, Annotated Format 549
for Presentation Report for Seaflower Marine Protected Area,
Colombia, 5 October 2010.
Annex 90 Circular Communication from the Division for Ocean Affairs and 577
the Law of the Sea – Office of Legal Affairs, No. M.Z.N.99.2013.
LOS, 11 October 2013
Annex 91 A.I. Márquez-Pérez, “Catboats, Lanchs and Canoes: Notes 581
towards a history of the relations between the islands of
Providencia, Santa Catalina and the Central American and
Insular Caribbean by means of the construction and use of
wooden vessels”, Revista Internacional de História Política e
Cultura Jurídica, Vol. 6, No. 3, September-December 2014.
Annex 92 Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquaculture – INPESCA, 609
Fishing and Aquaculture Yearbook for 2014, June 2015.
Annex 93 S.D. Crawford, A.I. Márquez-Pérez, “A Contact Zone: The 613
Turtle Commons of the Western Caribbean”, The International
Journal of Maritime History, 2016.
Annex 94 Seaflower Marine Protected Area – a SPAW Listed Site: Factsheet 631 (undated).
X.
AUDIOVISUAL AND PHOTOGRAPHIC MATERIAL1
Annex 95 Photographic Material, Event “Al John”, 28 April 2013. 633
Annex 96 Photographic Material, Event “Papa D”, 28 April 2013. 635
Annex 97 Photographic Material, Event “Pescasa 35”, 9 May 2013. 637
Annex 98 Audiovisual Material, Event “Pescasa 35”, 9 May 2013.
Annex 99 Audiovisual Material, Event “Miss Sofía”, 4 July 2013.
Annex 100 Photographic Material, Event “Doña Emilia”, 3 August 2013. 641
1 Annexes 98, 99, 101, 103, 104 and 112 are short videos. A CD-ROM containing them can be found in a jacket at the end of Volume II.
viii
Annex 101 Audiovisual Material, Event “Doña Emilia”, 3 August 2013.
Annex 102 Photographic Material, Event “Trapper”, 17 August 2013. 645
Annex 103 Audiovisual Material, Event “Lady Dee III”, 24 August 2013.
Annex 104 Audiovisual Material, Event “Cap. Charly”, 24 August 2013.
Annex 105 Photographic Material, Event “Miss Sofía”, 4 September 2013. 651
Annex 106 Photographic Material, Event “Diego Armando G”, 5 October 2013. 653
Annex 107 Photographic Material, Event “Pescasa 35”, 5 October 2013. 655
Annex 108 Photographic Material, Event “Marco Polo”, 9 October 2013. 657
Annex 109 Photographic Material, Event “Cap. Maddox”, 23 October 2013. 659
Annex 110 Photographic Material, Event “Miss Joela”, 23 October 2013. 661
Annex 111 Photographic Material, Event “Miss Sofía”, 17 November 2013. 663
Annex 112 Audiovisual Material, Event “Miss Sofía”, 17 November 2013.
Annex 113 Photographic Material, Event “Lady Prem”, “Miss Sofía”, 671
“Capitán Charlie” and “Doña Emilia”, 9 February 2016.
FIGURES
Figure 2.1 The Southwestern Caribbean: A Semi-Enclosed Sea 675
Figure 2.2 Colombia’s Seaflower Biosphere Reserve 676
Figure 2.3 Colombia’s Seaflower Marine Protected Area 677
Figure 2.4 Traditional Shallow Banks of the Artisanal Fishermen of the 678
Archipelago
Figure 2.5 Traditional Shallow and Deep-Sea Banks of the Artisanal Fishermen 679
of the Archipelago
Figure 2.6 Illicit Drug Trafficking Routes Transiting through and around the 680
Archipelago
Figure 2.7 Examples of Colombia’s Presence on the Islands of the Archipelago 681
ix
Figure 2.8 Examples of Events in which the Colombian Navy provided 682
Humanitarian Assistance, Technical Aid and carried out Search
and Rescue Operations
Figure 4.1 “Incident” 1 alleged by Nicaragua (19 February 2013) 683
Figure 4.2 “Incident” 4 alleged by Nicaragua (13 October 2013) 684
Figure 4.3 “Incident” 9 alleged by Nicaragua (7 November 2013) 685
Figure 4.4 “Incident” 10 alleged by Nicaragua (17 November 2013) 686
Figure 5.1 Colombia’s ‘Integral Contiguous Zone’ as set out in Presidential 687
Decree Number 1946 of 2013
Figure 8.1 Predatory Fishing Activities of Nicaragua within the Territorial Sea 688
of Colombia and the Joint Regime Area
Figure 8.2 Examples of Predatory Fishing by Nicaraguan-Flagged Fishing 689
Vessels
Figure 8.3 Example of Predatory Fishing Activities of Nicaragua within the 690
Territorial Sea of Colombia after the Critical Date
Figure 8.4 Nicaragua’s Harmful Activities to the Marine Environment in the 691
Territorial Sea of Colombia
Figure 10.1 Nicaragua’s straight baseline claim in the Caribbean Sea 692
Figure 10.2 Projection of Nicaragua’s islands and features on the general 693
direction line of its mainland coast
Figure 10.3 Distance of the straight baseline features to the mainland coast 694
Figure 10.4 Key figures related to Nicaragua’s straight baseline claim 695
Figure 10.5 Nicaragua’s Territorial Sea as derived from its straight baselines 696
as drawn in Decree number 33-2013
x
APPENDIXES
1
2
Appendix A COLOMBIA’S ALLEGED EVENTS IN THE CARIBBEAN SEA TECHNICAL AND HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE EVENTS # Date (dd/mm/yy) Colombian Navy Unit NNF Unit or motor vessel (flag) Location Summary of the Event CCM, Annex 1 02/02/2013 A.R.C. “20 de Julio” “Lady Aime” (Nicaragua) Lat. 014º 54N Long. 081º 42W Luna Verde On 02 February 2013, the A.R.C. “20 de Julio” received a call from the captain of the Nicaraguan flagged fishing vessel “Lady Aimee” requesting support to repair the radio of its unit which was presenting malfunctions in the microphone. Assistance was provided to the motor vessel that had an incident with its communication equipment, in particular HF band channels. See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 32 –National Navy of Colombia, Chief of Naval Operations Summary Report, A.R.C. “20 de Julio”, 2 February 2013.
Appendix A
Appendix A: Colombia’s Alleged Events in the Caribbean Sea -Technical and
Humanitarian Assistance Events
3
# Date (dd/mm/yy) Colombian Navy Unit NNF Unit or motor vessel (flag) Location Summary of the Event CCM, Annex 2 05/02/2013 A.R.C. “Antioquia” “Papa D” (Nicaragua) Lat. 14° 37' N Long. 81° 52'W Luna Verde On 5 February 2013 the RRU of the A.R.C. “Antioquia”, reports that a crewmember of Nicaraguan flagged vessel named “Papa D” had fractured his left hand and requires medical assistance. Assistance was offered to Mr. Pablo Emilio William Lenis by immobilizing his finger and providing medicines. Also medical assistance was provided to Mr. Lamac Matute Ordoñez who presented an infection on his right leg and to Mr. Rufino Cristóbal Sandino who had received bad post-operative care, reason why pain medication was given. The captain thanked the aid provided by the Colombian Navy. See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 33 – National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 024 – MD-CG-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMA, 5 February 2013.
Appendix A
4
# Date (dd/mm/yy) Colombian Navy Unit NNF Unit or motor vessel (flag) Location Summary of the Event CCM, Annex 3 30/04/2013 A.R.C. “Caldas” “Papa D” (Nicaragua) Lat. 15°59' N Long. 079°23'W On 30 April 2013, the A.R.C. “Caldas” provided medical support to the crew of the Nicaraguan flagged vessel “Papa D”, with 62 medical consultations, patient intake for generating medical records from the patients were issued and medicines supplied. The medical staff identified the following relevant cases: Mr. Wuenseslao Galvez had a hypertensive crisis; Messers José Osmeri Martinez Argueta, Tiburcio Wood Nelson, Kerry Thompsone and Walter Javier Esteban Zamora had controlled hypertension; Messers Orlando Méndez Miller and Oliverio Anderson Suarez acute bronchitis; Messers Tiburcio Wood Nelson, Matias Alen Gonzalez and See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 35 – National Navy of Colombia, Maritime Travel Report, A.R.C. “Caldas”, 19 May 2013.
Appendix A
5
# Date (dd/mm/yy) Colombian Navy Unit NNF Unit or motor vessel (flag) Location Summary of the Event CCM, Annex Joel García acute diarrheal disease; Mr. Carlos Martínez had infected wounds on his left knee and foot; Mr. Ostin Wilson Salazar had epicondylitis on his left elbow; Messers David Pachito Carcari and Lorenzo López had costochondritis; Mr. Joel Washinto had mechanical low back pain with mass of 20 cm. in the radius of his neck; Mr. Roger Alperth had acid peptic disease; Mr. Elbis Antonio Jacobo had urinary tract infection; Mr. Victor Lavante Anigol had acute otitis; and Mr. Antoni Macua Muded had bacterial conjunctivitis. Ill patients received treatment with medication from the unit. A domino table was donated. Likewise, hydration and breakfast were provided.
Appendix A
6
# Date (dd/mm/yy) Colombian Navy Unit NNF Unit or motor vessel (flag) Location Summary of the Event CCM, Annex Bathroom and laundry services were made available with the objective of improving the precarious conditions of the vessel. 4 17/08/2013 A.R.C. “Antioquia” “Trapper” (Nicaragua) Lat. 14° 20' N Long. 081°59'W Luna Verde On 17 August 2013, during communications sustained by the A.R.C. “Antioquia” with the Nicaraguan flagged vessel “Trapper”, the captain required health assistance for 15 crewmembers. The captain of the A.R.C. “Antioquia” ordered the staff of the Rapid Response Unit (RRU-BA40) to get ready for carrying out the humanitarian assistance. Medical assistance was provided to 12 crewmembers. Specifically, Mr. Pablo With had pain and fever in his left elbow, antibiotic (cephalexin) was provided; Messers. Livi See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 38 – National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 162 – MD-CG-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNCCFSUCA-CMA, 17 August 2013. See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 102 – Photographic Material, Event “Trapper”, 17 August 2013.
Appendix A
7
# Date (dd/mm/yy) Colombian Navy Unit NNF Unit or motor vessel (flag) Location Summary of the Event CCM, Annex Nolasco, Rufos Logan has ear pain and headache, antibiotic (amoxicilina) and analgesics were provided and Jony Fedrick Dualley had ear pain and fever, antibiotic (amoxicillin) and ibuprofen was supplied; Mr. Limber Jacobo had muscular and joint pain, diclofenac was provided; and Mr. Jarry Jainor Henriquez had second-degree burn on his right leg, the affected area was cleaned and the necrotic tissue was removed, antibiotic (cephalexin) was supplied, as well as topical cream. The other 6 crewmembers with general malaise were also treated. Additional medicines were provided to captain of the Nicaraguan vessel in case any crewmember presented
Appendix A
8
# Date (dd/mm/yy) Colombian Navy Unit NNF Unit or motor vessel (flag) Location Summary of the Event CCM, Annex nausea, headache or general malaise. 5 25/09/2013 A.R.C. “Cartagena de Indias” “Sea Falcon” (Nicaragua) Lat. 14° 53' N Long. 081°38'W Luna Verde On 25 September 2013, the A.R.C. “Cartagena de Indias” provided medical assistance to one (1) crewmember of the Nicaraguan flagged fishing vessel named “Sea Falcon” who was presenting hypertension and tachycardia. See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 44 – National Navy of Colombia, Maritime Travel Report, A.R.C. “Cartagena de Indias”, 11 October 2013. 6 08/11/2013 A.R.C. “San Andrés” “Pacific Star” (Nicaragua) Lat. 014º 50N Long. 081º 42W Luna Verde On 08 November 2013 the A.R.C. “San Andrés” received via marine VHF channel 16 communication from the Nicaraguan fishing flagged vessel named “Pacific Star” requesting support due to a leak which was causing the vessel a flood in the engine room’s compartment. The A.R.C. “San Andres” immediately See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 56 – National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 2525 – MD-CG-CARMA-SECAR-JIONA-OFAIN-29.80, 9 December 2013.See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 51
Appendix A
9
# Date (dd/mm/yy) Colombian Navy Unit NNF Unit or motor vessel (flag) Location Summary of the Event CCM, Annex proceeded to assist with water pumps and shoring equipment, allowing control of the damage and safeguard the motor vessel. – National Navy of Colombia, Clavegrama No. 152023, 8 November 2013. 7 17/11/2013 A.R.C. “Almirante Padilla” “Miss Sofia” (Nicaragua) Miss Sofia Lat. 014º 45N Long. 081º 46W Luna Verde On 17 November 2013, the A.R.C. “Almirante Padilla” found two (02) fishermen identified as Mr. Mauricio Bustillo and Mr. Abel Whath, both Nicaraguan nationals, adrift on a canoe type boat (cayuco), with no maritime safety elements whatsoever. Inside the vessel 04 diving tanks, 01 regulator and some fishing gear were found. The fishermen claimed they were part of the crew of the Nicaragua flagged fishing vessel “Miss Sofia”, that was conducting fishing activities without showing any interest on finding or determining the fate of its See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 53 – National Navy of Colombia, Communication No. 304 – MD-CGFFMM-CARMA-SECAR-JONA-CFNC-CFSUCA-CMW-29.57, 20 November 2013. See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 52 – National Navy of Colombia, Attestation of Good Treatment to the Crew, A.R.C. “Almirante Padilla”, 17 November 2013
Appendix A
10
# Date (dd/mm/yy) Colombian Navy Unit NNF Unit or motor vessel (flag) Location Summary of the Event CCM, Annex two crewmembers. Calls were made via VHF channel 16. Having obtained no answer from the fishing vessel, the A.R.C. “Almirante Padilla” proceeded to establish communication with the closest Nicaraguan patrol vessel – GC-201 “Río Grande Matagalpa” – to inform of the event. This unit of the NNF proceeded to call the fishing vessel “Miss Sofia” to no avail. On 18 November, following diplomatic coordination, the 02 castaways were turned over to the Nicaraguan flagged fishing vessel “Caribbean Star”. See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 111 – Photographic Material, Event “Miss Sofía”, 17 November 2013. See Colombia’s Counter Memorial Annex 112 – Audiovisual Material, Event “Miss Sofía”, 17 November 2013 * * *
Appendix A
11
12
Appendix B EXAMPLES FROM STATES WHICH HAVE ENACTED DOMESTIC LEGISLATION CONCERNING THE CONTIGUOUS ZONE State Regulation Comments Albania Law No. 8875, Article 5 (4 April 2002) Granting the Coast Guard the powers within the contiguous zone to “provide search and rescue services”; “to prevent and interdict illegal passage of ships, goods and persons”; “to anchor, board, inspect, interdict, seize and block vessels and individuals infringing sea law”; “to engage in hot pursuit”; “to use force in self defense when dictated by extreme circumstances”; “to compile preliminary documentation allowing institution of proceedings against violators of the sea law”; “to effectuate marine pollution education, prevention, response and enforcement”; “to ensure recreational boating safety”; “to enforce legislation with regard to marine fishing”; “to enforce legislation with regard to living marine and submarine resource protection, including in the sea bed”; “to enforce legislation on the archaeological and cultural values in the Albanian sea area”. Bangladesh Territorial Waters and Maritime Zones Act 1974, Act No. XXVI of 1974, Article 4 Recognizing within the zone control over “the security of the republic”.
Appendix B
Appendix B: Examples from States which have enacted domestic legislation
concerning the Contiguous Zone
13
Burma Territorial Sea and Maritime Zones Law, 1977, Pyithu Hluttaw Law No. 3 of 9 April l977, Article 11 Recognizing within the zone control over safeguarding “the security of Burma”. Cambodia Decree of the Council of States, Article 4 (13 July 1982) Recognizing within the zone exercises of necessary control “in order to oversee its security” and to prevent violations of “health laws”. Cameroon Act No. 74/16, Fixing the Limit of the Territorial Waters of the United Republic of Cameroon (5 December 1974) Setting the limit of the territorial waters of Cameroon to a distance of 50 nautical miles, and recognizing a contiguous zone “within which fishing and the exploitation of the undersea soil may be reserved for Cameroonian vessels and corporations”. China Law on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, Article 13 (25 February 1992); Law on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone of the Republic of China, Articles 14-17 (21 January 1998) Recognizing control within the zone over infringement of its security, trade, inspection, environmental protection, and unauthorized broadcasting, as well as “entry-exit control within its land territories, internal waters or territorial sea” and control over “all objects of an historical nature or relics”. Cuba Legislative Decree No. 158: Contiguous Zone, Article 3 (12 April 1995) Recognizing the exercise of control measures necessary to prevent and punish infringements of its laws relating to cultural heritage, environment and living and non-living natural resources.
Appendix B
14
Cyprus Law to Provide for the Proclamation of the Contiguous Zone by the Republic of Cyprus, Article 4 (2 April 2004) Recognizing control within the zone “over objects of archaeological or historical nature”. Djibouti Law No. 52/AN/78, Article 16 (9 January 1979) Establishing that any “fishing for commercial purposes” within the contiguous zone will be subject to prior authorization from the Ministry of Agriculture. Egypt Royal Decree Concerning the Territorial Waters of the Kingdom of Egypt , Article 9 (15 January 1951) Recognizing the power to assure compliance with the laws and regulations relating to “security” and “navigation” within the zone, including by means of maritime surveillance. France Act No. 89-874 of 1 December 1989 concerning Maritime Cultural Assets, Articles 12-13 Recognizing jurisdiction within the zone over “maritime cultural assets”. Gambia Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone Act, 1968, as amended in 1969, Article 3 Recognizing a contiguous zone extending seaward to a line of 18 nautical miles from low-water march, in which Gambia may “exercise control necessary to prevent and punish the infringement of any law or right of The Gambia”. Haiti Decree No. 38, Article 4 (8 April 1977) Recognizing jurisdiction with regard to the protection within the zone of “its security”. Israel Maritime Zones Draft Bill 2015 Applying the 1978 Antiques Law of Israel to its contiguous zone.
Appendix B
15
Italy Legislative Decree No. 41, Article 94 (22 January 2004); Law No. 61 (8 February 2006) Protecting objects of an archaeological and historical nature found on the sea-bed up to 12 nautical miles from the outer limit of its territorial sea; and establishing an ecological protection zone beyond the outer limit of the territorial sea. India The Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and other Maritime Zones Act, 1976, Act No. 80 of 28 May 1976, Article 5 Recognizing the right of India to alter the geographical scope of its zone beyond 24 nautical miles, in accordance with State practice and through notification in the Official Gazette; recognizing the Government’s power to exercise measures for the “security of India” within the zone. Iran Act on the Marine Areas of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Persian Gulf and the Oman Sea, 1993 Recognizing the right of the government to adopt measures necessary to prevent the infringement of laws and regulations in the contiguous zone, including “security, customs, maritime, immigration, sanitary, and environmental laws and regulations”. Jamaica Maritime Areas Act of 1996, Art. 28 Recognizing the right of the Minister to make regulations for safety matters in the contiguous zone, for activities relating to economic exploration or exploitation of the contiguous zone, the authorization, control and supervision of scientific research in the zone, the conservation of living resources in the zone, and the use of the general use of the zone. Kiribati Marine Zones (Declaration) Act 2011, Art. 8(2) Extending the powers within the contiguous zone to the airspace above it.
Appendix B
16
Malta Territorial Waters and Contiguous Zone Act, No. XXXII of 1971 as amended by the 1975, 1978, the 1981, and 2002 Acts Including pollution to the subject matter jurisdiction of Malta within the zone. Mauritius Maritime Zones Act 2005, Art. 13 Establishing a maritime cultural zone coincident with the contiguous zone where the prime minister may regulate and authorize activities directed at underwater cultural heritage. Myanmar Territorial Sea and Maritime Zones Law, 1977, Pyithu Hluttaw Law No. 3, Art. 11 (9 April 1977) Recognizing the right of Burma to exercise in its contiguous zone such control as necessary “to safeguard the security of Burma”. Nicaragua Maritime Law Areas of Nicaragua, Law No. 420, Art. 5 (5 March 2002) “[P]revent the removal, without authorization, of objects of an archaeological and historical nature found in its territory, in their internal maritime waters within its territorial sea”. Norway Act No. 57, Art. 4 (27 June 2003) Applying legislation on the removal of objects of an archaeological or historical nature to the contiguous zone. Pakistan Territorial Waters and Maritime Zones Act, Art. 2 (22 December 1976) Including the “security of Pakistan” amongst the topics the Federal Government may exercise powers over.
Appendix B
17
Palau Act to amend Chapter 1 of Title 27 of the Palau National Code, Art. 143(b) Establishing that the “national government possess and may exercise the same sovereign rights to living resources in the contiguous zone as it does in the territorial sea”. Romania Act Concerning the Legal Regime of the Internal Waters, the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, Art. 7 (7 August 1990) Romania shall exercise control in its contiguous zone to prevent “infractions relating to the crossing of the State frontier”. Samoa Maritime Zones, No. 18, Article 18(2) (25 August 1999) Including laws relating to environmental protection. Saudi Arabia Royal Decree No. 33, Article 8 (16 February 1958) and Royal Decree No. 6 18/1/1433H, Article 11 (13 December 2011) Including laws relating to security, navigation, and environmental regulation; also including “maritime surveillance” as a measure to be employed. Sierra Leone The Maritime Zones (Establishment) Decree 1999, Section 7(2) Including environmental laws. Spain Act No. 27/1992, Second Supplementary Provision (24 November 1992) Including smuggling regulations, stating that “in order to prevent the conduct of illicit activities or trafficking of any kind, the Government may stop, restrict or place conditions on the navigation of certain categories of civilian ships” in the contiguous zone.
Appendix B
18
Sudan Territorial Waters and Continental Shelf Act, 1970, Art. 9 Including “security laws”. Syria Law No. 28, At. 20 Recognizing powers to prevent infringements of “security” and “environmental laws and regulations” within the contiguous zone. Taiwan Law on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone of the Republic of China, Art. 15 (21 January 1998) Including environmental protections laws and regulations, as well as unauthorized broadcasting, trade and inspection. United Arab Emirates Federal Law No. 19 of 1993 in respect of the delimitation of the maritime zones of the United Arab Emirates (17 October 1993) Including “infringements of its security” into the State’s prevention powers within the contiguous zone. United States Proclamation by the President of the united States of America on the Contiguous Zone (2 September 1999) Stating that “[e]xtension of the contiguous zone of the United States to the limits permitted b international law will advance the law enforcement and public health interests of the United States. Moreover, this extension is an important step in preventing the removal of cultural heritage found within 24 nautical miles of the baseline”.
Appendix B
19
Venezuela Act concerning the Territorial Sea, Continental Shelf, Fishery Protection and Air-Space (27 July 1956) Claiming a Contiguous Zone for purposes of maritime control and police, as well as for national security and protection of national interests. Vietnam Statement on the Territorial Sea, the Contiguous Zone, the Exclusive Economic Zone, and the Continental Shelf of Vietnam, as approved by the Standing Committee of the SRV National Assembly (12 May 1997) and Decree of March 17, 1980 Including control “in order to see to its security” within the zone; as well as claiming that that military vessels must have its permission and must give notice before entering the zone. People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen Act No. 45 of 1977 concerning the Territorial Sea, Exclusive Economic Zone, Continental Shelf and other Marine Areas, Act. No. 45, Art. 11 (17 December 1977) Including “infringements of its security” into the prevention powers of the authorities of the Republic within the zone.
Appendix B
20
Yemen Arab Republic Republican Decrees No. 15 and 16 of 1967 Establishing an 18-mile security zone. See also Country Date Bangladesh (27 July 2001) All made declarations accompanying their ratification of UNCLOS. Cape Verde (10 August 1987) The Netherlands (28 June 1986) Malaysia (14 October 1996)
Appendix B
21
22
ANNEXES
23
24
Press Release from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with regard to the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve 30/08/2013 The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia hereby refers to statements known through the media to the effect that the Government of Nicaragua would request UNESCO’s recognition of a part of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve. In this regard, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs communicates that the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, registered in UNESCO’S Man and the Biosphere Programme, by means of a sovereign act of Colombia and is subject to national legislation. Therefore, it would not be in the field of competence of UNESCO to determine the management programme for such Reserve. Pursuant to its founding Treaty, UNESCO may not pronounce on international disputes between States, nor may it intervene in matters essentially appertaining to the internal jurisdiction of States. In relation to the Judgment rendered by the International Court of Justice in the dispute between Colombia and Nicaragua, Colombia is analysing the mechanisms, resources and actions available to it under domestic laws and international law, to promote the defense of national interests, historic fishing rights and the rights of the Colombian population of the Archipelago. Colombia reiterates its commitment to the protection of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve and emphasizes that this is a matter within the scope of national sovereignty. Bogotá, 30 August 2013
Annex 1
Annex 1: PRESS RELEASE FROM THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
WITH REGARD TO THE SEAFLOWER BIOSPHERE RESERVE,
30 AUGUST 2013.
(Available at: http://www.cancilleria.gov.co/newsroom/news/comunicado-del-
ministerio-relaciones-exteriores-sobre-la-reserva-biosfera-seaflower)
25
26
COLOMBIAN INSTITUTE FOR AGRARIAN REFORM RESOLUTION NUMBER 206 OF 1968 (16 December) Whereby certain lands from the Archipelago of San Andrés and Providencia are removed from the territorial reserve of the State and certain sectors therein are declared as special reserves. (…) Article Third. To declare the following sectors of the Archipelago of San Andrés and Providencia as special reserve zones, with the purpose of preserving the flora, fauna, lake levels, the creeks and natural scenic beauties: (…) Cays and Banks Preservation Zones … b) The Cay of Serrana and the banks of Roncador, Quitasueño, Serranilla, Bajo Nuevo and Alicia. Article Fourth. To declare the following sectors of the Archipelago of San Andrés and Providencia as special reserve zones for touristic purposes: (…) Cays and Banks All of the cays and banks that form part of the Archipelago of San Andrés and Providencia, excluding Cangrejo and Serrana Cays as well as the banks of Roncador, Quitasueño, Serranilla, Bajo Nuevo and Alicia, comprised within the intangible preservation zones dealt with in the previous article.... (…)
Annex 2
Annex 2: COLOMBIAN INSTITUTE FOR AGRARIAN REFORM,
RESOLUTION NO. 206 OF 16 DECEMBER 1968.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Agriculture)
27
28
DECREE 2324 OF 1984 (18 September) Whereby the General Maritime and Port Direction is reorganized. (…) Article 2° Jurisdiction. The General Maritime and Port Direction exercises jurisdiction up to the outer limit of the exclusive economic zone, in the following areas: maritime internal waters, including intercostal channels and those for maritime traffic; and all those marine and fluvio-marine systems; territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone, seabed and subsoil, waters superjacent, coastline, including beaches and low-water areas, ports of the State located under its jurisdiction; islands, islet and cays and over the rivers listed below, in the indicated areas; (…)
Annex 3
Annex 3: PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 2324 OF 18 SEPTEMBER 1984.
(Official Journal CXXI. N. 36780, 1 November 1984)
29
30
Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development RESOLUTION NUMBER 0107 OF 2005 (27 January) Whereby a Marine Protected Area is declared and other provisions are enacted. The Minister of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development, in exercise of the legal powers provided for in paragraph 10 of article 6º of Decree number 216 of 2003, and especially in Law 165 of 1994, and CONSIDERING: That the Colombian Constitution establishes that it is an obligation of the State and of its people to protect the natural and cultural riches of the Nation, as well as to ensure the right to a healthy environment; That it also establishes in its articles 80 and 95 paragraph 8, the duty to protect the diversity and integrity of the environment, the preservation of areas of special ecological importance, the planning, management and use of natural resources to ensure their sustainable development, preservation, restoration or replacement, as well as to prevent environmental deterioration factors; That Colombia signed the Convention on Biological Diversity – CDB -, approved by means of Law 165 of 1994, aimed at preserving biological diversity, promoting the sustainable use of its components and a fair and equitable sharing of the benefits resulting from the use of genetic resources, through an adequate use of those resources, an appropriate transfer of technology and judicious funding;
Annex 4
Annex 4: MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, HOUSING AND TERRITORIAL
DEVELOPMENT, RESOLUTION NO. 107 OF 27 JANUARY 2005.
(Official Journal No. 45.809, 1 February 2005)
31
That the Convention also establishes marine protected areas as an essential instrument for the development of marine and costal ecosystems; That the Convention on Biological Diversity provides, among others, that each Contracting Party shall establish a system of protected areas or areas in which special measures shall be taken in order to preserve biological diversity; moreover, they shall set out guidelines for the selection, establishment and orderly management of protected areas or areas in which special measures shall be taken in order to preserve biological diversity; and, that they shall promote the protection of natural habitats and ecosystems and the maintenance of viable populations of species within natural surroundings; That it is also the responsibility of each Contracting Party to promote an adequate and sustainable environmental development in zones adjacent to protected areas in order to increase the protection of those zones; to rehabilitate and restore degraded ecosystems, promoting the recovery of endangered species through, among others, the drafting and implementation of plans and other orderly management strategies, with the purpose of establishing the conditions necessary for harmonizing current uses with the preservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of its components; That within the framework of the above-mentioned Convention, the Jakarta Mandate and its work program was adopted in 1995, in relation to marine and costal biodiversity, the strategic elements of which are: a) The integrated management of marine and coastal zones; b) The sustainable use of living marine resources; c) The promotion of the establishment of marine and coastal protected areas; d) The sustainable shrimp farming, and e) The control to the introduction of invasive and exotic species and genotypes; That Colombia is also party to the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment in the
Annex 4
32
Wider Caribbean Region (Law 59 of 1987) and its Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (Law 356 of 1997), aimed at protecting, restoring and improving the state of the marine ecosystems, as well as protecting threatened or endangered species and their habitats in the Wider Caribbean region, through, among others, the establishment of protected areas in the marine areas and associated ecosystems; That in the year 2000, UNESCO declared the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina as the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, including the proposed zoning and management plan contained in that declaration; That the proposed Management Plan for the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve seeks to contribute to generate processes that create favourable conditions in order for social development to be based on the sustainability of the various lifeforms, ecosystems and natural resources, by means of: a) The preservation of strategic areas for the protection of the biological, genetic and cultural diversity of the Archipelago b) Being a model in terms of territorial orderly management as well as a place for sustainable development experimentation, and c) Allocating areas for research, constant observation, education and training for the Reserve’s residents and visitors; That the preservation and sustainable use of the natural resources of the Biosphere Reserve are part of the regional development and must follow the internationally identified management guidelines for three areas of intervention: core zones, buffer zones, and transition or cooperation zones that include the entire marine area beyond the barrier reef; That the notions of sustainable development shall be applied to the three zones, in order for activities to be sustainable in time, as well as equitable and profitable from a social, ecological and economic perspective, ensuring a joint and coordinated work between local communities, government agencies, conservation and scientific organizations, civil associations, cultural groups, private companies and other
Annex 4
33
interested parties in the sustainable management and development of the Archipelago; That within the proposed zoning, the following core zones from the Biosphere Reserve are included: a) In Providencia and Santa Catalina islands: Marine zone: the Mc Bean Lagoon National Natural Park, the mangroves, the Cangrejo and Tres Hermanos Cays, the reef barrier and associated communities; b) In San Andrés island: Marine zone: the reef barrier and associated communities; c) In the southern and northern cays: the Cays of Alburquerque, Quitasueño, Roncador along with its reef barrier and the eastern sector of Serrana Cay; That the Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development by means of Resolution 1426 of 20 December 1996, reserves, sets out the boundaries of, and declares the “Corals of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia, Santa Catalina and Cays”, as a Special Management Area for the administration, management and protection of the environment and renewable natural resources of the area of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina; That such Special Management Area is formed by the islands of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina; the Cays of Roncador, Quitasueño, Serrana, Serranilla, Bajo Nuevo, Albu4querque and the group of the East-Southeast Cays as well as all the other adjacent islets, cays, banks and atolls, and the territorial sea comprised within the jurisdiction of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, which contain ecosystems of high productivity, biological diversity and the most important areas of coral reef ecosystems within the national territory; That by means of Decree 216 of 3 February 2003, the objectives and organizational structure of the Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development were determined, and its functions distributed, among which, under the Directorate of Ecosystems, according to article 12 paragraph 3, it shall “propose strategies and policies for the creation, administration and management of special management areas
Annex 4
34
and other protected areas, jointly with the Special Administrative Unit of the National Natural Parks System and other environmental authorities…”; That the National Development Plan “Towards a Communitarian State” established the environmental sustainability strategy to promote the development of actions focused on the preservation, management, use and restoration of ecosystems, taking environmental policies into account and thus seeking to consolidate the State’s governance of, and legitimacy in, environmental management; That in accordance with the National Environmental Policy for the Sustainable Development of Ocean Areas and Coastal and Insular Spaces of Colombia (PNAOCI) adopted by the National Environmental Council on 5 December 2000, and the various international treaties adopted by Colombia, there is a defined need of promoting programs for the integrated management of marine and coastal areas and the sustainable use of their resources by means of the environmental territorial organization of ocean areas and costal and insular spaces, so as to contribute to improving the quality of life of the Colombian population and to the preservation of marine and coastal ecosystems and resources; That in accordance with document Conpes 3164: “2002-2004 Action Plan of the National Environmental Policy for the Sustainable Development of Ocean Areas and Coastal and Insular Spaces of Colombia”, the development of the Areas and Marine Protection Program aims at establishing the subsystem of Marine Protected Areas (MPA) as part of the National System of Protected Areas (SINAP), integrated by marine and coastal areas of particular ecological, socioeconomic and cultural importance. The prioritised activities of this program for the relevant time period are the definition of criteria for the establishment of Marine Protected Areas and joining these to the National System for Protected Areas or other protection schemes; That pursuant to the Territorial Organization Plan for San Andrés Island, adopted by Decree 325 of 18 November 2003,
Annex 4
35
the environmental structure of the insular territory is formed by the following: a) The land and/or maritime lines, areas, belts or sections determined by the zoning of the Biosphere Reserve; b) The System of Protected Areas determined by the level of environmental fragility or vulnerability; c) The littoral area, beaches and marine areas up to the 12-nautical miles’ line; d) The marine areas of underwater landscape, and e) The marine protected areas. Likewise, areas requiring special protection as a result of the zoning of the Biosphere Reserve, among them, the marine protected areas, are part of the System of Protected Areas of the Territory’s Environmental Structure; That during the latest meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity - COP 7, held in February 2004, in its decision VII/5, the Contracting parties are requested to advance in establishing and/or strengthening regional and national systems of marine and coastal protected areas, integrating them to the global network as a contribution towards achieving global objectives for the preservation of marine and coastal biodiversity; That pursuant to the above-mentioned decisions, the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Coralina, has been developing since the year 2000, a regional strategy that seeks to protect the natural resources in the marine area of the Biosphere Reserve in an adequate and environmentally sustainable manner, by identifying areas of special importance for protection and preservation, including their definition and zoning, and that could become part of the National System of Marine Protected Areas; That taking into account the importance of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, due to its ecosystems and resources of strategic value that provide environmental goods and services at the base of the sustainable development and preservation of the country’s environmental heritage, it is of interest to the Ministry of Environment,
Annex 4
36
Housing and Territorial Development, as the highest environmental authority, to declare the Marine Protected Area within the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve. The purpose is to preserve representative samples of the eco-systemic, specific and genetic marine biodiversity of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina; That for purposes of complying with this resolution, the agencies in charge of its implementation shall take into account all the bilateral and multilateral international commitments undertaken by Colombia in the area; That the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina is formed by the islands of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, the Cays of Roncador, Quitasueño, Serrana, Serranilla, Bajo Nuevo, Alburquerque and the group of the East-Southeast Cays, as well as all the other adjacent islets, cays, banks and atolls; That the maritime areas appertaining to the aforesaid archipelago extend towards the west up to Meridian 82º 00’00’’ W of Greenwich, agreed in the 1928 Esguerra-Bárcenas Treaty and its 1930 Protocol of Exchange of Ratifications; and towards the north and northeast, in accordance with the delimitations established with the Republic of Honduras in the 1986 Ramírez-López Treaty and with Jamaica in the 1993 Sanin-Robertson Treaty; That the cartographic base for the delimitation and zoning of the Marine Protected Areas within the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina is Chart COL 008 “Bank Rosalinda to San Andrés Island”, First Edition, scale 1:1.000.000, published by the Maritime Directorship-General of the Navy of the Republic of Colombia in November 1998; That taking into account the foregoing considerations, DECIDES: Article 1°. To declare as Marine Protected Area (AMP) of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, a zone within the Archipelago
Annex 4
37
Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, that due to its special ecological, economic, social and cultural importance, is delimited within the following coordinates: Coordinates Point Latitude Longitude 1 14º 59’ 08” N 82º 00’ 00” W 2 14º 59’ 08” N 79º 50’ 00” W 3 13º 10’ 00” N 79º 50’ 00” W 4 13º 10’ 00” N 81º 00’ 00” W 5 12º 00’ 00” N 81º 00’ 00” W 6 12º 00’ 00” N 82º 00’ 00” W Article 2º. Purpose. The purpose of the MPA declared and the outer limits of which are delimited pursuant to this resolution, is to preserve representative samples of marine and coastal biodiversity from the ecological basic processes that support the Archipelago’s environmental supply; as well as to preserve the social and cultural values of its population, and to promote the integration of the national and regional levels within the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve. Article 3º. Administration of the MPA. The administration and environmental management of the Marine Protected Area will be incumbent upon the Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development with regard to areas declared or those that may be declared as forming part of the National Natural Parks System; with regard to all other matters, it will be incumbent upon the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Coralina. Paragraph. The foregoing is without prejudice to the attributions of other authorities at the national, regional and municipal levels. Article 4º. Internal delimitation of the MPA. The Board of Directors of Coralina shall decide on the internal delimitation of the Marine Protected Area hereby declared and shall define the general guidelines for its subsequent zoning.
Annex 4
38
Article 5ª. Technical Advisory Committee. The Board of Directors of Coralina may create a Technical Advisory Committee, to provide technical assistance in matters relating to the ecological, economic and sociocultural criteria that are to guide the process of internal zoning of the Marine Protected Area and the regulation of its uses. Article 6º. This resolution is effective as of the date of its publication in the Official Journal and revokes Resolution 0876 of 23 July 2004 and any other contrary provisions. BE IT PUBLISHED AND COMPLIED WITH. 27 January 2005 The Minister of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development [Signed] Sandra Suárez Pérez
Annex 4
39
40
CORALINA CORPORATION FOR THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ARCHIPELAGO OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA AGREEMENT No. 021 09 JUNE 2005 “Whereby the Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve is internally delimited and other provisions are enacted” The Board of Directors of the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of an Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina – CORALINA –, in exercising its legal powers conferred by Law 99 of 1993, Resolution No. 107 of 27 January 2005 from the Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development, additional concurrent regulations, and CONSIDERING: That the Political Constitution of Colombia establishes in its article 8 that it is an obligation of the State and of its people to protect the cultural and natural riches of the Nation. It also guarantees in its article 79 the right to enjoy a healthy environment and establishes in articles 80 and 95 numeral 8, the obligation to protect the diversity and integrity of the environment, the conservation of ecological areas of special importance, the planning, management and use of the natural resources in order to guarantee its sustainable development, its conservation, restauration or substitution. Additionally, it states that the factors for environmental degradation shall be prevented. That Law 99 of 1993 on its article 37 created the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina– CORALINA – based in San Andrés (island) as an Autonomous Regional Corporation, which, besides its administrative functions regarding the natural
Annex 5
Annex 5: CORPORATION FOR THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF
THE SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA
ARCHIPELAGO - CORALINA, AGREEMENT NO. 021, 9 JUNE 2005.
(Available at: http://www.coralina.gov.co/coralina/informacionciudadano/
normatividad/acuerdos-coralina/acuerdos-coralina-2005)
41
resources and the environment of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, shall carry out promotion activities for scientific research and technology transfer, subject to the special regime set by law and by its statutes, mainly in charge of promoting the conservation and sustainable use of the renewable natural resources and the environment of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina. It will direct the regional planning process for the use of land and sea resources, in order to mitigate or deactivate pressures to inadequately exploit the natural resources, to promote the integration of native communities who inhabit the islands and its ancestral use methods, from nature to the preservation, protection and sustainable use of the renewable natural resources and the environment; and to promote, together with the cooperation of national and international entities, the creation of appropriate technologies to the use and preservation of the resources and the surroundings of the archipelago. CORALINA’s jurisdiction includes the territory of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, the territorial sea and the exclusive exploitation economic zone, generated from the land sections of the archipelago, and it shall carry out, besides the special functions determined by law, the functions that the Ministry of Environment assigns to it and the ones established by its statutes. That Paragraph 2 idem provides that the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina is designated as a biosphere reserve. That UNESCO, on 10 November 2000, declared the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, for the man and the biosphere, including both the marine and land area, with the objective of preserving the biological diversity in harmony with the protection of the local culture, among others. That Colombia signed the Convention on Biological Diversity – CBD – approved by means of Law 165 of 1994. That this Agreement aims at conserving the biological diversity, promoting the sustainable use of its components and the fair and
Annex 5
42
equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the use of the genetic resources, by means of the adequate use of the resources, an appropriate technological transfer and a wise funding. That, according to the Convention, the protected areas are an essential instrument for the Convention’s development in marine and coastal ecosystems. That Colombia is also party to the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment in the Wider Caribbean Region (Law 56 of 1987) and its Protocol related the Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (Law 356 of 1997), which aim at protecting, restoring and improving the condition of the ecosystems, as well as the endangered species or those in risk of extinction and their habitats in the region of the Wider Caribbean, through the establishment of protected areas in the associated marine zones and ecosystems, among others. That the Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development by means of Resolution No. 107 of 27 January 2005, declared the area of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina as a Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve; whose ecological, economic, social and cultural importance is delimited between the following coordinates: POINT LATITUDE LONGITUDE 1 14° 59’ 08” N 82° 00’ 00” W 2 14° 59’ 08” N 79° 50’ 00” W 3 13° 10’ 00” N 79° 50’ 00” W 4 13° 10’ 00” N 81° 00’ 00” W 5 12° 00’ 00” N 81° 00’ 00” W 6 12° 00’ 00” N 82° 00’ 00” W That in accordance to the above-mentioned Resolution, the objective of the Marine Protected Area is the conservation of representative samples of the marine and coastal biodiversity, of the basic ecological processes that support the environmental offer of theAarchipelago and the social and cultural values of its population; and to promote, within the Seaflower Biosphere
Annex 5
43
Reserve, the integration of the system of protected areas, from both the national and regional levels. That, likewise, the said Resolution establishes that the Board of Directors of CORALINA shall internally delimit the Marine Protected Area and define the general guidelines for its further zoning. That the delimitation of the Marine Protected Area is a mechanism to guarantee the management and preservation of biodiversity, the sustainable use of the resources and the possibility of the continuity of life itself for the inhabitants of the Archipelago, who fully rely on its environmental offer. That the San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina Archipelago possesses vast natural values, in its land and maritime zones, and therefore, the implementation of measures that ensure the protection of sensitive and vulnerable ecosystems becomes necessary in order to ensure their conservation. That, for the foregoing reasons, AGREES FIRST: To delimitate internally the Marine Protected Area (MPA) of the SEAFLOWER Biosphere Reserve, formed by the group of areas with special ecological and cultural importance, which are, at the same time, defined within the following coordinates. These are identified by the points enumerated in the attached sketch-map and annexed to the present administrative act, and which forms an integral part of it: 1. Northern Section or Sector Norte of the Marine Protected Area: Comprises the reef complexes of Quitasueño (Queena), Roncador and Serrana, with an area of approximately 37.522 km2.
Annex 5
44
Latitude Longitude a) 14° 59’ 08” N - 82° 00’ 00” W Starting from this point (1) in a straight line towards the East until reaching the next point. (2) b) 14° 59’ 08” N - 79° 50’ 00” W Continuing from this point (2) in a straight line towards the South until reaching the next point. (3) c) 13° 10’ 00” N - 79° 50’ 00” W Continuing from this point (3) in a straight line towards the West until reaching the next point. (4) d) 13° 10’ 00” N - 80° 30’ 00” W Continuing from this point (4) in a straight line towards the North until reaching the next point. (5) e) 13° 50’ 00” N - 80° 30’ 00” W Continuing from this point (5) in a straight line towards the West until reaching the next point (6). f) 13° 50’ 00” N - 82° 00’ 00” W Continuing from this point (6) in a straight line towards the North until reaching and closing at the initial point (1) or starting point. 2. Central Section or Sector Central of the Marine Protected Area: Comprises the coastal zone of the Providencia and Santa Catalina islands with its reef complex, Cays and Shoals, with an area of approximately 12.715 km2, and its external limits – forming a geometrical figure that simulates a rectangle – are given by the following coordinates and identified by the points enumerated in the attached sketch-map: Latitude Longitude a) 13° 50’ 00” N - 82° 00’ 00” W Starting from this point (6) in a straight line towards the East until reaching the next point (5). b) 13° 50’ 00” N - 80° 30’ 00” W Continuing from this point (5) in a straight line towards the South until reaching the next point. (4) c) 13° 10’ 00” N - 80° 30’ 00” W Continuing from this point (4) in a straight line towards the West until reaching the next point (7)
Annex 5
45
d) 13° 10’ 00” N - 82° 00’ 00” W Continuing from this point (4) in a straight line towards the North until closing at the initial point (6). 3. Southern Section or Sector Sur of the Marine Protected Area: Comprises the coastal zone of the San Andrés Island with its reef complex, the Bolivar’s reef complex (East-Southeast Cays) and Alburquerque’s reef complex (South-Southwest Cays), Cays and Shoals, with an area of approximately 14.780 km2 and its external limits – forming a geometrical figure that simulates a rectangle – are provided by the following coordinates and identified by the points enumerated in the attached sketch-map: Latitude Longitude a) 13° 10’ 00” N - 82° 00’ 00” W Starting from this point (7) in a straight line towards the East until reaching the next point. (10). b) 13° 10’ 00” N - 81° 00’ 00” W Continuing from this point (10) in a straight line towards the South until reaching the next point. (9). c) 12° 00’ 00” N - 81° 00’ 00” W Continuing from this point (9) in a straight line towards the West until reaching the next point. (8) d) 12° 00’ 00” N - 82° 00’ 00” W Continuing from this point (8) in a straight line towards the North until reaching and closing at the initial point (7). SECOND: The Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, which is delimited by means of this act, has the following objectives, according to the purpose established in Resolution 107 of 27 January 2005:  To preserve and recover the species, the biodiversity, the ecosystems and other natural values.  To promote good use practices in order to guarantee the sustainable use of the coastal and marine resources.  To equitably share the social and economic benefits in order to contribute to the local development.
Annex 5
46
 To protect the rights regarding the traditional uses of the community.  To promote the feeling of belonging by means of education. PARAGRAPH: CORALINA shall promote, jointly with the competent environmental authorities, the articulation of information and actions related to the areas that define the National System of Protected Areas – SINAP – and the Regional System of Protected Areas – SIRAP. THIRD: The foundations for the zoning and regulation of the sectors that comprise the Marine Protected Area will be the pertinent ecological and environmental studies; the domestic regulations and applicable international treaties; the guiding principles of the Biosphere Reserve; the current uses, socially accepted by the local communities and that do not threaten the sustainability or rational use of the resource; and, in general, the environmental, socioeconomic and managing criteria that allow an adequate zoning, an efficient regulation and an effective management in those areas. FIRST PARAGRAPH: The Board of Directors of CORALINA shall decide on the zoning and general regulatory framework for the use of the zones within the Marine Protected Area. SECOND PARAGRAPH: For the management of the Marine Protected Area, the General Directorate of CORALINA shall file the management model of those areas, to the Board of Directors. FORTH: The present Agreement enters into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal and in the environmental newsletter of CORALINA. BE IT PUBLISHED AND COMPLIED WITH Issued in San Andrés Island, on 9 JUNE 2005
Annex 5
47
[Signed] SUSANIE DAVIS BRYAN President [Signed] RIXCIE NEWBALL STEPHENS Secretary AD HOC
Annex 5
48
ANNEX AGREEMENT 021 OF 9 JUNE 2005 SKETCH-MAP – INTERNAL DELIMITATION OF THE MARINE PROTECTED AREA OF THE SEAFLOWER BIOSPHERE RESERVE
Annex 5
49
50
REGIONAL AUTONOMOUS CORPORATION FOR THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ARCHIPELAGO OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA AGREEMENT No. 025 04 AUGUST 2005 Whereby the Protected Marine Area of the SEAFLOWER Biosphere Reserve is internally zoned, and the General Regulatory Framework of Uses and other provisions are enacted The Board of Directors of the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina Archipelago, in exercising its legal and statutory responsibilities, especially those conferred by Law 99 of 1993, Decree 1768 of 1994, Resolution 0107 of 27 January 2005, and CONSIDERING That the Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development, by means of Resolution 0107 of 27 January 2005, instituted as Marine Protected Area - MPA - of the SEAFLOWER Biosphere Reserve, a zone within the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, on account of its ecological, economic, social and cultural significance. That the purpose of the declared MPA is to preserve representative samples of the marine and coastal biodiversity, of the basic ecological processes that support the Archipelago’s environmental offer and the social and cultural values of its inhabitants, and to promote the integration of national, regional and local levels within the Biosphere Reserve - SEAFLOWER - for its administration and management. That the zoning and its general regulatory framework of uses constitute the main planning instrument for the conservation and management of the MPA, and the environmental determining
Annex 6
Annex 6: CORPORATION FOR THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA
ARCHIPELAGO - CORALINA, AGREEMENT NO. 025,
4 AUGUST 2005.
(Available at: http://www.coralina.gov.co/coralina/informacionciudadano/
normatividad/acuerdos-coralina/acuerdos-coralina-2005)
51
aspects which guide the different sustainable activities to be carried out within the MPA zones will be established thereunder. That the zoning and its general regulatory framework of uses are drafted in consideration of the ecological, socio-economic and cultural values which oriented the inclusion of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina in the UNESCO’s International Network as the SEAFLOWER Biosphere Reserve. In association with other planning and management instruments already in place, those regulations aim at protecting and sustaining the ecosystems and biodiversity existing within the MPA, adding into it a network of strictly protected zones in order to guarantee the use of and sustainable access to the environmental goods and services they generate. That further to the protection and preservation of the representative areas as a result of its biodiversity, the zoning and its general regulatory framework of uses also facilitate the protection of other areas with high preservation values, by assigning protection areas to a wide range of habitats including coral formations, marine phanerogam seagrass and mangrove ecosystems, as well as those habitats which are relevant to endangered species or those in risk of extinction (such as spiny lobster, queen conch, octopus, snapper, grouper, among others), or other special or unique places. That the MPA will be administered and managed as an area of multiple uses which implies that, while strengthening the preservation activities, it permits the creation and continuance of productive activities, including recreational, commercial, investigative and environmental education activities, as well as those activities traditionally carried out by the local communities. That the administration and management of the MPA will allow ensuring the achievement of the goals in mind when establishing, designing and administering such area, and those central elements to be taken into account in this process include: a) Protection of species: protecting the biodiversity and the species of particular interest, including lobsters, marine turtles, sharks, parrot fishes, sea cucumbers, corals (Acropora spp,
Annex 6
52
Porites spp, Dendrogyra spp), mangroves, marine phanerogams and algae, among others; b) Habitat protection: protecting representative habitats and those critical for the survival of species of particular interest and for the functioning of the ecosystems, taking into account the ecological connections existing among them; c) Dispute resolution: removing or minimising incompatible uses and conflicts among users; d) Recovery: allow the regeneration of benthic communities, fish populations and other marine species, degraded and/or overexploited; e) Socio-economic impacts: minimising the adverse socio-economic impacts; f) Sustainable use: ensure the sustainability of the use of resources; g) Equity and possession: guarantee the equitable distribution of the economic and social benefits and protect the traditional rights; h) Implementation: facilitate the delimitation, compliance with and monitoring of the adopted measures. That the internal zoning of the MPA and the general regulatory framework of uses arising from it expressly recognise the rights and interests of the communities traditionally located in the area, facilitating the implementation of activities for the traditional use of the marine and coastal resources in accordance with the customs and traditions of the inhabitants. That the contribution of the scientific research for the management and better knowledge of the MPA is recognised in the zoning and its general regulatory framework of uses, and for such purposes, specific areas within each zone are assigned in order to allow better information and knowledge as required both for the monitoring of the Management Plan to be developed and for verifying the efficiency and effectivity of the established zoning. That the zoning and general regulatory framework of uses for the MPA are built having in mind other instruments of planning, orderly management and territorial development previously established by entities with functions and competencies in the area, and it proposes a unique, consistent and simplified scheme for the management and administering of the whole MPA. That the zoning and general regulatory framework of uses establish the purposes for the use and the access mechanisms in
Annex 6
53
each zone, therefore no longer requiring special permits, as well as the type of uses and access to certain zones which do require authorisation and permits issued the competent authority. In general, in the General Use Zones a larger number of activities with less restrictions are allowed fundamentally aiming at protecting the water quality of the ecosystems, while the Preservation Zones (no extraction or access), are the more restrictive. That the zoning will be defined under the following categories: 1. GENERAL USE ZONE 2. SPECIAL USE ZONE 3. ZONE FOR RECOVERY AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF HYDRO-BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 4. CONSERVATION ZONE (NO TAKE) 5. PRESERVATION ZONE (NO ENTRY) The zoning foresees the possibility of defining or delimiting other types of specific areas within the areas already zoned and identified. Additionally, the zoning foresees the possibility of establishing additional measures on the use and access to certain areas with the purpose of being able to carry out activities which, for exceptional reasons, were not foreseen under the regulatory framework for general uses in each zone or area described in the above numbers, such as, security concerns, emergencies, placing of navigation facilities, defence operations and the exercise of traditional practices and customs by the native communities of the archipelago. That for each area described above, a regulatory framework of uses is established and it shall guide the exercise of the permitted, restricted and prohibited activities in each zone or in part of them, the creation of areas within the MPA zones, and the producers to be followed by all users in order to obtain the
Annex 6
54
required permits for using and accessing each zone in accordance with what was established in the zoning. That the general regulatory framework of uses becomes a decisive parameter for the exercise of functions and competences of those entities with jurisdiction within the MPA area, and therefore it must be comprised within their respective planning and investment mechanisms. That pursuant to Agreement 021 of the Board of Directors of CORALINA dated 9 June 2005, the Marine Protected Area of the SEAFLOWER Biosphere Reserve was approved, internally delimited and divided in three sectors Northern, Central and Southern. That it is the responsibility of the Board of Directors of CORALINA to adopt the zoning and general regulatory framework of uses of the Marine Protected Area and for the foregoing reasons, AGREES FIRST ARTICLE: Zoning each one of the sectors of the Marine Protected Area of the SEAFLOWER Biosphere Reserve, as declared by the Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development pursuant to Resolution 0107 of 2005; internally delimited by means of Agreement of the Board of Directors of Coralina number 021 dated 9 June 2005 and cartographically represented in the maps annexed to the present Agreement and which are an integral part of it. The zoning corresponds to a subdivision with purposes of preservation and management of the different areas contained within the MPA, and is planned and determined in accordance with the natural, politico-administrative, legal and socio-economical characteristics of each area, for its orderly management. The zoning to be defined below implies different degrees of protection that are to be regulated through special measures in order to guarantee its comprehensive management, having into account the particular circumstances of the area with
Annex 6
55
regard to is potentials, restrictions, alterations, degradation and use pressures. The zoning to be adopted is as follows: 1. General Use Zone: Unity for the sustainable management applicable to those areas which contain ecosystems with a high offer of environmental goods and services, hence permitting to take advantage of them in a sustainable manner without introducing significant modifications to the natural surroundings of the area, in order to produce a sustainable development model and use the natural resources for the benefit of the region, while being compatible with the preservation objectives of the MPA. In this zone recreational low-impact activities, sustainable aquaculture, subsistence fishing, sustainable artisanal and industrial fishing, ecotourism, among other, are to be allowed. 2. Special Use Zone: Unity for the sustainable management applicable to those areas in which it is necessary to implement specific management measures, such as controlling the access or the types of activities to be allowed in sectors with a high intensity of use, with the aim of protecting the natural resources; establishing thresholds for recovering over-exploited species or guaranteeing the public safety in case of contingencies. This type of zones can be established with a temporary or permanent character depending on the way in which they are defined by means of the regulatory framework of uses for the MPA. The environmental authority will establish this type of zones and its particular regulation, based on the regulatory framework currently in force, in order to deal with situations that demand immediate intervention. In this zones the degree of human intervention will be limited to activities such as, inter alia: research, monitoring, environmental education, ecotourism, low-impact recreation, anchoring, access channel and sustainable fishing.
Annex 6
56
3. Zone of Recovery and Sustainable Use of Hydro-biological Resources: Unity for the preservation and sustainable management applicable to those zones within the marine protected area which, due to natural causes or as a result of human intervention, have suffered considerable damages and demand special management in order to recover its quality and environmental stability. In this zone activities for the recovery and/or restoration of ecosystems, traditional regulated artisanal fishing, scientific research, environmental education, artisanal and sport fishing guided by artisanal traditional fishermen will be allowed. Conservation Zone (NO TAKE): Unity for the conservation and sustainable management applicable to those areas whose main purpose will be the protection of biodiversity, including ecosystems which are vital to its sustainable development. This zone also includes those zones declared as natural regional parks and those to be declared as such in the future. In this zone only activities of research, ecological recovery and/or restoration of degraded ecosystems, monitoring, environmental education, ecotourism and low-impact recreation are allowed. Preservation Zone (No entry): Unity for the conservation and sustainable management applicable to those areas whose existence is critical and fundamental for the protection and conservation of biodiversity, including marine communities and ecological processes highly representative of the MPA, as well as ecosystems which are vital to its sustainable development. The purpose of its establishment is creating areas within the MPA destined to the strictest conservation of ecosystems and/or essential habitats in order to guarantee the comprehensiveness of the ecosystems and the natural values of the marine protected area, keeping them free from anthropic extractive interferences.
Annex 6
57
In this zone only activities of scientific research and monitoring, after obtaining the required authorisation from the competent authorities, are allowed. SECOND ARTICLE: In order to achieve the mission and objectives of the MPA, and the objectives of the zoning, the following regulatory frameworks on uses for each zone are established and they include the description of allowed activities, the prohibitions, the use and/or access without permit and the use/access with permit: 1. General Use Zone: In this zone recreational activities of low-impact, sustainable aquaculture, subsistence fishing, sustainable artisanal fishing, ecotourism, maritime transportation, among other, are allowed. A. Prohibitions. a) In the Central and Southern sectors of the MPA no industrial fishing activities will be allowed. in the Northern sector of the MPA, the Regional Fishing and Aquaculture Council, in coordination with the Environmental Authority of the MPA/CORALINA and the maritime authority, after hearing the opinion of different interest groups such as well as artisanal fishermen, industrial fishermen, among others, shall establish and regulate the zones of special use destined to industrial sustainable fishing activities which are allowed in the Northern sector. Paragraph: after the entry into force of the present Agreement, there will be a time-limit of one (1) year for establishing and regulating industrial sustainable fishing in the Northern sector of the MPA. B. Use and/or access without permits. The following activities can be carried in the General Use Zones without the need for permits or authorizations:
Annex 6
58
a) Low-impact activities, including recreational activities. b) Subsistence fishing. c) National scientific and/or technologic research which do not imply taking samples of biodiversity including non-renewable natural resources, taking into account what was established in Decree 309 of 2000 or the law that modifies or replaces it, Convention on Biological Diversity - CBD- approved by means of Law 165 of 1994 and regulations in force on access to genetic resources. d) Traditional uses of marine resources by local communities only when those are allowed within the zone or based on agreements duly signed and regulated by the environmental authority. e) Non-profit photography and filming. f) Non-profit educational programs. C. Use and/or access with permit. In order to carry out or develop any of the following activities, it is necessary to process and obtain the corresponding permit or authorisation from the competent authority: a) Extracting or collecting Marine resources associated to activities different to those allowed under letter A, for any type of activity expected to be developed. b) Artisanal or industrial fishing in any form. c) Industrial fishing in the case of the exception described for the northern zone. d) Aquaculture or mariculture projects when the national or regional environmental regulations so prescribe (subsidiary rigour- agreement of the Board of Directors and approval from the Ministry - transitory validity). e) Tourism projects and operating touristic services when so required by the national and regional environmental regulations. f) Scientific and/or technological research in accordance with the regulations on this matter. g) Traditional uses of marine natural resources when those are not covered by what is established in paragraph B - d), described in the previous section. h) Development and/or refurbishment and/or adaptation and/or operation of infrastructure projects compatible to the
Annex 6
59
preservation objectives established for the MPA and for the General Use Zones, including: • Facilities for unloading or discharge of any type of waste both liquid or solid. • Construction, maintenance, adaptation and operation of ports and/or port facilities. • Construction, maintenance or demolition of any type of infrastructure project which can cause environmental adverse effects in the MPA. i) Developing projects or activities compatible with the conservation objectives assigned to the MPA and to the General Use Zones, including: • Dredging. • Discharge of solid and liquid waste (dangerous or not) from any source (movable, fixed or diffused from land or sea). • Works for protecting the beaches or areas under risk due to natural hazards. j) Any other activity which is compatible to the general conservation and sustainable use objectives for the MPA and for the General Use Zones not mentioned or described in section B. 2. Special Use Zones In this zone the degree of human intervention will be limited to activities such as: research, monitoring, environmental education, ecotourism, low-impact recreation, anchoring, access channel, sustainable fishing, among others. The general and specific regulations for using this type of zone will be defined within one (1) year, since the entry into force of this Agreement, and will likewise require approval from the Board of Directors. The Corporation in its capacity as Environmental and Administrative Authority of the MPA will work co-ordinately with different organizations and interest groups in establishing it. Pending the issuance of general and specific regulations on uses in these zones, the regulation established for the general use
Annex 6
60
zones with regard to prohibitions and forms (permits and authorizations) required for accessing, using and taking sustainable advantage of the ecosystems will transitorily apply. 3. Zone of Recovery and Sustainable Use of Hydro-biological Resources. In this zone it is allowed to carry out activities of recovery and/or restoration of ecosystems, traditional artisanal fishing duly regulated, scientific research, environmental education, traditional artisanal fishing and sport fishing guided by traditional artisanal fishermen. A. Prohibitions: a) Industrial fishing is prohibited. b) Recreational and commercial fishing which imply extraction of natural renewable resources is not allowed, except for subsistence fishing, traditional artisanal fishing duly regulated, artisanal and sport fishing guided by traditional artisanal fishermen. c) Jet propulsion vessel for personal use are not allowed. B. Uses and/or access without permits. a) Low-impact activities, including recreational ones, which do not involve extraction of natural resources or marine products. b) Subsistence fishing. c) Traditional uses of marine resources carried out by local communities when they are authorised within the zone or are based on agreements duly signed and regulated by the environmental authority. d) Non-profit photographing and filming. e) Non-profit educational programs.
Annex 6
61
C. Use and/or access with permits. a) Artisanal traditional fishing is allowed, but subject to the terms established by the Regional Board of Fishing and Aquaculture in accordance with the existing regulations on fisheries management. All regulations currently in force with regard to the San Andrés Archipelago will remain in force, including but not limited to, quotas and restrictions on the use of fishing arts (harpoon and other restricted methods). b) Sport fishing. c) Research, monitoring and education. d) Navigation by fishing vessels, in which case all equipment used to carry out their activities should be stored and secured when the vessel is in transit to another authorised fishing zone within the MPA or on the way to the disembark port. e) Small scale aquaculture and mariculture projects carried out by traditional artisanal fishermen legally recognised to do so. f) Use of fish aggregation systems (FADs) is only allowed with previous authorisation and approval from the Administrative Authority for the MPA/CORALINA and the Regional Board on Fishing and Aquaculture. g) Photographing and filming for profit. h) Educational programs for profit. 4. Conservation Zone (no take): In this zone it is only allowed to carry out activities of research, recovery and or ecological restoration of degraded ecosystems, monitoring, environmental education, ecotourism and low-impact recreation. A. Prohibitions a) Recreational and commercial activities which imply extraction of renewable and non-renewable natural resources are not allowed. b) Jet propulsion vessel for personal use are not allowed. B. Use and/or access without permits.
Annex 6
62
a) Low-impact activities, including recreational ones, which do not involve extraction of natural resources and marine products. b) Traditional uses of marine resources carried out by local communities when they are authorised within the zone or are based on agreements duly signed and regulated by the environmental authority. c) Non-profit photographing and filming. d) Non-profit educational programs. C. Use and/or access with permits. a) Research, monitoring and education. b) Navigation by fishing vessels, in which case all equipment used to carry out their activities should be stored and secured when the vessel is in transit to another authorised fishing zone within the MPA or on the way to the disembark port. c) Traditional artisanal fishermen legally recognised to carry out small scale aquaculture and mariculture projects. d) Use of systems for aggregation of fish (FADs) is only allowed with previous authorisation and approval from the Administrative Authority for the MPA / CORALINA and the Regional Board on Fishing and Aquaculture. e) Photographing and filming for profit. f) Educational programs for profit. 5. Preservation Zone (no entry). In this zone only activities of scientific research and monitoring, after obtaining the required authorisation form the competent authorities, are allowed. A. Prohibitions The following activities, which can cause the alteration of the natural surroundings of these zones, are prohibited: a) Discharge, introduction, distribution, use or abandonment of toxic or pollutant substances. b) Use of any chemical product with residual or explosive effects, except when they are to be used in an authorised construction site.
Annex 6
63
c) Any extracting activity, except when authorised by CORALINA for technical or scientific motives. d) Any activity defined by CORALINA as causing significant modifications to the environment or to the natural values in the different areas. e) Carrying out any fishing activity, except for fishing for scientific research purposes authorised by CORALINA, and subsistence fishing in zones where such activity is allowed, having regard to the natural and social conditions, provided the authorised activity does not affect the ecological stability of those sectors where it is permissible. f) Colleting samples of any flora or fauna product, except when CORALINA so authorises for research and special investigative purposes. g) Carrying, using or possessing flammable substances which have not been duly authorised, as well as explosive substances. h) Discharging or dumping trash, waste or residues. i) Producing noises or using instruments and sound equipment which affect the natural environment. j) Altering, modifying or removing signs, signals, billboards and boundary stones. B. Use and/or access without permits. a) All activities to be carried out in these zones require authorisation by the competent authority and can only be developed if they do not cause modifications to the natural environment. b) Transit of vessels. C. Use and/or access with permits. Persons who use these areas can remain there only for the time specified in the respective authorisation. For any finality users need to obtain the corresponding authorisation in due course and in accordance with the purpose of their visit and must comply with the remaining requirements indicated in the respective authorisation. A permit is required to develop the following activities:
Annex 6
64
a) Carry out research and/or scientific and/or technological analysis. THIRD ARTICLE: Each permit or authorisation required to carry out the activities described in each zone shall be obtained from the competent authorities and shall be subject to the rules and regulations established for such purpose. In any case, the entities in charge of managing those procedures shall take into account the regulations contained in the present Agreement, in order to contribute to achieving the goals of conservation, sustainable use and comprehensive management of the MPA. FOURTH ARTICLE: CORALINA shall perform all necessary arrangements before the Maritime Authority for establishing and regulating navigational routes within the MPA and for all other activities within its jurisdiction, especially those related to posting signs and designing anchoring and/or mooring zones. FIFTH ARTICLE: In all the zones referred-to in the present administrative act, it is prohibited to: a. Damaging, affecting or altering in any form, the coral reefs, mangrove ecosystems, marine phanerogams, beaches, dunes and or environmental systems present therein. b. Extracting, mobilizing, transporting, selling and/or commercializing elements and/or products which are part of environmental systems such as coral reefs, mangroves, marine phanerogams, beaches, dunes and all related components and products without due authorisation from the environmental authority. c. Anchoring on top of coral reefs. d. Operating or anchoring vessels in a way which damages or could damage coral reefs, mangroves, marine phanerogams, the marine seabed or any other part of the MPA. e. Discharging or unloading any type of substance from land, sea or air without due authorisation. f. Dredging, drilling, depositing, installing, fixing or separating structures or any other alteration to the marine seabed without authorisation, including among these, any activity for
Annex 6
65
operating fishing aggregation devices (artificial reefs, etc.) (FADs), aquaculture and using research equipment. g. Extracting, destroying, moving, possessing, selling or commercializing components of historical or cultural heritage without authorisation from the competent authority. h. Introducing or releasing exotic fauna and/or flora species or repopulating with native species without authorisation. i. Developing aquaculture or mariculture activities without proper authorisation from the Regional Fishing and Aquiculture Board and the Administrative Authority of the MPA/CORALINA. j. Destroying, removing or in any other way altering buoys, signals and scientific equipment. k. Extracting, damaging, altering, selling, commercializing or possessing any species, or its parts or products, regulated or protected by means of international, national or local measures; including marine species defined as endangered or at risk of extinction. l. Using explosives and other fishing arts legally prohibited. m. Introducing or releasing hazardous substances, including poisons and chemical agents used for fishing activities in any modality. n. Collecting eggs or altering nests of any animal species in the beach, mangroves, cays, coastal areas and marine waters. o. Carrying out research projects and or monitoring, without due authorisation from the competent Authorities. SIXTH ARTICLE: CORALINA shall develop and/or adjust and adopt, within six (6) months from the date in which this Agreement enters into force, the Management Plans for each Regional Park included within the MPA, having into account the fundamental features set forth in the present Agreement. SEVENTH ARTICLE: CORALINA shall give due publicity to the provisions of this Agreement and raise awareness within the community at large. A copy of this Agreement shall be communicated to the competent authorities for what falls within their jurisdiction, and in any case it shall be published in widely-distributed regional media and in the Website of such Corporation.
Annex 6
66
EIGHT ARTICLE: The zoning and regulation established herein shall be reviewed every three (3) years. NINTH ARTICLE: Non-compliance with the provisions contained in the present Agreement shall give rise to the preventive measures and sanctions provided for in Law 99 of 1993 or the modifying or substituting legislation. TENTH ARTICLE: The present Agreement enters into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal. BE IT COMMUNICATED, PUBLISHED AND COMPLIED WITH. Issued in San Andrés Island, on 04 AUGUST 2005 [Signed] SUSANIE DAVIS BRYAN President [Signed] EDITH CARREÑO CORPUS Secretary
Annex 6
67
ANNEX No. 1 Sketch-Map. No. 1 Delimitation and zoning MPA
Annex 6
68
ANNEX No. 2 Sketch-Map. No. 2 Zoning – reef complex of San Andrés
Annex 6
69
ANNEX No. 3 Sketch-Map. No. 3 Zoning – reef complex of Bolívar
Annex 6
70
ANNEX No. 4 Sketch-Map. No. 4 Zoning – reef complex of Albuquerque
Annex 6
71
ANNEX No. 5 Sketch-Map. No. 5 Zoning – reef complex of Providencia
Annex 6
72
ANNEX No. 6 Sketch-Map. No. 6 Zoning – reef complex of Quitasueño
Annex 6
73
ANNEX No. 7 Sketch-Map. No. 7 Zoning – reef complex of Roncador
Annex 6
74
ANNEX No. 8 Sketch-Map. No. 8 Zoning – reef complex of Serrana
Annex 6
75
76
PRESIDENCY OF THE REPUBLIC DECREE NUMBER 1946 OF 2013 (9 SEPTEMBER 2013) [as modified and amended by Decree number 1119 of 17 June 2014] Regulating Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9 of Law 10/1978 and Articles 2 and 3 of Law 47/1993, concerning territorial seas, the contiguous zone, certain aspects of the continental shelf of the Colombian island territories in the Western Caribbean, and the integrity of the Department of the archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina. THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA in exercise of his powers under the Constitution , in particular those conferred by section 189.11 Constitution, and further to the terms of laws 10/1978 and 47/1993 WHEREAS Article 101 of the Constitution states that "in addition to the mainland territory, the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina and Malpelo, and the islands, islets, cays, shoals and banks which belong to it form part of Colombia" The same Article states that "The subsoil, territorial seas, the contiguous zone, the continental shelf, the exclusive economic zone, the segment of the geostationary orbit, the electromagnetic spectrum and the space in which it acts are also part of Colombia, in accordance with international law or with Colombian law in the absence of international law". Article 309 of the Constitution made the Intendancy of "the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina" a Department, establishing that "the property and rights which
Annex 7
Annex 7: PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1946 OF 9 SEPTEMBER 2013,
AS MODIFIED AND AMENDED BY DECREE NO. 1119 OF
17 JUNE 2014 (COMPOSITE VERSION)
(Presidency of the Republic of Colombia)
77
belonged on any title to the intendancies and commissaries will continue to be the property of the respective Departments". Article 310 of the Constitution states that "the Department Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina will also be governed by the rules provided in the Constitution and the law for other Departments, by special rules in matters of administration, immigration, fiscal management, foreign trade, exchange, finance and economic development as established in the Law." Law 47/1993 establishes [Article 3] that the territory of the Department Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina is formed by the islands of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, and the cays of Albuquerque, East Southeast, Roncador, Serrana, Quitasueño, Bajo Nuevo and the Banks of Serranilla and Alicia and other islands, islets, cays, shoals, banks and reefs which formed the former Special Intendancy of San Andrés and Providencia. Article 2 of Law 47/1993 recognizes the territorial, cultural, administrative, economic and political unity of the Archipelago, stating that "the Department Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina is a territorial entity created by the Constitution, and as such, enjoys autonomy for the management of its interests within the limits of the Constitution and the law, with the right to govern itself through its own authorities; to exercise the competencies related to that, to participate in national revenues, to manage its resources and to establish such taxation as may be necessary for it to perform its functions". Law 10/1978, Article 9 establishes that the Government will proceed to indicate in the Department Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia, and other island territories the lines from which the various maritime spaces in which the Colombian nation exercises sovereignty are measured, including sovereign rights and jurisdiction in accordance with customary international law, and orders that these be published in the official maritime charts, in accordance with international norms on the matter.
Annex 7
78
Pursuant to what Article 101 of the Political Constitution and Law 10 of 1978 provide, following what is established in the Political Constitution, it is the duty of the State to establish the breadth of the territorial sea and the contiguous zone that are generated by the islands that form the Colombian insular territories in the Western Caribbean and the extent of the corresponding maritime jurisdiction, with the purpose of facilitating their proper administration, the orderly management of the seas and the exercise of the sovereignty or the sovereign rights of the country. In conformity with customary international law and in furtherance of the provisions of Article 101 of the Political Constitution and Law 10 of 1978, the Republic of Colombia is entitled to have the insular features that form the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina generate territorial sea and contiguous zone, without prejudice to their rights over an economic exclusive zone and a continental shelf. In accordance with customary international law, in the contiguous zone States exercise sovereign rights and jurisdiction and control in matters of security, control of the trafficking in drugs and illicit substances, the protection of the environment, fiscal and customs matters, immigration, health, and other matters. The extent of the contiguous zone of the island territories forming the Western Caribbean needs to be determined, in particular those territories which form the archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, such that an orderly management of the Archipelago and its maritime areas can be guaranteed, in order to secure the protection of the environment and resources, and the maintenance of comprehensive security and public order. The Colombian State is committed to the preservation of the ecosystems of the Archipelago, which are fundamental to the ecological balance of the zone, and to preserve historical, traditional, ancestral, environmental and cultural rights, and the rights of survival of the inhabitants. The publication of the thematic nautical charts issued by the
Annex 7
79
General Maritime Office under Resolution No. 613 of 9 December 2013 only proceeds after the Decree establishing the points and baselines referred to in Article 3 of the present Decree are issued; The Republic of Colombia exercises all the rights over its maritime spaces in conformity with International Law In the merits of what has been referred-to above, DECREES Article 1. THE ISLAND TERRITORIES OF COLOMBIA IN THE WESTERN CARIBBEAN SEA 1. The island territories of Colombia in the Western Caribbean Sea are formed by the Department Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, and other islands, islets, cays, shoals and banks which belong to them. 2. The Department Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina is formed by the following islands: [A] San Andrés [B] Providencia [C] Santa Catalina [D] Cays of Albuquerque [E] Cays of East Southeast [F] Cays of Roncador [G] Cays of Serrana [H] Cays of Quitasueño [I] Cays of Serranilla [J] Cays of Bajo Nuevo [K] Other islands, islets, cays, shoals, banks, elevations at low tide, shallows and reefs adjacent to each of these islands, and
Annex 7
80
which form the Department Archipelago of San Andrés and Providencia. 3. Modified by Decree 1119 of 2014, Art. 1. The Republic of Colombia exercises full sovereignty over its insular territories and territorial sea; jurisdiction and sovereign rights over the rest of the maritime spaces generated by its insular territories in the terms prescribed by international law, the Political Constitution, Law 10 of 1978, and by the present Decree, in what corresponds to each of them. In those spaces Colombia exercises historic fishing rights in conformity with international law. Article 2. MARITIME SPACES GENERATED BY THE ISLAND TERRITORIES OF COLOMBIA IN THE WESTERN CARIBBEAN SEA In accordance with Article 101 of the Constitution, customary international law and Law 10/1978 and Law 47/1993, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone generated by the island territories in the Western Caribbean Sea are part of Colombia. The continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone generated to the east by the island territories of Colombia in the Caribbean Sea overlap with the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone generated to the northwest by the Colombian Atlantic Coast. Article 3. BASELINES ON THE ISLAND TERRITORIES IN THE WESTERN CARIBBEAN SEA 1. In furtherance of the terms of Law 10/1978, the Government will indicate the points and baselines for which the width of territorial seas will be measured, along with the contiguous zone and the various maritime spaces generated by the islands formed by the island territories of Colombia in the Western Caribbean Sea. 2. These lines will be drawn in accordance with criteria recognized by customary international law, including those related to the islands situated on atolls or islands surrounded by reefs, in which the baseline for measuring the width of territorial
Annex 7
81
seas is the low tide line on the seaward side of the reef. 3. Straight baselines may be used in the events provided for in Article 4 of Law 10/1978. 4. Waters situated between the baselines and the island territories will be considered as interior waters. Article 4. TERRITORIAL SEAS OF THE ISLAND TERRITORIES IN THE WESTERN CARIBBEAN SEA 1. The territorial seas of the island territories of Colombia in the Western Caribbean Sea over which the Republic of Colombia exercises full sovereignty, extend from the territory of each of the islands mentioned in Article 1 and its interior waters, to the distance established in Section 2 of this Article 2. The outer limit of the territorial sea will be formed by a line on which points are marked at a distance equal to 12 nautical miles from the baseline. 3. National sovereignty is also exercised over the airspace situated over the territorial seas, the seabed and the subsoil of that sea. 4. The vessels of any State enjoy the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea, in accordance with the norms of customary international law and other peaceful uses recognized in it. The passage of warships, submarines, nuclear-propelled vessels and other naval artefacts which carry nuclear substances or other hazardous substances or potentially hazardous to the environment through its territorial sea will be subject to prior authorization of the competent authorities of the Republic of Colombia. PARAGRAPH. For the purposes of this Decree and in accordance with the terms of Article 1 of Law 10/1978, it will be understood that a nautical mile is equal to 1.852 km. Article 5. THE CONTIGUOUS ZONE OF THE ISLAND
Annex 7
82
TERRITORIES IN THE WESTERN CARIBBEAN SEA 1. Without prejudice to the terms of Section 2 of this Article, the Contiguous Zone of the island territories of Colombia in the Western Caribbean Sea extends up to a distance of 24 nautical miles measured from the baselines referred to in Article 3 above. 2. The Contiguous Zones adjacent to the territorial sea of the islands which form the island territories of Colombia in the Western Caribbean Sea, except for the islands Serranilla and Bajo Nuevo, where they intersect, generate a continuous and uninterrupted Contiguous Zone, across the whole of the Department of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, over which the competent national authorities will exercise the powers recognized by international law and Colombian laws mentioned in Section 3 of this Article. In order to secure the proper administration and orderly management of the entire Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, and of their islands, cays and other formations and their maritime areas and resources, and in order to avoid the existence of irregular figures or contours which would make practical application difficult, the lines indicated for the outer limits of the contiguous zones will be joined to each other through geodetic lines. In the same fashion, these will be linked to the contiguous zone of the island of Serranilla by geodetic lines which maintain the direction of parallel 14° 59´ 08”N, and to Meridian 79° 56´ 00” W, and thence to the North, thus forming an Integral Contiguous Zone of the Department Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina. 3. Modified by Decree 1119 of 2014, Art. 2. In developing what has been provided for in the previous numeral, with the purpose of protecting the sovereignty in its territory and territorial sea, in the Integral contiguous zone established in this Article Colombia exercises the faculties of enforcement and control necessary to: a) Modified by Decree 1119 of 2014, Art. 2. Prevent and control the infractions of the laws and regulations related with the integral security of the State, including piracy and trafficking
Annex 7
83
of drugs and psychotropic substances, as well as conduct contrary to the security in the sea and the national maritime interests, the customs, fiscal, migration and sanitary matters which take place in its insular territories or in their territorial sea. In the same manner, violations against the laws and regulations related with the preservation of the maritime environment and the cultural heritage will be prevented and controlled. b) Punish violations of laws and regulations related to the matters indicated in section a) above, committed in its island territories or in their territorial sea PARAGRAPH. Added by Decree 1119 of 2014, Art. 3. The application of this article will be carried out in conformity with international law and Article 7 of the present Decree.” Article 6°. Modified by Decree 1119 of 2014, Art. 4. PREPARATION OF THE CARTOGRAPHY. The points and base lines referred to in Article 3 of the present Decree, will be published in official thematic maps of the Republic of Colombia drawn by the General Maritime Office. The corresponding maps will be sent to the Agustin Codazzi Geographic Institute for matters within its competence. Said maps will be given due publicity. The Integral Contiguous Zone established by virtue of this Article will be represented in official thematic maps of the Republic of Colombia built by the General Maritime Office. The corresponding maps will be sent to the Agustin Codazzi Geographic Institute for matters within its competence. Said maps will be given due publicity. Once the points and base lines have been determined, as well as the remaining spaces to which the present Decree refers to, they shall be established through a Decree issued by the National Government. PARAGRAPH: The publication of the corresponding official thematic maps will be made once the National Government has published the Decree by which are established the points and
Annex 7
84
base lines from which the breadth of the territorial sea, the contiguous zone and the diverse maritime spaces generated by the islands conforming the insular territories of Colombia in the Caribbean Sea, are measured. Article 7. THE RIGHTS OF THIRD STATES Nothing in this Decree will be understood to affect or limit the rights and obligations derived from the "Treaty on maritime delimitation between the Republic of Colombia and Jamaica" signed between those States on 12 November 1993, nor will it affect or limit the rights of other states. Article 8. EFFECTIVE DATE This Decree will take effect from the date of its issue, and repeals all norms and regulations contrary to it. BE IT PUBLISHED, COMMUNICATED AND COMPLIED WITH Given in Bogotá on 9 September 2013 / 17 June 2014 [Signed] JUAN MANUEL SANTOS CALDERÓN MINISTER OF INTERIOR MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS MINISTER OF FINANCE MINISTER OF DEFENSE MINISTER OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL PROTECTION MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Annex 7
85
86
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT RESOLUTION No. 000350 of 2013 (10 October) whereby the global fishing quotas for Queen Conch and shark are established within the Caribbean and Pacific Regions for the year 2014 and other provisions are issued. The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, in exercise of his legal powers and especially those conferred in Article 2 of Decree No. 1431 of 2006, and CONSIDERING: That Article 5° of Decree No. 2256 of 1991 set up the Executive Committee for Fishing, with the purpose of defining species, volumes susceptible of being used and minimum permissible sizes, in accordance with the provisions of Article 7° of Law 13 of 1990; That Article 1° of Decree No. 1431 of 2006, establishes that the Executive Committee for Fishing will meet on any one day during the month of August of every year with the purpose of identifying the species and volumes susceptible of being used and, when relevant, the minimum permissible sizes. Similarly, it establishes that the Committee will meet for the purposes referred-to above, in the following cases: 1. When the minutes of the meeting held each August expressly foresee and with regard to objective situations, that the decision may be subsequently reviewed. In this case, the Committee may meet and modify its previous decision only once. 2. When extraordinary circumstances subsequent to the August decision, documented in technical, scientific and social reports, merit a review of decisions previously taken;
Annex 8
Annex 8: MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT,
RESOLUTION NO. 350 OF 10 OCTOBER 2013.
(Official Journal No. 48.987, 27 November 2013)
87
That the Executive Committee for Fishing held an ordinary meeting on 29 August 2013 and since it did not have enough scientific evidence to establish quotas for queen conch, Caribbean deep-water shrimp (CDW) and shark in the Caribbean and Pacific regions, proposed to hold an extraordinary meeting of the Committee in October 2013. That the Executive Committee for Fishing held an extraordinary meeting on 4 October 2013, as recorded in the relevant minutes that form an integral part of this resolution, with the purpose of reviewing available technical information for resources of queen conch, Caribbean deep-water shrimp (CDW) and shark in the Caribbean and Pacific regions, and if possible, establishing their use quota for the year 2014; That according to the provisions in Article 2° of Decree No. 1431 of 2006, it is incumbent on the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, based on the proposal made by the Executive Committee for Fishing, recorded in the minutes for [the meeting held on] 4 October 2013, to issue the administrative act whereby the global fishing quotas for the year 2014 for the species of queen conch and shark in the Caribbean and Pacific region are established; That by virtue of the foregoing, DECIDES: Article 1°. The global fishing quota for Queen Conch for the year 2014 in the area of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, is established as follows: Resource QUOTA (Tons.) Queen Conch 16 Paragraph 1°. The quota hereby established applies exclusively to artisanal fishermen from the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina and catching is only allowed in the area of Serrana.
Annex 8
88
Paragraph 2°. The quota established herein is only applicable to the commercialization in the domestic market and primarily in the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina. Article 2°. A zero (0) quota for shark fishing is hereby established for the Colombian Caribbean and Pacific Regions for the year 2014. Resource QUOTA (Tons.) Caribbean and Pacific Shark 0 Article 3°. This resolution is effective as of the date of its publication in the Official Journal. BE IT PUBLISHED AND COMPLIED WITH. Done in Bogotá D.C., on 10 October 2013. The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, [Signed] Ruben Darío Lizarralde Montoya (C.F.)
Annex 8
89
90
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT RESOLUTION No. 0977 (24 JUNE 2014) Whereby Resolution No. 107 of 27 January 2005 is added to, in order to assign a protected area category to the “Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve" THE MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, In exercise of her constitutional and legal powers, and especially those conferred by article 5 paragraphs 18 and 19 of Law 99 of 1993; Decree No. 3570 of 2011, other related provisions, and CONSIDERING: That by means of Resolution No. 0107 of 27 January 2005, the then Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development, declared the Marine Protected Area (MPA) of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, allowing therein the conduct of activities sustainable in time, as well as equitable and profitable from a social, ecological and economic perspective, ensuring a joint and coordinated work between local communities, government agencies, conservation and scientific organizations, civil associations, cultural groups, private companies and other interested parties in the sustainable management and development of the Archipelago. That the Seaflower MPA ensures the preservation of representative samples of marine and coastal biodiversity from the ecological basic processes that support the Archipelago’s environmental supply; preserves the social and cultural values of its population, and promotes the integration of the national and regional levels within the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve.
Annex 9
Annex 9: MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT,
RESOLUTION NO. 977 OF 24 JUNE 2014.
(Official Journal No. 49.248, 19 August 2014)
91
That in accordance with article 3 of the aforesaid resolution, the administration and environmental management of the Marine Protected Area is incumbent upon National Natural Parks with regard to declared areas of the National Natural Parks System; and, with regard to all other matters, it is incumbent upon the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Coralina. The foregoing, without prejudice to the attributions of other authorities at the national, regional and municipal levels. That, for its part, by means of Agreement No. 021 of 9 June 2005, the Board of Directors of the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina (Coralina), internally delimited the Marine Protected Area (MPA) of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve. That likewise, through Agreement No. 025 of 4 August 2005, the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina (Coralina) adopted the MPA’s zoning and general regulation of its uses. That in the year 2010, the National Government issued Decree number 2372 of 2010 that, in its article 10, defined the public protected areas that form the National System of Protected Areas (Sinap), among which Integrated Management Districts are found. That this Ministry’s Resolution 107 being anterior to Decree 2372 of 2010, it did not envisage the respective management category. That the second paragraph of article 22 of the aforesaid decree established that, in order for the categories of protection and management of natural renewable resources regulated by Law 2 of 1959, Decree 2811 of 1974 or Law 99 of 1993, as is the case of the Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, to be considered as protected areas within the SINAP, the registration process shall be carried, following homologation or denomination, or re-categorization as the case may be.
Annex 9
92
That in view of the above, this Ministry’s Directorate of Marine, Coastal and Aquatic Resources Affairs drafted the technical document “support for implementing Decree 2372 of 2010 with regard to the Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve”. That the above-mentioned document concluded that the category of public protected area applicable to the Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve is that of an Integrated Management District, since it includes and fulfils the objectives of preservation, the attributes and modality of use, and all the other conditions foreseen for this category of the National System of Protected Areas. That bearing in mind that overlapping areas of public categories is not possible in accordance with Decree 2372 of 2010, the present administrative act does not include the areas of the Johnny Cay and Old Point Regional Natural Parks and the Old Providence Mc Bean Lagoon National Natural Park. By virtue of the foregoing; DECIDES: ARTICLE 1. To assign to the Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve declared through Resolution 107 of 2005, the category of Integrated Management District “Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve”. ARTICLE 2. The area of Integrated Management District “Marine Protected Area of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve”, does not include the emerged areas of the Island of San Andrés, Island of Providencia and Santa Catalina, the Old Providence Mc Bean Lagoon National Natural Park, the Johnny Cay Regional Natural Park and the Old Point Regional Natural Park. ARTICLE 3. Copy of the present administrative act and supporting documentation shall be sent to National Natural Parks of Colombia, for purposes of its registration in the RUNAP [Single National Registry of Protected Areas].
Annex 9
93
ARTICLE 4. The present Resolution is effective as of the date of its publication in the Official Journal, modifies Resolution No. 107 of 2005 and revokes any contrary provisions. BE IT PUBLISHED AND COMPLIED WITH Done in Bogota, D.C., on 24 June 2014 [Signed] LUZ HELENA SARMIENTO VILLAMIZAR Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development
Annex 9
94
LA GACETA OFFICIAL JOURNAL Telephone numbers: 228-3791 / 222-7344 Circulation:850 Copies 48 Pages Price C$ 45.00 Córdobas AÑO CXII Managua, Thursday 17 January 2008 No.12 SUMMARY NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA Law No. Page 613........................................................................................ 382 Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving. [pp- 382-415] NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA Law No. 613 The President of the Republic of Nicaragua To its inhabitants, be it known: That, THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY CONSIDERING I That the activity of commercial lobster fishing by diving is a practice banned in most countries, but that it is used in both of Nicaragua’s seas, without having adequately protected the persons that are dedicated to this type of work at sea. II That with their highly hazardous work in the year 2003 they contributed 2,579,000.00 pounds of lobster tail, out of which fifty percent (50%) were caught by diving and the rest by the
Annex 10
Annex 10: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA,
LAW NO. 613 OF 7 FEBRUARY 2007
(Available at: http://legislacion.asamblea.gob.ni/SILEG/Gacetas.nsf/15a7e7
eb5efa9c6062576eb0060b321/7e4f3a8da860646b06257d70007a8385/$FILE/
2007-02-07-%20G-%20Ley%20No.%20613,%20Ley%20de%20protecci%C3
%B3n%20y%20seguridad%20a%20las%20personas%20dedicadas%20a
%20 la%20actividad%20de%20buceo.pdf)
95
method of traps or cages, generating $37 million dollars, at an average price between [USD] $13 and $15 per pound and the workers receive between US$0.60 cents to US$1.00 dollar per pound for the catch. III That diving being a highly hazardous activity for the people who find themselves in need of conducting it for their survival since it causes serious professional hazards with significant effects of disability, irreparable harm and even death, without having the minimum support or protection from the State or its Institutions. IV That it is necessary for the State and Employers to protect and ensure coverage by the Nicaraguan Social Security Institute (INSS) to over three thousand workers of the lobster fishing industry, as well as to all of the thousands of this industry’s fishermen employed under any modality. V That the creation of a Special Fund is necessary, to allow for allaying a minimal part of their main material needs as well as the damages suffered by this practice that disable them. As well as to satisfy also a modicum of their economic needs, once they have retired from this activity. VI That it is necessary to execute occupational protection programs and occupational reconversion programs, that allow the workers dedicated to lobster fishing by diving, to appropriate the techniques for the use of traps and cages, or any other activity and thus achieve their economic and social insertion into the country. VII That international treaties require that every ship that is dedicated to diving must contain a hyperbaric chamber for the safety and medical care of the diving workers. THEREFORE In use of its powers
Annex 10
96
Has ordered the following: LAW FOR THE PROTECTION AND SAFETY OF PERSONS DEDICATED TO THE ACTIVITY OF DIVING TÍTLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS Chapter I Object and Purpose, Scope of Application and Terms Definitions Article 1 The object and purpose of the present law consists in protecting the life, the safety, hygiene and occupational health of the workers that are dedicated to the diving activities conducted in Nicaraguan waters, applying the procedures established in this Law, the Law on Fishing, the Labour Code, the Law on Social Security, the General Law on Health, the Law on Aquatic Transport, the international Resolutions and Agreements, as well as other Laws and Regulations, it being of mandatory compliance by all employers, national or foreign, sub-contractors, set up or installed in the country and [by the] workers. Art. 2 For purposes of this Law, the following are to be understood as: Sea Workers: Are all the persons that by virtue of a work contract or relationship carry out any function on board a ship or vessel for fishing, cargo, passenger, tourism, exploration or exploitation in marine waters . Diver: Is any person that subjects to diving into a submarine and/or underwater environment in any continental body of water, in our country. Hyperbaric Environment: An environment in which pressure is above atmospheric pressure.
Annex 10
97
Hyperbaric or Decompression Chamber: Equipment resistant to internal pressure, used to maintain persons in a breathable hyperbaric environment; it may have two or more compartments, used to conduct or complete Surface decompression periods, or to conduct recompressions forming part of diving operations. Diving System: Comprises all the plants, devices, equipment or installations used for diving’s different activities. Diving Technique: Comprises all manoeuvres and methods that are used to conduct activities in the underwater environment. Autonomous Diving Technique: Is that which allows the diver to move freely under water, without any connection to the surface. This technique includes free diving (skin diving) and scuba diving (with tank, regulator, etc.). Non-autonomous Diving Technique: Is that which does not allow the diver to move freely due to his being connected or dependent on air supply from the surface. This technique includes: Diving with classic Helmet and diving with equipment (Hookah or Narguille). Diving Plants and Equipment: Are all those installations and apparatus, fixed or mobile, used in diving’s different activities, both in dives as well as on surface. Diving accidents: Is the event or action that involuntarily, on occasion or as a consequence of work, results in the diver’s death, or produces an organic injury or functional disturbance, of permanent or transitory nature. These will be classified according to events or actions occurring during descent, in depth, [or] during ascent to the surface. Hyperbaric Diving Accident: Is that which occurs to the diver that is directly related to the changes in the physical properties and characteristics of the atmospheric and/or underwater environment. Gondola: Scaffold, wing, used in diving operations as platform where the diver rests during the decompression period.
Annex 10
98
Professional Diving Company: Are those entities, organisations, individuals, public or private entities, with autonomous legal capacity, legally constituted, recognized and duly certified, the activities of which include in a permanent, provisional or eventual manner, works that require human incursion into the underwater environment. Diving: Any incursion into the underwater environment derived from a professional, recreational, work and scientific activity, whether for-profit or not. Recreational Diving: Any incursion into the underwater environment derived from a tourist or recreational activity Diving Team Chief: Professional diver with the requisite technical training and certifications, who is responsible for diving operations. Scientific or Professional Diving: Any incursion into the underwater environment with the purpose of conducting research, testing, sample or data collection, or technical or scientific information gathering. Fishing Captain or Captain: Is the highest ranking, most experienced or most certified individual or person and who is in command of the vessel. Apnoea diving (skin diving or free diving): Is the dive performed by the diver by holding his breath, without relying on any apparatus. Breathable Blend: Is the combination of one, two or more breathable gases that allows the diver to remain underwater. Those gases must comply with hygienic and occupational safety standards. Dalton’s Law: This law of physics establishes that each gas exercises its own partial pressure in proportion to the percentage of the gas present in the total gas blend.
Annex 10
99
Charles’ Law: This law explains the air’s behaviour in diving tanks in relation to temperature. It establishes that if the air volume remains constant (the tank remains the same size), pressure will vary in direct proportion to temperature. If absolute temperature increases by double, the pressure inside the tank will also increase by double. Henry’s Law: This law basically establishes that a gas will dissolve in a liquid in direct proportion to that gas’ pressure. Boyle’s Law: This law explains how pressure changes affect air spaces that are located in our body and in the equipment we are wearing. Basically, it establishes that the volume of a gas varies in inverse proportion to the absolute pressure applied, while density varies in direct proportion to absolute pressure. Absolute Pressure: Is the sum of atmospheric pressure and water pressure, this is the pressure that bodies underwater are really subjected to. Equivalent air depth: Is a fictitious depth, used to determine the decompression procedure used to determine the decompression procedure on the basis of ordinary tables, in which the diving conditions, nitrogen blend, altitude, density of the environment, etc., entail a correction to the tables. Special Diving Techniques: Those conducted with autonomous closed or semi-closed circuit equipment, using medicinal oxygen, air or [gas] blends. Open System Diving Equipment: Are those in which the diver’s exhalation of the gases he breathes is released into the environment. Closed System Diving Equipment: Are those in which the diver’s exhalation of the gases he breathes is not released into the environment and is recirculated with the purpose of fixing the carbonic anhydrase. Semi-closed System Diving Equipment: Are those in which the diver’s exhalation of the gases he breathes is partly recirculated and partly released into the environment.
Annex 10
100
Water Density: Density is the relation existing between weight (mass) and volume of bodies. Sea water is denser than fresh water, since it is heavier Scuba: Self-contained, open-circuit underwater breathing apparatus. Hydrostatic Test: Is the visual examination performed on the compressed air bottle on its physical state and pressure, with the purpose of ascertaining the pressure capacity and the technical state of the bottle. Umbilical: It is a system for supplying air through hoses from the surface to the diver. Safety Harness: It is a safety system for lowering and raising objects or the diver with classic equipment. Breakers: Are the last phase of waves in reef areas. Diving Bell or Saturation System: Is a system for supplying air to the diver from the surface. Omitted Decompression [stop]: Is the non-compliance with regulation safety stops that must be observed by a diver during the ascent process to decompress, and who apparently does not manifest symptoms of accidents or decompression [sickness]. Chapter II General Art. 3 All employers dedicated to commercial fishing by diving are under the obligation, as mandated by this Law, to ensure the occupational safety conditions of their workers and their own vessel, avoiding overloading its capacity. To that end, the employer will conduct regulation and control, supervised by relevant agencies (Ministry of Labour, Naval Force of the Nicaraguan Army, Ministry of Health, Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, Nicaraguan Social Security Institute, Aquatic
Annex 10
101
Transportation General-Directorship of the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Social, and the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture (INPESCA). Art. 4 All vessels shall have, at a minimum, a first aid unit that includes oxygen equipment, 8-hour therapy capacity, salvage equipment and first aid kit, and a fast means of transport (panga) for emergency transfers, among others. Likewise, it shall have a health technician, trained and certified by a Commission formed by the Nicaraguan Red Cross, the Naval Force of the Nicaraguan Army and the Ministry of Health, to provide first aid care in case of diving and work accidents Art. 5 All employers are under the obligation of concluding a Work Contract, of definite or indefinite duration, with the diver, in accordance with the provisions of the Labour Code and those relating to diving work. Employers must hire the divers directly, and shall be liable for the economic, social and labour-related contributions, as well as for the risks of occupational illnesses that their workers may be affected by. Hiring divers through temp agencies, placement agencies and intermediaries is prohibited. Art. 6 All employers dedicated to commercial fishing by diving shall insure their workers with the INSS or indemnify workers for accidents, occupational illnesses and, in the fatal case of decease, their immediate family, that occur as a result of the work they perform, when the worker is not protected by the social security system or is not affiliated, as the case may be, or due to the employer’s non-payment of INSS contributions, in the corresponding time and manner. All employers are under the obligation to declare hired personnel, especially divers, before the Nicaraguan Social Security Institute. Art. 7 For purposes of this Law, a legal work relationship or work contract of fishing workers, embarked and not embarked, is considered to exist, the labour provisions of which will be governed by the Laws on Social Security, Labour Code, and other labour laws and regulations.
Annex 10
102
Art. 8 Fishing Companies that conduct diving activities, dive clubs, dive resorts, dive schools and, in general, all public or private entities or companies, that conduct any for-profit, social service or any humanitarian activities at sea, that subject persons to a hyperbaric environment are under the obligation to: a) Ensure that all the plants and equipment used in diving operations are checked and certified by competent companies, whether national or foreign. Certification services shall be regulated by the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture. As well as plants and equipment that are subjected to repairs or substituted in accordance with regulations in force, having to submit a current revision certification every year to the Ministry of Labour. b) Have an inventory of the installations and equipment at the entity’s disposal to conduct such activity, as well as a control sheet of duly certified equipment repairs and maintenance. c) Ascertain that divers have the required training and certification levels in accordance with the activities they conduct in the hyperbaric environments they will be subjected to. d) Ascertain that divers have the corresponding certification in accordance with the activity or work they are to perform, such as: 1. Underwater cutting and welding 2. Underwater explosives management 3. Operations in contaminated waters 4. Cold water diving operations 5. Works on live worksites 6. Scientific exploration activities 7. Search, salvage and rescue 8. Sport activities 9. Fishing activities 10. Others e) Submit to the Ministry of Labour, the verbal or written Work Contract and Certification according to the diving activity that the employee is to perform.
Annex 10
103
Chapter III Of the Employers’ Obligations Art. 9 All employers, upon hiring a worker for diving activities, whether as a new hire or rehire, shall instruct and train the worker on: a) The hazards to which he is exposed; b) Preventive measures to be taken; c) Handling of work equipment and work procedures; and d) The provisions contained in this Law. Art. 10 The following are also obligations of the employer: a) Notify the relevant agencies of work accidents and occupational illnesses occurring in his company or establishment and investigating their causes; b) Assist in investigations due to the occurrence of accidents, conducted by agencies authorised to do so; c) Require the diver to submit a medical certificate upon hiring and conduct periodic medical check-ups on: BHC, EGO, EGH, VDRL, Creatinine, EKG, Chest x-ray (Thorax Radiography), and full physical examination, at least once a year, at the employer’s cost, to the divers that due to the characteristics of the work are exposed to occupational hazards, adhering to medical criteria in each specific case; d) On compressed air tanks (SCUBA), perform maintenance every year and hydrostatic tests at a maximum every four (4) years and at a minimum every two (2) years, as well as daily check of air compressors’ filters, with the purpose of eliminating impurities; to that end, the employer shall maintain an inventory control of the equipment provided;
Annex 10
104
e) Require compliance with hygiene and safety rules at the air compressor’s outlet for tank filling, as well as duly certified technical revisions every three months; f) Train and certify personnel in charge of handling compressors, whether electrical or of internal combustion, with the purpose of ensuring air purity, as well as care and maintenance of the compressor, mainly with regard to replacing air filters, oil, fuel and purification; g) It shall be the owner’s and the compressor operator’s responsibility that the air source intake for tank filling is in adequate conditions, in compliance with the standards set by the rules on Hygiene and Safety at Work; h) It shall be the company’s responsibility to provide divers with adequate insulation equipment (insulated suits); and i) Comply with all the obligations incumbent on the employer contained in Chapter III of the Labour Code, in relation to work at sea. Art. 11 The hiring of persons under sixteen years of age for diving activities is prohibited for all employers. Art. 12 It is the obligation of the employers to ensure that diving workers enjoy full exercise of the labour, economic and union rights set out in labour laws. Art.13 By mandate of the present Law, in any work performed that entails diving, employers are under the obligation of providing each diver worker, at a minimum, with the following work equipment: 1.Autonomous Diving: a) Diving Basic Equipment: Visor (diving mask or face glass), Fins (flippers), buoyancy control device, harness or mount, insulated suit, fast-release buckle weight belt. b) Basic Equipment with [breathing] Apparatus: Compressed air tank and its protection boot, reserve system valve, on-demand regulator with depth meter and manometer
Annex 10
105
2. Surface-supplied Diving (Non-Autonomous Diving): a) A gas distribution scheme for at least two divers, with a main feed system of breathable supply and at least one reserve system, a battery of industrial bottles, that controls the pressure of the battery or main supply, the pressure sent to the diver, in addition to its regulation, the depth of the diver and a system to revert to the emergency battery immediately. b) Umbilicals (Non-Autonomous Diving), the technical features of which shall be: 1. With classic diving Helmet, it shall be manufactured and approved for specific use in diving. 2. Diving with equipment (Hookah or Narguille), is formed by a main supply hose with an inside diameter of at least 10 millimetres. It shall consist of a communications cable, a tube for the depth control system, a rope that withstands the pulls or efforts made by the diver. 3. The components will be joined by high-endurance tape every fifty (50) centimetres. In case the system is manufactured as a whole, this will not be necessary, and in any event it shall be so stated by the manufacturer. 4. It will have adequate buoyancy. 5. In case of interventions from the surface, their total length will be at least fifty percent (50%) greater than the working depth. c) Divers Equipment: 1. Helmet: It must be equipped with a non-return valve equipped with a small distributor, and breastplate. 2. Diver Suit: Dry suit of variable or constant volume. 3. Wool [thermal] undersuit.
Annex 10
106
4. Lead weight belt. 5. Steel-toed weighted boots. 6. Knife. 7. Umbilical for surface-supplied air. 8. Communications equipment. 9. Work gloves. 10. Safety harness. Chapter IV Workers’ Obligations Art. 14 The workers who perform a diving work activity, for their safety, are under the obligation to observe and comply with the following provisions of this Law: a) Comply with Hygiene and Safety at Work regulations upheld by the employer, set out in the Labour Code, the present law and other laws and rules on the subject. b) Correctly use and care for protection equipment, following the employer’s instructions, and reporting to his direct supervisor any defect, anomaly or damage to the work equipment he uses and that, in his view, entails a risk to his safety or health. c) Responsibly care for his own safety and health, and those of the persons that might be affected by his actions or omissions at work. d) Attend courses, seminars, conferences and talks given to him, as well as attain the knowledge and skills that his specialty requires. e) Immediately report to his direct supervisor of any situation that, in his view, might entail a risk to his health and safety.
Annex 10
107
f) Immediately report to the employer on any worker’s accident or health injury that occurs during the workday or in relation to it. g) Participate and assist in complying with the plans on Hygiene and Safety at Work, through the Company’s Joint Commission on Hygiene and Safety . Chapter V Substitution of the Fishing by Diving Technique Art. 15 Commercial lobster fishing by diving in the Caribbean Sea shall be conducted by means of the technique of TRAPS (Cages) and LOBSTER NETS with the purpose of protecting human health and marine species. In the particular case of lobster catching in Nicaragua’s Pacific Ocean, it shall only be conducted by means of the use of nets or lobster trammels. Art. 16 As of the third year following the present Law’s entry into force, the fishing of lobster and any marine resource for commercial purposes by means of autonomous and non-autonomous (surface-supplied air) diving is prohibited in both seas, with the purpose of proceeding, during the intervening period, to reconvert the fishing technique in accordance with the provisions of the previous article. The State, employers and divers are responsible for formulating and implementing the Occupational Reconversion Program. Art. 17 In accordance with the previous article, employers that hire personnel for lobster fishing by autonomous and non-autonomous diving, or sell lobsters caught by diving, shall be fined an equivalent amount in [Nicaraguan] córdobas of up to five thousand U.S. dollars, in favour of the Special Fund for Divers of Nicaragua’s Fishing, created by this Law, in addition to the confiscation of the product. Recurrence entails a fine of the equivalent amount in [Nicaraguan] córdobas of ten thousand U.S. dollars in favour of the Special Fund for Divers of Nicaragua’s Fishing and the cancellation of the fishing license
Annex 10
108
and permit. This activity shall be supervised and controlled by the Naval Force of the Nicaraguan Army in both seas. Art. 18 The following sanctions will be applied against an employer that does not comply with the labour provisions of hygiene and safety at work. Social Security Law, Labour Code, as well as other labour laws, provisions, regulations or rules: a) First time: Confiscation of the product and a fine in the equivalent amount in [Nicaraguan] córdobas ranging between two thousand and ten thousand dollars. b) Second time: Confiscation of the product and a fine in the equivalent amount in [Nicaraguan] córdobas ranging between four thousand and twenty thousand dollars. c) Third time: Licence is suspended and Company is closed. Art. 19 The sanctions consisting in fines or confiscation of product shall be imposed and implemented by the Ministry of Labour (MITRAB) in coordination with the Naval Force of the Nicaraguan Army; cancellation of the licence and fishing permit shall be implemented by the Ministry of Development, Industry and Trade [MIFIC] in coordination with the Ministry of Labour. Art. 20 The product confiscated as mandated by this Law is to be placed under MIFIC custody. If lobster meets legal requirements (sizes or measurements), MIFIC is authorised to sell through public auction; if lobster does not meet legal requirements, MIFIC shall, in coordination with the Autonomous Regional Councils of the Atlantic Coast and the Municipal Governments, donate the product to the Disabled Divers Associations, Public Hospitals, Children Centres, Orphanages or Nursing Homes for the Elderly. Art. 21 The MIFIC shall, in coordination with the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARENA), the Autonomous Regional Councils of the Atlantic Coast, the Municipal Governments and the fishing industry in its case, within a year as from the entry into force of the present law, conduct an integral study on diving, a census of active and retired divers, with the purpose of submitting a report to the
Annex 10
109
Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture. The report shall discuss and approve measures and alternatives that lead to submitting proposals for the solution and/or special regulation of this type of extractive fishing. A copy of this census shall be submitted to the Naval Force of the Nicaraguan Army, for its control and follow-up in dispatching vessels on their fishing activities through the corresponding port captaincies. Without prejudice to the foregoing paragraph, as of the entry into force of the present Law, the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture shall, in coordination with entrepreneurs, fishermen and with the participation of the Autonomous Regional Councils of the Atlantic Coast, promote a program for the reconversion of the commercial lobster fishing by diving or harpoon technique, to the use of traps or cages in both of the country’s seas, with the purpose of protecting the species and mainly the health of persons dedicated to this type of activities. Art. 22 The amount of seven cents in dollars (US$ 0.07) or its equivalent in Nicaraguan] córdobas per each pound of lobster caught is destined for the creation of a Special Fund for the Protection and Safety of Nicaraguan Divers dedicated to this extractive activity, with which a minimal medical care and other subsidies or social benefits are to be ensured for divers who are retired, ill or disabled due to this high-risk practice. The Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture shall regulate the use and operation of this Special Fund. The Nicaraguan Social Security Institute (INSS) shall, following a technical and economic study, incorporate all those who work in fishing activities as divers, into its categories of insured persons with all their social and health benefits. Once the prohibitive and inhumane practice of lobster fishing by diving is discontinued and the provisions of the previous paragraph have been complied with, the Special Fund to which this same article refers shall cease to operate, and its remnants, if any, are to be destined to the INSS to tend to persons disabled as a result of this activity.
Annex 10
110
Art. 23 The Fund created by the present Law shall be administered by the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit. This fund shall be destined for a special health program, administered by the Ministry of Health, aimed at the attention, treatment and rehabilitation of ill or disabled divers that are not covered by social security. The program shall include purchase of hyperbaric chambers, maintenance of existing chambers and personnel training for operating said chambers. Art. 24 The Nicaraguan Social Security Institute, with the aid of the Ministry of Labour and the National Institute of Development Information, shall conduct the technical and economic studies to ensure an adequate balance between contributions and benefits. All in accordance with the provisions of the La won Social Security. The State shall promote the search of funds to facilitate reconversion and will develop an alternative program for fishermen who cannot reconvert to the traps or cages technique. TITLE II WORKERS’ SAFETY AND HEALTH MEASURES IN DIVING Chapter I Of Dives Art. 25 The duration of a continuous dive by a diver will be subject to Table III (No-Decompression Limits and Table of Repetitive Dives’ Groups from Dives on Air with No Decompression), in Annex I, from which the bottom time, equipment’s autonomy, water temperature and underwater activity will be taken into account. Art. 26 When repetitive dives are conducted, the following tables in Annex I shall be taken into account: IV (Repetitive Dive Groups Table at End of Surface Interval) and V (Residual Nitrogen Time Table), using the group for repetitive dive at end of surface interval and depth of repetitive dive in metres. Art. 27 When dives requiring decompression are conducted, Table II (Table for Normal Decompression for Dives on Air) in
Annex 10
111
Annex I must be used, with the purpose of observing the times of decompression stops included therein. Art. 28 Tables to be used must be in accordance with the type of dive and gas blend used. These tables must be authorised and updated by duly certified national and international schools. Art. 29 Divers’ underwater stay will be suspended in the following cases: contamination (whenever divers do not have appropriate equipment), oil spills, toxic waste spills, and any other pollutant; strong winds, breakers, currents above one knot, storms, thunderstorms, hurricanes and, in general, any natural phenomenon that poses risks to the life and safety of the diver and the vessel’s crew. Art. 30 When cold water dives or heavy works are performed, the actual bottom time set out in Table II (Table for Normal Decompression for Dives on Air) in Annex I shall be reported to the direct supervisor, with a purpose of securing a greater safety margin during the dive. Art. 31 The use of three to five-millimetre-thick insulated suits is established for cold water dives. Art. 32 For conducting altitude dives (lakes, lagoons, rivers and reservoirs) at three hundred metres above sea level or higher, the following Tables will be used: XXI (Theoretical Depth for Altitude Dives Table) and XXII (Actual Depth of Decompression Stops for Altitude Dives Table) in Annex I, using the group for repetitive dive at end of surface interval and depth of repetitive dive in metres. Art. 33 In diving accidents and small and serious injuries resulting from continued and repetitive dives, Table 6, in Annex II, for the treatment of serious injuries, shall be used. Art. 34 In diving operations in which the diver is subjected to depths over thirty metres (autonomous diving with SCUBA equipment), it is advisable to have a surface decompression chamber available on the worksite.
Annex 10
112
Art. 35 Only one continuous or repetitive dive may be conducted per day, allowing for at least 12 hours to lapse between the former and the first dive of the following workday. The sum of the second dive’s bottom time and the first dive’s bottom time, shall not exceed the time limits set per workday for maximum exposure to a hyperbaric environment, and [be] in accordance with Tables II (Table for Normal Decompression for Dives on Air), III (No-Decompression Limits and Table of Repetitive Dives’ Groups from Dives on Air with No Decompression), IV (Repetitive Dive Groups Table at End of Surface Interval) and V (Residual Nitrogen Time Table) in Annex I of the present Law. Art. 36 It is the employers’ obligation to divulge and explain the scope of the safety and health measures for diving workers, by establishing training systems for divers and all their workers. The Ministry of Labour shall organize, supervise and exercise control over these trainings. Chapter II Of the Use of Hyperbaric Chambers Art. 37 The Ministry of Health will be responsible for hiring a physician specializing in undersea [hyperbaric] medicine and a technician to operate the hyperbaric chamber, and for the purchase of the hyperbaric chamber in the incidence areas for fishing and diving, in addition to the training and education of physicians qualified for dealing with diving accidents, who will provide primary and secondary care to divers injured by decompression sickness [as foreseen in] the present Law. Art. 38 Treatments for diving accidents shall be applied under direction from the following personnel, in order of preference: a) Specialist in Undersea [Hyperbaric] Medicine. b) Physician qualified for dealing with Diving Accidents. c) Sanitary Technical Assistant (ATS), qualified for dealing with Diving Accidents.
Annex 10
113
d) Divers and personnel qualified for the operation of hyperbaric chambers. Art. 39 The Ministry of Health shall maintain patient records, inventories of equipment, tools and accessories, control and maintenance of the hyperbaric chambers, training and training renewals of those responsible for the chamber. Art. 40 Following duly established and updated treatment tables is compulsory, as well as not allowing for any deviation from them except under the responsibility of a physician specializing in undersea [hyperbaric] medicine. Art. 41 For the maintenance of the hyperbaric chambers periodic assessments of all the elements and accessories shall be performed, after every use or once a month. In addition, an exterior and interior inspection shall be performed once a year, with the purpose of eliminating oils, dust, rust and others. Chapter III Personnel Requirements for Treatments Art. 42 The minimum team composition for personnel conducting a decompression operation in hyperbaric chamber is as follows: a. A supervisor responsible for the hyperbaric treatment, who shall be in direct contact with the specialist in undersea [hyperbaric] medicine. b. An external operator of gases supply, ventilation, pressurization and exhaust of the chamber from its exterior. c. An external operator responsible for controlling partial and total times of the operation and preparing the report of the entire process, following instructions from the supervisor and communication with personnel inside the chamber. d. The Sanitary Technical Assistant (ATS) is in charge of the chamber’s pressurization when interior valves are used and must provide the care the patient requires during the treatment.
Annex 10
114
Chapter IV Diving Personnel Art. 43 Of the minimum number of persons who must be involved in a diving work according to the system used. a) Autonomous diving: A team chief or supervisor, two divers, a rescue diver prepared to intervene at all times in case of emergency and an assistant that will maintain direct contact with the diver and inform the supervisor. b) Surface-supplied diving: Diving with [air] supply from the surface: A team chief or supervisor, a communications and records diver who will tend to the gas distribution scheme in addition to the assigned functions, two divers, a rescue diver in case of emergency, and an assistant diver for both divers, who will control the umbilical at all times. c) Diving Bell or Saturation System: A team chief or supervisor, a communications and records diver who will tend to the gas distribution scheme in addition to the assigned functions, two divers, a rescue diver in case of emergency, an operator for the bell’s umbilical, an operator of the commands for lowering and raising the bell or saturation system. Chapter V Breathable Blends Other than Air Art. 44 No deep dives will be conducted when blends other than air are being used, unless there is a sufficient amount available of breathable blend other than air, and an appropriate diving system for divers that are duly trained and certified. Art. 45 Breathable blends other than air must have a certificate issued by the company or person that prepared it, stating the following: a) Name, company name and tax number of the manufacturer. b) Percentage of the gases that make up the blend. c) Date and time of preparation.
Annex 10
115
d) Blending system and gases used. e) Degree of homogenization. f) Nambe and signature of the technician in charge of the blend. In case it is a company, stamp and signature of the individual responsible as well. Art. 46 When breathable blends are used, there will be a reserve supply ready for immediate use in case of any incident, stored at the location where the diving operations are being conducted. Art. 47 Divers will have, at working depth, a reserve mechanism of breathable blend at their disposal to allow them to reach the surface, including the time needed to make the corresponding decompression stop(s). Art. 48 The tables established and required for the use of breathable blends other than compressed air must be used during dives. Chapter VI Diving Restrictions or Limitations Art. 49 The minimal unit underwater for conducting dives with autonomous equipment will be a pair of divers, a diver and boatman who shall be subject to the following restrictions: a) Any diver that is under [a subpar] physical, psychological state, stress, anxiety, drunkenness, illness, sleepiness, or has ingested, injected, inhaled or absorbed [narcotic] drugs or [under] similar effects, will be unable to perform underwater activities. b) No dives requiring underwater decompression stops will be performed, when the state of the water does not allow for safely making the requisite stops or for maintaining an accurate depth. Art. 50 When autonomous equipment are used, and for reasons of extreme necessity, urgency or emergency it is necessary to conduct a dive with s single diver, the diver must remain
Annex 10
116
attached to the Surface by a life line. The end of the line will always be in the hands of an assistant, on alert to the diver’s signals. Art. 51 After a dive requiring decompression is completed, in order to prevent diving accidents, the personnel involved will not be subjected to physical labour on the surface that may cause an acceleration of the circulatory system during the following two hours. Art. 52 If, for any reason, a diver is forced to ascend to the surface, he will let his diving buddy know and whenever divers lose contact with one another, they will ascend to the surface. Art. 53 In the practice of apnoea [free] diving, for all intents and purposes the following will be understood: a) The minimum unit underwater will be a pair, whose position must be located by a red or yellow buoy tied to a line, bearing the flag with the “Alpha” signal code. b) It is compulsory for divers to carry, in addition to the basic equipment, a knife and gloves. c) Divers will remain within a radius of twenty-five (25) metres from the buoy. Chapter VII Of the Vessels for Support to Divers Art. 54 There will always be a surface vessel available for help and aid to the divers during their dives. Art. 55 Personnel on board the vessel will keep track of the bubbles emanating from the breathing equipment of the divers at all times and inform the communications and records diver of the approximate length of the dive. Art. 56 When divers dive from the vessel, it will remain stalled, while the divers are on the surface or in its proximity.
Annex 10
117
Art. 57 When the return of the divers to the Surface is known or there is evidence of it, the captain will stall the engine and will not engage it again, until the divers are out of the water or have descended again. Art. 58 The vessel’s personnel will be on alert to collect a diver in trouble or [following] a diving accident who is ascending to the surface in the least amount of time possible. Art. 59 The only diving operation allowed from a vessel in motion, is that of search with diver in tow. In this case, the vessel’s engine will not be reengaged until the diver is beyond the reach of the propellers. Art. 60 The compressor used for filling the compressed air cylinders, must be located on the opposite side or extreme of the engine room’s location or beyond the reach of carbon monoxide produced by the exhaust of the vessel’s engine. Chapter VII Of Diving Accidents Art. 61 Work accidents in the diving activity may occur in three instances: During descent, while the diver is at the bottom or when ascending to the surface. a) Problems [in] descent: 1. Ear barotrauma. 2. Sinus barotrauma. 3. Lung barotrauma. 4. Oxygen toxicity. 5. Nitrogen narcosis. 6. Decompression sickness. 7. Carbon monoxide poisoning. 8. Carbon dioxide poisoning. b) Problems in ascent: 1. Arterial gas embolism (aeroembolism). 2. Lung overexpansion injury. 3. Mediastinal and subcutaneous emphysema. 4. Pneumothorax. 5. Fainting or blackout.
Annex 10
118
Art. 62 The team chief, divers and permanent personnel on the vessel shall have basic knowledge of the signs and symptoms of a diving accident, as well as of providing necessary first aid care. Art. 63 In case of omitted decompression [stop(s)], the procedure of a decompressive accident will be followed, even if [the diver] does not present signs or symptoms. Art. 64 During transfer of the accident’s casualty, he shall remain in a semi-horizontal position (lying down, face up), with an approximate inclination of thirty (30) degrees from the Surface (head low and legs high), maintaining body temperature, [and] breathing oxygen at the highest possible concentration. Chapter IX Art. 65 The procedure for air travel after diving is as follows: a) Wait for an interval of at least twelve (12) hours on the surface before changing to higher altitudes. This time is necessary to be certain that the diver will not suffer any complications when ascending altitudes in a commercial aircraft. b) In case a diver suffers a diving accident and an air transfer is conducted, the accident’s victim shall not be subjected to a pressure over that equivalent to an altitude of three hundred (300) metres, in order to prevent worsening of his condition worsening; only in case of extreme urgency. Art. 66 In case of a diving accident, the diving team chief must make the most appropriate decision, sending the accident’s victim to a medical or hyperbaric centre, according to the type of accident. Art. 67 The diving team chief shall prepare the report of the diving accident. Chapter X
Annex 10
119
Final Provisions Art. 68 The Ministry of Labour, in coordination with the Ministry of Health, the Nicaraguan Red Cross, the Naval Force, and the authorities of the Autonomous Regions of the Atlantic Coast, are responsible for updating the tables for diving on air and the treatment tables in case of accident, annexed to the present Law, in accordance with the technical and scientific developments registered in relation to this matter. Art. 69 This Law derogates any law, regulation or rule that is opposed to it. Art. 70 This Law is of social interest. Art. 71 This Law shall enter into force as of publication in any written media of nationwide circulation, without prejudice to its publication in La Gaceta, Official Journal. Given at Managua, in the Hall of Sessions of the National Assembly on the seventh day of the month of February of the year two thousand seven. Eng. René Núñez Téllez, Chairman of the National Assembly. - Dr. Wilfredo Navarro Moreira, Secretary of the National Assembly. Therefore: Be it held as Law of the Republic. Be it published and Executed. Managua, eight January of the year two thousand eight. DANIEL ORTEGA SAAVEDRA, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR DIVING ON AIR Need for decompression: A certain amount of nitrogen is absorbed by the body during each dive; that amount depends on the dive’s depth and time spent at the bottom. If the amount of nitrogen dissolved in the tissues exceeds a critical value, ascent must be delayed to allow tissues to be rid of the excess nitrogen. The result of omitting this delay is the appearance of decompression sickness. The specific amount of time [spent] at a certain depth with the purpose of desaturating is called decompression stop.
Annex 10
120
Units: Times are stated in minutes. Depths are stated in metres of salt water and refer to the depth at which the diver’s lungs are. Descent rate: Descent rate shall be no higher than 24 metres per minute. Use of Tables: The tables are calculated for a surface atmospheric pressure of 1 bar. Nevertheless, they may be used with slight variations of atmospheric pressure and with altitude variations of up to 300 metres above sea level. In case of greater altitude variations, the Tables for Altitude Dives shall be used. Terms used: Dive depth: Is the maximum [depth] reached by the diver during the dive, regardless of the actual time spent at that depth. In case of having to perform a multi-level dive, plan the dive to begin with the deepest one. Even if a no-decompression dive is conducted, frequent ascents to the surface to receive instructions or collect tools are to be avoided, since this increases the risk of suffering from decompression sickness. Bottom time: Is the time elapsed between leaving the surface and leaving the bottom. Surface interval: Is the time elapsed between a diver’s two repetitive dives. It is marked from the time he reaches the surface until the second dive begins. Following a surface period of 12 hours all tissues are deemed to be completely desaturated. Time and depth selection on tables: The time that corresponds exactly to, or that immediately above, the bottom time must be selected, as well as the exact depth, or that immediately above, the dive depth.
Annex 10
121
Ascent rate: Ascent rate to the first stop or to the surface must be 9 metres per minute, although variations of up to 3 metres per minute are acceptable. Variations on ascent rate: - If the delay occurs at a depth of over 15 metres, the difference between the time spent ascending and the time that would have been needed to ascend at 9 m/min is to be added to bottom time. Decompress according to new total bottom time. - If the delay occurs at a depth of 15 metres or less, the difference between the time spent ascending and the time that would have been needed to ascend at 9 m/min is to be added to the first stop. Duration of stops: Times indicated for decompression stops are marked from the time the diver reaches the stop. Time between stops is one minute. Stay at stops: - No work is to be performed during stops. - Dive must be planned in order to avoid having to perform work during ascent ([due to] irregular buoyancy, currents, etc.). Factors that contribute to decompressive accidents: - When works that are difficult or demand great physical exertion are performed. - When the diver is in subpar physicial condition, under stress, cold, or following several weeks of intensive dives. - When the diving conditions are such that the possibility of a decompression sickness ocurring is foreseen, the increased bottom time must be [reported] to the direct supervisor. Observance of the diver: After conducting a dive, the diver must be observed for 30 minutes following arrival to the Surface, given that it is during this time when decompression sickness symptoms usually appear. After a non-decompression dive (with decompression stops) no altitude variations should be made higher than 500 m. until
Annex 10
122
[twelve] hours (12 hours) following completion of the dive. When altitude variation is higher than 2600 metres the delay shall be of 4 [sic] hours (12 [sic] hours). No-decompression dives: Dives that do not last long or are not deep enough so as to require decompression stops are called no-decompression dives. Dives at 10 m. or less do not require decompression stops. To the extent depth increases, time allowed at the bottom for no-decompression dives diminishes. These dives are tabulated on Table III and only require ascending at 9 m/min. Decompression dives: All dives exceeding the limits for no-decompression dives, require decompression stops. These dives are tabulated on Table II: Table for Normal Decompression on Air. Repetitive Dives: A dive conducted before 12 hours following arrival at the surface from the previous dive is a repetitive dive. A minimum [interval] of 10 minutes should be observed between two repetitive dives. Continuous dives: Are those in which the Surface interval is under 10 minutes. To calculate decompression stops the greatest depth of the two dives and a bottom time equal to the sum of the times of the two dives are to be taken. […] [Annexes I and II comprising tables and instructions for their use follow, pp. 391-415]
Annex 10
123
124
3 22-02-11 LA GACETA - OFFICIAL JOURNAL 35 NATIONAL ASSEMBLY LAW No. 753 The President of the Republic of Nicaragua To its inhabitants, be it known: That, THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY Has ordered the following: LAW AMENDING ARTICLE 16 OF LAW No. 613, “LAW FOR THE PROTECTION AND SAFETY OF PERSONS DEDICATED TO THE ACTIVITY OF DIVING” FIRST ARTICLE Amendment to article 16 of Law No. 613, Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving. Article 16 of Law No. 613, “Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving”, approved by the National Assembly on 7 February 2007 and published in La Gaceta, Official Journal No. 12 of 17 January 2008, is amended to read as follows: “Art. 16 Upon the expiration of a time period of two years as of the publication of this provision, the fishing of lobster and any marine resource for commercial purposes by means of autonomous and non-autonomous (surface-supplied air) diving is prohibited in both seas. Within this period, the State of Nicaragua must ensure through the relevant agencies, the training of the work force so as to turn it into a qualified and certified work force, with the purpose of proceeding to reconvert the fishing technique in accordance with the provisions of the previous article. The State, regional and local governments, employers, divers and their respective organisations are responsible for formulating and implementing the Occupational Reconversion Program during this same period.
Annex 11
Annex 11: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA,
LAW NO. 753 OF 22 FEBRUARY 2011.
(Available at: http://legislacion.asamblea.gob.ni/SILEG/Gacetas.nsf/0/0b80b
ba86d151e69062578400068a857/$FILE/2011-02-03-%20G-%20Ley%20
No.%20753,%20Ley%20de%20reforma%20al%20art%C3%ADculo%20
16%20de%20la%20Ley%20No.%20613,%20Ley%20de%20protecci%C3
%B3n%20y%20seguridad....pdf)
125
4 The Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture (INPESCA) will be the agency in charge of coordinating and ensuring preparation of the Technical and Occupational Reconversion Plans, stating goals and benchmarks, with the actors involved that the Law foresees. The Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture shall submit said plans to the National Assembly’s Committee on Labour and Sectorial Affairs within a period of three months following the publication of this amendment. The Committee on Labour and Sectorial Affairs will follow up and oversee the implementation of the provisions, in relation to the Technical and Occupational Reconversion Program of the workers that currently dedicate to the activity of fishing by diving.” SECOND ARTICLE Publication and entry into force The present Law shall enter into force as of publication in any written media of nationwide circulation, without prejudice to its subsequent publication in La Gaceta, Official Journal. Given at the city of Managua, in the Hall of Sessions of the National Assembly of the Republic of Nicaragua, on the third day of the month of February of the year two thousand eleven. Eng. René Núñez Téllez, Chairman of the National Assembly. - Dr. Wilfredo Navarro Moreira, Secretary of the National Assembly. Therefore: Be it held as Law of the Republic. Be it published and Executed. Managua, sixteen February of the year two thousand eleven. DANIEL ORTEGA SAAVEDRA, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA. 1074
Annex 11
126
LEGAL NORMS OF NICARAGUA Topic: Labour and Social Security Rank: Laws LAW AMENDING AND ADDING TO LAW No. 613, “LAW FOR THE PROTECTION AND SAFETY OF PERSONS DEDICATED TO THE ACTIVITY OF DIVING” LAW No. 836, Approved on 13 March 2013 Published in La Gaceta [Official Journal] No. 53 of 20 March 2013 The President of the Republic of Nicaragua To its inhabitants, be it known: That, THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY Has ordered the following: LAW AMENDING AND ADDING TO LAW No. 613, “LAW FOR THE PROTECTION AND SAFETY OF PERSONS DEDICATED TO THE ACTIVITY OF DIVING” First Article: Article 16 of Law No. 613, “Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving”, published in La Gaceta, Official Journal No. 12 of 17 January 2008, is amended to read as follows: “Art. 16 Upon the expiration of a time period of three years as of the publication of the present law of amendment and addition in La Gaceta, Official Journal, the fishing of lobster for
Annex 12
Annex 12: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA,
LAW NO. 836 OF 13 MARCH 2013.
(Available at: http://legislacion.asamblea.gob.ni/Normaweb.nsf/4c9d05860
ddef1c50625725e0051e506/a29c71e19ba8b51406257b480057a3ab?Open Document)
127
commercial purposes by means of autonomous and non-autonomous diving is prohibited in both seas. The other species or marine resources for commercial purposes, the capture of which is solely done by means of diving, such as the sea cucumber and the Queen Conch “Strombus gigas”, among others, are subject to the yearly global catch quotas and other provisions set out by the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture, through an Executive Resolution. Each commercial fishing-by-diving vessel shall meet the minimum conditions required by law, in order for the relevant authority to issue the sailing and fishing permit. Likewise, the preparation of the special Rules setting out the terms and conditions of legal labour regulations, to ensure the affiliation of sea workers to social security must be complied with, pursuant to the provisions of Decree No. 9-2005, Rules regulating Law No. 489, “Law of Fishing and Aquiculture”, published in La Gaceta, Official Journal No. 40 of 25 February 2005. Within this period, the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture (INPESCA) will be the agency in charge of coordinating and ensuring the review, updating and implementation of the Technical and Occupational Reconversion Plans prepared in 2011, stating goals and benchmarks, with the actors involved that the Law foresees. It is incumbent on the Executive Branch to take measures for obtaining the financial resources required for the reconversion, in addition to taking all actions for the effective compliance and execution of the stated plans. INPESCA and the relevant agencies will generate the necessary conditions to promote the gradual reconversion, promotion and training of this fishing sector, so as to turn it into a qualified and certified work force, taking into account Retired and Active divers and Women Sea Workers (Pikneras) in order to incorporate them to the specific projects set out in the Reconversion Plan.
Annex 12
128
The Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture (INPESCA) shall submit quarterly reports to the National Assembly as of the publication of this amendment, in relation to the progress of the Technical and Occupational Reconversion Program for the workers that currently dedicate to the activity of fishing by diving. The National Assembly will exercise its overseeing role through the Parliamentary Committees it deems fit. Employers are under the obligation to conclude written contracts, duly informed and in good faith, in all labour relations, in order to ensure the labour and human rights of divers. The provisions of this article are without prejudice to all the benefits and other actions or measures in favour of divers provided for in the present Law.” Second Article: Law No. 753, “Law Amending Article 16 of Law No. 613, ‘Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving’[”], published in La Gaceta, Official Journal No. 35 of 22 February 2011, is rendered without effect. Third Article: The present Law shall enter into force as of publication in any daily newspaper with nationwide circulation, without prejudice to its publication in La Gaceta, Official Journal. Given at the city of Managua, in the Hall of Sessions of the National Assembly of the Republic of Nicaragua, on the thirteenth day of the month of March of the year two thousand thirteen. Eng. René Núñez Téllez, Chairman of the National Assembly. - Lic. Alba Palacios Benavídez, Secretary of the National Assembly. Therefore: Be it held as Law of the Republic. Be it published and Executed. Managua, fifteen March of the year two thousand thirteen. DANIEL ORTEGA SAAVEDRA, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA. National Assembly of the Republic of Nicaragua
Annex 12
129
Carlos Núñez Téllez Legislative Complex Avenida Peatonal General Augusto C. Sandino Edificio Benjamin Zeledón, 7mo. Piso. Direct telephone number: 22768460. Ext.: 281. Send comments to: Legislative Information Division Note: We request that any discrepancy found between the printed Text of the Law and that published here, be communicated to the Legislative Information Division of the National Assembly of Nicaragua.
Annex 12
130
Republic of Nicaragua
Central America
La Gaceta
Official Journal
Telephone: 2228-3791/2222-7344
Printing: 650 copies Price C$45.00
28 pages córdobas
Year CXVII Managua, Tuesday, 27 August 2013 No. 161
Contents
Page
Government House
Decree No. 33-2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6701
Annex 13: DECREE NO. 33-2013, BASELINES OF THE MARINE AREAS OF
THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA IN THE CARIBBEAN SEA,
19 AUG 2013 [ENGLISH AND SPANISH VERSIONS]
(Available at: http://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/
PDFFILES/DEPOSIT/nic_mzn99_2013_e.pdf)
131
Annex 13
27 August 2013 La Gaceta Government House Government of Reconciliation and National Unity United Nicaragua Triumphs Decree No. 33-2013 The President of the Republic Comandante Daniel Ortega Saavedra, Considering I That in accordance with Article 10 of the Political Constitution of the Republic of Nicaragua, the sovereignty, jurisdiction and rights of Nicaragua extend to the adjacent islands, cays and banks, as well as the internal waters, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the continental shelf, the exclusive economic zone and the corresponding airspace, in accordance with the law and the standards of international law, II That on 3 May 2000 the Republic of Nicaragua ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, an instrument that brings together the essential principles guaranteeing the rights of States in their marine areas, III That on 5 March 2002 the Republic of Nicaragua, in the interests of strengthening international law and its commitment to international law, adopted Law No. 420 on Marine Areas of Nicaragua, IV That the Caribbean coast of Nicaragua has a special configuration owing to the presence of numerous coastal islands closely linked by their history and economy to the mainland, and also owing to the fact that the coastline is deeply indented and cut into, and that it is of vital importance to maintain the territorial integrity, peace and security of the nation, V That the International Court of Justice issued a historic judgement on 19 November 2012 regarding the Territorial and Maritime Delimitation between Nicaragua and Colombia in the Caribbean Sea, in which it found that the islands adjacent to the coast of Nicaragua in the Caribbean Sea are part of the respective coast and contribute to the establishment of the baselines, 132
Annex 13
VI
That in view of the foregoing, the Republic of Nicaragua in the exercise of its
full sovereignty over its marine areas and in accordance with the provisions of the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and Law No. 420 on Marine
Areas of Nicaragua, is proceeding to determine the straight baselines from which to
measure the breadth of its marine areas in the Caribbean Sea,
In the exercise of the powers granted to him by the Political Constitution,
Has issued the following:
Decree
Baselines of the Marine Areas of the Republic of Nicaragua in the Caribbean Sea
Article 1. The straight baselines of the Republic of Nicaragua to be used to measure
the breadth of its territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone and
continental shelf in the Caribbean Sea shall be established.
Article 2. The baselines shall be determined by the geographical coordinates set
forth in Annex I, as indicated in the chart that is included as Annex II to this Decree.
Both annexes shall constitute an integral part of this Decree.
Article 3. The waters located within the interior of the baselines established under
Article 1 of this Decree shall form part of the internal waters of the Republic of
Nicaragua in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea.
Article 4. In compliance with the provisions of Article 16, paragraph 2, of the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, this decree shall be duly
publicized and a copy thereof, together with the annexes, shall be deposited with the
Office of the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Article 5. All legal provisions or regulations that contradict this decree shall be
repealed.
Article 6. This decree shall enter into force on the date of its publication in the
official journal La Gaceta.
DONE in the City of Managua, Government House, Republic of Nicaragua, on
19 August 2013.
Daniel Ortega Saavedra,
President of the Republic of Nicaragua
Paul Oquist Kelley,
Private Secretary for National Policies
133
Annex 13
Annex I Straight baselines of Nicaragua in the Caribbean Sea WGS84 datum geographical coordinates Item No. Latitude (N) Deg. Min. Sec. Longitude (W) Deg. Min. Sec. Name 1 15 00 05.9 083 07 43.0 Cabo Gracias a Dios 2 14 49 15.8 082 41 00.0 Edinburgh Cay 3 14 22 31.2 082 44 06.1 Miskito Cays 4 14 08 40.6 082 48 29.0 Ned Thomas Cay 5 13 03 11.6 083 20 38.6 Man of War Cays 6 12 56 10.8 083 17 31.9 East of Great Tyra Cay 7 12 16 55.5 082 57 54.0 Isla del Maiz Pequeña (Little Corn Island) 8 12 10 39.3 083 01 49.9 Isla del Maiz Grande (Great Corn Island) 9 10 55 52.0 083 39 58.1 Harbour Head ____________
Annex 13
134
Annex 13
135
Annex 13
136
Annex 13
137
138
NICARAGUAN INSTITUTE FOR FISHING AND AQUACULTURE Executive Resolution PA-No. 001-2015 Fishing Organization Measures, Mechanisms and Export Quota for the Resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas) for the year 2015 The Executive Vice-president of the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquaculture CONSIDERING I That the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquaculture [INPESCA] is the competent authority for the application of “Law 489, Law on Fishing and Aquaculture” and its Regulation, and the agency responsible for the management of the use and sustainable exploitation of the fishing resources in the national territory. II That since 1977 Nicaragua is Party to the Convention on International [Trade] in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), that regulates international trade in these resources, parts and derivatives thereof through permits and certificates, and that the resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas) is included in Appendix II of that Convention. III That the resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas), according to studies carried out by INPESCA’s Fishing and Aquicultural Research Center, is widely distributed throughout Nicaragua’s entire Exclusive Economic Zone in the Caribbean. IV That tracking of this resource is of permanent interest for the country’s Fishing and Environmental Authorities, to ensure
Annex 14
Annex 14: NICARAGUAN INSTITUTE FOR FISHING AND AQUACULTURE -
INPESCA, EXECUTIVE RESOLUTION PA-NO. 001-2015.
(Available at: http://www.inpesca.gob.ni/images/Res%20001%202015%20
Cuota%20Exp%20Caracol.pdf)
139
sustainability and its rational and more equitable exploitation to benefit the fishing populations and communities of the Caribbean. To that effect, an ample level of dialogue and consultations is maintained with Nicaragua’s Fishing Chamber (CAPENIC), as well as with fishermen and community leaders. WHEREFORE: In use of its powers and based on the provisions of Article 102 [of the National Constitution]; Law 612, Law Amending and Adding to Law 290, Law on Organization, Attributions and Procedure of the Executive Branch of power, published in La Gaceta Official Journal No. 20 of 29 January 2007; Law 678, General Law of the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquaculture, published in La Gaceta Official Journal No. 106 of 09 June 2009; Law 489, Law on Fishing and Aquaculture, published in La Gaceta Official Journal No. 251 of 27 December 2004 and Decree 009-2005, Regulation of the Law on Fishing and Aquaculture, published in La Gaceta Official Journal No. 40 of 25 February 2005; the undersigned Executive Vice-President, RESOLVES: FIRST: For the year 2015, an Export Quota is established for the resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas) of five hundred eighty-nine thousand, six hundred seventy kilograms (589,670 kg), equivalent to one million, three hundred thousand pounds (1,300,000 lb.) of 100%-clean filleted meat, that corresponds to three million, nine hundred thousand (3,900,000) specimens. A quota of two hundred sixty-one thousand, four hundred twenty-five kilograms (261,425 kg) for sub-products based on trimmings, and of three million, nine hundred thousand (3,900,000) units of claws, is established. SECOND: An additional quota is established exclusively for research of forty-five thousand, three hundred fifty-nine kilograms (45,359 kg), equivalent to one hundred thousand pounds (100,000 lb.) of 100%-clean filleted meat, that will be extracted under the modality of scientific fishing, for purposes of which interested parties shall conclude a Collaboration Agreement with INPESCA.
Annex 14
140
THIRD: For the resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas) a minimum catch size of 20 cm in total length and a minimum thickness of the flared lip of shell of 9.5 mm are established. FOURTH: The captains of industrial vessels that catch this resource, shall fill out the Fishing Log designed by INPESCA and provided to the ship owners and captains by the corresponding delegation; the Licensee will be responsible for compliance with this provision. FIFTH: Prior to the Export Permit’s issuance by INPESCA, the processed product or raw material in existence shall be verified by means of inspection conducted by INPESCA’s Delegate or Inspector; the Record of the inspection shall be attached to the respective application. SIXTH: INPESCA through its Executive President or Vice-president shall issue a Permit for each export [operation] to be effected, that must be requested at least 24 hours in advance. The Permit shall be granted by INPESCA within a maximum of three days, and shall be valid for the same period of validity stated on the CITES Permit granted by MARENA [Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources]. SEVENTH: For The issuance of the subsequent export permits, the processed product or raw material in existence shall be verified through the records of inspection issued by INPESCA’s fishing inspectors. Likewise, for obtaining a new permit, a copy of the Export Policy authorized by the DGA [Customs] for the previous export [operation] shall be submitted. The copy may be submitted in printed form or by electronic means. INPESCA shall submit a copy thereof to Nicaragua’s Fishing Chamber (CAPENIC). EIGHTH: INPESCA shall submit a bimonthly report to CAPENIC on export volumes, and will likewise publish said volumes on INPESCA’s webpage. NINTH: The export of this resource’s catch under the modality of scientific fishing shall be managed on the basis of what will
Annex 14
141
be set out in the Collaboration Agreements with the companies interested in contributing to research in this resource. In any event, the export permit for the quota with research purposes is assured. TENTH: Once the export quota for the year 2015 is reached, issuance of permits shall cease and authorizations or issuance of fishing permits for the extraction of the conch resource shall be suspended. Offloading of conch product shall only be allowed as incidental fishing and artisanal fishing catches. ELEVENTH: The present resolution shall enter into force as of its date, without prejudice to its subsequent publication in La Gaceta Official Journal. Managua, on the sixth day of the month of January of the year two thousand fifteen. [Signed] Eng. Danilo Rosales Pichardo Executive Vice-president
Annex 14
142
NICARAGUAN INSTITUTE FOR FISHING AND AQUACULTURE Executive Resolution PA-No. 001-2016 Export Quota for the Resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas) for the year 2016 The Executive Vice-president of the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquaculture CONSIDERING I That the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquaculture [INPESCA] is the competent authority for the application of “Law 489, Law on Fishing and Aquaculture” and its Regulation, and the agency responsible for the management of the use and sustainable exploitation of the fishing resources in the national territory. II That since 1977 Nicaragua is Party to the Convention on International [Trade] in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), that regulates international trade in these resources, parts and derivatives thereof through permits and certificates, and that the resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas) is included in Appendix II of that Convention. III That the resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas), according to studies carried out by INPESCA’s Fishing and Aquicultural Research Center, is widely distributed throughout Nicaragua’s entire Exclusive Economic Zone in the Caribbean. IV That tracking of this resource is of permanent interest for the country’s Fishing and Environmental Authorities, to ensure sustainability and its rational and more equitable exploitation to benefit the fishing populations and communities of the Caribbean. To that effect, an ample level of dialogue and consultations is
Annex 15
Annex 15: NICARAGUAN INSTITUTE FOR FISHING AND AQUACULTURE -
INPESCA, EXECUTIVE RESOLUTION PA-NO. 001-2016.
(Available at: http://www.inpesca.gob.ni/images/Res%20001%202016%20
Caracol.pdf)
143
maintained with Nicaragua’s Fishing Chamber (CAPENIC), as well as with fishermen and community leaders. WHEREFORE: In use of its powers and based on the provisions of Article 102 [of the National Constitution]; Law 612, Law Amending and Adding to Law 290, Law on Organization, Attributions and Procedure of the Executive Branch of power, published in La Gaceta Official Journal No. 20 of 29 January 2007; Law 678, General Law of the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquaculture, published in La Gaceta Official Journal No. 106 of 09 June 2009; Law 489, Law on Fishing and Aquaculture, published in La Gaceta Official Journal No. 251 of 27 December 2004 and Decree 009-2005, Regulation of the Law on Fishing and Aquaculture, published in La Gaceta Official Journal No. 40 of 25 February 2005; the undersigned Executive Vice-President, RESOLVES: FIRST: For the year 2016, an Export Quota is established for the resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas) of five hundred eighty-nine thousand, six hundred seventy kilograms (589,670 kg), equivalent to one million, three hundred thousand pounds (1,300,000 lb.) of 100%-clean filleted meat, that corresponds to three million, nine hundred thousand (3,900,000) specimens. A quota of two hundred sixty-one thousand, four hundred twenty-five kilograms (261,425 kg) for sub-products based on trimmings, and of three million, nine hundred thousand (3,900,000) units of claws, is established. SECOND: An additional quota is established exclusively for research of forty-five thousand, three hundred fifty-nine kilograms (45,359 kg), equivalent to one hundred thousand pounds (100,000 lb.) of 100%-clean filleted meat, that will be extracted under the modality of scientific fishing, for purposes of which interested parties shall conclude a Collaboration Agreement with INPESCA. THIRD: For the resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas) a minimum catch size of 20 cm in total length and a minimum thickness of the flared lip of shell of 9.5 mm are established.
Annex 15
144
FOURTH: The captains of industrial vessels that catch this resource, shall fill out the Fishing Log designed by INPESCA and provided to the ship owners and captains by the corresponding delegation; the Licensee will be responsible for compliance with this provision. FIFTH: Once the export quota for the year 2016 is reached, issuance of permits shall cease and authorizations or issuance of fishing permits for the extraction of the conch resource shall be suspended. Offloading of conch product shall only be allowed as incidental fishing and artisanal fishing catches. SIXTH: The export of the resource of Caribbean Queen Conch (Strombus gigas) will be subject to the provisions of Interinstitutional Resolution INPESCA-IPSA-MAREN-MIFIC-PRONICARAGUA No. 991-2015. The present resolution shall enter into force as of its date, without prejudice to its subsequent publication in La Gaceta Official Journal. Managua, on the fourth day of the month of January of the year two thousand sixteen. [signed] Eng. Danilo Rosales Pichardo Executive Vice-president
Annex 15
145
146
3 The President of the Republic of Nicaragua To its inhabitants, be it known: That, The National Assembly of the Republic of Nicaragua Has ordered the following: THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA CONSIDERING I That Article 16 of Law N°. 613, Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving, published in La Gaceta, Official Journal N°. 12 of 17 January 2008, provides for the prohibition of the fishing of lobster and any marine resources by means of autonomous and non-autonomous diving as of the third year following that Law’s entry into force; and that, by the amendments contained in Law N°. 753 – Law Amending Article 16 of Law N°. 613, “Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving”, published in La Gaceta, Official Journal N°. 35 of 22 February 2011 – and Law N°. 836 – Law Amending and Adding to Law N°. 613, “Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving”, published in La Gaceta, Official Journal N°. 53 of 20 March 2013 – that time limit was extended until 20 March 2016 in order to proceed, during that period, to train divers and persons linked to this activity and to generate projects and other actions for the technical and occupational reconversion of lobster diving, while making diving for other species and marine resources subject to the catch quotas and other regulations set out by the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture. II That diving still persists as a significant component in national lobster production entailing serious risks to the divers’ safety and health; this, despite the fact that important progress has been made since the Reconversion Plan was submitted to the National Assembly in 2011 in the diving reconversion process towards other economic activities,
Annex 16
Annex 16: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA,
LAW NO. 923 OF 2016.
(Available at: http://legislacion.asamblea.gob.ni/SILEG/Iniciativas.nsf/0/
fea2eefd6228298d06257f5a0073a5a9/$FILE/2016-03-01-%20Ley%20No
%20923%20Reforma%20a%20%20la%20Ley%20No%20613%20Actividad
%20%20de%20%20Buceo%20final.pdf)
147
4 such as the reduction of the industrial fleet from 26 to 15 ships and of the artisanal fleet from 310 to 178; going from an annual catch by diving of 1.8 million pounds to a current catch of 1 million pounds in 2015. III That this problematic situation in relation to diving has also been a recurring concern of the Central-American Integration System, through the SICA/OSPESCA; with regard to which the Council of Ministers has adopted Regional Norms of binding character as from Regulation OPS-02-09 for the Regional Management of Caribbean Spiny Lobster (Panulirus argus) Fishing; and Addenda I, II and III, whereby regional actions have been approved, aimed at the permanent discontinuance of the practice of diving as a fishing method for lobster. IV That the Council of Ministers In Charge of Fishing of the Central-American Integration System (SICA/OSPESCA), meeting in Mexico on 26 March 2015, adopted Resolution N°. 11 that contains Addendum N°. III to Regulation OPS-02-09, whereby an Action Plan was approved for Nicaragua in order to achieve the definitive discontinuance of autonomous diving for Caribbean spiny lobster fishing, subject to reports and monitoring by the SICA/OSPESCA Regional Direction Committee. V That it is necessary to harmonise national and regional legislation in this regard, specifically article 16 of Law N°. 613, Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving, published in La Gaceta, Official Journal No. 12 of 17 January 2008, in order to adjust the prohibition of lobster fishing by means of diving provided for in that Law and its amendments, to the Action Plan that was submitted and approved for Nicaragua by the SICA/OSPESCA, wherein a series of measures are set out, aimed at the gradual decrease of this practice until the definitive discontinuance thereof is declared, maintaining, as to this date, the overseeing role of the National Assembly, without prejudice to the monitoring that the SICA/OSPESCA carries out.
Annex 16
148
5 THEREFORE In exercise of its attributions HAS ISSUED The following: LAW N°. 923 LAW AMENDING ARTICLE 16 OF LAW N°. 613, LAW FOR THE PROTECTION AND SAFETY OF PERSONS DEDICATED TO THE ACTIVITY OF DIVING First article: Amendment Article 16 of Law N°. 613, Law for the Protection and Safety of Persons Dedicated to the Activity of Diving, published in La Gaceta, Official Journal N°. 12 of 17 January 2008, is amended to read as follows: “Article 16 The implementation of the Action Plan for the Definitive Discontinuance of lobster fisheries by the method of autonomous or assisted diving, developed by the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture in coordination with the Autonomous Regional Governments of the Atlantic Coast, shall continue. The implementation and fulfilment of the Plan will be in harmony with Resolution N°. 11 of the Council of Ministers In Charge of Fishing of the Central-American Integration System (SICA/OSPESCA) that contains Addendum N°. III to Regulation OPS-02-09C for the Regional Management of Caribbean Spiny Lobster (Panulirus argus) Fishing, approved on 26 March 2015. Once the Plan has been implemented and fulfilled, the definitive discontinuance of lobster fishing for commercial purposes by means of autonomous or assisted diving will proceed in both seas.
Annex 16
149
6 The other species or marine resources for commercial purposes, the capture of which is solely done by means of diving, such as the sea cucumber and the pink conch “Strombus gigas”, among others, are subject to the yearly global catch quotas and other provisions set out by the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture, through an Executive Resolution. Each commercial fishing-by-diving vessel shall meet the minimum conditions required by law, in order for the relevant authority to issue the sailing and fishing permit. Likewise, the preparation of the special Rules setting out the terms and conditions of legal labour regulations, to ensure the affiliation of sea workers to social security must be complied with, pursuant to the provisions of Decree N°. 9-2005, Rules regulating Law N°. 489, “Law of Fishing and Aquiculture”, published in La Gaceta, Official Journal N°. 40 of 25 February 2005. Within this period, the Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture (INPESCA) will be the agency in charge of coordinating and ensuring the review, updating and implementation of the Technical and Occupational Reconversion Plans prepared in 2011, stating goals and benchmarks, with the actors involved that the Law foresees. It is incumbent on the Executive Branch to take measures for obtaining the financial resources required for the reconversion, in addition to taking all actions for the effective compliance and execution of the stated plans. The Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture INPESCA and relevant agencies will generate the necessary conditions to promote the gradual reconversion, promotion and training of this fishing sector, so as to turn it into a qualified and certified work force, taking into account Retired and Active divers and Women Sea Workers (Pikneras) in order to incorporate them to the specific projects set out in the Reconversion Plan.
Annex 16
150
7 The Nicaraguan Institute for Fishing and Aquiculture (INPESCA) shall submit quarterly reports to the National Assembly as of the publication of this amendment, in relation to the progress of the Technical and Occupational Reconversion Program for the workers that currently dedicate to the activity of fishing by diving. The National Assembly will exercise its overseeing role through the Parliamentary Committees it deems fit. Employers are under the obligation to conclude written contracts, duly informed and in good faith, in all labour relations, in order to ensure the labour and human rights of divers.” Second article: Entry into Force The present Law shall enter into force as of publication in any social written media with nationwide circulation, without prejudice to its publication in La Gaceta, Official Journal. Given at the city of Managua, in the Hall of Sessions of the National Assembly of the Republic of Nicaragua, on the first day of March of the year two thousand sixteen. Lic. Iris Montenegro Blandón Acting Chairwoman of the National Assembly Lic. Alba Palacios Benavídez Secretary of the National Assembly
Annex 16
151
152
Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean RegionThe Final Act of the Conference of the Plenipotentiaries on the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean RegionCartagena de Indias, 24 March 1983The Contracting Parties,Fully aware of the economic and social value of the marine environment, including coastal areas, of the wider Caribbean region,Conscious of their responsibility to protect the marine environment of the wider Caribbean region for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations,Recognizing the special hydrographic and ecological characteristics of the region and its vulnerability to pollution, Recognizing further the threat to the marine environment, its ecological equilibrium, resources and legitimate uses posed by pollution and by the absence of sufficient integration of an environmental dimension into the development process, Considering the protection of the ecosystems of the marine environment of the wider Caribbean region to be one of their principal objectives, Realizing fully the need for co-operation amongst themselves and with competent international organizations in order to ensure co-ordinated and comprehensive development without environmental damage, Recognizing the desirability of securing the wider acceptance of international marine pollution agreements already in existence, Noting however, that, in spite of the progress already achieved, these agreements do not cover all aspects of environmental deterioration and do not entirely meet the special requirements of the wider Caribbean region, Have agreed as follows: Article 1CONVENTION AREA1. This Convention shall apply to the wider Caribbean region, hereinafter referred to as "the Convention area" as defined in paragraph 1 of article 2.2. Except as may be otherwise provided in any protocol to this Convention, the Convention area shall not include internal waters of the Contracting Parties.
Annex 17
Annex 17: CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF
THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT OF THE WIDER CARIBBEAN REGION
(CARTAGENA CONVENTION) [ENGLISH AND FRENCH VERSIONS]
(Available at: http://www.cep.unep.org/cartagena-convention)
153
Article 2DEFINITIONSFor the purposes of this Convention: 1. The "Convention area" means the marine environment of the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean Sea and the areas of the Atlantic Ocean adjacent thereto, south of 30 deg north latitude and within 200 nautical miles of the Atlantic coasts of the States referred to in article 25 of the Convention.2. "Organization" means the institution designated to carry out the functions enumerated in paragraph 1 of article 15.Article 3GENERAL PROVISIONS1. The Contracting Parties shall endeavour to conclude bilateral or multilateral agreements including regional or subregional agreements, for the protection of the marine environment of the Convention area. Such agreements shall be consistent with this Convention and in accordance with international law. Copies of such agreements shall be communicated to the Organization and, through the Organization, to all signatories and Contracting Parties to this Convention.2. This Convention and its protocols shall be construed in accordance with international law relating to their subject-matter. Nothing in this Convention or its protocols shall be deemed to affect obligations assumed by the Contracting Parties under agreements previously concluded.3. Nothing in this Convention or its protocols shall prejudice the present or future claims or the legal views of any Contracting Party concerning the nature and extent of maritime jurisdiction.Article 4 GENERAL OBLIGATIONS1. The Contracting Parties shall, individually or jointly, take all appropriate measures in conformity with international law and in accordance with this Convention and those of its protocols in force to which they are parties to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the Convention area and to ensure sound environmental management, using for this purpose the best practicable means at their disposal and in accordance with their capabilities.2. The Contracting Parties shall, in taking the measures referred to in paragraph 1, ensure that the implementation of those measures does not cause pollution of the marine environment outside the Convention area. 3. The Contracting Parties shall co-operate in the formulation and adoption of protocols or other agreements to facilitate the effective implementation of this Convention. 4. The Contracting Parties shall take appropriate measures, in conformity with international law, for the effective discharge of the obligations prescribed in this Convention and its protocols and shall endeavour to harmonize their policies in this regard.5. The Contracting Parties shall co-operate with the competent international, regional and subregional organizations for the effective implementation of this Convention and its protocols. They shall assist each other in fulfilling their obligations under this Convention and its protocols.
Annex 17
154
Article 5 POLLUTION FROM SHIPS
The Contracting Parties shall take all appropriate measures to prevent, reduce and control
pollution of the Convention area caused by discharges from ships and, for this purpose, to
ensure the effective implementation of the applicable international rules and standards
established by the competent international organization.
Article 6 POLLUTION CAUSED BY DUMPING
The Contracting Parties shall take all appropriate measures to prevent, reduce and control
pollution of the Convention area caused by dumping of wastes and other matter at sea
from ships, aircraft or manmade structures at sea, and to ensure the effective
implementation of the applicable international rules and standards.
Article 7 POLLUTION FROM LAND-BASED SOURCES
The Contracting Parties shall take all appropriate measures to prevent, reduce and control
pollution of the Convention area caused by coastal disposal or by discharges emanating
from rivers, estuaries, coastal establishments, outfall structures, or any other sources on
their territories.
Article 8 POLLUTION FROM SEA-BED ACTIVITIES
The Contracting Parties shall take all appropriate measures to prevent, reduce and control
pollution of the Convention area resulting directly or indirectly from exploration and
exploitation of the sea-bed and its subsoil.
Article 9 AIRBORNE POLLUTION
The Contracting Parties shall take all appropriate measures to prevent, reduce and control
pollution of the Convention area resulting from discharges into the atmosphere from
activities under their jurisdiction.
Article 10 SPECIALLY PROTECTED AREAS
The Contracting Parties shall, individually or jointly, take all appropriate measures to
protect and preserve rare or fragile ecosystems, as well as the habitat of depleted,
threatened or endangered species, in the Convention area. To this end, the Contracting
Parties shall endeavour to establish protected areas. The establishment of such areas shall
not affect the rights of other Contracting Parties and third States. In addition, the
Contracting Parties shall exchange information concerning the administration and
management of such areas.
Annex 17
155
Article 11CO-OPERATION IN CASES OF EMERGENCY1. The Contracting Parties shall co-operate in taking all necessary measures to respond to pollution emergencies in the Convention area, whatever the cause of such emergencies, and to control, reduce or eliminate pollution or the threat of pollution resulting therefrom. To this end, the Contracting Parties shall, individually and jointly, develop and promote contingency plans for responding to incidents involving pollution or the threat thereof in the Convention area.2. When a Contracting Party becomes aware of cases in which the Convention area is in imminent danger of being polluted or has been polluted, it shall immediately notify other States likely to be affected by such pollution, as well as the competent international organizations. Furthermore, it shall inform, as soon as feasible, such other States and competent international organizations of measures it has taken to minimize or reduce pollution or the threat thereof. Article 12ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT1. As part of their environmental management policies the Contracting Parties undertake to develop technical and other guidelines to assist the planning of their major development projects in such a way as to prevent or minimize harmful impacts on the Convention area. 2. Each Contracting Party shall assess within its capabilities, or ensure the assessment of, the potential effects of such projects on the marine environment, particularly in coastal areas, so that appropriate measures may be taken to prevent any substantial pollution of, or significant and harmful changes to, the Convention area.3. With respect to the assessments referred to in paragraph 2, each Contracting Party shall, with the assistance of the Organization when requested, develop procedures for the dissemination of information and may, where appropriate, invite other Contracting Parties which may be affected to consult with it and to submit comments. Article 13SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION1. The Contracting Parties undertake to cooperate, directly and, when appropriate, through the competent international and regional organizations, in scientific research, monitoring, and the exchange of data and other scientific information relating to the purposes of this Convention.2. To this end, the Contracting Parties undertake to develop and co-ordinate their research and monitoring programmes relating to the Convention area and to ensure, in co-operation with the competent international and regional organizations, the necessary links between their research centres and institutes with a view to producing compatible results. With the aim of further protecting the Convention area, the Contracting Parties shall endeavour to participate in international arrangements for pollution research and monitoring.3. The Contracting Parties undertake to cooperate, directly and, when appropriate, through the competent international and regional organizations, in the provision to other Contracting Parties of technical and other assistance in fields relating to pollution and
Annex 17
156
sound environmental management of the Convention area, taking into account the special
needs of the smaller island developing countries and territories.
Article 14 LIABILITY AND COMPENSATION
The Contracting Parties shall co-operate with a view to adopting appropriate rules and
procedures, which are in conformity with international law, in the field of liability and
compensation for damage resulting from pollution of the Convention area.
Article 15 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
1. The Contracting Parties designate the United Nations Environment Programme to carry
out the following secretariat functions:
a. To prepare and convene the meetings of Contracting Parties and conferences
provided for in articles 16, 17 and 18;
b. To transmit the information received in accordance with articles 3, 11 and 22;
c. To perform the functions assigned to it by protocols to this Convention;
d. To consider enquiries by, and information from, the Contracting Parties and to
consult with them on questions relating to this Convention, its protocols and
annexes thereto;
e. To co-ordinate the implementation of cooperative activities agreed upon by the
meetings of Contracting Parties and conferences provided for in articles 16, 17
and 18;
f. To ensure the necessary co-ordination with other international bodies which the
Contracting Parties consider competent.
2. Each Contracting Party shall designate an appropriate authority to serve as the channel of
communication with the Organization for the purposes of this Convention and its
protocols.
Article 16 MEETINGS OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES
1. The Contracting Parties shall hold ordinary meetings once every two years and
extraordinary meetings at any other time deemed necessary, upon the request of the
Organization or at the request of any Contracting Party, provided that such requests are
supported by the majority of the Contracting Parties.
2. It shall be the function of the meetings of the Contracting Parties to keep under review
the implementation of this Convention and its protocols and, in particular:
a. To assess periodically the state of the environment in the Convention area;
b. To consider the information submitted by the Contracting Parties under article 22;
c. To adopt, review and amend annexes to this Convention and to its protocols, in
accordance with article 19;
d. To make recommendations regarding the adoption of any additional protocols or
any amendments to this Convention or its protocols in accordance with articles 17
and 18;
e. To establish working groups as required to consider any matters concerning this
Convention and its protocols, and annexes thereto;
Annex 17
157
f. To consider co-operative activities to be undertaken within the framework of this Convention and its protocols, including their financial and institutional implications, and to adopt decisions relating thereto;g. To consider and undertake any other action that may be required for the achievement of the purposes of this Convention and its protocols.Article 17ADOPTION OF PROTOCOLS1. The Contracting Parties, at a conference of plenipotentiaries, may adopt additional protocols to this Convention pursuant to paragraph 3 of article 4.2. If so requested by a majority of the Contracting Parties, the Organization shall convene a conference of plenipotentiaries for the purpose of adopting additional protocols to this Convention.Article 18AMENDMENT OF THE CONVENTION AND ITS PROTOCOLS1. Any Contracting Party may propose amendments to this Convention. Amendments shall be adopted by a conference of plenipotentiaries which shall be convened by the Organization at the request of a majority of the Contracting Parties.2. Any Contracting Party to this Convention may propose amendments to any protocol. Such amendments shall be adopted by a conference of plenipotentiaries which shall be convened by the Organization at the request of a majority of the Contracting Parties to the protocol concerned.3. The text of any proposed amendment shall be communicated by the Organization to all Contracting Parties at least 90 days before the opening of the conference of plenipotentiaries. 4. Any amendment to this Convention shall be adopted by a three-fourths majority vote of the Contracting Parties to the Convention which are represented at the conference of plenipotentiaries and shall be submitted by the Depositary for acceptance by all Contracting Parties to the Convention. Amendments to any protocol shall be adopted by a three-fourths majority vote of the Contracting Parties to the protocol which are represented at the conference of plenipotentiaries and shall be submitted by the Depositary for acceptance by all Contracting Parties to the protocol.5. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval of amendments shall be deposited with the Depositary. Amendments adopted in accordance with paragraph 3 shall enter into force between Contracting Parties having accepted such amendments on the thirtieth day following the date of receipt by the Depositary of the instruments of at least three fourths of the Contracting Parties to this Convention or to the protocol concerned, as the case may be. Thereafter the amendments shall enter into force for any other Contracting Party on the thirtieth day after the date on which that Party deposits its instrument. 6. After entry into force of an amendment to this Convention or to a protocol, any new Contracting Party to the Convention or such protocols shall become a Contracting Party to the Convention or protocol as amended. Article 19ANNEXES AND AMENDMENTS TO ANNEXES
Annex 17
158
1. Annexes to this Convention or to a protocol shall form an integral part of the Convention or, as the case may be, such protocol. 2. Except as may be otherwise provided in any protocol with respect to its annexes, the following procedure shall apply to the adoption and entry into force of amendments to annexes to this Convention or to annexes to a protocol:a. Any Contracting Party may propose amendments to annexes to this Convention or to annexes to any protocol at a meeting convened pursuant to article 16;b. Such amendments shall be adopted by a three-fourths majority vote of the Contracting Parties to the instrument in question present at the meeting referred to in article 16; c. The Depositary shall without delay communicate the amendments so adopted to all Contracting Parties to the Convention;d. Any Contracting Party that is unable to accept an amendment to annexes to this Convention or to annexes to any protocol shall so notify the Depositary in writing within 90 days from the date on which the amendment was adopted; e. The Depositary shall without delay notify all Contracting Parties of notifications received pursuant to the preceding subparagraph; f. On expiration of the period referred to in subparagraph (d), the amendment to the annex shall become effective for all Contracting Parties to this Convention or to the protocol concerned which have not submitted a notification in accordance with the provisions of that subparagraph;g. A Contracting Party may at any time substitute an acceptance for a previous declaration of objection, and the amendment shall thereupon enter into force for that Party.3. The adoption and entry into force of a new annex shall be subject to the same procedure as that for the adoption and entry into force of an amendment to an annex, provided that, if it entails an amendment to the Convention or to one of its protocols, the new annex shall not enter into force until such time as that amendment enters into force. 4. Any amendment to the Annex on Arbitration shall be proposed and adopted, and shall enter into force, in accordance with the procedures set out in article 18. Article 20RULES OF PROCEDURE AND FINANCIAL RULES1. The Contracting Parties shall unanimously adopt rules of procedure for their meetings. 2. The Contracting Parties shall unanimously adopt financial rules, prepared in consultation with the Organization, to determine, in particular, their financial participation under this Convention and under protocols to which they are parties.Article 21SPECIAL EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT TO VOTEIn their fields of competence, the regional economic integration organizations referred to in article 25 shall exercise their right to vote with a number of votes equal to the number of their member States which are Contracting Parties to this Convention and to one or more protocols. Such organizations shall not exercise their right to vote if the member States concerned exercise theirs, and vice versa.
Annex 17
159
Article 22TRANSMISSION OF INFORMATIONThe Contracting Parties shall transmit to the Organization information on the measures adopted by them in the implementation of this Convention and of protocols to which they are parties, in such form and at such intervals as the meetings of Contracting Parties may determine. Article 23SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES1. In case of a dispute between Contracting Parties as to the interpretation or application of this Convention or its protocols, they shall seek a settlement of the dispute through negotiation or any other peaceful means of their own choice. 2. If the Contracting Parties concerned cannot settle their dispute through the means mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the dispute shall upon common agreement, except as may be otherwise provided in any protocol to this Convention, be submitted to arbitration under the conditions set out in the Annex on Arbitration. However, failure to reach common agreement on submission of the dispute to arbitration shall not absolve the Contracting Parties from the responsibility of continuing to seek to resolve it by the means referred to in paragraph 1. 3. A Contracting Party may at any time declare that it recognizes as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other Contracting Party accepting the same obligation, the application of the arbitration procedure set out in the Annex on Arbitration. Such declaration shall he notified in writing to the Depositary, who shall communicate it to the other Contracting Parties.Article 24RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CONVENTION AND ITS PROTOCOLS1. No State or regional economic integration organization may become a Contracting Party to this Convention unless it becomes at the same time a Contracting Party to at least one protocol to the Convention. No State or regional economic integration organization may become a Contracting Party to a protocol unless it is, or becomes at the same time, a Contracting Party to the Convention.2. Decisions concerning any protocol shall be taken only by the Contracting Parties to the protocol concerned.Article 25SIGNATUREThis Convention and the Protocol concerning Cooperation in Combating Oil Spills in the Wider Caribbean Region shall be open for signature at Cartagena de Indias on 24 March 1983 and at Bogota from 25 March 1983 to 23 March 1984 by States invited to participate in the Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region, held at Cartagena de Indias from 21 to 24 March 1983. They shall also be open for signature between the same dates by any regional economic integration organization exercising competence in fields covered by the Convention and that Protocol and having at least one member State which
Annex 17
160
belongs to the wider Caribbean region, provided that such regional organization has been invited to participate in the Conference of Plenipotentiaries. Article 26RATIFICATION, ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL1. This Convention and its protocols shall be subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by States. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Government of the Republic of Colombia, which will assume the functions of Depositary.2. This Convention and its protocols shall also be subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by the organizations referred to in article 25 having at least one member State a party to the Convention. In their instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval, such organizations shall declare the extent of their competence with respect to the matters governed by the Convention and the relevant protocol. Subsequently these organizations shall inform the Depositary of any substantial modification in the extent of their competence. Article 27ACCESSION1. This Convention and its protocols shall be open for accession by the States and organizations referred to in article 25 as from the day following the date on which the Convention or the protocol concerned is closed for signature.2. After entry into force of this Convention and of any protocol, any State or regional economic integration organization not referred to in article 25 may accede to the Convention and to any protocol subject to prior approval by three fourths of the Contracting Parties to the Convention or the protocol concerned, provided that any such regional economic integration organization exercises competence in fields covered by the Convention and the relevant protocol and has at least one member State belonging to the wider Caribbean region, that is a party to the Convention and the relevant protocol.3. In their instruments of accession, the organizations referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall declare the extent of their competence with respect to the matters governed by the Convention and the relevant protocol. These organizations shall also inform the Depositary of any substantial modification in the extent of their competence. 4. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Depositary. Article 28ENTRY INTO FORCE1. This Convention and the Protocol concerning Co-operation in Combating Oil Spills in the Wider Caribbean Region shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the date of deposit of the ninth instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval of, or accession to, those agreements by the States referred to in article 25. 2. Any additional protocol to this Convention, except as otherwise provided in such protocol, shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the date of deposit of the ninth instrument of ratification, acceptance, or approval of such protocol, or of accession thereto.
Annex 17
161
3. For the purposes of paragraphs 1 and 2, any instrument deposited by an organization referred to in article 25 shall not be counted as additional to that deposited by any member State of such organization. 4. Thereafter, this Convention and any protocol shall enter into force with respect to any State or organization referred to in article 25 or article 27 on the thirtieth day following the date of deposit of its instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 29DENUNCIATION1. At any time after two years from the date of entry into force of this Convention with respect to a Contracting Party, that Contracting Party may denounce the Convention by giving written notification to the Depositary.2. Except as may be otherwise provided in any protocol to this Convention, any Contracting Party may, at any time after two years from the date of entry into force of such protocol with respect to that Contracting Party, denounce the protocol by giving written notification to the Depositary. 3. Denunciation shall take effect on the ninetieth day after the date on which notification is received by the Depositary.4. Any Contracting Party which denounces this Convention shall be considered as also having denounced any protocol to which it was a Contracting Party.5. Any Contracting Party which, upon its denunciation of a protocol, is no longer a Contracting Party to any protocol of this Convention, shall be considered as also having denounced the Convention itself.Article 30DEPOSITARY1. The Depositary shall inform the Signatories and the Contracting Parties, as well as the Organization, of:a. The signature of this Convention and of its protocols, and the deposit of instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession; b. The date on which the Convention or any protocol will come into force for each Contracting Party;c. Notification of any denunciation and the date on which it will take effect;d. The amendments adopted with respect to the Convention or to any protocol, their acceptance by the Contracting Parties and the date of their entry into force; e. All matters relating to new annexes and to the amendment of any annex; f. Notifications by regional economic integration organizations of the extent of their competence with respect to matters governed by this Convention and the relevant protocols, and of any modifications thereto.2. The original of this Convention and of any protocol shall be deposited with the Depositary, the Government of the Republic of Colombia, which shall send certified copies thereof to the Signatories, the Contracting Parties, and the Organization.3. As soon as the Convention and its protocols enter into force, the Depositary shall transmit a certified copy of the instrument concerned to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for registration and publication in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.
Annex 17
162
In witness whereof the undersigned, being duly authorized by their respective Governments, have signed this Convention. Done at Cartagena de Indias this twenty-fourth day of March one thousand nine hundred and eighty-three in a single copy in the English, French and Spanish languages, the three texts being equally authentic.AnnexARBITRATIONArticle 1Unless the agreement referred to in article 23 the Convention provides otherwise, the arbitration procedure shall be conducted in accordance with articles 2 to 10 below.Article 2The claimant party shall notify the Secretariat that the parties have agreed to submit the dispute to arbitration pursuant to paragraph 2 or paragraph 3 of article 23 of the Convention. The notification shall state the subject-matter of arbitration and include, in particular, the articles of the Convention or the protocol, the interpretation or application of which are at issue. The Secretariat shall forward the information thus received to all Contracting Parties to the Convention or to the protocol concerned.Article 3The arbitral tribunal shall consist of three members. Each of the parties to the dispute shall appoint an arbitrator and the two arbitrators so appointed shall designate by common agreement the third arbitrator who shall be the chairman of the tribunal. The latter shall not be a national of one of the parties to the dispute, nor have his usual place of residence in the territory of one of these parties, nor be employed by any of them, nor have dealt with the case in any other capacity.Article 41. If the chairman of the arbitral tribunal has not been designated within two months of the appointment of the second arbitrator, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall, at the request of either party, designate him within a further two months period. 2. If one of the parties to the dispute does not appoint an arbitrator within two months of receipt of the request, the other party may inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations who shall designate the chairman of the arbitral tribunal within a further two
Annex 17
163
months' period. Upon designation, the chairman of the arbitral tribunal shall request the party which has not appointed an arbitrator to do so within two months. After such period, he shall inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall make this appointment within a further two months' period. Article 51. The arbitral tribunal shall render its decision in accordance with international law and in accordance with the provisions of this Convention and the protocol or protocols concerned.2. Any arbitral tribunal constituted under the provisions of this annex shall draw up its own rules of procedure.Article 61. The decisions of the arbitral tribunal, both on procedure and on substance, shall be taken by majority vote of its members. 2. The tribunal may take all appropriate measures in order to establish the facts. It may, at the request of one of the parties, recommend essential interim measures of protection. 3. The parties to the dispute shall provide all facilities necessary for the effective conduct of the proceedings.4. The absence or default of a party to the dispute shall not constitute an impediment to the proceedings. Article 7The tribunal may hear and determine counterclaims arising directly out of the subject-matter of the dispute. Article 8Unless the arbitral tribunal determines otherwise because of the particular circumstances of the case, the expenses of the tribunal, including the remuneration of its members, shall be borne by the parties to the dispute in equal shares. The tribunal shall keep a record of all its expenses, and shall furnish a final statement thereof to the parties. Article 9Any Contracting Party that has an interest of a legal nature in the subject-matter of the dispute which may be affected by the decision in the case, may intervene in the proceedings with the consent of the tribunal.
Annex 17
164
Article 101. The tribunal shall render its award within five months of the date on which it is established unless it finds it necessary to extend the time-limit for a period which should not exceed five months. 2. The award of the arbitral tribunal shall be accompanied by a statement of reasons on which it is based. It shall be final and binding upon the parties to the dispute.3. Any dispute which may arise between the parties concerning the interpretation or execution of the award may be submitted by either party to the arbitral tribunal which made the award or, if the latter cannot be seized thereof, to another arbitral tribunal constituted for this purpose in the same manner as the first.
Annex 17
165
Convention Pour La Protection Et La Mise En Valeur Du Milieu Marin Dans La Région Des Caraïbes Cartagena de Indias, 24 mars 1983 Les Parties contractantes, Pleinement conscientes de la valeur économique et sociale du milieu marin, y compris les zones côtières, de la région des Caraïbes, Conscientes du devoir qui leur incombe de protéger le milieu marin de la région des Caraïbes dans l’intérêt et pour l’agrément des générations pré-sentes et futures, Reconnaissant les caractéristiques hydrographiques et écologiques spéciales de la région, ainsi que sa vulnérabilité à la pollution, Reconnaissant en outre la menace que la pollution et le fait que l’envi-ronnement ne soit pas suffisamment pris en compte dans le processus de développement font peser sur le milieu marin, son équilibre écologique, ses ressources et ses utilisations légitimes, Considérant que la protection des écosystèmes du milieu marin de la région des Caraïbes constitue l’un de leurs principaux objectifs, Appréciant pleinement la nécessité de coopérer entre elles et avec les organisations internationales compétentes afin d’assurer un développement coordonné et global sans causer de dommages à l’environnement, Reconnaissant qu’il est souhaitable que les accords internationaux deja existants relatifs à la pollution marine soient plus largement acceptés, Notant, cependant, qu’en dépit des progrès déjà réalisés ces accords ne couvrent pas tous les aspects de la détérioration de l’environnement et ne répondent pas pleinement aux besoins particuliers de la région des Caraïbes, Sont convenues de ce qui suit : Article premier ZONE D'APPLICATION DE LA CONVENTION 1. La présente Convention s’applique à la région des Caraïbes, telle qu’elle est définie au paragraphe 1 de l’article 2 sous la dénomination << zone d’application de la Convention >>. 2. Sauf disposition contraire de l’un quelconque des protocoles relatifs à la présente Convention, la zone d’application de la Convention ne comprend pas les eaux intérieures des Parties contractantes.
Annex 17
166
Article 2 DÉFINITIONS
Aux fins de la présente Convention :
1. On entend par << zone d’application de la Convention >> le milieu marin du golfe du
Mexique, de la mer des Caraïbes et des zones de l’océan Atlantique qui lui sont adjacentes,
au sud d’une limite constituée par la ligne des 30o de latitude nord et dans un rayon de 200
milles marins à partir des côtes atlantiques des Etats visés à l’article 25 de la présente
Convention.
2. On entend par << Organisation >> l’institution chargée d’assurer les fonctions énumérées
au paragraphe 1 de l’article 15.
Article 3 DISPOSITIONS GÉNÉRALES
1. Les Parties contractantes s’efforcent de conclure des accords bilatéraux ou multilatéraux,
y compris des accords régionaux ou sousrégionaux, en vue d’assurer la protection du
milieu marin de la zone d’application de la Convention. De tels accords doivent être
compatibles avec la présente Convention et conformes au droit international. Des copies
de ces accords seront transmises à l’Organisation et, par son entremise, communiquées à
tous les signataires et à toutes les Parties contractantes à la présente Convention.
2. La présente Convention et ses protocoles doivent s’interpréter conformément au droit
international applicable en la matière. Aucune disposition de la présente Convention ou
de ses protocoles ne saurait être interprétée comme portant atteinte aux obligations
assumées par les Parties contractantes en vertu de traités conclus antérieurement.
3. Aucune disposition de la présente Convention ou de ses protocoles ne préjuge des
revendications ou positions juridiques actuelles ou futures de l’une quelconque des Parties
contractantes en ce qui concerne la nature et l’étendue de la juridiction maritime.
Article 4 OBLIGATIONS GÉNÉRALES
1. Les Parties contractantes prennent, individuellement ou conjointement, toutes mesures
appropriées conformes au droit international et aux dispositions de la présente Convention
et de ses protocoles auxquels elles sont parties pour prévenir, réduire et combattre la
pollution de la zone d’application de la Convention et pour assurer une gestion rationnelle
de l’environnement, en mettant en oeuvre à cette fin les moyens les mieux adaptés dont
elles disposent, en fonction de leurs capacités.
2. Lorsqu'elles prennent les mesures visées au paragraphe 1, les Parties contractantes
s'assurent que l'application de ces mesures ne provoque pas une pollution du milieu marin
hors de la zone d'application de la Convention.
3. Les Parties contractantes coopèrent en vue d'élaborer et d'adopter des protocoles ou autres
accords afin de faciliter l'application effective de la présente Convention.
4. Les Parties contractantes adoptent des mesures appropriées, conformément au droit
international, en vue de permettre la bonne exécution des obligations prévues par la
présente Convention et ses protocoles et s'efforcent d'harmoniser leurs politiques à cet
égard.
5. Les Parties contractantes coopèrent avec les organisations internationales, régionales et
sous-régionales compétentes en vue d'assurer l'application effective de la présente
Annex 17
167
Convention et de ses protocoles. Elles s'aident mutuellement à s'acquitter de leurs obligations en vertu de la présente Convention et de ses protocoles. Article 5 POLLUTION PAR LES NAVIRES Les Parties contractantes prennent toutes les mesures appropriées pour prévenir, réduire et combattre la pollution de la zone d'application de la Convention causée par les rejets des navires et, à cette fin, assurent la mise en oeuvre effective des règles et normes internationales applicables établies par l'organisation internationale compétente. Article 6 POLLUTION DUE AUX OPÉRATIONS D'IMMERSION Les Parties contractantes prennent toutes les mesures appropriées pour prévenir, réduire et combattre la pollution de la zone d'application de la Convention due aux opérations d'immersion de déchets et'autres matières effectuées en mer à partir de navires, d'aéronefs ou de structures artificielles placées en mer, et assurent la mise en oeuvre effective des règles et normes internationales applicables. Article 7 POLLUTION D'ORIGINE TELLURIQUE Les Parties contractantes prennent toutes les mesures appropriées pour prévenir, réduire et combattre la pollution de la zone d'application de la Convention due aux déversements effectués à partir des côtes ou provenant des fleuves, des estuaires, des établissements côtiers, des installations de décharge, ou émanant de toute autre source située sur leur territoire. Article 8 POLLUTION RÉSULTANT D'ACTIVITÉS RELATIVES AUX FONDS MARINS Les Parties contractantes prennent toutes les mesures appropriées pour prévenir, réduire et combattre la pollution de la zone d'application de la Convention, résultant, directement ou indirectement, d'activités relatives àl'exploration et à l'exploitation du fond de la mer et de son sous-sol. Article 9 POLLUTION TRANSMISE PAR L'ATMOSPHÈRE Les Parties contractantes prennent toutes les mesures appropriées pour prévenir, réduire et combattre la pollution de la zone d'application de la Convention provenant des rejets dans l'atmosphère qui résultent d'activités relevant de leur juridiction. Article 10 ZONES SPÉCIALEMENT PROTÉGÉES Les Parties contractantes prennent, individuellement ou conjointement, toutes les mesures appropriées pour protéger et préserver, dans la zone d'application de la Convention, les écosystèmes rares ou fragiles ainsi que l'habitat des espèces en régression, menacées ou en voie d'extinction. A cet effet, les Parties contractantes s'efforcent d'établir des zones protégées. L'établissement de telles zones ne porte pas atteinte aux droits des autres Parties
Annex 17
168
contractantes ni à ceux des Etats tiers. En outre, les Parties contractantes procèdent à
l'échange de renseignements concernant l'administration et la gestion de ces zones.
Article 11 COOPÉRATION EN CAS DE SITUATION CRITIQUE
1. Les Parties contractantes coopèrent pour prendre toutes les mesures nécessaires en cas de
situation critique génératrice de pollution dans la zone d'application de la Convention,
quelle que soit la cause de cette situation, et pour combattre, réduire ou éliminer les
pollutions ou les menaces de pollution qui en résultent. A cette fin, les Parties
contractantes s'emploient, individuellement ou conjointement, à mettre au point et à
promouvoir des plans d'urgence pour intervenir en cas d'incidents entraînant une pollution
ou présentant une menace de pollution dans la zone d'application de la Convention.
2. Toute Partie contractante ayant connaissance de cas dans lesquels la zone d'application de
la Convention est en danger imminent d'être polluée ou a été polluée en informe sans délai
les autres Etats susceptibles d'être touchés par la pollution, ainsi que les organisations
internationales compétentes. En outre, elle informe, dès qu'elle est en mesure de le faire,
ces autres Etats et les organisations internationales compétentes des mesures prises par
elle pour minimiser ou réduire la pollution ou le risque de pollution.
Article 12 EVALUATION DE L'IMPACT SUR L'ENVIRONNEMENT
1. Dans le cadre de leur politique de gestion de l'environnement, les Parties contractantes
s'engagent à formuler des directives techniques et autres en vue de contribuer à planifier
leurs projets importants de développement de manière à empêcher ou minimiser les effets
néfastes de ceux-ci dans la zone d'application de la Convention.
2. Les Parties contractantes évaluent, dans les limites de leurs possibilités, ou font évaluer
les effets potentiels de tels projets sur le milieu marin, en particulier dans les zones
côtières, afin que des mesures appropriées puissent être prises pour prévenir toute
pollution importante ou modification significative et nuisible du milieu marin de la zone
d'application de la Convention.
3. En ce qui concerne les évaluations visées au paragraphe 2, chaque Partie contractante
élabore, avec l'assistance de l'Organisation si elle en fait la demande, des procédures aux
fins de la diffusion d'informations et il lui est loisible, le cas échéant, d'inviter les autres
Parties contractantes qui peuvent être touchées à procéder avec elle à des consultations et
à formuler des observations.
Article 13 COOPÉRATION SCIENTIFIQUE ET TECHNIQUE
1. Les Parties contractantes s'engagent à coopérer, directement et le cas échéant par
l'intermédiaire des organisations internationales et régionales compétentes, dans les
domaines de la recherche scientifique, de la surveillance et de l'échange de données et
autres renseignements scientifiques relatifs aux objectifs de la présente Convention.
2. A cette fin, les Parties contractantes s'engagent à mettre au point et à coordonner leurs
programmes de recherche et de surveillance relatifs à la zone d'application de la
Convention, et à établir, en coopération avec les organisations internationales et régionales
compétentes, les liens nécessaires entre leurs centres et instituts de recherche en vue
d'aboutir à des résultats compatibles. Dans le but de protéger mieux encore la zone
Annex 17
169
d'application de la Convention, les Parties contractantes s'efforcent de participer aux arrangements internationaux concernant la recherche et la surveillance en matière de pollution. 3. Les Parties contractantes s'engagent à coopérer, directement et le cas échéant par l'intermédiaire des organisations internationales et régionales compétentes, en vue de fournir aux autres Parties contractantes une assistance technique et autre dans les domaines de la lutte contre la pollution et de la gestion rationnelle de l'environnement dans la zone d'application de la Convention, compte tenu des besoins particuliers des petits pays et territoires insulaires en développement. Article 14 RESPONSABILITÉ ET RÉPARATION DES DOMMAGES Les Parties contractantes coopèrent en vue d'adopter des règles et des procédures appropriées, conformes au droit international, en matière de responsabilité et de réparation des dommages résultant de la pollution de la zone d'application de la Convention. Article 15 ARRANGEMENTS INSTITUTIONNELS 1. Les Parties contractantes désignent le Programme des Nations Unies pour l'environnement pour assurer les fonctions de secrétariat ciaprès : a. Préparer et convoquer les réunions des Parties contractantes et les conférences prévues aux articles 16, 17 et 18; b. Transmettre les informations reçues en conformité des articles 3, 11 et 22; c. Accomplir les fonctions qui lui sont confiées en vertu des protocoles à la présente Convention; d. Examiner les demandes de renseignements et les informations émanant des Parties contractantes et consulter lesdites Parties sur les questions relatives à la présente Convention, à ses protocoles et à leurs annexes; e. Coordonner l'exécution des activités de coopération convenues aux réunions des Parties contractantes et aux conférences visées aux articles 16, 17 et 18; f. Assurer la coordination nécessaire avec d'autres organismes internationaux que les Parties contractantes considèrent comme qualifiés. 2. Chaque Partie contractante désigne une autorité compétente chargée d'assurer la liaison avec l'Organisation aux fins de la présente Convention et de ses protocoles. Article 16 RÉUNIONS DES PARTIES CONTRACTANTES 1. Les Parties contractantes tiennent une réunion ordinaire tous les deux ans et, chaque fois qu'elles le jugent nécessaire, des réunions extraordinaires à la demande de l'Organisation ou à la demande d'une Partie contractante, à condition que ces demandes soient appuyées par la majorité des Parties contractantes. 2. Les réunions des Parties contractantes ont pour objet de veiller à l'application de la présente Convention et de ses protocoles et, en particulier : a. D'évaluer périodiquement l'état de l'environnement dans la zone d'application de la Convention; b. D'étudier les informations soumises par les Parties contractantes conformément à l'article 22;
Annex 17
170
c. D'adopter, de réviser et d'amender les annexes à la présente Convention et à ses
protocoles, conformément à l'article 19;
d. De faire des recommandations concernant l'adoption de protocoles additionnels
ou d'amendements à la présente Convention ou à ses protocoles, conformément
aux articles 17 et 18;
e. De constituer, le cas échéant, des groupes de travail chargés d'examiner toute
question en rapport avec la présente Convention, ses protocoles et leurs annexes;
f. D'étudier les activités de coopération à entreprendre dans le cadre de la présente
Convention et de ses protocoles, y compris leurs incidences financières et
institutionnelles, et d'adopter des décisions à ce sujet;
g. D'étudier et de mettre en oeuvre toute autre mesure requise, le cas échéant, pour
la réalisation des objectifs de la présente Convention et de ses protocoles.
Article 17 ADOPTION DE PROTOCOLES
1. Les Parties contractantes peuvent, au cours d'une conférence de plénipotentiaires, adopter
des protocoles additionnels à la présente Convention conformément au paragraphe 3 de
l'article 4.
2. Si la majorité des Parties contractantes en fait la demande, l'Organisation convoque une
conférence de plénipotentiaires en vue de l'adoption de protocoles additionnels à la
Convention.
Article 18 AMENDEMENTS À LA CONVENTION ET À SES PROTOCOLES
1. Toute Partie contractante peut proposer des amendements à la présente Convention. Les
amendements sont adoptés au cours d'une conférence de plénipotentiaires convoquée par
l'Organisation à la demande de la majorité des Parties contractantes.
2. Toute Partie contractante à la présente Convention peut proposer des amendements aux
protocoles. Les amendements sont adoptés au cours d'une conférence de plénipotentiaires
convoquée par l'Organisation à la demande de la majorité des Parties contractantes au
protocole concerné.
3. Le texte de toute proposition d'amendement est communiqué par l'Organisation à toutes
les Parties contractantes quatre-vingt-dix jours au moins avant l'ouverture de la
Conférence de plénipotentiaires.
4. Tout amendement à la présente Convention est adopté à la majorité des trois quarts des
Parties contractantes à la Convention représentées à la Conférence de plénipotentiaires, et
soumis par le Dépositaire à l'acceptation de toutes les Parties contractantes à la
Convention. Les amendements à tout protocole sont adoptés à la majorité des trois quarts
des Parties contractantes à ce protocole représentées à la Conférence de plénipotentiaires,
et soumis par le Dépositaire à l'acceptation de toutes les Parties contractantes à ce
protocole.
5. Les instruments d'acceptation, de ratification ou d'approbation des amendements seront
déposés auprès du Dépositaire. Les amendements adoptés conformément au paragraphe 3
entreront en vigueur, entre les Parties contractantes les ayant acceptés, le trentième jour
suivant la date à laquelle le Dépositaire aura reçu les instruments des trois quarts au moins
des Parties contractantes à la présente Convention ou au protocole concerné, selon le cas.
Annex 17
171
Ensuite, les amendements entreront en vigueur pour toute autre Partie contractante le trentième jour suivant la date à laquelle elle aura déposé son instrument. 6. Après l'entrée en vigueur d'un amendement à la présente Convention ou à un protocole, toute nouvelle Partie contractante à la Convention ou à ce protocole devient Partie contractante à la Convention ou au protocole tel qu'amendé. Article 19 ANNEXES ET AMENDEMENTS AUX ANNEXES 1. Les annexes à la présente Convention ou à un protocole font partie intégrante de la Convention ou, selon le cas, du protocole. 2. Sauf disposition contraire de l'un quelconque des protocoles, la procédure suivante s'applique à l'adoption et à l'entrée en vigueur des amendements aux annexes à la présente Convention ou aux protocoles : a. Toute Partie contractante peut proposer, lors d'une réunion convoquée conformément à l'article 16, des amendements aux annexes à la présente Convention ou aux protocoles; b. Les amendements sont adoptés à la majorité des trois quarts des Parties contractantes à l'instrument dont il s'agit, présentes à la réunion visée à l'article 16; c. Le Dépositaire communique sans délai à toutes les Parties contractantes à la présente Convention les amendements ainsi adoptés; d. Toute Partie contractante qui n'est pas en mesure d'accepter un amendement aux annexes à la présente Convention ou à l'un quelconque de ses protocoles en donne par écrit notification au Dépositaire dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours suivant la date de l'adoption de l'amendement; e. Le Dépositaire informe sans délai toutes les Parties contractantes des notifications reçues conformément à l'alinéa précédent; f. A l'expiration de la période indiquée à l'alinéa d, l'amendement à l'annexe prend effet pour toutes les Parties contractantes à la présente Convention ou au protocole concerné qui n'ont pas soumis de notification en conformité des dispositions dudit alinéa; g. Une Partie contractante peut, à tout moment, remplacer une déclaration d'opposition par une déclaration d'approbation et l'amendement qui faisait antérieurement l'objet de ladite opposition entre alors en vigueur àl'égard de cette Partie. 3. L'adoption et l'entrée en vigueur d'une nouvelle annexe sont soumises aux mêmes procédures que l'adoption et l'entrée en vigueur d'un amendement à une annexe. Toutefois, si la nouvelle annexe implique un amendement à la présente Convention ou à un protocole, elle n'entre en vigueur qu'après l'entrée en vigueur de cet amendement. 4. Tous les amendements à l'Annexe relative à l'arbitrage sont proposés, adoptés et entrent en vigueur conformément à la procédure indiquée à l'article 18. Article 20 RÈGLEMENT INTÉRIEUR ET RÈGLES FINANCIÈRES 1. Les Parties contractantes adoptent à l'unanimité un règlement intérieur pour leurs réunions.
Annex 17
172
2. Les Parties contractantes adoptent à l'unanimité des règles financières, préparées en
consultation avec l'Organisation, pour déterminer notamment leur participation financière
à la présente Convention et aux protocoles auxquels elles sont parties.
Article 21 EXERCICE PARTICULIER DU DROIT DE VOTE
Dans les domaines relevant de leur compétence, les organisations d'intégration
économique régionale visées à l'article 25 exercent leur droit de vote avec un nombre de
voix égal au nombre de leurs Etats membres qui sont Parties contractantes à la présente
Convention et à un ou plusieurs protocoles. De telles organisations n'exercent pas leur
droit de vote dans le cas où les Etats membres concernés exercent le leur et inversement.
Article 22 COMMUNICATION D'INFORMATIONS
Les Parties contractantes adressent à l'Organisation des informations sur les mesures
adoptées par elles en application de la présente Convention et des protocoles auxquels
elles sont parties, la forme et la fréquence de ces informations étant déterminées lors des
réunions des Parties contractantes.
Article 23 RÈGLEMENT DES DIFFÉRENDS
1. Si un différend surgit entre des Parties contractantes à propos de l'interprétation ou de
l'application de la présente Convention ou de ses protocoles, ces Parties s'efforcent de le
régler par voie de négociation ou par tout autre moyen pacifique de leur choix.
2. Si les Parties contractantes concernées ne peuvent régler leur différend par les moyens
mentionnés au paragraphe précédent, le différend est, sauf disposition contraire de l'un
quelconque des protocoles à la présente Convention, soumis d'un commun accord à
l'arbitrage dans les conditions définies dans l'Annexe relative à l'arbitrage. Toutefois, si
les Parties contractantes ne parviennent pas à s'entendre en vue de soumettre le différend
àl'arbitrage, elles ne sont pas relevées de leur responsabilité de continuer àchercher à le
résoudre selon les moyens mentionnés au paragraphe précédent.
3. Toute Partie contractante peut à tout moment déclarer reconnaître comme obligatoire de
plein droit et sans convention spéciale, à l'égard de toute autre Partie contractante
acceptant la même obligation, l'application de la procédure d'arbitrage décrite
dans l'Annexe relative à l'arbitrage. Une telle déclaration est notifiée par écrit au
Dépositaire qui en donne communication aux autres Parties contractantes.
Article 24 RELATION ENTRE LA CONVENTION ET SES PROTOCOLES
1. Nul Etat ou organisation d'intégration économique régionale ne peut devenir Partie
contractante à la présente Convention s'il ou elle ne devient en même temps partie à l'un
au moins de ses protocoles. Nul Etat ou organisation d'intégration économique régionale
ne peut devenir Partie contractante à un protocole s'il ou elle n'est pas, ou ne devient pas
en même temps, Partie contractante à la Convention.
2. Seules les Parties contractantes à un protocole peuvent prendre les décisions relatives à ce
protocole.
Annex 17
173
Article 25 SIGNATURE La présente Convention et le Protocole relatif à la coopération en matière de lutte contre les déversements d'hydrocarbures dans la région des Caraibes seront ouverts à Cartagena de Indias le 24 mars 1983, et à Bogotà du 25 mars 1983 au 23 mars 1984, à la signature des Etats invités en tant que participants à la Conférence de plénipotentiaires pour la protection et la mise en valeur du milieu marin dans la région des Caraïbes tenue à Cartagena de Indias, du 21 au 24 mars 1983. Ils seront également ouverts aux mêmes dates à la signature de toute organisation d'intégration économique régionale exerçant des compétences dans les domaines couverts par la Convention et ce protocole et dont au moins un des Etats membres appartient à la région des Caraïbes à condition que cette organisation régionale ait été invitée à la Conférence de plénipotentiaires. Article 26 RATIFICATION, ACCEPTATION ET APPROBATION 1. La présente Convention et ses protocoles seront soumis à la ratification, l'acceptation ou l'approbation des Etats. Les instrumctits de ratification, d'acceptation ou d'approbation seront déposés auprès du Gouvernement de la République de Colombie qui assumera les fonctions de dépositaire. 2. La présente Convention et ses protocoles seront également soumis à la ratification, l'acceptation ou l'approbation des organisations visées à l'article 25 et dont un Etat membre au moins est partie à la Convention. Dans leur instrument de ratification, d'acceptation ou d'approbation, ces organisations indiquent l'étendue de leur compétence dans les domaines couverts par la Convention et le protocole concerné. Ultérieurement, ces organisations informent le Dépositaire de toute modification substantielle de l'étendue de leur compétence. Article 27 ADHÉSION 1. La présente Convention et ses protocoles seront ouverts à l'adhésion des Etats et des organisations visés à l'article 25 le premier jour suivant la date à laquelle la Convention ou le protocole concerné ne sera plus ouvert à la signature. 2. Après l'entrée en vigueur de la présente Convention et de tout protocole, tout Etat ou toute organisation d'intégration économique régionale non visé à l'article 25 peut adhérer à la Convention et à tout protocole sous réserve de l'accord préalable des trois quarts des Parties contractantes à la Convention ou au protocole concerné et à condition que de telles organisations d'intégration économique régionale exercent des compétences dans les domaines couverts par la Convention et tout protocole concerné et qu'au moins un de leurs Etats membres appartienne à la région des Caraïbes et soit partie à la Convention et au protocole concerné. 3. Dans leurs instruments d'adhésion, les organisations visées aux paragraphes 1 et 2 indiquent l'étendue de leur compétence dans les domaines couverts par la présente Convention et tout protocole concerné. Ces organisations informent également le Dépositaire de toute modification substantielle de l'étendue de leur compétence. 4. Les instruments d'adhésion seront déposés auprès du Dépositaire.
Annex 17
174
Article 28 ENTRÉE EN VIGUEUR
1. La présente Convention et le Protocole relatif à la coopération en matière de lutte contre
les déversements d'hydrocarbures dans la région des Caraïbes entreront en vigueur le
trentième jour à compter de la date du dépôt du neuvième instrument de ratification,
d'acceptation ou d'approbation de ces instruments ou d'adhésion à ceux-ci par les Etats
visés à l'article 25.
2. Tout protocole additionnel à la présente Convention, sauf disposition contraire de ce
protocole, entrera en vigueur le trentième jour à compter de la date du dépôt du neuvième
instrument de ratification, d'acceptation ou d'approbation de ce protocole ou d'adhésion à
celui-ci.
3. Pour l'application des paragraphes 1 et 2, aucun instrument déposé par une organisation
visée à l'article 25 ne sera compté en sus de celui déposé par un Etat membre de cette
organisation.
4. Par la suite, la présente Convention et tout protocole entreront en vigueur, à l'égard de tout
Etat ou organisation visé à l'article 25 ou à l'article27, le trentième jour suivant la date du
dépôt de ses instruments de ratification, d'acceptation, d'approbation ou d'adhésion.
Article 29 DÉNONCIATION
1. A tout moment après l'expiration d'un délai de deux ans à compter de la date à laquelle la
présente Convention sera entrée en vigueur à son égard, toute Partie contractante pourra
dénoncer la Convention en donnant par écrit une notification au Dépositaire.
2. Sauf disposition contraire de l'un quelconque des protocoles à la présente Convention,
toute Partie contractante pourra, à tout moment après l'expiration d'un délai de deux ans à
compter de la date d'entrée en vigueur de ce protocole à son égard, dénoncer le protocole
en donnant par écrit une notification au Dépositaire.
3. La dénonciation prendra effet quatre-vingt-dix jours après la date à laquelle la notification
aura été reçue par le Dépositaire.
4. Une Partie contractante qui dénonce la présente Convention sera considérée comme ayant
également dénoncé tout protocole auquel elle était Partie contractante.
5. Une Partie contractante qui, à la suite de sa dénonciation d'un protocole, n'est plus Partie
contractante à aucun des protocoles à la présente Convention sera considérée comme ayant
également dénoncé la présente Convention.
Article 30 DÉPOSITAIRE
1. Le Dépositaire informe les signataires et les Parties contractantes, ainsi que l'Organisation:
a. De la signature de la présente Convention ou de ses protocoles et du dépôt des
instruments de ratification, d'acceptation, d'approbation ou d'adhésion;
b. De la date à laquelle la Convention ou tout protocole entrera en vigueur à l'égard
de chaque Partie contractante;
c. De la notification de toute dénonciation et de la date à laquelle elle prendra effet;
d. Des amendements adoptés en ce qui concerne la Convention ou tout protocole,
de leur acceptation par les Parties contractantes et de la date de leur entrée en
vigueur;
Annex 17
175
e. De toute question relative à de nouvelles annexes et aux amendements à toute annexe; f. Des notifications faites par les organisations d'intégration économique régionale portant sur l'étendue de leur compétence en ce qui concerne les domaines couverts par la présente Convention et tout protocole concerné et des modifications de l'étendue de leur compétence. 2. L'original de la présente Convention et de ses protocoles sera déposé auprès du Dépositaire, le Gouvernement de la République de Colombie, qui en adressera des copies certifiées conformes aux signataires, aux Parties contractantes et à l'Organisation. 3. Dès que la présente Convention ou que tout protocole sera entré en vigueur, le Dépositaire transmettra une copie certifiée conforme de l'instrument concerné au Secrétaire général de l'Organisation des Nations Unies, pour enregistrement et publication conformément à l'Article 102 de la Charte des Nations Unies. En foi de quoi les soussignés, dûment autorisés par leurs gouvernements respectifs, ont signé la présente Convention. Fait à Cartagena de Indias, le vingt-quatre mars mil neuf cent quatrevingt-trois, en un seul exemplaire en langues anglaise, espagnole et française, les trois textes faisant également foi. Annexe ARBITRAGE Article premier A moins que la convention visée à l'article 23 de la Convention n'en dispose autrement, la procédure d'arbitrage est conduite conformément aux dispositions des articles 2 à 10 de la présente annexe. Article 2 La partie requérante notifie à l'Organisation que les Parties sont convenues de soumettre le différend à l'arbitrage conformément au paragraphe 2 ou au paragraphe 3 de l'article 23 de la Convention. La notification indique l'objet de l'arbitrage et, notamment, les articles de la Convention ou du protocole dont l'interprétation ou l'application font l'objet du litige. L'Organisation communique les informations ainsi reçues à toutes les Parties contractantes àla Convention ou au protocole concerné.
Annex 17
176
Article 3
Le tribunal arbitrai est composé de trois membres. Chacune des parties au différend
nomme un arbitre; les deux arbitres ainsi nommés désignent d'un commun accord le
troisième arbitre, qui assume la présidence du tribunal. Ce dernier ne doit pas être
ressortissant de l'une des parties au différend, ni avoir sa résidence habituelle sur le
territoire de l'une de ces parties, ni se trouver au service de l'une d'elles, ni s'être déjà
occupé de l'affaire à aucun titre.
Article 4
1. Si, dans un délai de deux mois après la nomination du deuxième arbitre, le président du
tribunal arbitrai n'est pas désigné, le Secrétaire général de l'Organisation des Nations
Unies procède, à la requête de l'une des deux parties, à sa désignation dans un nouveau
délai de deux mois.
2. Si, dans un délai de deux mois après la réception de la requête, l'une des parties au
différend ne procède pas à la nomination d'un arbitre, l'autre partie peut saisir le Secrétaire
général de l'Organisation des Nations Unies qui désigne le président du tribunal arbitral
dans un nouveau délai de deux mois. Dès sa désignation, le président du tribunal arbitral
demande à la partie qui n'a pas nommé d'arbitre de le faire dans un délai de deux mois.
Passé ce délai, il saisit le Secrétaire général de l'Organisation des Nations Unies qui
procède à cette nomination dans un nouveau délai de deux mois.
Article 5
1. Le tribunal arbitral rend sa sentence conformément au droit international et conformément
aux dispositions de la présente Convention et du ou des protocoles concernés.
2. Tout tribunal arbitral constitué aux termes de la présente annexe établit ses propres règles
de procédure.
Article 6
1. Les décisions du tribunal arbitral, tant sur la procédure que sur le fond, sont prises àla
majorité des voix de ses membres.
2. Le tribunal peut prendre toutes mesures appropriées pour établir les faits. Il peut, à la
demande de l'une des parties, recommander les mesures conservatoires indispensables.
3. Les parties au différend fourniront toutes facilités nécessaires pour la conduite efficace de
la procédure.
4. L'absence ou le défaut d'une partie au différend ne fait pas obstacle à la procédure.
Article 7
Le tribunal peut connaître et décider des demandes reconventionnelles directement liées
àl'objet du différend.
Article 8
Annex 17
177
A moins que le tribunal d'arbitrage n'en décide autrement du fait des circonstances particulières de l'affaire, les dépenses du tribunal, y compris la rémunération de ses membres, sont prises en charge, à parts égales, par les parties au différend. Le tribunal tient un relevé de toutes ses dépenses et en fournit un état final aux parties. Article 9 Toute Partie contractante ayant, en ce qui concerne l'objet du différend, un intérêt d'ordre juridique susceptible d'être affecté par la décision peut intervenir dans la procédure, avec le consentement du tribunal. Article 10 1. Le tribunal prononce la sentence cinq mois à partir de la date à laquelle il est créé, àmoins qu'il n'estime nécessaire de prolonger ce délai pour une période qui ne devrait pas excéder cinq mois. 2. La sentence du tribunal arbitral est motivée. Elle est définitive et obligatoire pour les parties au différend. 3. Tout différend qui pourrait surgir entre les parties concernant l'interprétation ou l'exécution de la sentence peut être soumis par l'une des deux parties au tribunal arbitral qui l'a rendue ou, si ce dernier ne peut en être saisi, à un autre tribunal arbitral constitué à cet effet de la même manière que le premier.
Annex 17
178
PROTOCOL CONCERNING SPECIALLY PROTECTED AREAS AND WILDLIFE TO THE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT OF THE WIDER CARIBBEAN REGION Adopted at Kingston on 18 January 1990The Final Act of the Conference of Plenipotentiaries Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife in the Wider Caribbean RegionThe Contracting Parties to this Protocol,Being Parties to the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region, done at Cartagena de Indias, Colombia on 24 March 1983, Taking into account Article 10 of the Convention which requires the establishment ofspecially protected areas, Having regard to the special hydrographic, biotic and ecological characteristics of the Wider Caribbean Region, Conscious of the grave threat posed by ill-conceived development options to the integrity of the marine and coastal environment of the Wider Caribbean Region, Recognizing that protection and maintenance of the environment of the Wider Caribbean Region are essential to sustainable development within the region, Conscious of the overwhelming ecological, economic, aesthetic, scientific,cultural,nutritional and recreational value of rare or fragile ecosystems and native flora and fauna to the Wider Caribbean Region, Recognizing that the Wider Caribbean Region constitutes an interconnected group ofecosystems in which an environmental threat in one part represents a potential threat in other parts, Stressing the importance of establishing regional co-operation to protect and, as appropriate, to restore and improve the state of ecosystems, as well as threatened and endangered species and their habitats in the Wider Caribbean Region by, among other means, the establishment of protected areas in the marine areas and their associated ecosystems, Recognizing that the establishment and management of such protected areas, and the protection of threatened and endangered species will enhance the cultural heritage and values of the countries and territories in the Wider Caribbean Region, and bring
Annex 18
Annex 18: PROTOCOL CONCERNING SPECIALLY PROTECTED AREAS AND
WILDLIFE TO THE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION AND
DEVELOPMENT OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT OF THE WIDER
CARIBBEAN REGION (SPAW PROTOCOL)
[ENGLISH AND FRENCH VERSIONS]
(Available at: http://www.cep.unep.org/cartagena-convention)
179
increased economic and ecological benefits to them, Have agreed as follows: Article 1 DefinitionsFor the purpose of this Protocol: a)"Convention" means the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region (Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, March 1983);b) "Action Plan" means the Action Plan for the Caribbean Environment Programme (Montego Bay, April 1981);c) "Wider Caribbean Region" has the meaning given to the term "the Convention area" in Article 2 (1) of the Convention, and in addition, includes for the purposes of this Protocol:i)waters on the landward side of the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured and extending, in the case of water courses, up to the fresh water limit; and ii) such related terrestrial areas (including watersheds) as may be designated by the Party having sovereignty and jurisdiction over such areas:d) "Organization" means the body referred to in Article 2 (2) of the Convention;e) "Protected area" means the areas accorded protection pursuant to article 4 of this Protocol;f) "Endangered species" are species or sub-species of fauna and flora, or their populations, that are in danger of extinction throughout all or part of their range and whose survival is unlikely if the factors jeopardizing them continue to operate; g) "Threatened species" are species or sub-species of fauna and flora , or their populations:i) that are likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or part of their range if the factors causing numerical decline or habitat degradation continue to operate; orii) that are rare because they are usually localized within restricted geographical areas or habitats or are thinly scattered over a more extensive range and which are potentially or actually subject to decline and possible endangerment or extinction. h) "Protected species" are species or sub-species of fauna and flora, or their populations, accorded protection pursuant to Article 10 of this Protocol;
Annex 18
180
i) "Endemic species" are species or sub-species of fauna and flora, or their populations, whose distribution is restricted to a limited geographical area; j) "Annex I" means the annex to the Protocol containing the agreed list of species of marine and coastal flora that fall within the categories defined in Article 1 and that require the protection measures indicated in Article 11(1)(a). The annex may include terrestrial species as provided for in Article 1(c)(ii); k) "Annex II" means the annex to the Protocol containing the agreed list of species of marine and coastal fauna that fall within the category defined in Article 1 and that require the protection measures indicated in Article 11(1)(b). The annex may include terrestrial species as provided for in Article 1(c)(ii); and l) "Annex III" means the annex to the Protocol containing the agreed list of species of marine and coastal flora and fauna that may be utilized on a rational and sustainable basis and that require the protection measures indicated in Article 11(1)(c). The Annex may include terrestrial species as provided for in Article 1(c)(ii). Article 2 General Provisions 1.This Protocol shall apply to the Wider Caribbean Region as defined in Article 1(c). 2.The provisions of the Convention relating to its Protocols shall apply to this Protocol,including in particular, paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 3 of the Convention.3.The present Protocol shall not apply to warships or other ships owned or operated by a State while engaged in government non-commercial service. Nevertheless, each Party shall ensure through the adoption of appropriate measures that do not hinder the operation or operational capacities of vessels they own or operate, that they adhere to the terms of the present Protocol in so far as is reasonable and feasible.Article 3 General Obligations1.Each Party to this Protocol shall, in accordance with its laws and regulations and the terms of the Protocol, take the necessary measures to protect, preserve and manage in a sustainable way, within areas of the Wider Caribbean Region in which it exercises sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction:a) areas that require protection to safeguard their special value; andb) threatened or endangered species of flora and fauna.
Annex 18
181
Each Party shall regulate and, where necessary, prohibit activities having adverse effects on these areas and species. Each Party shall endeavour to co-operate in the enforcement of these measures, without prejudice to the sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction of other Parties. Any measures taken by such Party to enforce or to attempt to enforce the measures agreed pursuant to this Protocol shall be limited to those within the competence of such Party and shall be in accordance with international law. Each Party, to the extent possible, consistent with each Party's legal system, shall manage species of fauna and flora with the objective of preventing species from becoming endangered or threatened.Article 4 Establishment of Protected Areas1. Each Party shall, when necessary, establish protected areas in areas over which it exercises sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction, with a view to sustaining the natural resources of the Wider Caribbean Region, and encouraging ecologically sound and appropriate use, understanding and enjoyment of these areas, in accordance with the objectives and characteristics of each of them. 2. Such areas shall be established in order to conserve, maintain and restore, in particular: a)representative types of coastal and marine ecosystems of adequate size to ensure their long-term viability and to maintain biological and genetic diversity;b)habitats and their associated ecosystems critical to the survival and recovery of endangered, threatened or endemic species of flora or fauna; c)the productivity of ecosystems and natural resources that provide economic or social benefits and upon which the welfare of local inhabitants is dependent; andd)areas of special biological, ecological, educational, scientific, historic, cultural, recreational, archaeological, aesthetic, or economic value, including in particular, areas whose ecological and biological processes are essential to the functioning of the Wider Caribbean ecosystems. Article 5 PROTECTION MEASURES1. Each Party taking into account the characteristics of each protected area over which it exercises sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction, shall, in conformity with its national laws and regulations and with international law, progressively take such measures as are necessary and practicable to achieve the objectives for which the protected area was established.2. Such measures should include, as appropriate:
Annex 18
182
a)the regulation or prohibition of the dumping or discharge of wastes and other substances that may endanger protected areas; b)the regulation or prohibition of coastal disposal or discharges causing pollution, emanating from coastal establishments and developments, outfall structures or any other sources within their territories; c)the regulation of the passage of ships, of any stopping or anchoring, and of other ship activities, that would have significant adverse environmental effects on the protected area, without prejudice to the rights of innocent passage, transit passage, archipelagic sea lanes passage and freedom of navigation, in accordance with international law;d)the regulation or prohibition of fishing, hunting, taking or harvesting of endangered or threatened species of fauna and flora and their parts or products;e)the prohibition of activities that result in the destruction of endangered or threatened species of fauna or flora and their parts and products, and the regulation of any other activity likely to harm or disturb such species, their habitats or associated ecosystems; f)the regulation or prohibition of the introduction of non-indigenous species;g)the regulation or prohibition of any activity involving the exploration or exploitation of the sea-bed or its subsoil or a modification of the sea-bed profile; h)the regulation or prohibition of any activity involving a modification of the profile of the soil that could affect watersheds, denudation and other forms of degradation of watersheds, or the exploration or exploitation of the subsoil of the land part of a marine protected area;i)the regulation of any archaeological activity and of the removal or damage of any object which may be considered as an archaeological object; j)the regulation or prohibition of trade in, and import and export of threatened or endangered species of fauna or their parts, products, or eggs, and of threatened or endangered species of flora or their parts or products, and archaeological objects that originate in protected areas; k)the regulation or prohibition of industrial activities and of other activities which are not compatible with the uses that have been envisaged for the area by national measures and/or environmental impact assessments pursuant to Article 13; l)the regulation of tourist and recreational activities that might endanger the ecosystems of protected areas or the survival of threatened or endangered species of flora and fauna; andm)any other measure aimed at conserving, protecting or restoring natural processes, ecosystems or populations for which the protected areas were established.
Annex 18
183
Article 6 PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT REGIME FOR PROTECTED AREAS1.In order to maximize the benefits from protected areas and to ensure the effective implementation of the measures set out in Article 5, each Party shall adopt and implement planning, management and enforcement measures for protected areas over which it exercises sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction. In this regard, each Party shall take into account the guidelines and criteria formulated by the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee as provided for in Article 21 and which have been adopted by meetings of the Parties.2.Such measures should include: a)the formulation and adoption of appropriate management guidelines for protected areas;b)the development and adoption of a management plan that specifies the legal and institutional framework and the management and protection measures applicable to an area or areas; c)the conduct of scientific research on, and monitoring of, user impacts, ecological processes, habitats, species and populations; and the undertaking of activities aimed at improved management; d)the development of public awareness and education programmes for users, decision-makers and the public to enhance their appreciation and understanding of protected areas and the objectives for which they were established;e)the active involvement of local communities, as appropriate, in the planning and management of protected areas, including assistance to, and training of local inhabitants who may be affected by the establishment of protected areas; f)the adoption of mechanisms for financing the development and effective management of protected areas and facilitating programmes of mutual assistance;g)contingency plans for responding to incidents that could cause or threaten to cause damage to protected areas including their resources; h)procedures to permit, regulate or otherwise authorize activities compatible with the objectives for which the protected areas were established; and i)the development of qualified managers, and technical personnel, as well as appropriate infrastructure. Article 7 Cooperation Programme for, and Listing of, Protected Areas1. The Parties shall establish co-operation programmes within the framework of the Convention and the Action Plan and in accordance with their sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction to further the objectives of the Protocol.2. A co-operation programme will be established to support the listing of protected areas. It will assist with the selection, establishment, planning, management and conservation of protected areas, and shall create a network of protected areas. To this end, the Parties shall establish a list of protected areas. The Parties shall:
Annex 18
184
a)recognize the particular importance of listed areas to the Wider Caribbean Region; b)accord priority to listed areas for scientific and technical research pursuant to Article 17; c)accord priority to listed areas for mutual assistance pursuant to Article 18; and d)not authorize or undertake activities that would undermine the purposes for which a listed area was created.3. The procedures for the establishment of the list of protected areas are as follows: a)The Party that exercises sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction over a protected area shall nominate it to be included in the list of protected areas. Such nominations will be made in accordance with the guideline and criteria concerning the identification, selection, establishment, management, protection and any other matter adopted by the Parties pursuant to Article 21. Each Party making a nomination shall provide the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee through the Organization with the necessary supporting documentation, including in particular, the information noted in Article 19 (2); andb)After the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee evaluates the nomination and supporting documentation, it will advise the Organization as to whether the nomination fulfills the common guidelines and criteria established pursuant to Article 21. If these guidelines and criteria have been met, the Organization will advise the Meeting of Contracting Parties who will include the nomination in the List of Protected Areas. Article 8 Establishment of Buffer ZonesEach Party to this Protocol may, as necessary, strengthen the protection of a protected area by establishing, within areas in which it exercises sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction, one or more buffer zones in which activities are less restricted than in the protected area while remaining compatible with achieving the purposes of the protected area.Article 9 Protected Areas and Buffer Zones Contiguous to International Boundaries1.If a Party intends to establish a protected area or a buffer zone contiguous to the frontier or to the limits of the zone of national jurisdiction of another Party, the two Parties shall consult each other with a view to reaching agreement on the measures to be taken and shall, inter alia, examine the possibility of the establishment by the other Party of a corresponding contiguous protected area or buffer zone or the adoption by it of any other appropriate measures including co-operative management programmes. 2.If a Party intends to establish a protected area or a buffer zone contiguous to the frontier or to the limits of the zone of national jurisdiction of a State that is not a Party to this Protocol, the
Annex 18
185
Party shall endeavour to work together with the competent authorities of that State with a view to holding the consultations referred to in paragraph 1.3.Whenever it becomes known to a Party that a non-Party intends to establish a protected area or a buffer zone contiguous to the frontier or to the limits of the zone of national jurisdiction of a Party to this Protocol the latter shall endeavour to work together with that State with a view to holding the consultations referred to in paragraph 1.4.If contiguous protected areas and/or buffer zones are established by one Party and by a State that is not a Party to this Protocol, the former should attempt, where possible, to achieve conformity with the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols.Article 10 National Measures for the Protection of Wild Flora and Fauna1.Each Party shall identify endangered or threatened species of flora and fauna within areas over which it exercises sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction, and accord protected status to such species. Each Party shall regulate and prohibit according to its laws and regulations, where appropriate, activities having adverse effects on such species or their habitats and ecosystems, and carry out species recovery, management, planning and other measures to effect the survival of such species. Each Party, in keeping with its legal system, shall also take appropriate actions to prevent species from becoming endangered or threatened.2.With respect to protected species of flora and their parts and products, each Party, in conformity with its laws and regulations, shall regulate, and where appropriate, prohibit all forms of destruction and disturbance, including the picking, collecting, cutting, uprooting or possession of, or commercial trade in, such species. 3.With respect to protected species of fauna, each Party, in conformity with its laws and regulations, shall regulate, and where appropriate, prohibit:a)the taking, possession or killing (including, to the extent possible, the incidental taking, possession or killing) or commercial trade in such species or their parts or products; andb)to the extent possible, the disturbance of wild fauna, particularly during the period of breeding, incubation, estivation or migration, as well as other periods of biological stress.Each Party shall formulate and adopt policies and plans for the management of captive breeding of protected fauna and propagation of protected flora. The Parties shall, in addition to the measures specified in paragraph 3, co-ordinate their efforts, through bilateral or multilateral actions, including if necessary, any treaties for the protection and recovery of migratory species whose range extends into areas under their sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction.The Parties shall endeavour to consult with range States that are not Parties to this Protocol, with a view to co-ordinating their efforts to manage and protect endangered or threatened migratory species.
Annex 18
186
The Parties shall make provisions, where possible, for the repatriation of protected species exported illegally. Efforts should be made by Parties to reintroduce such species to the wild, or if unsuccessful, make provision for their use in scientific studies or for public education purposes.The measures which Parties take under this Article are subject to their obligations under Article 11 and shall in no way derogate from such obligations. Article 11 CO-OPERATIVE MEASURES FOR THE PROTECTION OF WILD FLORA AND FAUNA1.The Parties shall adopt co-operative measures to ensure the protection and recovery of endangered and threatened species of flora and fauna listed in Annexes I, II and III of the present Protocol. a)The Parties shall adopt all appropriate measures to ensure the protection and recovery of species of flora listed in Annex I. For this purpose, each Party shall prohibit all forms of destruction or disturbance, including the picking, collecting, cutting, uprooting or possession of, or commercial trade in such species, their seeds, parts or products. They shall regulate activities, to the extent possible, that could have harmful effects on the habitats of the species.b)Each Party shall ensure total protection and recovery to the species of fauna listed in Annex II by prohibiting:i)the taking, possession or killing (including, to the extent possible, the incidental taking, possession or killing) or commercial trade in such species, their eggs, parts or products;ii)to the extent possible, the disturbance of such species, particularly during periods of breeding, incubation, estivation or migration, as well as other periods of biological stress.c)Each Party shall adopt appropriate measures to ensure the protection and recovery of the species of flora and fauna listed in Annex III and may regulate the use of such species in order to ensure and maintain their populations at the highest possible levels. With regard to the species listed in Annex III, each Party shall, in co-operation with other Parties, formulate, adopt and implement plans for the management and use of such species, including:i) for species of fauna: a)the prohibition of all non-selective means of capture, killing, hunting and fishing and of all actions likely to cause local disappearance of a species or serious disturbance of its tranquility;
Annex 18
187
b)the institution of closed hunting and fishing seasons and of other measures for maintaining their population; c)the regulation of the taking, possession, transport or sale of living or dead species, their eggs, parts or products;iii)For species of flora, including their parts or products, the regulation of their collection, harvest and commercial trade. 2.Each Party may adopt exemptions to the prohibitions prescribed for the protection and recovery of the species listed in Annexes I and II for scientific, educational or management purposes necessary to ensure the survival of the species or to prevent significant damage to forests or crops. Such exemptions shall not jeopardize the species and shall be reported to the Organization in order for the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee to assess the pertinence of the exemptions granted. 3.The Parties also shall: a)accord priority to species contained in the annexes for scientific and technical research pursuant to Article 17; b)accord priority to species contained in the annexes for mutual assistance pursuant to Article 18.4.The procedures to amend the annexes shall be as follows: a)any Party may nominate an endangered or threatened species of flora or fauna for inclusion in or deletion from these annexes, and shall submit to the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee, through the Organization, supporting documentation, including, in particular, the information noted in Article 19. Such nomination will be made in accordance with the guidelines and criteria adopted by the Parties pursuant to Article 21; b)the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee shall review and evaluate the nominations and supporting documentation and shall report its views to the meetings of Parties held pursuant to Article 23; c)the Parties shall review the nominations, supporting documentation and the reports of the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee. A species shall be listed in the annexes by consensus, if possible, and if not, by a three-quarters majority vote of the Parties present and voting, taking fully into account the advice of the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee that the nomination and supporting documentation meet the common guidelines and criteria established pursuant to Article 21;d)a Party may, in the exercise of its sovereignty or sovereign rights, enter a reservation to the listing of a particular species in an annex by notifying the Depositary in writing within 90 days of the vote of the Parties. The Depositary shall, without delay, notify all Parties of reservations received pursuant to this paragraph;
Annex 18
188
e) a listing in the corresponding annex shall become effective 90 days after the vote for all
Parties, except those which made a reservation in accordance with paragraph (d) of this
Article; and
f) a Party may at any time substitute an acceptance for a previous reservation to a listing by
notifying the Depositary, in writing. The acceptance shall thereupon enter into force for
that Party.
5. The Parties shall establish co-operation programmes within the framework of the Convention
and the Action Plan to assist with the management and conservation of protected species, and
shall develop and implement regional recovery programmes for protected species in the
Wider Caribbean Region, taking fully into account other existing regional conservation
measures relevant to the management of those species. The Organization shall assist in the
establishment and implementation of these regional recovery programmes.
Article 12 Introduction of Non-Indigenous or Genetically Altered Species
Each Party shall take all appropriate measures to regulate or prohibit intentional or accidental
introduction of non-indigenous or genetically altered species to the wild that may cause harmful
impacts to the natural flora, fauna or other features of the Wider Caribbean Region.
Article 13 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
1. In the planning process leading to decisions about industrial and other projects and activities
that would have a negative environmental impact and significantly affect areas or species that
have been afforded special protection under this Protocol, each Party shall evaluate and take
into consideration the possible direct and indirect impacts, including cumulative impacts, of
the projects and activities being contemplated.
2. The Organization and the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee shall, to the extent
possible, provide guidance and assistance, upon request, to the Party making these
assessments.
Article 14 EXEMPTIONS FOR TRADITIONAL ACTIVITIES
1. Each Party shall, in formulating management and protective measures, take into account and
provide exemptions, as necessary, to meet traditional subsistence and cultural needs of its
local populations. To the fullest extent possible, no exemption which is allowed for this
reason shall:
Annex 18
189
a)endanger the maintenance or areas protected under the terms of this Protocol, including the ecological processes contributing to the maintenance of those protected areas; orb)cause either the extinction of, or a substantial risk to, or substantial reduction in the number of, individuals making up the populations of species of fauna and flora within the protected areas, or any ecologically inter-connected species or population, particularly migratory species and threatened, endangered or endemic species. Parties which allow exemptions with regard to protective measures shall inform the Organization accordingly. Article 15 Changes in ihe Status if Protected Areas ir Protected Species1.Changes in the delimitation or legal status of an area, or part thereof, or of a protected species, may only take place for significant reasons, bearing in mind the need to safeguard the environment and in accordance with the provisions of this Protocol and after notification to the Organization.2.The status of areas and species should be periodically reviewed and evaluated by the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee on the basis of information provided by Parties through the Organization. Areas and species may be removed from the area listing or Protocol annexes by the same procedure by which they were incorporated.Article 16 Publicity, Information, Public Awareness and Education1.Each Party shall give appropriate publicity to the establishment of protected areas, in particular to their boundaries, buffer zones, and applicable regulations, and to the designation of protected species, in particular to their critical habitats and applicable regulations.2.In order to raise public awareness, each Party shall endeavour to inform the public as widely as possible, of the significance and value of the protected areas and species and of the scientific knowledge and other benefits which may be gained from them or any changes therein. Such information should have an appropriate place in education programmes concerning the environment and history. Each Party should also endeavour to promote the participation of its public and its conservation organizations in measures that are necessary for the protection of the areas and species concerned. Article 17 Scientific, Technical and Management Research1.Each Party shall encourage and develop scientific, technical and management-oriented research on protected areas, including, in particular, their ecological processes and
Annex 18
190
archaeological, historical and cultural heritage, as well as on threatened or endangered
species of fauna and flora and their habitats.
2. Each Party may consult with other Parties and with relevant regional and international
organizations with a view to identifying, planning and undertaking scientific and technical
research and monitoring programmes necessary to characterize and monitor protected areas
and species and to assess the effectiveness of measures taken to implement management and
recovery plans.
3. The Parties shall exchange, directly or through the Organization, scientific and technical
information concerning current and planned research and monitoring programmes and the
results thereof. They shall, to the fullest extent possible, co- ordinate their research and
monitoring programmes, and endeavour to standardize procedures for collecting, reporting,
archiving and analyzing relevant scientific and technical information.
4. The Parties shall, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 1 above, compile comprehensive
inventories of:
a) areas over which they exercise sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction that
contain rare or fragile ecosystems; that are reservoirs of biological or genetic diversity;
that are of ecological value in maintaining economically important resources; that are
important for threatened, endangered or migratory species; that are of value for aesthetic,
recreational, tourist or archaeological reasons; and
b) species of fauna or flora that may qualify for listing as threatened or endangered
according to the criteria established under this Protocol.
Article 18 Mutual Assistance
1. The Parties shall co-operate, directly or with the assistance of the Organization or other
relevant international organizations, in formulating, drafting, financing and implementing
programmes of assistance to those Parties that express a need for it in the selection,
establishment and management of protected areas and species.
2. These programmes should include public environmental education, the training of scientific,
technical and management personnel, scientific research, and the acquisition, utilization,
design and development of appropriate equipment on advantageous terms to be agreed
among the Parties concerned.
Article 19 Notifications and Reports to the Organization
1. Each Party shall report periodically to the Organization on:
Annex 18
191
a)the status of existing and newly established protected areas, buffer zones and protected species in areas over which they exercise sovereignty or sovereign rights or jurisdiction; andb)any changes in the delimitation or legal status of protected areas, buffer zones and protected species in areas over which they exercise sovereignty, or sovereign rights or jurisdiction.2.The reports relevant to the protected areas and buffer zones should include information on: a)name of the area or zone; b)biogeography of the area or zone (boundaries, physical features, climate, flora and fauna);c)legal status with reference to relevant national legislation or regulation;d)date and history of establishment; e)protected area management plans; f)relevance to cultural heritage; g)facilities for research and visitors; and h)threats to the area or zone, especially threats which originate outside the jurisdiction of the Party.3.The reports relevant to the protected species should include, to the extent possible, information on: a)scientific and common names of the species; b)estimated populations of species and their geographic ranges;c)status of legal protection, with reference to relevant national legislation or regulation;d)ecological interactions with other species and specific habitat requirements; e)management and recovery plans for endangered and threatened species;f)research programmes and available scientific and technical publications relevant to the species; and g)threats to the protected species, their habitats and their associated ecosystems, especially threats which originate outside the jurisdiction of the Party. 4.The reports provided to the Organization by the Parties will be used for the purposes outlined in Articles 20 and 22.Article 20 Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee1.A Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee is hereby established. 2.Each Party shall appoint a scientific expert appropriately qualified in the field covered by the Protocol as its representative on the Committee, who may be accompanied by other experts
Annex 18
192
and advisors appointed by that Party. The Committee may also seek information from scientifically and technically qualified experts and organizations.3.The Committee shall be responsible for providing advice to the Parties through the Organization on the following scientific and technical matters relating to the Protocol: a)the listing of protected areas in the manner provided for in Article 7;b)the listing of protected species in the manner provided for in Article 11;c)reports on the management and protection of protected areas and species and their habitats; d)proposals for technical assistance for training, research, education and management (including species recovery plans);e)environmental impact assessment pursuant to Article 13; f)the formulation of common guidelines and criteria pursuant to Article 21; andg)any other matters relating to the implementation of the Protocol, including those matters referred to it by the meetings of the Parties. 4.The Committee shall adopt its own Rules of Procedures. Article 21 Establishment of Common Guidelines and Criteria1.The Parties shall at their first meeting, or as soon as possible thereafter, evaluate and adopt common guidelines and criteria formulated by the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee dealing in particular with: a)the identification and selection of protected areas and protected species;b)the establishment of protected areas; c)the management of protected areas and protected species including migratory species; andd)the provision of information on protected areas and protected species, including migratory species. In implementing this Protocol, the Parties shall take into account these common guidelines and criteria, without prejudicing the right of a Party to adopt more stringent guidelines and criteria.Article 22 Institutional Arrangements1.Each Party shall designate a Focal Point to serve as liaison with the Organization on the technical aspects of the implementation of this Protocol. 2.The Parties designate the Organization to carry out the following Secretariat functions: a)convening and servicing the meetings of the Parties; b)assisting in raising funds as provided for in Article 24;
Annex 18
193
c)assisting the Parties and the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee, in co-operation with the competent international, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations in:-facilitating programmes of technical and scientific research as provided for in Article 17;-facilitating the exchange of scientific and technical information among the Parties as provided for in Article 16;-the formulation of recommendations containing common guidelines and criteria pursuant to Article 21; -the preparation, when so requested, of management plans for protected areas and protected species pursuant to Article 6 and 10 respectively;-the development of co-operative programmes pursuant to Articles 7 and 11;-the preparation, when so requested, of environmental impact assessments pursuant to Article 13; -the preparation of educational materials designed for various groups identified by the Parties;-the repatriation of illegally exported wild flora and fauna and their parts or products; d)preparing common formats to be used by the Parties as the basis for notifications and reports to the Organization, as provided in Article 19;e)maintaining and updating databases of protected areas and protected species containinginformation pursuant to Articles 7 and 11, as well as issuing periodically updated directories of protected areas and protected species;f)preparing directories, reports and technical studies which may be required for the implementation of this Protocol; g)co-operating and co-ordinating with regional and international organizations concerned with the protection of areas and species; andh)carrying out any other function assigned by the Parties to the Organization.Article 23 Meetings of ohe Parties1.The ordinary meetings of the Parties shall be held in conjunction with the ordinary meetings of the Parties to the Convention held pursuant to Article 16 of the Convention. The Parties may also hold extraordinary meetings in conformity with Article 16 of the Convention. The meetings will be governed by the Rules of Procedure adopted pursuant to Article 20 of the Convention.2.It shall be the function of the meetings of the Parties to this Protocol:a)to keep under review and direct the implementation of this Protocol; b)to approve the expenditure of funds referred to in Article 24;
Annex 18
194
c) to oversee and provide policy guidance to the Organization;
d) to consider the efficacy of the measures adopted for the management and protection of
areas and species, and to examine the need for other measures, in particular in the form of
annexes, as well as amendments to this Protocol or to its annexes;
e) to monitor and promote the establishment and development of the network of protected
areas and recovery plans for protected species provided for in Articles 7 and 11;
f) to adopt and revise, as needed, the guidelines and criteria provided for in Article 21;
g) to analyze the advice and recommendations of the Scientific and Technical Advisory
Committee pursuant to Article 20;
h) to analyze reports transmitted by the Parties to the Organization under Article 22 of the
Convention and Article 19 of this Protocol, as well as any other information which the
Parties may transmit to the Organization or to the meeting of the Parties; and
i) to conduct such other business as appropriate.
Article 24 Funding
In addition to the funds provided by the Parties in accordance with paragraph 2, Article 20 of the
Convention, the Parties may direct the Organization, to seek additional funds. These may include
voluntary contributions for purposes connected with the Protocol from Parties, other
governments, government agencies, non- governmental, international, regional and private sector
organizations and individuals.
Article 25 Relationship to Other Conventions Dealing With The Special Protection of
Wildlife
Nothing in this Protocol shall be interpreted in a way that may affect the rights and obligations of
Parties under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES) and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals
(CMS).
Article 26 Transitional Clause
1. The initial version of the annexes, which constitutes an integral part of the Protocol, shall
be adopted by consensus at a Conference of Plenipotentiaries of the Contracting Parties
to the Convention.
Annex 18
195
Article 27 Entry Into Force1.The Protocol and its annexes, once adopted by the Contracting Parties to the Convention, will enter into force in conformity with the procedure established in paragraph 2 of Article 28 of the Convention.2.The Protocol shall not enter into force until the initial annexes have been adopted in accordance with Article 26. Article 28 SignatureThis Protocol shall be open for signature at Kingston, from 18 January 1990 to 31 January 1990 and at Bogotá from 1February 1990 to 17 January 1991 by any party to the Convention.IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorized by their respective governments, have signed this Protocol. Done at Kingston, on this eighteenth day of January one thousand nine hundred and ninety in a single copy in the English, French and Spanish languages, the three texts being equally authentic.
Annex 18
196
PROTOCOLE RELATIF AUX ZONES ET A LA VIE SAUVAGE SPECIALEMENT PROTEGEES A LA CONVENTION POUR LA PROTECTION ET LA MISE EN VALEUR DU MILIEU MARIN DANS LA REGION DES CARAIBESLes Parties contractantes au présent Protocole, Etant Parties á la Convention pour la protection et la mise en valeur du milieu marin dans la région des Caraïbes, adoptée á Carthagène, Colombie, le 24 mars 1983, Tenant compte de l'Article 10 de ladite Convention qui préconise la création de zones spécialement protégées, Considérante les caractéristiques hydrographiques, biologiques et écologiques particulières á la région des Caraïbes, Conscientes de la menace grave constituée par des choix mal conçus en matière de développement pour l'intégrité du milieu marin et côtier de la région des Caraïbes, Reconnaissant que la protection et la conservation du milieu marin de la région des Caraïbes sont essentielles á un développement durable dans la région, Conscientes de l'immense valeur écologique, économique, esthétique, scientifique, culturelle, nutritionnelle et récréative des écosystèmes rares et fragiles et de la faune et de la flore indigène de la région des Caraïbes, Reconnaissant que la région des Caraïbes constitue un groupe d'écosystèmes interdépendants pour lesquels une menace sur l'environnement dans une partie représente une menace potentielle pour les autres, Soulignant la nécessité de mettre en place une coopération régionale pour protéger et, si cela s'avère nécessaire, rétablir et améliorer l'état des écosystèmes ainsi que des espèces menacées ou en voie d'extinction et de leur habitat dans la région des Caraïbes, en établissant, entre autres, des zones protégées dans les zones marines et dans leurs écosystèmes associés, Reconnaissant que la création et la gestion de ces zones protégées ainsi que la protection des espèces menacées ou en voie d'extinction renforceront l'héritage et les valeurs culturelles des pays et territoires de la zone des Caraïbes, et leur apporteront de plus grands bénéfices économiques et écologiques, Sont convenues de ce qui suit:
Annex 18
197
Article Premier DéfinitionsAux fins du présent Protocole: a) On entend par "Convention" la Convention pour la protection et la mise en valeur du milieu marin dans la région des Caraïbes (Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, mars 1983); b) On entend par "Plan d'action" le Plan d'action du Programme pour l'environnement des Caraïbes (Montego Bay, avril 1981); c) "La région des Caraïbes" a la même définition que la "zone d'application de la Convention" précisée á l'Article 2(1) de la Convention. De plus, aux fins de l'application de ce Protocole, elle comprend: i) les eaux qui sont situées en-deçá de la ligne de base á partir de laquelle est mesurée la largeur de la mer territoriale et qui s'étendent, dans le cas des cours d'eaux, jusqu'à la limite des eaux douces; et ii) les zones terrestres associées, (y compris les bassins versants) désignées par chacune des Parties ayant la souveraineté et la juridiction sur ces zones;d) On entend par "Organisation" l'institution visée á l'Article 2(2) de la Convention; e) On entend par "zones protégées" les zones auxquelles on accorde une protection conformément á l'Article 4 du présent protocole; f) On entend par "espèces en voie d'extinction" les espèces ou les sous-espèces animales et végétales, ou leurs populations, susceptibles d'être en voie d'extinction dans toute ou partie de leur aire de répartition et dont la survie est peu probable si les menaces persistent; g) On entend par "espèces menacées", les espèces et sous-espèces animales et végétales, ou leurs populations: i) Qui risquent de disparaître dans un avenir prévisible, dans toute ou partie de leur aire de répartition, et dont la survie est peu probable si les facteurs de déclin numérique ou de dégradation de l'habitat persistent; ou ii) qui sont rares parce qu'elles se trouvent en général dans les zones géographiques ou habitats réduits ou sont éparpillées sur une aire de répartition plus étendue, ce qui réduit ou risque d'en réduire le nombre et peut même les mettre en péril, voire entraîner leur extinction. h) On entend par "espèces protégées", les espèces ou sous espèces animales et végétales, ou leurs populations auxquelles on accorde une protection conformément á l'Article 10 du présent protocole;
Annex 18
198
i) On entend par "espèces endémiques", les espèces ou les sous-espèces animales et végétales
ou leurs populations dont l'aire de répartition est limitée á une zone géographique
particulière;
j) L'Annexe I" s'entend de l'annexe au Protocole comportant la liste approuvée des espèces
végétales, marines et côtières, qui entrent dans les catégories visées á l'Article premier et
doivent bénéficier des mesures de protection prévues á l'Article 11 1. (a). On peut inclure
dans cette Annexe des espèces terrestres, tel que prévu á l'Article 1 (c) (ii);
k) L'Annexe II" s'entend de l'annexe au Protocole comportant la liste approuvée des espèces
animales marines et côtières, qui entrent dans la catégorie visée á l'Article 1 et doivent
bénéficier des mesures de protection prévues á l'Article 11 1. (b). On peut inclure dans cette
Annexe des espèces terrestres, tel que prévu á l'Article 1 (c) (ii).
l) L'Annexe III" s'entend de l'annexe au Protocole comportant la liste approuvée des espèces
végétales et animales, marines et côtières, qui peuvent faire l'objet d'une exploitation
rationnelle et durable et doivent bénéficier des mesures de protection prévues dans l'Article
11 1. (c). On peut inclure dans cette Annexe des espèces terrestres, tel que prévu á l'Article 1
(c) (ii).
Article 2 Dispositions générales
1. Le présent Protocole s'applique á la région des Caraïbes selon les modalités définies á
l'Article 1 (c).
2. Les dispositions de la Convention concernant ses Protocoles s'appliquent au présent
Protocole et, en particulier, aux paragraphes 2 et 3 de l'Article 3 de la Convention.
3. Le présent Protocole ne s'applique pas aux navires de guerre, ni aux autres navires qui sont la
propriété d'un Etat ou qui sont exploités par lui á des fins uniquement non commerciales au
service dudit Etat. Toutefois, chaque Partie veille, par l'adoption de mesures appropriées
n'entravant pas l'exploitation des navires qui sont sa propriété ou qui sont exploités par elle, á
ce qu'ils se conforment, dans la mesure á cela est raisonnable et possible, aux dispositions du
présent Protocole.
Article 3 Obligations générales
1. Chaque Partie au présent Protocole, conformément á sa législation et réglementation et aux
termes du Protocole, prend les mesures nécessaires pour protéger, préserver et gérer de
manière durable, dans les zones de la région des Caraïbes dans laquelle s'exerce sa
souveraineté, ses droits souverains ou sa juridiction:
Annex 18
199
a) les zones qui ont besoin d'une protection pour préserver leur valeur particulière; et b) les espèces végétales et animales menacées ou en voie d'extinction. 2. Chaque Partie réglemente, et, au besoin, interdit les activités nuisibles á ces zones et espèces. Chaque Partie coopérera dans la mesure du possible á l'application de ces mesures, sans qu'il soit porté atteinte á la souveraineté, aux droits souverains ou á la juridiction des autres Parties. Toute mesure prise par une Partie pour appliquer ou chercher á appliquer les mesures convenues conformément au présent Protocole doit relever de la compétence de ladite Partie et être conforme au droit international. 3. Dans la mesure du possible, chaque Partie gère, conformément á son système juridique, les espèces animales et végétales dans le but de les empêcher de devenir des espèces menacées ou en voie d'extinction. Article 4 Création de zones protégées1. Chaque Partie crée, selon les besoins, des zones protégées dans les zones placées sous sa souveraineté, ses droits souverains ou sa juridiction, dans le but de préserver les ressources naturelles de la région des Caraïbes et d'encourager une approche écologiquement saine et appropriée pour l'utilisation, la connaissance et la jouissance de ces zones, conformément á leurs caractéristiques particulières. 2. De telles zones sont créées afin de préserver, de maintenir ou de restaurer, en particulier: a) des types d'écosystèmes côtiers et marins représentatifs, de taille suffisante, pour assurer leur viabilité á long terme et maintenir leur diversité biologique et génétique; b) l'habitat et son écosystème associé nécessaire á la survie et á la restauration des espèces animales et végétales en danger, menacées ou endémiques; c) la productivité des écosystèmes et des ressources naturelles qui fournissent des avantages économiques ou sociaux et dont dépend le bien-être de la population locale; et d) les zones présentant un intérêt biologique, écologique, éducatif, scientifique, historique, culturel, récréatif, archéologique, esthétique ou économique, y compris en particulier, les zones dont les processus écologiques et biologiques sont indispensables au fonctionnement des écosystèmes de la région des Caraïbes.
Annex 18
200
Article 5 Mesures de protection
1. Chaque Partie, tenant compte des caractéristiques de chaque zone protégée placée sous sa
souveraineté, ses droits souverains ou sa juridiction, prend progressivement, en conformité
avec sa législation et réglementation nationale et le droit international, les mesures
nécessaires et pratiques pour atteindre les objectifs pour lesquels ont été créées les zones
protégées.
2. Ces mesures devraient comprendre, selon les cas:
a) la réglementation ou l'interdiction du déversement ou de la décharge de déchets ou
d'autres substances susceptibles de porter atteinte aux zones protégées;
b) la réglementation ou l'interdiction de tout déversement sur les côtes ou de la décharge de
produits polluants émanant des établissements côtiers et da–ás au développement côtier,
des installations de décharge, ou de toute autre source située sur leur territoire.
c) la réglementation du passage des navires, de tout arrêt ou mouillage, et de toutes autres
activités des navires susceptibles de nuire sérieusement á l'environnement des zones
protégées, á condition que cette réglementation soit compatible avec le droit de passage
inoffensif, le droit de transit, le droit de passage archipélagique et le principe de la liberté
de navigation consacrés par le droit international;
d) la réglementation ou l'interdiction de la pêche, de la capture d'espèces animales, de la
récolte d'espèces végétales et de leurs parties et produits, dès lors qu'il s'agit d'espèces en
voie d'extinction ou menacées;
e) l'interdiction de toute activité de nature á détruire la flore et la faune menacées ou en voie
d'extinction, de leurs parties et produits et la réglementation de toute autre activité
susceptible de nuire á ces espèces, á leur habitat ou á leur écosystème associé, ou de les
perturber;
f) la réglementation ou l'interdiction de l'introduction d'espèces non indigènes;
g) la réglementation ou l'interdiction de toute activité impliquant l'exploration ou
l'exploitation du fond de la mer ou de son sous-sol ou une modification de la
configuration du fond de la mer;
h) la réglementation ou l'interdiction de toute activité entraînant une modification de la
configuration du sol, qui porte atteinte aux bassins versants, une dénudation ou toute
dégradation des bassins versants ou l'exploration ou l'exploitation du sous-sol de la partie
terrestre d'une zone marine protégée;
i) la réglementation de toute activité archéologique et de l'enlèvement ou de la détérioration
de tout objet pouvant être considéré comme un objet archéologique;
Annex 18
201
j) la réglementation ou l'interdiction du commerce, de l'importation et de l'exportation d'espèces animales, menacées ou en voie d'extinction, et de parties, de produits ou d'oeufs de ces espèces, d'espèces végétales ou de parties d'espèces végétales et d'objets archéologiques provenant de zones protégées; k) la réglementation ou l'interdiction d'activités industrielles ou d'autres activités incompatibles avec l'utilisation prévue pour la zone par des mesures nationales ou par des études d'impact sur l'environnement menées conformément á l'Article 13; l) la réglementation des activités touristiques ou récréationnelles pouvant mettre en danger les écosystèmes des zones protégées ou la survie des espèces de faune et de flore menacées ou en voie d'extinction; et m) toute autre mesure qui vise la conservation, la protection ou la restauration des processus naturels, des écosystèmes ou des populations pour lesquels ces zones ont été créées. Article 6 Régime de planification et de gestion des zones protégées1. Pour retirer le maximum de bénéfices des zones protégées et assurer la mise en oeuvre efficace des mesures indiquées á l'Article 5, chaque Partie adopte, pour les zones protégées placées sous leur souveraineté, leur droits souverains ou leur juridiction, des mesures de planification, de gestion et de surveillance et de contrôle. A cet égard, chaque Partie tient compte des lignes directrices et des critères établis par le Comité consultatif scientifique et technique tels que prévus á l'Article 21 et qui ont été adoptés par les réunions des Parties. 2. Ces mesures devraient comprendre: a) l'élaboration et l'adoption de lignes directrices appropriées pour la gestion des zones protégées;b) l'élaboration et l'adoption d'un plan de gestion qui précise le cadre juridique et institutionnel ainsi que les mesures de gestion et de protection en vigueur dans les zones; c) la conduite de la recherche scientifique et la surveillance des impacts des usagers, des processus écologiques, des habitats, des espèces, des populations; et le développement d'activités visant á assurer une meilleure gestion; d) l'élaboration de programmes favorisant la prise de conscience du public et de programmes éducatifs destinés aux utilisateurs, aux gestionnaires et au public pour accroître leur sensibilisation et leur connaissance des zones protégées á l'origine de leur création;
Annex 18
202
e) la participation active des populations locales, selon les cas, á la gestion des zones protégées, y compris l'aide et la formation des habitants qui pourraient être affectés par la création de ces zones; f) l'adoption de mécanismes pour le financement de la mise en valeur et de la gestion efficace des zones protégées et la promotion des programmes d'assistance mutuelle; g) des plans d'urgence pour faire face aux incidents qui peuvent causer des dommages ou des menaces á la région des Caraïbes ou á ses ressources; h) des procédures en vue de réglementer ou d'autoriser des activités compatibles avec les objectifs á l'origine de la création des zones; et i) la formation de gestionnaires et de personnel technique qualifié, ainsi que la mise en place d'une infrastructure appropriée. Article 7 Programme de coopération et inscription des zones protégées1. Les Parties mettent en place des programmes de coopération dans le cadre de la Convention et du Plan d'action, conformément á leur souveraineté, leur droits souverains ou á leur juridiction en vue de promouvoir les objectifs du Protocole. 2. Un programme de coopération sera établi pour aider á l'établissement de la liste des zones protégées. Il contribuera á la sélection, á l'établissement, á la planification, á la gestion et á la préservation des zones protégées, et créera un réseau des zones protégées. A cette fin, les Parties dressent une liste des zones protégées. Les Parties conviennent: a) de reconnaître l'importance particulière pour la région des Caraïbes des zones figurant sur la liste; b) de classer par ordre de priorité les zones figurant sur la liste pour la recherche scientifique et technique conformément á l'Article 17; c) de classer par ordre de priorité les zones figurant sur la liste pour l'assistance mutuelle conformément á l'Article 18; et d) de ne pas autoriser ni entreprendre d'activités qui pourraient aller á l'encontre des buts á l'origine de la création d'une zone figurant sur la liste. 3. Les procédures pour la création de cette liste de zones protégées sont les suivantes: a) La Partie qui exerce sa souveraineté, ses droits souverains ou sa juridiction sur une zone protégée, la propose pour qu'elle figure sur la liste des zones protégées. Ces propositions sont faites conformément aux lignes directrices et critères relatifs á l'identification, á la
Annex 18
203
sélection, á la création, á la gestion, á la protection et á tout autre point qui pourrait être adopté conformément á l'Article 21. Chaque Partie faisant une proposition fournit au Comité scientifique et technique, par l'intermédiaire de l'Organisation, la documentation nécessaire comprenant, en particulier, l'information citée á l'Article 19 2. b) Le Comité consultatif scientifique et technique étudie la proposition et la documentation s'y rapportant et fait savoir á l'Organisation si la proposition est conforme ou non aux lignes directrices prévues á l'Article 21 (b). Si ces lignes directrices et critères ont été respectés, l'Organisation en informera les Parties contractantes qui inscriront la zone proposée sur la liste des zones protégées. Article 8 Création de zones tamponsChaque Partie adhérant au Protocole peut renforcer, en cas de besoin, la protection d'une zone protégée en créant, dans les zones placées sous sa souveraineté, ses droits souverains ou sa juridiction, une ou des zones tampons dans lesquelles les activités seront moins sévèrement limitées que dans la zone protégée, á condition qu'elles demeurent compatibles avec les finalités des zones protégées. Article 9 Zones protégées et zones tampons contiguës aux frontières internationales1. Lorsqu'une Partie a l'intention de créer une zone protégée ou une zone tampon contiguë á la frontière ou aux limites de la zone de juridiction nationale d'une autre Partie, les deux Parties se consultent afin de parvenir á un accord sur les mesures á prendre et, entre autres, examinent la possibilité pour l'autre Partie de créer une zone protégée ou une zone tampon contiguë correspondante ou d'adopter toute autre mesure appropriée y compris des programmes de gestion en coopération. 2. Lorsqu'une Partie se propose de créer une zone protégée ou une zone tampon contiguë á la frontière ou aux limites de la zone de juridiction nationale d'un Etat qui n'est pas Partie au présent Protocole, cette Partie s'efforce de coopérer avec les autorités compétentes de cet Etat en vue de procéder aux consultations prévues au paragraphe 1. 3. Lorsqu'une Partie apprend qu'un Etat qui n'est pas Partie au présent Protocole se propose de créer une zone protégée ou une zone tampon contiguë á sa frontière ou aux limites de sa zone de juridiction nationale, elle s'efforce de coopérer avec ledit Etat en vue de procéder aux consultations prévues au paragraphe 1. 4. Au cas des zones protégées ou des zones tampons contiguës sont établies par une Partie et un Etat qui n'est pas Partie au présent Protocole, la Partie devrait, dans la mesure du possible, veiller á agir en conformité avec les dispositions de la Convention et de ses Protocoles.
Annex 18
204
Article 10 Mesures nationales de protection de la faune et de la flore sauvages
1. Chaque Partie doit identifier, dans les zones relevant de sa souveraineté, de ses droits
souverains, ou de sa juridiction, les espèces végétales et animales menacées ou en voie
d'extinction, et accorder á ces espèces le statut d'espèces protégées. Chaque Partie réglemente
et, au besoin, interdit, conformément á sa législation et réglementation, les activités nuisibles
á ces espèces ou á leur habitat et écosystème et met en oeuvre des mesures de gestion, de
planification et autres pour assurer la survie de ces espèces. Chaque Partie entreprend,
conformément á son système juridique, les actions appropriées pour éviter que ces espèces ne
deviennent des espèces menacées ou en voie d'extinction.
2. En ce qui concerne les espèces végétales protégées, leurs parties et produits, chaque Partie
contrôle et, si nécessaire, interdit conformément á sa législation et réglementation, toutes
formes de destruction ou de perturbation, y compris la cueillette, le ramassage, la coupe ou le
déracinage, la possession ou le commerce de ces espèces.
3. En ce qui concerne les espèces animales protégées, les Parties contrôlent et, si nécessaire,
interdisent:
a) la capture, la détention ou la mise á mort (y compris, si possible, la capture, la mise á
mort et la détention fortuites) ou le commerce de ces espèces et de leurs parties et
produits; et
b) dans la mesure du possible, toute perturbation de la faune sauvage, en particulier pendant
les périodes de reproduction, d'incubation, d'hibernation ou de migration ainsi que
pendant toute autre période biologique critique.
4. Chaque Partie élabore et adopte des mesures et des plans en ce qui concerne la reproduction
en captivité de la faune protégée et la culture de la flore protégée.
5. En plus des mesures précisées au paragraphe 3, les Parties coordonnent leurs efforts, dans des
actions bilatérales ou multilatérales, y compris, si cela s'avère nécessaire, par des traités, pour
protéger et restaurer les populations d'espèces migratrices dont l'aire de répartition s'étend á
l'intérieur des zones placées sous leur souveraineté, leurs droits souverains ou leur
juridiction.
6. Les Parties s'efforcent de consulter les Etats non Parties á ce Protocole dont le territoire est
compris dans l'aire de répartition de ces espèces, dans le but de coordonner leurs efforts pour
gérer et protéger les espèces migratrices, menacées ou en voie d'extinction.
7. Les Parties prennent, si possible, des mesures pour la réintégration dans leur pays d'origine
des espèces protégées exportées illégalement. Les Parties devraient s'efforcer de réintroduire
ces espèces dans leur habitat naturel ou, en cas d'échec, de les utiliser dans des recherches
scientifiques ou á des fins d'éducation du public.
Annex 18
205
8. Les mesures prises par les Parties sous cet Article sont assujetties aux obligations prévues á l'Article 11 et ne dérogent en aucune façon á ces obligations. Article 11 Mesures concertées pour la protection de la faune et de la flore sauvages1. Les Parties adoptent des mesures concertées pour assurer la protection et la restauration des espèces végétales et animales menacées ou en voie d'extinction qui sont énumérées dans les annexes I, II et III du présent Protocole. a) Les Parties adoptent toutes mesures appropriées pour assurer la protection et la restauration des espèces menacées ou en voie d'extinction énumérées á l'Annexe I. Elles interdisent, á ces fins, toute forme de destruction ou de perturbation, y compris la cueillette, la récolte, la coupe, le déracine, la possession ou le commerce de ces espèces et de leurs semences, parties ou produits. Elles réglementent, dans la mesure du possible, toutes activités qui auraient des effets nuisibles sur l'habitat des espèces. b) Chaque Partie assure la protection totale et la restauration des espèces animales énumérées á l'annexe II en interdisant: i) la capture, la détention ou la mise á mort, (y compris la capture, la détention ou la mise á mort fortuites) ou le commerce de ces espèces, de leurs oeufs, parties ou produits.ii) dans la mesure du possible, de perturber ces espèces, en particulier pendant les périodes de reproduction, d'incubation, d'hibernation, de migration ou pendant toute autre période biologique critique. c) Chaque Partie prend toutes les mesures appropriées pour assurer la protection et la restauration des espèces animales et végétales énumérées á l'annexe III tout en autorisant et réglementant l'exploitation de ces espèces de manière á assurer et á maintenir les populations á un niveau optimal. En coordination avec les autres Parties, chaque Partie contractante doit, pour les espèces figurant á l'annexe III, élaborer, adopter et faire appliquer des plans de gestion et d'exploitation de ces espèces qui peuvent comprendre: i) Pour les espèces animales: a) l'interdiction de tous les moyens non sélectifs de capture, de mise á mort, de chasse et de pêche, et de tous les moyens risquant d'entraîner localement la disparition d'une espèce ou de troubler gravement sa tranquillité. b) l'institution de périodes de fermeture de la chasse et de la pêche et d'autres mesures de conservation des populations.
Annex 18
206
c) la réglementation de la capture, de la détention, du transport ou de la vente des
animaux vivants ou morts ou de leurs oeufs, parties ou produits.
ii) Pour les espèces végétales, la réglementation de leur collecte, de leur récolte et de
leur commerce ainsi que de leurs parties ou produits.
2. Chaque Partie adopte des dérogations aux interdictions fixées pour la protection et la
restauration des espèces figurant aux annexes I et II á des fins scientifiques, éducatives ou de
gestion nécessaires á la survie des espèces ou pour empêcher des dommages importants aux
forêts ou aux cultures. De telles dérogations ne doivent pas mettre en péril les espèces et
devront être notifiées á l'Organisation afin que le Comité consultatif scientifique et technique
puisse évaluer la pertinence des dérogations accordées.
3. Les Parties accordent également:
a) la priorité aux espèces énumérées dans les annexes, en ce qui concerne la recherche
scientifique et technique conformément á l'Article 17.
b) la priorité aux espèces énumérées dans les annexes pour l'assistance mutuelle
conformément á l'Article 18.
4. Les procédures pour modifier les annexes sont les suivantes:
a) Toute Partie peut proposer qu'une espèce animale ou végétale menacée ou en voie
d'extinction soit ajoutée ou enlevée des annexes, et soumettre au Comité consultatif
scientifique et technique, par l'intermédiaire de l'Organisation, la documentation de
référence comprenant, en particulier, les informations figurant á l'Article 19. Cette
proposition est faite en fonction des lignes directrices et des critères adoptés par les
Parties conformément á l'Article 21;
b) Le Comité consultatif scientifique et technique examine et évalue les propositions et la
documentation de référence et transmet son avis, lors des réunions que tiennent les
Parties conformément á l'Article 23.
c) Les Parties passent en revue les propositions, la documentation de référence ainsi que les
rapports du Comité. Une espèce est incluse par consensus dans une annexe, si possible,
sinon á la majorité des trois quarts des Parties présentes et votantes, et en tenant
pleinement compte de l'avis du Comité consultatif scientifique et technique pour s'assurer
que cette proposition et la documentation qui s'y rapportent correspondent aux lignes
directrices et aux critères adoptés conformément á l'Article 21.
d) Une Partie peut, dans l'exercice de sa souveraineté ou de ses droits souverains, émettre
des réserves sur l'inclusion d'une espèce particulière dans une annexe en notifiant par
écrit le Dépositaire dans un délai de 90 jours á compter du vote des Parties. Le
Dépositaire doit notifier, le plus tôt possible, á toutes les Parties, les réserves exprimées
conformément á ce paragraphe.
Annex 18
207
e) L'inclusion d'une espèce dans une annexe entre en vigueur 90 jours après le vote de toutes les Parties, á l'exception de celles qui ont émis des réserves conformément au paragraphe d) de cet article. f) Une Partie a la faculté de remplacer, á tout moment, une déclaration d'opposition á une espèce figurant sur une liste en la notifiant au Dépositaire par écrit; á la suite de quoi, son acceptation entre en vigueur pour cette Partie á cette date. 5. Les Parties mettent en place des programmes de coopération dans le cadre de la Convention et du Plan d'action afin de faciliter la gestion et la conservation des espèces protégées, en développant et en appliquant des programmes régionaux de restauration des espèces protégées dans la région des Caraïbes, qui tiennent pleinement compte des autres actions régionales de conservation relatives á la gestion de ces espèces. L'Organisation aidera á la création et á la mise en place de ces programmes régionaux de restauration. Article 12 Introduction d'espèces non indigènes ou génétiquement modifiéesLes Parties prennent toutes mesures appropriées pour réglementer ou interdire l'introduction volontaire ou accidentelle dans la nature d'espèces non indigènes ou modifiées génétiquement qui pourrait entraîner des impacts nuisibles á la flore, á la faune ou aux autres éléments naturels de la région des Caraïbes. Article 13 Etude d'impact sur l'environnement1. Au cours des procédures de planification qui précèdent la prise de décisions sur des projets industriels et d'autres projets et activités pouvant avoir un impact négatif sur l'environnement et sérieusement affecter les zones et les espèces qui ont fait l'objet d'une protection spéciale en vertu du présent Protocole, chaque Partie évalue et tient compte de l'impact possible, direct et indirect, y compris de l'impact cumulé des projets et des activités considérées. 2. L'Organisation et le Comité consultatif scientifique et technique doivent, dans la mesure du possible, fournir des avis et aider, á sa demande, la Partie qui effectue cette étude d'impact. Article 14 Dérogations pour des activités traditionnelles1. En définissant des mesures de protection, les Parties prennent en considération les besoins traditionnels de la population locale sur le plan de la subsistance et de la culture et accordent des dérogations, si cela s'avère nécessaire, pour tenir compte de ces besoins. Dans toute la mesure du possible, les dérogations accordées de ce fait ne doivent pas être de nature:
Annex 18
208
a) á compromettre le maintien des zones protégées en vertu du présent Protocole et les
processus écologiques participant au maintien de ces zones protégées; ou
b) á provoquer l'extinction ou des risques de diminution substantielle des effectifs des
espèces ou des populations animales et végétales incluses dans les zones protégées ou de
celles qui leur sont écologiquement liées, en particulier les espèces migratrices et les
espèces menacées, en voie d'extinction ou endémiques.
2. En ce qui concerne les mesures de protection, les Parties qui accordent des dérogations en
informent l'Organisation.
Article 15 Modifications du statut des zones ou des espèces protégées
1. Les modifications de la délimitation ou la situation juridique d'une zone ou d'une Partie de
cette zone ou d'une espèce protégée ne peuvent intervenir que pour des raisons importantes
en tenant compte de la nécessite de sauvegarder l'environnement et en respectant les
obligations prévues dans le présent Protocole, après en avoir informé l'Organisation.
2. Le statut des zones et des espèces devrait être revu et évalué périodiquement par le Comité
consultatif scientifique et technique sur la base des informations fournies par les Parties par
l'intermédiaire de l'Organisation. Les zones et les espèces peuvent être retirées de la liste des
zones ou des annexes au Protocole selon les modalités utilisées pour les inclure.
Article 16 Publicité, information, sensibilisation et éducation du public
1. Chaque Partie donne la publicité qu'il convient á la création de zones protégées et, en
particulier, en ce qui concerne leur délimitation, aux zones tampons, et á la réglementation
qui s'y applique ainsi qu'á la sélection des espèces protégées, en particulier, á leur habitat
vital et á la réglementation s'y rapportant.
2. Dans le but d'accroître la sensibilisation du public, chaque Partie s'efforce d'informer le
public aussi largement que possible de l'importance et de la valeur des zones et des espèces
protégées ainsi que des connaissances scientifiques et d'autres avantages qu'elles permettent
de recueillir également sur tous les changements qui y interviennent. Ces informations
devraient faire partie intégrante des programmes d'enseignement relatifs á l'environnement et
á l'histoire. Chaque Partie devrait également s'efforcer de faire en sorte que le public et les
organisations de protection de la nature participent aux programmes nécessaires pour la
protection des zones et des espèces concernées.
Annex 18
209
Article 17 Recherche scientifique, technique et dans le domaine de la gestion1.Chaque Partie encourage et intensifie sa recherche scientifique et technique sur les zonesprotégées et la recherche orientée vers leur gestion, et, en particulier, sur leurs processusécologiques et sur le patrimoine historique, culturel et archéologique, ainsi que sur lesespèces animales et végétales menacées, ou en voie d'extinction et sur leur habitat.2.Chaque Partie a la possibilité de consulter d'autres Parties et les organisations régionales etinternationales compétentes en vue de définir, de planifier et d'entreprendre des recherchesscientifiques et techniques et des programmes de surveillance nécessaires á l'identification etau contrôle des zones et des espèces protégées et d'évaluer l'efficacité des mesures prisespour mettre en place des plans de gestion et de restauration.3.Les Parties échangent directement ou, par l'intermédiaire de l'Organisation, des informationsscientifiques et techniques relatives á leurs programmes de recherche et de surveillance encours et prévus, ainsi que sur les résultats obtenus. Elles coordonnent, autant que possible,leurs programmes de recherche et de surveillance et s'efforcent de normaliser des méthodesde collecte, de diffusion, d'archivage et d'analyse de l'information scientifique et techniquenécessaires.4.Conformément aux dispositions du paragraphe 1 ci-dessus, les Parties font des inventairesexhaustifs:a)des zones placées sous leur souveraineté, leurs droits souverains ou leur juridiction quicomprennent des écosystèmes rares ou fragiles; qui sont des réservoirs de diversitébiologique et génétique; qui ont une valeur écologique pour le maintien de ressourcesimportantes sur le plan économique; qui sont importantes pour les espèces menacées, envoie d'extinction ou migratrices ainsi que celles qui ont une valeur esthétique, touristique,récréationnelle ou archéologique.b)des espèces animales ou végétales menacées ou en voie d'extinction pouvant figurer enannexe conformément aux critères établis par le présent Protocole.Article 18 Assistance mutuelle1.Les Parties coopérant directement, ou avec l'aide de l'Organisation ou d'autres organisationsinternationales, pour élaborer, réaliser, financer et mettre en oeuvre des programmesd'assistance aux Parties qui en expriment le besoin pour le choix, la création et la gestion deszones et des espèces protégées.2.Ces programmes devraient porter, en particulier, sur l'éducation du public dans le domaine del'environnement, la formation du personnel scientifique, technique et administratif, larecherche scientifique et l'acquisition, l'utilisation, la conception et la mise au point dematériel approprié, á des conditions avantageuses á définir entre les Parties concernées.
Annex 18
210
Article 19 Notifications et rapports á l'Organisation
1. Chaque Partie informe périodiquement l'Organisation en ce qui concerne:
a) l'état des zones existantes et récemment créées, des zones tampons et des espèces
protégées situées dans les zones placées sous leur souveraineté, leurs droits souverains ou
leur juridiction; et
b) toute modification de la délimitation ou de la situation juridique des zones protégées, des
zones tampons et des espèces protégées situées dans les zones placées sous leur
souveraineté, leurs droits souverains ou leur juridiction.
2. Les rapports concernant les zones protégées et les zones tampons devraient inclure des
informations sur:
a) le nom de la zone ou de la région;
b) la biogéographie de la zone ou de la région (délimitations, caractéristiques physiques,
climat, flore et faune);
c) la situation juridique par rapport á la législation ou á la réglementation nationale;
d) la date et l'histoire de sa création;
e) les plans de gestion des zones protégées;
f) les liens avec le patrimoine culturel;
g) les équipements pour la recherche et l'accueil; et
h) les menaces pour la zone ou la région, en particulier, les menaces provenant de sources
de pollution extérieures á la zone de juridiction de la Partie.
3. Les rapports concernant les espèces protégées devraient comprendre, dans la mesure du
possible, des informations sur:
a) le nom scientifique et le nom usuel des espèces;
b) l'estimation des effectifs des espèces et leur répartition géographique;
c) le statut juridique de leur protection selon la législation ou réglementation nationale
pertinentes;
d) l'interaction biologique avec d'autres espèces et les besoins spécifiques concernant leur
habitat;
Annex 18
211
e) les plans de gestion et de restauration pour les espèces menacées et les espèces en voie d'extinction; f) les programmes de recherche et les publications scientifiques et techniques disponibles sur ces espèces; et g) les menaces á l'encontre des espèces protégées, de leur habitat et de leurs écosystèmes associés, et particulièrement, les menaces provenant de sources extérieures á la zone de juridiction de la Partie. 4. Les rapports fournis á l'Organisation par les Parties sont utilisés aux fins énoncées aux Articles 20 et 22. Article 20 Comité consultatif scientifique et technique1. Il est créé par le présent Protocole un Comité consultatif scientifique et technique. 2. Chaque Partie nomme au poste de représentant au Comité un expert scientifique ayant des compétences reconnues dans le domaine couvert par ce Protocole, qui peut être accompagné par d'autres experts et conseillers désignés par elle. Le Comité peut également demander l'avis d'experts et d'organisations compétents sur le plan scientifique et technique. 3. Le Comité est chargé de fournir aux Parties, par l'intermédiaire de l'Organisation, des avis sur les sujets scientifiques et techniques ayant trait au Protocole et en particulier sur les questions suivantes:a) la liste des zones protégées pouvant figurer dans la liste, selon les procédures décrites á l'Article 7; b) la liste des espèces protégées selon les procédures décrites á l'Article 11; c) les rapports sur la gestion et la protection des zones protégées ainsi que sur les espèces protégées et leur habitat; d) les propositions pour l'assistance technique, la formation, la recherche, l'éducation et la gestion (y compris les plans de sauvetage d'espèces); e) l'évaluation de l'impact sur l'environnement conformément á l'Article 13; f) l'élaboration de lignes directrices et de critères communs conformément á l'Article 21; et g) Toute autre question en relation avec l'application du Protocole, y compris celles qui lui sont déférées par les réunions des parties.
Annex 18
212
4. Le Comité adopte lui-même son Règlement intérieur.
Article 21 Etablissement de lignes directrices et de critères communs
1. Les Parties, lors de leur première réunion ou le plus tôt possible après celle-ci, évaluent et
adoptent les lignes directrices et les critères communs formulés par le Comité consultatif
scientifique et technique, concernant notamment:
a) l'identification et le choix des zones et des espèces protégées;
b) la création de zones protégées;
c) la gestion des zones et des espèces protégées, y compris les espèces migratrices; et
d) la collecte d'informations sur les zones et les espèces protégées, y compris les espèces
migratrices.
2. Lors de l'application de ce Protocole, les Parties tiennent compte des lignes directrices et des
critères communs, sans porter préjudice au droit d'une Partie d'adopter des lignes directrices
et des critères plus sévères.
Article 22 Mécanismes institutionnels
1. Chaque Partie désigne un correspondant pour faire la liaison avec l'Organisation sur les
aspects techniques de l'application de ce Protocole.
2. Les Parties chargent l'Organisation d'assurer les fonctions de secrétariat suivantes:
a) convoquer et organiser les réunions des Parties;
b) aider au recueil des fonds conformément á l'Article 24;
c) aider les Parties et le Comité consultatif scientifique et technique, en coopération avec les
organisations internationales, intergouvernementales et non gouvernementales
compétentes, á:
- aider á mener á bien les programmes de recherche technique et scientifique
conformément á l'Article 17;
- aider á mener á bien l'échange d'informations scientifiques et techniques entre les
Parties conformément á l'Article 16;
- formuler des recommandations comprenant des principes et des critères communs
conformément á l'Article 21;
Annex 18
213
-préparer, sur demande, des plans de gestion pour les zones et les espèces protégées conformément aux Articles 6 et 10 respectivement; -élaborer des programmes de coopération conformément aux Articles 7 et 11; -préparer, sur demande, des études d'impact sur l'environnement conformément á l'Article 13; -préparer du matériel éducatif conçu pour différents publics identifiés par les Parties; et-réintégrer dans leur pays d'origine les espèces végétales ou animales sauvages et les parties ou produits de ces espèces illégalement exportés. d) préparer les formulaires de présentation communs pouvant être utilisés par les Parties pour les notifications et les rapports á l'Organisation, conformément á l'Article 19; e) conserver et mettre á jour des bases de données sur les zones et les espèces protégées comprenant des informations conformément aux Articles 7 et 11 et publier des répertoires, périodiquement mis á jour, des zones et des espèces protégées; f) préparer les répertoires, les rapports et les études techniques pouvant être nécessaires á la mise en oeuvre de ce Protocole; g) coopérer avec les organisations régionales et internationales chargées de la protection des zones et des espèces; et h) mener á bien toute autre fonction dont l'Organisation a été chargée par les Parties. Article 23 Réunions des Parties1. Les réunions ordinaires des Parties se tiennent en même temps que les réunions ordinaires des Parties contractantes á la Convention organisées en vertu de l'article 16 de la Convention. Les Parties peuvent également tenir des réunions extraordinaires conformément á l'article 16 de la Convention. Les réunions se déroulent selon le Règlement intérieur adopté en vertu de l'article 20 de la Convention. 2. Les réunions des Parties au présent Protocole ont pour objet: a) de guider et de veiller á la mise en oeuvre du présent Protocole; b) d'approuver l'affectation des ressources visées á l'article 24 du Protocole; c) de superviser l'Organisation et de lui fournir des orientations pour ses activités; d) d'examiner l'efficacité des mesures adoptées pour la gestion et la protection des zones et des espèces et la nécessité d'autres mesures, en particulier, sous forme d'annexes et d'amendements á ce Protocole ou á ses annexes;
Annex 18
214
e) de veiller á la création et au développement d'un réseau de zones protégées et aux plans
de restauration des espèces protégées conformément aux Articles 7 et 11;
f) d'adopter et de passer en revue les lignes directrices et les critères conformément á
l'Article 21;
g) d'examiner les conseils et les recommandations formulés par le Comité consultatif
scientifique et technique conformément á l'Article 20;
h) d'examiner les rapports transmis par les Parties á l'Organisation conformément á l'Article
22 de la Convention et á l'Article 19 du présent Protocole, ainsi que toute autre
information que les Parties pourraient adresser á l'Organisation ou á la réunion des
Parties; et
i) d'examiner, s'il y a lieu, toute autre question.
Article 24 Financement
En plus des contributions versées par les Parties conformément á l'Article 20, paragraphe 2 de la
Convention, les Parties peuvent demander á l'Organisation de trouver des sources de financement
complémentaires. Ces fonds peuvent comprendre des contributions volontaires, pour un objectif
lié au Protocole, provenant des Parties, d'autres gouvernements et agences gouvernementales,
d'organisations non gouvernementales, d'organisations internationales et régionales,
d'organisations du secteur privé et de particuliers.
Article 25 Liens avec d'autres Conventions relatives á la protection spéciale de la vie
sauvage
Aucune disposition du présent Protocole ne peut être interprétée dans un sens qui affecte les
droits et obligations des Parties á la Convention sur le commerce international des espèces
animales ou végétales menacées (CITES) et á la Convention sur la conservation des espèces
migratrices appartenant á la faune sauvage (CMS).
Article 26 Mesures transitoires
La version initiale des annexes, qui forment partie intégrante du Protocole, devra être adoptée par
consensus á une conférence de plénipotentiaires des Parties contractantes á la Convention .
Annex 18
215
Article 27 Entrée en vigueur1. Le Protocole et les annexes, lorsqu'ils auront été adoptés par les Parties contractantes á la Convention, entreront en vigueur dans les conditions prévues au paragraphe 2 de l'article 28 de la Convention. 2. Le Protocole n'entrera pas en vigueur tant que les annexes dans leur version initiale n'auront pas été adoptées par les Parties á la Convention conformément á l'article 26. Article 28 SignatureCe Protocole est ouvert á la signature á Kingston, Jamaïque, á partir du 18 jusqu'au 31 janvier 1990 et á Bogota, Colombie, du 1er février 1990 au 17 janvier 1991, de toute Partie á la Convention.EN FOI DE QUOI les soussignés, dûment autorisés par leurs gouvernements respectifs, ont signé le présent Protocole. Fait á Kingston, le dix-huit janvier mil neuf cent quatre-vingt-dix, en un seul exemplaire en langues française, anglaise et espagnole, les trois textes faisant également foi.
Annex 18
216
Annex 19
Annex 19: DIPLOMATIC NOTE DM NO. 94331 FROM THE MINISTER OF
FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF COLOMBIA TO THE SECRETARY - GENERAL
OF THE UNITED NATIONS, 23 NOVEMBER 2012.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
217
Annex 19
218
Annex 19
219
220
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA DM No. 94365 Bogotá, D.C., 23 November 2012 Dear Secretary-General: The International Court of Justice issued its Judgment on the Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua - Colombia) on 19 November 2012. The decision rendered by the Court creates precedents that could affect the stability of the Western Caribbean. Conflicts could emerge between fishermen whereas this Judgment ignores the historic and ancestral rights of a Raizal community that has always considered this sea as its heritage and part of its culture, livelihood and past. The Judgment contains a series of inconsistencies under international law and in its interpretation and application that we reject just as President Juan Manuel Santos declared in his speech of last 19 November. Colombia, in this context, carries out a rigorous and meticulous analysis of the Court’s Judgment to establish the actions it will perform in accordance with international law. However, I would like to share with You our concern about the implications that the Judgment brings to our Raizal people and the ecological reserve of the Seaflower marine protected area. The decision of the Court establishes maritime boundaries that isolate two Cays from the rest of the Colombian Archipelago and its Exclusive Economic Zone. In other words, it creates two enclaves, with the security implications that it brings for this fishing population who has carried out fishing activities since ancestral times in To the Honorable Mr José Miguel Insulza Secretary-General OAS Washington
Annex 20
Annex 20: DIPLOMATIC NOTE DM NO. 94365 FROM THE MINISTER OF
FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF COLOMBIA TO THE SECRETARY - GENERAL
OF THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES,
23 NOVEMBER 2012.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
221
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA these Archipelago which now is broken. This ignores the social, cultural, historical, geographical, ecological and geological unity of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina as well as the islands and cays that constitute it. The San Andrés population includes a differentiated ethnic group, the Raizales, with a dialect and culture that evolved from African, European and Caribbean roots. The Raizales have their own language, the Criole – one of the dialects of the Caribbean English. They represent 50% of the 80.000 inhabitants of the Archipelago. With the richness of its roots, the Raizal identity is a unique culture product of an insular character, of its allegiance to the Archipelago and the material and immaterial practices that have been inherited, created and adapted with time. The Raizal ethnic group is constitutionally recognized. Today, the Court’s decision gives rise to a deep sense of fear, anxiety and nonconformity for the Raizal population. They fear that their identity, deeply linked to their inheritance, founded on the basis of its historical and livelihood waters, will be undercut. Under the Inter-American System of Human Rights, it has been determined that native peoples have the right to the natural resources that they have traditionally used over centuries within their territory, in order to ensure their economic, social and cultural livelihood, as well as the continuity of their ways and means of life. Historically, artisanal fishing has been the most important productive activity for the Raizal community in this region that the Court now wants to transfer to Nicaragua. The Seaflower Marine Biosphere Reserve ensures the food security and nutrition of the population. However, beyond the provision of livelihoods for the Raizales, the maritime territory is the expression of their ancestral customs and culture. A decision cannot ignore the need to guarantee that ethnic communities will be enabled to continue their traditional livelihoods,
Annex 20
222
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA and that their cultural identity, social structure, economic system, and their distinctive customs, beliefs and traditions be respected and protected. As you well know, the Inter-American system, as well as the international system, have jurisprudence on this subject. The establishment of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve is the result of the tireless efforts by the ancestral communities of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, together with the Colombian Government, to protect oceanic ecosystems located in the western coast of the Caribbean Sea, as well as the culture of the Raizal people, constitutionally recognized in Colombia. The Reserve contains the most complex and diverse oceanic coral reefs system of the Caribbean region. Over 192 species that appear in the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red list are protected, including such important species as marine mammals, turtles, sharks, corals, mangroves, birds and invertebrates. The Archipelago is an ecological and geological formation dating back millions of years that includes from shallow gradients (beaches, mangroves, coral reefs, marine seagrass beds) to deep waters. It is therefore particularly diverse and complex. UNESCO attributes special relevance to the Seaflower Reserve. When it was established in 2000 it was the world’s largest insular biosphere reserve and up to some time ago it was the largest on Earth. With its establishment the Islands and Cays that constitute the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina fall into the category of a unique and indivisible Archipelago. Its establishment was so important that in 2001 the then Director-General Koishiro Matsura personally launched it together with President Andrés Pastrana. Seaflower Reserve has been one of the most iconic biosphere reserves of the global network, and has been used as a model of sustainable development and a global model for implementation of the Sevilla Strategy and the Madrid Action Plan.
Annex 20
223
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA Despite the fact that the International Court of Justice recognized Colombia’s sovereignty over the Islands and Cays, the Court’s decision ignores the fact that this Archipelago is constituted by the main islands as well as the atolls where the cays are located, and constitutes a single ecological and geological unit, by virtue of the physical (nutrients) and biological (genetic dispersion) flows among them. It’s due to this that in the year 2000 UNESCO, in an unanimous decision, established the Seaflower Marine Biosphere. The Seaflower Marine Protected Area is the largest in the Caribbean and it covers approximately 10% of the Caribbean Sea. It is widely recognized as a biodiversity “hotspot”. The Government of Colombia in recognition of the unique ecological value of this zone has employed internationally established tools to provide for the long term integrity and functionality of the Archipelago’s resources. The Court’s decision compromises the loss of a significant part of the Biosphere Reserve as well as of the Marine Protected Area, damaging the integrity and unity of this Archipelago recognized as such by the Court in the initial section of the Judgment as well as by UNESCO. The valuable biodiversity of this area, that has been protected by Colombia for more than a decade and that has guaranteed the preservation of endangered species, and moreover the food security of our Raizal population, has been particularly affected by the Court’s Judgment since in the past and currently Nicaragua has declared its intentions to carry out oil exploration in this area. With this background, I would like to share with You the severe social, cultural, historic, geographical, economical, and ecological implications of this Judgment. This implications allow the Government of Colombia to analyze the legal mechanisms under international law before reaching a final decision regarding the Court’s Judgment.
Annex 20
224
I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to You, Secretary-General, the assurances of my highest and distinguished consideration. [signed] MARIA ÁNGELA HOLGUÍN CUELLAR Minister of Foreign Affairs
Annex 20
225
226
Annex 21
Annex 21:DIPLOMATIC NOTE DM NO. 78634 FROM THE MINISTER OF
FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF COLOMBIA TO THE DIRECTOR - GENERAL
OF THE UNITED NATIONS EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC AND
CULTURAL ORGANIZATION - UNESCO, 23 NOVEMBER 2012.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
227
Annex 21
228
Annex 21
229
230
EMBASSY OF COLOMBIA E. No. 16 The Embassy of Colombia in Nicaragua presents its compliments to the Honourable Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Nicaragua - General Direction of Legal Affairs, Sovereignty and Territory - with the occasion to inform that according to the information provided by the National Army of Colombia last 16 December the fishing vessel named LADY DEE I of Nicaraguan flag, was detected in waters of the of Serrana Island, in position Latitude 14°28’19”N Long 80º15’45”W, it was abandoned, stuck in the coral, ransack and presented in its interior approximately 60 cubic meters of oily residues at risk of falling into the sea. The Embassy of Colombia in Nicaragua, according to the foregoing and considering the existence of an environmental risk, seeks the cooperation of the Illustrated Government of Nicaraguan in order to obtain precise information on the fishing company for which the fishing vessel works, as well as the name of its owner and captain. The Embassy of Colombia in Nicaragua takes this opportunity to renew to the Honourable Ministry of Foreign Affairs General - Direction of Legal Affairs, Sovereignty and Territory the assurances of its highest and most distinguished consideration. Managua, 14 January 2013 To the Honourable MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS General Direction of Legal Affairs, Sovereignty and Territory Managua
Annex 22
Annex 22: NOTE VERBALE NO. E-16 FROM THE EMBASSY OF COLOMBIA IN
MANAGUA TO THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF
NICARAGUA, 14 JANUARY 2013.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
231
232
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS Managua, Nicaragua MRE/SCPE/014/01/13 THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA - SECRETARIAT OF CEREMONIAL AND PROTOCOL OF THE STATE - presents its compliments to the Embassy of the Republic of Colombia and refers to the requested meeting for the Ambassador Mrs. Luz Stella Jara Portilla, with Dr. Cesar Vega Masís, General Director of Sovereignty, Territory and Legal Affairs of this Ministry. In this regard we would like to confirm such meeting for 15 January 2016, at 10:00 hours in the office of Comrade Vega. THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA - SECRETARIAT OF CEREMONIAL AND PROTOCOL OF THE STATE - avails itself the occasion to renew to the Embassy of the Republic of Colombia, the securities of its highest and distinguishes consideration. Managua, 14 January 2013 TO THE EMBASSY OF THE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA MANAGUA
Annex 23
Annex 23: NOTE VERBALE NO. MRE/SCPE/014/01/13 FROM THE MINISTRY
OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF NICARAGUA TO THE EMBASSY OF
COLOMBIA IN MANAGUA, 14 JANUARY 2013.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
233
234
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Note No. MRE/DGAJ//0014//13 The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Nicaragua, General Direction of Legal Affairs, Sovereignty and Territory, presents its compliments to the Honourable Embassy of the Republic of Colombia and refers to Note E. no. 16, dated 14 January 2013, regarding the running aground of the LADY DEE I fishing vessel of Nicaraguan flag. In this regard, we communicate that we started the relevant investigations before the competent authorities. THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS – General Direction of Legal Affairs, Sovereignty and Territory – is pleased to notify about the requested information to the Honourable Embassy of the Republic of Colombia and takes this opportunity to renew its distinguished consideration. Managua, 17 January 2013 TO THE HONOURABLE EMBASSY OF THE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA
Annex 24
Annex 24: NOTE VERBALE NO. MRE/DGAJ//0014 //13 FROM THE EMBASSY
OF COLOMBIA IN MANAGUA TO THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN
AFFAIRS OF NICARAGUA, 17 JANUARY 2013.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
235
236
Annex 25
Annex 25: DIPLOMATIC NOTE NO. S-GACIJ-13-044275 FROM THE MINISTER
OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF COLOMBIA TO THE SECRETARY -
GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION,
1 NOVEMBER 2013
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
237
Annex 25
238
REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS S-DISTD-16-013262 The Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Direction of Territorial Sovereignty and Border Development – presents its compliments to the Honourable EMBASSY OF NICARAGUA in the interest of communicating that according to the information provided by the National Navy of Colombia, on 08 February 2016, four (4) vessels, carrying the Nicaraguan flag, identified as “Lady Prem”, “Miss Sofía”, “Capitán Charlie” and “Doña Emilia”, were found on the territorial sea of the island of Cayo Serrana, in evident breach of sovereignty and performing illegal fishing activities. After detecting the presence of the National Army such vessels escaped leaving behind seventy-three (73) diver fishermen in coordinates 14º16,54’ N 80º22,51’ W, which lead the Navy to deploy a humanitarian assistance and safety operation to protect life at sea. Along with the fishermen thirty-four (34) canoe type boats (cayucos) with their gears were also abandoned, including one hundred and fifty-two (152) diving tanks, twenty-four (24) masks, thirty-four (34) harnesses for diving tanks, twenty-six (26) pairs of swimming fins, thirty (30) diving regulators, sixty-nine (69) knives, thirty-one hammers (31), thirty five (35) fishing hooks, all of those used for the exploitation of natural resources in special environmentally protected areas. Likewise, one-hundred (100) kilos of Queen Conch were found, as the result of illegal fishing activities. To the Honourable EMBASSY OF NICARAGUA Bogotá
Annex 26
Annex 26: NOTE VERBALE NO. S-DISTD-16-013262 FROM THE MINISTRY OF
FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF COLOMBIA TO THE EMBASSY OF
NICARAGUA IN BOGOTÁ, 10 FEBRUARY 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
239
REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS At the same time, the vessel “Dona Emilia”, of Nicaraguan flag, with forty-three (43) crewmembers and fishermen on board, that is still located in Colombian Territorial Sea in coordinates 14º17,175’N 80º22,948’W, requested assistance because it had a flood and had lost propulsion. As a consequence of this request, the National Army provided the required assistance, which still persists. Unfortunately, a cold front is currently affecting the safety of operations at sea, hence the motor boat, the fishermen and the vessel’s crew continue receiving humanitarian assistance in the Serrana Cay island. The re-establishment of meteorological conditions is awaited so that a safe operation can be carried out, in collaboration with the Nicaraguan authorities, for the safe return of the motorboat, the fishermen, and the crew. In this regard, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs urgently requests the Embassy of Nicaragua to inform the competent authorities of that country in order for them to coordinate deployment of a vessel which can facilitate the safe return of the fishermen and crew to their country. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs allows itself to notify to the Embassy that all the facts referred to in this Note are supported by documents and audio and video files. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Direction of Territorial Sovereignty and Border Development, avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Embassy of Nicaragua the assurances of its highest and distinguished consideration. 10 February 2016
Annex 26
240
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS Managua, Nicaragua Nota No. MRE/VM-AJ/0079/02/16 The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Nicaragua, presents its compliments to the Honorable Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Colombia – Direction of Territorial Sovereignty and Border Development – and refers to your kind note S-DISTD-16-013262, dated 10 February 2016, concerning the situation of the fishermen who were in the sector of the Serrana Bank. In this regard, the Ministry wishes to express its appreciation for the information provided and, at the same time, its gratitude for the work carried out by the Colombian Navy in the operation of humanitarian aid and safety of life at sea. Likewise, this Ministry notifies the Honorable Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia, that we have duly informed our authorities in order to coordinate the necessary activities with the Colombian authorities so as to facilitate the safe return of the fishermen and crewmembers to their country of origin. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Nicaragua, avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Honorable Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Colombia – Direction of Territorial Sovereignty and Border Development– the expressions of its highest consideration. Managua, 11 February 2016 To the Honorable Ministry of Foreign Affairs Of the Republic of Colombia
Annex 27
Annex 27: NOTE VERBALE NO. MRE/VM-AJ/0079/02/16 FROM THE MINISTRY
OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF NICARAGUA TO THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF COLOMBIA, 11 FEBRUARY 2016. (Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
241
Annex 28
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 29
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 30
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 31
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 32
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 33
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 34
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 35
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 36
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 37
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 38
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 39
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 40
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 41
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 42
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 43
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 44
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 45
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 46
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 47
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 48
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 49
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 50
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 51
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 52
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 53
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 54
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 55
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 56
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 57
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 58
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 59
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 60
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 61
Page intentionally left blank
= SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = PROVIDENCIA ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA – COLOMBIA == RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE PROVIDENCIA ISLAND NOTARY CIRCUIT: In the Island of Providencia, municipality of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the eighteenth (18 ) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before me, MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES, Single Notary Public of the Providencia Island Notary Circuit, LANDEL HERNANDO ROBINSON ARCHBOLD appeared, identified as stated below his signature, in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the legal implications entailed by lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment whatsoever to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full responsibility.-THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein, given freely and voluntarily, relate to facts that he attests to by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:- My name is as stated above, Landel Robinson Archbold, I am sixty (60)years old, I have lived in Providencia Island for sixty (60)years, and I reside in the following sector: Boxon, married civilstatus, bearer of National ID number 15.241.653 issued in SanAndrés Island.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that myname is Landel Robinson Archbold, I am currently president of
Annex 62
Annex 62:AFFIDAVIT BY MR LANDEL HERNANDO ROBINSON ARCHBOLD,
18 OCTOBER 2016 (Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
373
the Fishermen Co-operative of Providencia called “Fish and Farm”. My father was a fisherman until the day he died. He was a fisherman and he built boats, lanchas made of wood. Before in Providencia boats with engines were not used. Sailing was only done with sailboats and wooden boats. Now we use fiberglass because it is lighter and much more resistant. We fished with hand lines and hooked [harpooned] lobsters. To me, artisanal fishermen usually use handheld lines to fish. You can recognize artisanal fishing in two ways. If the boats have big core systems instead of small ones or simple refrigeration boxes with ice usually they are not artisanal. Artisanal fishermen will not have long lines of 3 or 4 miles that smash the corals. Subsistence fishing is just when you go along the beach, with a line, catch a snapper and go home. Artisanal fishing is about selling products to your community. You want to make your economic situation viable. Subsistence fishing does not have this commercial component. It is only about survival. We have a policy in the co-operative, to the effect that fishing products must first be sold to the community. Only the surplus can be sold outside of the community. Fishermen are not forced to be part of the co-operatives but there is an interest in doing so because the co-operatives can help you on your project if you pay the fees. If a fisherman does not own a boat, he can use the boat of the co-operative. But if he is not a member, the co-operative’s policy is to give priority to its members when setting up the crew for a fishing expedition. If there is no space, he has to wait. We are afraid to go the North cays nowadays. I know that Minival Ward, a member of the co-operative, was attacked by Nicaraguan fishermen when going to the North Cays. They took all of his products as well as his fishing and navigation gear and most of his gasoline. They left him in his 25 ft. lancha with barely enough gasoline to come back to Providencia. Both the fishermen from Providencia and those from San Andrés consider that the cays and their banks are ancestral fishing grounds. Unfortunately some of our banks are now in the waters of Nicaragua and others can only be reached after passing through Nicaraguan waters. If I want to
Annex 62
374
fish in North East Bank and in Julio Bank, which are located in Nicaraguan waters between Quitasueño and Providencia, I have to be very careful. I do not go all the way to Quitasueño and Serrana anymore. We are afraid of Nicaraguan coast guards and fishermen. It was my father who discovered North East Bank which he called like that because of its location North-East of Providencia. I still go there although it is in Nicaraguan waters, but I fear to go farther North. My father used to sail on sailboats without any modern technical aids. He would find the banks by measuring the depth of the sea with a line that he would simply feed by hand, to measure the depth so as to find the bank. He used sight, lines and the stars to find the locations. He did not even need a map and a compass. For my part, I am afraid to go too far anymore. I do not fish up to La Esquina and Cape Bank. I limit my fishing expeditions to the waters located between Quitasueño and Providencia, and Serrana and Roncador. I think that lately the fishing production has decreased about 50% on the islands. Chicken was traditionally more expensive than fish. But now it is the opposite. Fish become scarce and more expensive. You have to go in deeper waters to find something. The problem is not only in Providencia but also in Serrana and Quitasueño. The water is hot, there are too many industrial fishermen. The changes in the climate are very problematic. For the record, it is issued in Providencia Island, on the eighteenth (18) day of October of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016). Dues $11.500.oo. Decree 0726 of 2016. [Signed] AFFIANT: LANDEL HERNANDO ROBINSON ARCHBOLD C.C. [Colombian National ID Card] N° 15.241.653 of San Andrés Island
Annex 62
375
[Signed] [Stamped and initialled] THE SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE CIRCUIT MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES THE WRIT ENDS HERE
Annex 62
376
BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION FOR EXTRA-PROCEDURAL DECLARATION In the city of Providencia, Department of San Andrés, Republic of Colombia, on the eighteenth (18) day of October of two-thousand sixteen (2016), in the Single Notary Public of the Notary Circuit of Providencia, appeared: LANDEL HERNANDO ROBINSON ARCHBOLD bearing National ID / NUIP #0015241653. [Signed] Autographic signature [Barcode] flpzk10usw18/10/2106-10:57:32 Pursuant to Article 18 of Decree-Law 019 of 2012, the affiant was identified by biometric authentication, through the comparison of his fingerprint against the biographical and biometric information of the database of the National Civil Status Registry. These minutes are part of the extra-procedural declaration FISHING DECLARATION, rendered by the affiant destined to MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF COLOMBIA [Digital signature and stamp] [Stamped and initialled] MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES Single Notary Public of the Circuit of Providencia
Annex 62
377
378
= SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = PROVIDENCIA ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA – COLOMBIA == RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE PROVIDENCIA ISLAND NOTARY CIRCUIT : In the Island of Providencia, municipality of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the eighteenth (18 ) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before me, MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES, Single Notary Public of the Providencia Island Notary Circuit, WAL[L]IN[G]FORD GONZALEZ STEELE BORDEN appeared, identified as stated below his signature, in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the legal implications entailed by lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment whatsoever to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full responsibility.-THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein, given freely and voluntarily, relate to facts that he attests to by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-My name is as stated above, Wallingford Gonzalez Steele Borden, I am sixty-six (66) years old, I have lived in Providencia Island for sixty-six (66) years and I reside in the following sector: Santa Catalina, married civil status, bearer of National ID number 4.034.645 issued in Providencia.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that my maternal grandfather was a fisherman born in
Annex 63
Annex 63:AFFIDAVIT BY MR WALLINGFORD GONZALEZ STEELE BORDEN,
18 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
379
the island of Great Cayman. He frequented Serrana Cay to carry out fishing activities and during one of his trips [sic] began to fish with my father at the age of 10. In those days we fished on catboats with two sails because there were no engines. Later on, I continued to fish on sailboats on my own with the fishing techniques I learned from my father. I began fishing with a line and hook, and later I began to use a harpoon for diving in shallow waters. But now I mostly fish in deep waters with lines and traps, looking in particular for red snappers. We artisanal fishermen always fished in Roncador, Quitasueño, Serrana and in the area of the 82° west of Providencia. We would even go further and reach Bobel Cays close to Cape Gracias a Dios. But at that time the expeditions occurred less frequently because in the sixties we had a lot of fish also around Providencia. We would go in these expeditions to the Northern and Western banks a few times a year and stay there one or two months. With less fish around Providencia we started going more often to these banks. Of course it was easier once engines arrived and we started using lanchas. To go on a catboat to the North Cays is a demanding physical exercise. Lanchas allow us to reach the grounds with less effort. I personally used to go one or two times a month to Quitasueño and Serrana. When I went on longer expeditions, I would even sleep a month in Serrana where I built a hut with coconut palm leafs. Our stay in Serrana depends on the boat we use. When we go on small boats like my lancha, I stay two or three days. When we went on bigger boats that carried our catboats, we would stay up to fifteen days and, sometimes, even a month in Serrana Cays. There I would also take the opportunity to collect “see weed” or algae, which is an aphrodisiac, bird and turtle eggs, as well as tortoiseshell that I would then send to Panama and sell for US$ 30 dollars a pound. Nowadays we do not do that anymore, because catching turtles is banned but we keep fishing fish, conchs and lobsters. One of the strategies we used to catch turtles was to go to the areas where this type of sea weed abounds and wait for the turtles to surface for air, and then go after them. Catboats are specifically designed to catch turtles in the sea. We
Annex 63
380
used harpoons and nets to catch them. I have also fished in the South Cays, specifically in Bolívar Cay [Alburquerque]. We sailed to San Andrés on larger boats and from there we would go to Bolívar Cay [Alburquerque] on smaller artisanal boats to carry out fishing activities. I got to spend several nights on Bolívar Cay [Alburquerque] during our fishing activities in the south. But now I mostly fish in the 82nd Meridian, west of Providencia, with traps. In the past, when we did not have refrigeration nor ice, we carried up to two hundred pounds of salt in our trips to the North Cays, to salt the fish and turtle and be able to preserve them until we returned to Providencia. I used to navigate with sails up to Serrana and Quitasueño ever since I was 14 years old. We sailed at a speed of approximately 8 or 10 knots. When we did the route we used a 16 ft.-long catboat. If night fell during the trip, we took turns sleeping on the boat while we sailed until we reached our destination. You can sail very far if you have the skills. In my trips to Serrana and Quitasueño, I would make around 62 miles. But those who went to Roncador navigate even 90 miles. When we go to Serrana to fish, we fish both in areas close to the cay as well as in farther areas. When we fish close to the cay, it is because we are looking for shallow banks. But we also fish farther from the cays in the deep-sea banks located between Providencia and Quitasueño, between Quitasueño and Serrana, and between Serrana and Roncador. In those areas, there are large fishing banks that are very well known to us, such as “Far Bank” and “Julio Bank”. There you find groupers which are the fish that the cooperative is most interested in. Those fishing banks have names given to them by the people who have discovered them. But no, there is no Wallin[g]ford bank at the moment. I sell the fishing product that I bring back from my fishing activities to the fishing co-operative “Fish and Farm” in which I am affiliated. Fishing is the major source of income for many families on the island. Even now, my youngest daughter is in college and I support her with the resources I obtain from fishing. There are no jobs on the island. This is why fishing is very important. I try to carry the tradition. My children are not very enthusiastic about fishing but
Annex 63
381
I bring many young guys to fish with me because I want to teach them the arts of fishing. In my youth we ate fish every day except on Sundays, when we ate chicken. We only ate beef and pork in the month of December. Fish is still the basic staple of our gastronomy. We have a lot of different recipes like Rondon. In fact, we have many festivities about the sea like the Semana del Mar [Week of the Sea] and the Chub festival. I know that the Colombian Navy is there to protect the artisanal fishermen but my feeling is that they are mostly interested in fighting drug traffickers. I try to avoid them because otherwise they stop me to carry out controls and by the time they are done part of my ice has melted and sometimes I have even had to go back home. I have seen industrial fishing boats fishing with compressors, including from Nicaragua. This is a problem because they can take a lot of fish in very little time. I have no problems with the Raizales from Nicaragua. My wife is from the Corn Islands. I have family there and in the Cayman Islands. I am however concerned by our current situation and the loss of our ancestral territory. For the record, it is issued in Providencia Island, on the eighteenth (18) day of October of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016). Dues $11.500.oo. Decree 0726 of 2016. [Signed] AFFIANT: WALLINGFORD GONZALEZ STEELE BORDEN C.C. [Colombian National ID Card] N° 4.034.645 of Providencia Island THE SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE CIRCUIT [Signed] [Stamped and initialled] MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES THE WRIT ENDS HERE
Annex 63
382
BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION FOR EXTRA-PROCEDURAL DECLARATION In the city of Providencia, Department of San Andrés, Republic of Colombia, on the eighteenth (18) day of October of two-thousand sixteen (2016), in the Single Notary Public of the Notary Circuit of Providencia, appeared: WALLINGFORD GONZALEZ STEELE BORDEN bearing National ID / NUIP #0018005106. [Signed] Autographic signature [Barcode] 8g471lk9k6st18/10/2106-15:14:27 Pursuant to Article 18 of Decree-Law 019 of 2012, the affiant was identified by biometric authentication, through the comparison of his fingerprint against the biographical and biometric information of the database of the National Civil Status Registry. These minutes are part of the extra-procedural declaration FISHING DECLARATION, rendered by the affiant destined to MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF COLOMBIA [Digital signature and stamp] [Stamped and initialled] MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES Single Notary Public of the Circuit of Providencia
Annex 63
383
384
= SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = PROVIDENCIA ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA – COLOMBIA == RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE PROVIDENCIA ISLAND NOTARY CIRCUIT : In the Island of Providencia, municipality of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the eighteenth (18 ) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before me, MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES, Single Notary Public of the Providencia Island Notary Circuit, ORNULDO RODOLFO WALTERS DAWKINS appeared, identified as stated below his signature, in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the legal implications entailed by lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment whatsoever to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full responsibility.-THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein, given freely and voluntarily, relate to facts that he attests to by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-My name is as stated above, Ornuldo Rodolfo Walters Dawkins, I am fifty (50) years old, I have lived in Providencia Island again for seven (07) years now and I reside in the following sector: Old Town, civil status single, bearer of National ID number 18.005.106 issued in Providencia.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that I was born in Providencia and have lived in the
Annex 64
Annex 64:AFFIDAVIT BY MR ORNULDO RODOLFO WALTERS DAWKINS,
18 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
385
islands of San Andrés and Providencia. I began fishing when I was 9 years old with Mr Shemuel Dawkins, he is the person who taught me how to fish. In the past, apart from fishing, I also worked for the municipality for 8 years, then I travelled to San Andrés Island to work as a fisherman for nearly 15 consecutive years and 7 years ago I returned to Providencia. As a fisherman I have gone to the North Cays: Serranilla, Roncador, Queena [Quitasueño] and Bajo Nuevo. I have also gone to the fishing banks located between Nicaragua and Honduras such as Bob cays [Bobel cay] and the 82nd Meridian on the Nicaraguan line. But we used to go beyond the meridian. We fished as close as 8 miles off Great Corn Island and Little Corn Island. We could see those Nicaraguan islands during our fishing activities. I have always fished with other people that were on lanchas, artisanal boats, or industrial boats. We used to fish together without problems. Most of my fishing trips to the 82nd Meridian were on boats with two outboard engines. Those are our artisanal boats today. I fish: Rock Fish, Yellow Tail, Silk, Caribbean, [and] John pou. Those are the fish that sell the most in the market. Now I fish with the co-operative’s boat. I no longer fish beyond the 82nd Meridian because we are not keen on fishing there. The cooperative prefers that we do not go that far with the shared boat because of the current situation. They are afraid that something might happen, since there have been incidents with Nicaraguan coastguards; I know that apart from what we hear in the media, there is the one with [the] Condorito, who[se] [crew] were taken to Nicaragua and mistreated 5 years ago.. We prefer to fish in the North Cays. I continue to fish in the area between Providencia and Quitasueño. I have fished in Julio Bank, Far Bank, North East Bank and Serrana. But we also fish farther from the cays like for example as far as 35 miles from the north tip of Queena. This we do as artisanal fishing, which is fishing with a line and industrial fishing, instead, is with line with thousands of fishhooks (Long Line).
Annex 64
386
For the record, it is issued in Providencia Island, on the eighteenth (18) day of October of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016). Dues $11.500.oo. Decree 0726 of 2016. [Signed] AFFIANT: ORNULDO RODOLFO WALTERS DAWKINS C.C. [Colombian National ID Card] N° 18.005.106 of Providencia Island [Signed] [Stamped and initialled] THE SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE CIRCUIT MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES [Signed] THE WRIT ENDS HERE
Annex 64
387
BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION FOR EXTRA-PROCEDURAL DECLARATION In the city of Providencia, Department of San Andrés, Republic of Colombia, on the eighteenth (18) day of October of two-thousand sixteen (2016), in the Single Notary Public of the Notary Circuit of Providencia, appeared: ORNULDO RODOLFO WALTERS DAWKINS bearing National ID / NUIP #0018005106. [Signed] Autographic signature [Barcode] 89fhjgbpf21l18/10/2106-14:41:03 Pursuant to Article 18 of Decree-Law 019 of 2012, the affiant was identified by biometric authentication, through the comparison of his fingerprint against the biographical and biometric information of the database of the National Civil Status Registry. These minutes are part of the extra-procedural declaration FISHING DECLARATION, rendered by the affiant destined to MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFARIS OF COLOMBIA [Digital signature and stamp] [Stamped and initialled] MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES Single Notary Public of the Circuit of Providencia
Annex 64
388
= SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = PROVIDENCIA ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA – COLOMBIA == RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE PROVIDENCIA ISLAND NOTARY CIRCUIT : In the Island of Providencia, municipality of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the nineteenth (19 ) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before me, MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES, Single Notary Public of the Providencia Island Notary Circuit, LIGORIO LUIS ARCHBOLD HOWARD appeared, identified as stated below his signature, in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the legal implications entailed by lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment whatsoever to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full responsibility. -THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein, given freely and voluntarily, relate to facts that he attests to by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-My name is as stated above, Ligorio Luis Archbold Howard, I am forty-six (46) years old, I have lived in Providencia Island for the same number of years as my age and I reside in the following sector: Santa Catalina, civil status in a domestic partnership, bearer of National ID number 18.005.238 issued in Providencia.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that I am a fisherman, informal
Annex 65
Annex 65:AFFIDAVIT BY MR LIGORIO LUIS ARCHBOLD HOWARD,
19 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
389
[boat] pilot and vice president of the fishermen co-operative “Fish and Farm”. Most of my time I spend building boats and fishing. I combine both activities. As my father used to say, “you have to learn how to live on an island”; we fish but we also farm. We have to do a little of everything. Before, fishing boats were often imported from the mainland. But since it was sporadically, we had to learn to build boats ourselves; it is all like a chain. We used to build larger wooden boats of 50 ft. long that could carry 20 sailors to the Northern fishing grounds. In those days the boat could be considered big, but today what used to be seen as a big boat is in fact a small boat when you compare it to non-artisanal boats. These boats could carry 5 to 15 small catboats on their decks. These were then used to fish in those cays for weeks or months. The large boat would often be used as a station for the [sic] fishermen to go to after their activities. But very often the fishermen would build shelters on the cays where they would be able to rest after their fishing activities and to process (salt) the products they fished. Once filled with fish, the large boat would return to the main island to sell the catch to the community, while most of the fishermen remained with their catboats at the provisional station in order to prepare a new stock in the Northern fishing grounds. Sometimes the large boat would sail to Jamaica to sell the products and then go back to the cays to pick up the fishermen that remained and their new stock, in order to finally return to Providencia and San Andrés. Today it is easier to go to the Northern Cays thanks to the lanchas that are equipped with outboard engines. We can go farther in less time. For me, artisanal fishing relates to the arts of fishing; it is the ancestral way of fishing. Instead of using the modern industrial means that rely on long lines with thousands of hooks that do not discriminate, you fish with lines with four, five or ten hooks. It is the traditional way. Subsistence fishing is just for household, personal and family use. Artisanal fishing is for commercial purposes but it is also necessary for our subsistence. I believe that 90% of the population of Providencia depends on artisanal fishing. This is because there are not many jobs. People have to fish to better their
Annex 65
390
living conditions. Many of us fishermen receive support from the co-operative in the form of resources to help us in our fishing projects. While some fishermen have their own boats, others rely on the three boats of the co-operative. Right now the biggest fishing boat in Providencia is a 35 ft. boat owned by the co-operative, but currently it is their only one functioning. I have my own boat but I am currently repairing it. This is why, right now, I depend on other fishermen or the co-operative to go fishing. Since the [Court’s] decision, I believe that all the fishermen in Providencia are very much on alert. In my case, I felt very downhearted because I had already invested a lot of money – 150,000 million pesos - and time fixing my boat. But I do not think it is safe to go where I used to fish. You cannot simply go to Quitasueño like before. I have to find someone to accompany me on my trips. I know the Colombian Navy has a mission to protect us, but I have no guarantees that they will be able to do something about it. We know that Nicaraguans have committed acts of piracy against American sailing boats and others. This is why we are afraid to go in these waters at this time. Those who still go to the cays now, have to follow the co-operative’s policy that there must at least be two boats. But most of us stopped going there. You just do not want to take the risk with the Nicaraguan boats. I know that Minival Ward was attacked by fishermen from Nicaragua. These are Nicaraguan fishermen that come all the way to Quitasueño and Cape Bank. They did not use to come there before. These are not artisanal Raizal fishermen from Nicaragua, they are equipped with scuba tanks and come in large numbers. I am afraid of them but also of the coastguard of Nicaragua. A few years ago, while I was navigating on a sailboat northwest of Quitasueño, towards Honduras, I was stopped by a fast lancha with people that were armed. They identified themselves as the coastguard of Nicaragua. We always fish in groups, as fishermen affiliated with the co-operative. Because it is necessary for safety, which is why we fish in pairs and we maintain permanent radio contact with the [Colombian] coastguard. Before, we did not use to see other fishermen around the cays. In the banks of Quitasueño
Annex 65
391
only Colombian and Honduran fishermen would fish, but we did not see artisanal fishermen from Nicaragua. Nowadays after the [Court’s] decision they come to fish close to the North Cays. Our parents and grandparents did not know about the maritime limits in those waters; they used to fish in Bobel Cay close to Honduras, Serrana, Quitasueño, Serranilla and Southwest Cay [Alburquerque]. Now we cannot do that so easily. To get to Quitasueño we have to sail 35 miles from point of reef north of Providencia and to get there we have to sail in Nicaraguan waters. We fear to get stopped there. You have to be sure before going there that your engines work properly. Right now I fish in Nicaragua’s waters north and west of Providencia. But I do that because I know that I am close to home and can come back quickly if there are problems. But now I always go with someone else and remain close to Colombia’s waters. I do not go all the way to Serrana and Quitasueño because there are more possibilities of getting stopped by Nicaraguan fishermen or coastguard. The fishing grounds of Far Bank, North East and Julio Banks are traditional fishing grounds of Providencia and now some of their coordinates are in Nicaraguan waters. They are deep-water banks very important for artisanal fishermen of Providencia because it is where you can find the fish most appreciated by the islanders. We fish from Low Cay off the northern tip of Providencia up to the southern tip of Quitasueño. I spend 5 or 6 days in Julio Bank, North-East Bank, Far Bank and Low Cay. We fish deep water groupers that we call “John pou”, Mandilous, Satten, Red Eyes, Soapfish, Yellow Eyes and Bream. There are similar deep-sea banks between Quitasueño and Serrana, but I do not know their names. Fishermen try to keep them secret, it is a family tradition. They might have a name but I know that I am not the first one who went there so I did not name them. They are in the jurisdiction of Nicaragua but I do not fish there right now because they are far from home and I run the risk of crossing dangerous people. I, for example, named a bank Rose because, one time, when I was fishing there for the first time with my father and my uncle, I pulled up a line with 10 hooks and the
Annex 65
392
water underneath turned red due to the color of all the red fish that we caught. My great-uncle used to sail from Quitasueño to Providencia on a 14 ft. catboat when fishing. I used to go fishing to Cape Bank and the 82nd Meridian with my father. But we would even go as far as Bobel Cay and Rosalind. My great-grandfather bought a 31 ft. boat in Cartagena and sailed it back to Providencia. We constantly fished between Quitasueño and Serrana, also in Little Bank, 15 miles off Roncador. Nowadays the situation is problematic because there are less fish due to the increase of the temperature of the water, the large number of industrial fishermen who use compressors and long lines. The situation is particularly difficult because there is not much left around Providencia. We always tried to preserve the resources around Providencia as a reserve by fishing farther away in the North Cays. But now it is very difficult to fish anywhere. The production has reduced very significantly. We used to be able to catch 5.000 pounds of fish just by spending two days in Quitasueño. A fellow fisherman left last week to go to the North. But when he gets back, 15 days after his departure, he will probably have around 2.000 pounds of fish. We see the Nicaraguan boats that bring compressors. They are industrial boats with 65 to 90 people. If you look at them, you do not see the boat, you just see the people. Like the islet close to Múcura Island, where you see houses and people everywhere but not the land. The Nicaraguan fishing boats are like that and they come with 15 or 20 cayucos tied behind the boat. It is better to remain far from them because some will try to take your equipment and your products. We have cultural festivities that concern the marine environment. We especially organize catboats and canoe races. Another celebration is the Chub festival that is called after the name of a fish that is particularly appreciated in the sector of Rocky Point. They love that fish and prepare it in many ways. It is a one-day celebration that is held once a year. We also have the celebration called Semana del Mar [Week of the Sea], which is mostly centered around sailing boat races and horse races. We use our traditional fishing boats, the catboats, which are designed to catch turtles in the sea, during these races. But in
Annex 65
393
fact everybody who headed to the fishing areas with those boats would race all the way to the grounds. This is the cultural fun part. For the record, it is issued in Providencia Island, on the nineteenth (19) day of October of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016). Dues $11.500.oo. Decree 0726 of 2016. [Signed] AFFIANT: LIGORIO LUIS ARCHBOLD HOWARD C.C. [Colombian National ID Card] N° 18.005.238 of Providencia Island [Signed] [Stamped and initialled] THE SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE CIRCUIT MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES
Annex 65
394
BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION FOR EXTRA-PROCEDURAL DECLARATION In the city of Providencia, Department of San Andrés, Republic of Colombia, on the nineteenth (19) day of October of two-thousand sixteen (2016), in the Single Notary Public of the Notary Circuit of Providencia, appeared: LIGORIO LUIS ARCHBOLD HOWARD bearing National ID / NUIP #0018005238. [Signed] Autographic signature [Barcode] 3syhvpt1pkm919/10/2106-08:25:47 Pursuant to Article 18 of Decree-Law 019 of 2012, the affiant was identified by biometric authentication, through the comparison of his fingerprint against the biographical and biometric information of the database of the National Civil Status Registry. These minutes are part of the extra-procedural declaration FISHING DECLARATION, rendered by the affiant destined to MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF COLOMBIA [Digital signature and stamp] [Stamped and initialled] MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES Single Notary Public of the Circuit of Providencia
Annex 65
395
396
= SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = PROVIDENCIA ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA – COLOMBIA == RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE PROVIDENCIA ISLAND NOTARY CIRCUIT : In the Island of Providencia, municipality of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the nineteenth (19 ) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before me, MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES, Single Notary Public of the Providencia Island Notary Circuit, JONATHAN ARCHBOLD ROBINSON appeared, identified as stated below his signature, in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the legal implications entailed by lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment whatsoever to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full responsibility. -THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein, given freely and voluntarily, relate to facts that he attests to by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-My name is as stated above, Jonathan Archbold Robinson, I am eighty-eight (88) years old, I have lived in Providencia Island for eighty-eight (88) years, and I reside in the following sector: Santa Catalina, Profession or occupation fisherman and farmer, civil status in a domestic partnership, bearer of National ID number 991.555 issued in Providencia Island.-SIXTH:-As stated, I
Annex 66
Annex 66:AFFIDAVIT BY MR JONATHAN ARCHBOLD ROBINSON,
19 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
397
declare under oath that I began to fish when I was 18 years old, with my father. My father was a fisherman. I fished most of my life in Serrana, Roncador and Quitasueño. I used to go in long fishing expeditions of even one month in these cays to lay traps for turtles, fishing and collecting seabirds’ eggs. We would then corn [salt] the products and bring them back for selling in the markets of Providencia and San Andrés. My father was always very hard on me when fishing, because he wanted me to become a captain and I wanted to be a fisherman. In 1950 I arrived in Providencia again and I started to fish, I raised eight children selling salted fish from Serrana, Roncador and Quitasueño, up to this day. I am 88 years old and I am still a fisherman but I cannot go far from Providencia now. I think that the last time I went to the North Cays was 10 years ago. I remember that my father and three brothers bought a boat in Great Cayman and brought it to Providencia and started to fish. We fished and farmed, it was the only thing we could do. We always fished in groups, my uncles fished with their children and my father had three of us and we fished with him. We also fished along with other people. We fished around the island. I built the house that I live in with fish at 20 cents a pound. My father grew oranges and took them to Cartagena to sell. I have fished in Nicaraguan waters; we fished in Quenna and all that zone because in those days there were no limits. I have fished in Jamaica on a fishing boat, laying traps and fishing grouper, snapper, kingfish, barracuda, deep-water fish. We used the conch and lobster as bait because at the time they were of less value. I have fished between Serrana and Quitasueño, and between Quitasueño and Roncador, fishing in deep waters. In Serrana we collected seabirds’ eggs by the thousands. We caught turtles using nets and rings in the waters surrounding Quitasueño. I also built boats, catboats and other sailing boats. I am also a carpenter that uses wood that comes from Cartagena. I have spent my whole life fishing with sons, grandsons, relatives and neighbours. I know Julio Bank, North East Bank. We would stay for 2 months, sometimes 3 months, on the cays fishing, collecting seabirds’ eggs to send to San Andrés to sell, catching turtles and
Annex 66
398
corning [salting] fish. We stayed on the cays overnight. We built shelters, fished and collected eggs, and other boats would come and pick up the products and bring them to Providencia or take them to San Andrés. Jamaicans would arrive at the cays to fish and we would fly the Colombian flag on the boat when going out to the cays. My father died at 96 years of age and he had been fishing in those waters until that time. For the record, it is issued in Providencia Island, on the nineteenth (19) day of October of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016). Dues $11.500.oo. Decree 0726 of 2016. [Signed] [Fingerprint] AFFIANT: JONATHAN ARCHBOLD ROBINSON C.C. [Colombian National ID Card] N° 991.555 of Providencia Island [Signed] [Stamped and initialled] THE SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE CIRCUIT MARIO RAFAEL MIRANDA MORALES [Document bears stamp reading: That the biometric system mandated by law was not used and therefore there was no fingerprint digitalization for this act, due to the following reasons: (…) 6. Other: At residence Article 3. Resolution [illegible] of 2015]
Annex 66
399
400
3 = SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = SAN ANDRES ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA==================================== ADDRESS: AVENIDA FRANCISCO NEWBALL- CENTRO COMERCIAL DANN LOCALES 133- 134- TELEFONOS – 5126119- TELEFAX- 5122112- SAN ANDRES-ISLAND-COLOMBIA==================================== RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT In the city of San Andrés, Island, provincial capital of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the twenty-first (21) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before the Single Notary Public of the San Andrés Island Notary Circuit, the functions of which are discharged by RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA, ALFREDO RAFAEL HOWARD NEWBALL, identified with national identification card number 990514 issued in San Andrés, appeared in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the implications of lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full civil, criminal or disciplinary liability.-THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein are given freely and voluntarily, and that I have personal knowledge thereof and can attest to them by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-GENERAL LEGAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION- My
Annex 67
Annex 67:AFFIDAVIT BY MR ALFREDO RAFAEL HOWARD NEWBALL,
21 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
401
4 name is Alfredo Rafael Howard Newball, I am eighty-six (86) years old, I live in San Andrés Island, at the following address Sarie Bay Boulevard, profession or occupation maritime sailor, civil status widower.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that I was born in 1930 in Providencia Island. My ancestors came [to the island] in the 17th century and my family has lived there ever since. My great-great-grandfather was a great sailor and boat owner and he taught his trade to his five sons who also became seamen and boat captains. My grandfather taught me to be a sailor since I was 8 years old; I learned what the sea is and how to perform in it. The sea is very beautiful but it can also be dangerous. Everything that I am going to tell is because I lived it and experienced it since I was very young. In those old days, we would go to the North Cays to do artisanal fishing. We fished to fulfil our own needs and what was left we distributed among the neighbours in the community. There was no way of selling in an industrial manner at that time. It was a traditional craft, both those who fished as well as those who farmed. In those days there was no ice, so we caught the fish, cleaned them, salted them, and set them to dry. That is what we call salt fish. That was the way we preserved the fish. This practice was more common among the fishermen from Providencia who were closer to the North Cays. The fishing more often took place in the banks where there were cays in order to be able to sleep [there] at night. In those days we lived off the sea, there were no industries or factories. We were wholly dependent on fishing since we ate fish every day. We fished Snapper, Rock Fish, Yellow-tail, among others. In those days, there were no limits, we fished in all the cays and banks. The fishermen from the Nicaraguan coast would also come to fish to the cays and banks. They came and went, and we came and went. It was the same territory, you did not have to ask anyone for permission, there was no authority at that time. We have a lot of connections with the Nicaraguan coast, as reflected by the fact that we share the same last names. When there were problems with the Sandinistas, many emigrated to San Andrés and Providencia, others then went back and many stayed and became
Annex 67
402
5 Colombian nationals. To fish, we would go in small boats, between 10 and 25 ft., on catboats with sails. With a 20 ft. sailing boat, good islander sailors could go anywhere in the Caribbean. The boats were built with red cedar, a tradition since the time of the English puritans who arrived in the 17th century. Likewise, we used hooks and lines and a water glass to be able to see where the fish were. We used conch and lobster as bait; these products were eaten very little at that time. All the inhabitants of the island were sailors; it was the only way to survive since we were so far away from the Colombian mainland. There was a lot of trade with Central America’s coastal communities. In those days, we did not have any electronic instruments. There was the sun, the moon and the stars. We used the sextant, set square and parallel ruler as aids. With our boats, no matter how small, their sails and our navigation instruments we could go anywhere in the world. Another traditional activity related to the sea is the sailboats race; nowadays, especially in Providencia, catboat races are still held, a tradition that comes from the Cayman Islands. Likewise, we used the sea for recreation, especially on the beaches. It was very traditional for the whole family to go to the beach on Good Friday, which was the opportunity for the youths to meet and fall in love. To this day, the tradition of having baptisms in the sea survives; Baptists and Adventists follow this tradition. Likewise, an important traditional activity is trade. The sea was the only way to go from one place to another and acquire elements that we did not produce on the islands. The sea was everything to us. In the 1940s and 1950s there was also trade in agricultural products with Bocas del Toro and Colon in Panama, and surely there were exchanges of products with the Nicaraguan coast, especially with Bluefields. On the Panamanian coast we acquired other essential products, such as furniture, clothes, grains, medicines, etc. In those days there was very little trade with mainland Colombia. It was common for fishermen from the Nicaraguan coast to come and buy sea turtles that we would catch in the North Cays and banks. The turtle’s shell was very valuable in Europe back then. Ever since like 10 years ago, there have been fishermen co-
Annex 67
403
6 operatives that help to commercialize fishing products in the islands. Generally, the fishermen from San Andrés and Providencia are the owners of the boats they use for their fishing activities but the cooperatives own boats that they can lend to the fishermen. In my time, there were no organizations of this type. Fish are more scarce nowadays. Artisanal fishermen have to go farther more often to survive. After the 2012 decision, we do hear that the fishermen have difficulties with the Nicaraguan coastguard. They stop them, they take away their products, their equipment and they threaten them and mistreat them. The Affiant displayed sound mind, expressed himself clearly and signs the present declaration writ with the undersigned Notary Public, once read and approved, his right index fingerprint was set. NOTES. ______________________________________________ [Signed] The Affiant: CC. [Colombian National ID Card No.] 990514 [Signed] The Notary Public RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA ERTSW. [signature and stamp] ______________________________________________ THE WRIT ENDS HERE
Annex 67
404
7 BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION FOR EXTRA-PROCEDURAL DECLARATION In the city of San Andrés Island, Department of San Andrés, Republic of Colombia, on the twenty-first (21) day of October of two-thousand sixteen (2016), in the Single Notary Public of the Notary Circuit of San Andrés Island, appeared: ALFREDO HOWARD NEWBALL, bearing National ID / NUIP #0000990514. [Signed] Autographic signature [Barcode] 583tq10gzl21/10/2106-17:34:57 Pursuant to Article 18 of Decree-Law 019 of 2012, the affiant was identified by biometric authentication, through the comparison of his fingerprint against the biographical and biometric information of the database of the National Civil Status Registry. These minutes are part of the extra-procedural declaration EXTRA-PROCEDURAL AFFIDAVIT, rendered by the affiant destined to MESSRS. MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS. [Digital signature and stamp] [Stamped and initialled] RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA Single Notary Public of the Circuit of San Andres Island
Annex 67
405
406
= SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = SAN ANDRES ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA============= ADDRESS: AVENIDA FRANCISCO NEWBALL- CENTRO COMERCIAL DANN LOCALES 133- 134- TELEFONOS – 5126119- TELEFAX- 5122112- SAN ANDRES-ISLAND- COLOMBIA==================================== RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT In the city of San Andrés, Island, provincial capital of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the twenty-first (21) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before the Single Notary Public of the San Andrés Island Notary Circuit, the functions of which are discharged by RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA, ORLANDO FRANCIS POWELL, identified with national identification card number 15.242.65[8] issued in San Andrés, appeared in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the implications of lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full civil, criminal or disciplinary liability.-THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein are given freely and voluntarily, and that I have personal knowledge thereof and can attest to them by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-GENERAL LEGAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION- My name is Orlando Francis Powell, I am fifty-six (56) years old, I
Annex 68
Annex 68:AFFIDAVIT BY MR ORLANDO FRANCIS POWELL,
21 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
407
live in San Andrés Island, at the following address Sarie Bay neighbourhood, profession or occupation boat Captain, civil status single.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that I am a member of the San Luis Fish & Farm Association. Also a member of the Association of Fishermen and Farmers of San Andrés and Providencia (ASOPACFA), that promoted a project in 2004 to take artisanal fishermen to the North Cays (Serranilla, Serrana, Roncador, Quitasueño, Bajo Nuevo). The fishing zone is chosen depending on the fishing project; for example, when seeking conch, you go to Serrana. The activities are carried out with a mother vessel 55 ft. long and 17 ft. wide (the vessel’s name is Blue Fin). The fishing activity is done in groups of 20 fishermen and 5 other smaller boats are taken. This is because Cape Bank, which is one of the best places to fish, is located approximately 100 nautical miles from San Andrés. It takes more or less 10 hours to reach the fishing grounds. From Providencia it is much shorter. We fished in the territories that have ancestrally belonged to the indigenous Raizal population. The last time I went in an expedition we went to Roncador because there we do not risk crossing the Nicaraguan coastguards. The catch was approximately 10.000 pounds of red fish, although Roncador is a small bank compared to Quitasueño, Serrana and Cape Bank. But I am afraid to go to these places nowadays because I might come across the Nicaraguan coastguards. There have been incidents with illegal fishermen from other countries, they have been reported to the local authorities (the Department’s [provincial] Fishing Secretariat, Port Captaincy, Coast Guard), through the action of the co-operatives or associations. They [foreign illegal fishermen] do not prevent us from fishing but sometimes they use their compressors and this is a problem for the availability of resources. Our products are sold on the island, as opposed to industrial fishing that exports their products. The difference between artisanal and industrial fishing is also established by the size of the vessel and the fishing gear. The Affiant displayed sound mind, expressed himself clearly and signs the present declaration writ with the undersigned Notary
Annex 68
408
Public, once read and approved, his right index fingerprint was set. NOTES. ______________________________________________ [Signed] The Affiant: CC. [Colombian National ID Card No.] 15.242.658 [Signed and stamped] The Notary Public RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA ERTSW. ______________________________________________ THE WRIT ENDS HERE
Annex 68
409
BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION FOR EXTRA-PROCEDURAL DECLARATION In the city of San Andrés Island, Department of San Andrés, Republic of Colombia, on the twenty-first (21) day of October of two-thousand sixteen (2016), in the Single Notary Public of the Notary Circuit of San Andrés Island, appeared: ORLANDO EDUARDO FRANCIS POWELL, bearing National ID / NUIP #0015242658. [Signed] Autographic signature [Barcode] 1234jqw6p9wh 21/10/2106-17:02:31 Pursuant to Article 18 of Decree-Law 019 of 2012, the affiant was identified by biometric authentication, through the comparison of his fingerprint against the biographical and biometric information of the database of the National Civil Status Registry. These minutes are part of the extra-procedural declaration EXTRA-PROCEDURAL AFFIDAVIT, rendered by the affiant destined to MESSRS. MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS. [Digital signature and stamp] [Stamped and initialled] RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA Single Notary Public of the Circuit of San Andres Island
Annex 68
410
= SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = SAN ANDRES ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA============= ADDRESS: AVENIDA FRANCISCO NEWBALL- CENTRO COMERCIAL DANN LOCALES 133- 134- TELEFONOS – 5126119- TELEFAX- 5122112- SAN ANDRES-ISLAND-COLOMBIA==================================== RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT In the city of San Andrés, Island, provincial capital of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the twenty-first (21) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before the Single Notary Public of the San Andrés Island Notary Circuit, the functions of which are discharged by RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA, DOMINGO SÁNCHEZ MCNABB, identified with national identification card number 15.242.603 issued in San Andrés, appeared in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the implications of lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full civil, criminal or disciplinary liability.-THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein are given freely and voluntarily, and that I have personal knowledge thereof and can attest to them by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-GENERAL LEGAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION:- My name is Domingo Sánchez McNabb, I am fifty-six (56) years old, I live in San Andrés Island, at the following address Avenida de las Américas N° 6-25 (5 esquinas), profession as Intermediate Professional Technician in Agricultural and Livestock Engineering and occupation as farmer, fisherman and ecologist, civil status married.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that I come from a family with a
Annex 69
Annex 69:AFFIDAVIT BY MR DOMINGO SÁNCHEZ MCNABB,
21 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
411
sea culture tradition. All of us on the island are seamen or sea women, given that in one way or another our daily activities and the ancestral knowledge and traditions are directly related to the sea. Among these activities we can mention bathing and playing in the sea, swimming, fishing, diving, among others. I have personally had experiences fishing in the North Cays for up to 42 days without seeing dry land; we used to go up to Cabo Gracias a Dios in Honduras or to Bajo Nuevo in search of new fishing banks. Before, having a catboat with sails was synonymous with being an artisanal fisherman. We used the water glass, a box with a glass [bottom], to see where the fish were from our boats, and lines of calibres between 50 and 150 pounds. In the 1970s the outboard engines were introduced and the catboats were cut to set up the engine. Different types of lines were introduced according to the intended fishing. Trawling was also introduced. For an artisanal islander fisherman any day is good for fishing, as long as there is good weather. We can say that fishing is done on average nine out of the twelve months of the year. Later on, and with the influence of the other islands of the Caribbean a new type of boat was introduced, called the “Kingfivers”, very fast and adapted for outboard engines. Besides, they had an autonomy of 4 to 5 days for travelling to the South Cays (Bolívar and Alburquerque) and the North Cays (Quitasueño, Roncador, Serranilla and Serrana). Fishing in the North Cays began by the artisanal fishermen living on the islands of Providencia. First, they used to go in search of sea turtles and eggs, and later they began to fish for conch, lobster and deep-sea fish of higher value in the islands markets. In those days, turtles were caught in large numbers with nets from our catboats. The demand for fishing products due to the increase in tourism, commerce and population growth led to fishing in the farther zones of the North of the Archipelago more often. Artisanal fishermen use boats of 40 ft. maximum, three tons’ maximum capacity, outboard engine of 100 horsepower and inboard engines of 250 horsepower maximum. Artisanal fishermen began to use some technological elements like, for example, radios, radars and GPS. These technological improvements greatly facilitated the fishing expeditions going farther, to the 82nd meridian and even close to cape Gracias a Dios. Artisanal fishermen possess a thorough knowledge of the fishing zones in this area of the Caribbean. Many times, Honduran industrial fishing boats hired captains
Annex 69
412
from the San Andrés Archipelago. The [Court’s 2012] decision had a strong impact on the psyche of the islands’ artisanal fishermen, who no longer feel as the kings of the seas, they feel like a bird who lost one of its wings. The dispute between Colombia and Nicaragua is a problem between Bogotá and Managua, not a problem between the peoples of the islands of San Andrés, Providencia, Corn Islands, Bluefields, Pearl Lagoon, Puerto Limón or Jamaica. We are all one culture and have always had cultural and trade exchanges. It was a single Caribbean Sea, there were no limits for the communities and we did not care, which allowed for the exchange of knowledge, information, culture and business with all of the Caribbean. After the [Court’s] decision we feel apprehensive about going to fish in the zones in the North and the 82nd meridian, since we do not know with certainty whether we can or cannot fish there. A couple of months ago, a fisherman named Aldrick had a mishap with the Nicaraguan coast guard when, due to a problem with his boat’s engine, he drifted away into Nicaraguan waters. The Nicaraguan authorities took his GPS, compass and fishing product and then he had to pay a series of fines to recover his fishing boat. The [crew] were not well treated, as evidenced by the fact that the fishermen arrived in San Andrés Island with the same clothes after five days of being retained in Nicaragua. The Affiant displayed sound mind, expressed himself clearly and signs the present declaration writ with the undersigned Notary Public, once read and approved, his right index fingerprint was set. NOTES. __________________________________________________ The Affiant: [signed] CC. [Colombian National ID Card No.] 15.242.603 S.A.I. The Notary Public RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA [signed and stamped] ERTSW. __________________________________________________________________ THE WRIT ENDS HERE
Annex 69
413
BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION FOR EXTRA-PROCEDURAL DECLARATION In the city of San Andrés Island, Department of San Andrés, Republic of Colombia, on the twenty-first (21) day of October of two-thousand sixteen (2016), in the Single Notary Public of the Notary Circuit of San Andrés Island, appeared: DOMINGO SANCHEZ MC NABB, bearing National ID / NUIP #0015242603. [Signed] Autographic signature [Barcode] 175Z2Z2MY3X0 21/10/2106-10:59:58 Pursuant to Article 18 of Decree-Law 019 of 2012, the affiant was identified by biometric authentication, through the comparison of his fingerprint against the biographical and biometric information of the database of the National Civil Status Registry. These minutes are part of the extra-procedural declaration EXTRA-PROCEDURAL AFFIDAVIT, rendered by the affiant destined to MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS. [Digital signature and stamp] [Stamped and initialled] RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA Single Notary Public of the Circuit of San Andres Island
Annex 69
414
= SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = SAN ANDRES ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA============= ADDRESS: AVENIDA FRANCISCO NEWBALL- CENTRO COMERCIAL DANN LOCALES 133- 134- TELEFONOS – 5126119- TELEFAX- 5122112- SAN ANDRES-ISLAND- COLOMBIA=================================== RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT In the city of San Andrés, Island, provincial capital of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the [twenty-fourth] (24) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before the Single Notary Public of the San Andrés Island Notary Circuit, the functions of which are discharged by RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA, EDUARDO STEELE MARTINEZ, identified with national identification card number 15.242.987 issued in San Andrés, appeared in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the implications of lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full civil, criminal or disciplinary liability.-THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein are given freely and voluntarily, and that I have personal knowledge thereof and can attest to them by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-GENERAL LEGAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION- My
Annex 70
Annex 70:AFFIDAVIT BY MR EDUARDO STEELE MARTÍNEZ,
24 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
415
name is Eduardo Steele Martinez, I am fifty-eight (58) years old, I live in San Andrés Island, at the following address Simpson Well upper part, profession or occupation artisanal fisherman, civil status married.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that for over 40 years I have fished in the cays appertaining to the Archipelago (Serranilla, Serrana, Roncador, Quitasueño, Bajo Nuevo). I have supported my family with this activity. Nowadays I do not go to the North Cays because I fear to fish in these areas. The fear relates to the fact that artisanal fishermen sometimes get stopped by the Nicaraguan coastguards that take their food when they try to reach Cape Bank or the North Cays. I am currently only fishing around San Andrés. The Affiant displayed sound mind, expressed himself clearly and signs the present declaration writ with the undersigned Notary Public, once read and approved, his right index fingerprint was set. NOTES. ______________________________________________ [Document bears stamp reading: SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF SAN ANDRES ISLAND Witnessed fingerprint Date 24 Oct. 2016] [Signed] The Affiant: CC. [Colombian National ID Card No.] 15.242.987 S.A.I. [Signed and stamped] The Notary Public RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA ERTSW. ______________________________________________ THE WRIT ENDS HERE
Annex 70
416
[Document bears stamp reading: That the biometric system mandated by law was not used and therefore there was no fingerprint digital verification for this act, due to the following reasons: (…) 4. Lack of connectivity Article 3. Resolution 6467 of 2015 S.N.R.] [Stamped and initialled]
Annex 70
417
418
= SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF = SAN ANDRES ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA============== ADDRESS: AVENIDA FRANCISCO NEWBALL- CENTRO COMERCIAL DANN LOCALES 133- 134- TELEFONOS – 5126119- TELEFAX- 5122112- SAN ANDRES-ISLAND- COLOMBIA==================================== RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT In the city of San Andrés, Island, provincial capital of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the twenty-fifth (25) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before the Single Notary Public of the San Andrés Island Notary Circuit, the functions of which are discharged by RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA, GEORGE DE LA CRUZ DE ALBA BARKER, identified with national identification card number 15.241.630 issued in San Andrés, appeared in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the implications of lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full civil, criminal or disciplinary liability.-THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein are given freely and voluntarily, and that I have personal knowledge thereof and can attest to them by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-GENERAL LEGAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION- My name is George de la Cruz De Alba Barker, I am fifty-nine (59)
Annex 71
Annex 71:AFFIDAVIT BY MR GEORGE DE LA CRUZ DE ALBA BARKER,
25 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
419
years old, I live in San Andrés Island, at the following address Schooner Bight, profession or occupation artisanal fisherman and sailor, civil status single in a domestic partnership.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that I am 60 years old and have fished for nearly 40 years. As a fisherman I go where the product is. If it is in Bolívar Cay [East-Southeast] or Alburquerque or Serranilla or Quitasueño or Roncador or to the west and the northwest at Cape Bank, that is where I will be. Cape Bank, what they sometimes call today Luna Verde but I do not know where this name comes from, is the name with which I have known that area since I was a child. Cape Bank goes from Cape Gracias a Dios in Honduras down to Costa Rica. It is not only limited to the area east of the 82nd Meridian and south of the 15th Parallel. My parents also fished in this area, and today we generally go there when there is not enough product in the South Cays. Fishing is more abundant in this zone and this is why we go there although it is farther than the South Cays. Usually we would go for a few days and fish between 1.000 and 1.500 pounds of fish. To fish that same amount in Bolívar Cay [East-Southeast] we would have to stay there between 8 and 10 days approximately according to the size of the vessel. In a month, we can earn seven million [Colombian] pesos in 5 or 6 fishing trips monthly fishing along the 82nd Meridian. We fish Yellow-tail, Ocean, Dolphin [fish], Barracuda, Kingfish, Snapper, Deep-water fish. In these areas we find other fishermen from the Nicaraguan coast, Bluefields and Corn Islands. We have no problems with them since we are the same people, we speak the same language. The problem is between Bogotá and Managua. Nowadays we cannot go to the North Cays because the decision whether they let us pass through is up to the Nicaraguan coastguard. There is the risk of being taken to the Nicaraguan coasts by the authorities. If you go to Quitasueño, the Nicaraguan coastguard will stop you on the way in and ask you whether you are passing through or fishing there. This happens when you go to Quitasueño and to Cape Bank. Usually they would stop the fishermen coming from San Andrés that are navigating west and north of Providencia to reach Cape
Annex 71
420
Bank or Quitasueño. Nowadays, after the [Court’s] decision, we cannot circulate in peace in the waters that belong to Nicaragua. This happens in the trips between the islands and the North Cays and from cay to cay in the northern zone, especially in the trip out there. It is as if I had a house and had to cross through someone else’s yard to get to my house. If they do not let me cross through their yard, I cannot get to my house. It is common to have our GPS, VHF radio, cigarettes and food supplies taken by them. They also strip the boats of all their equipment of any value. Usually, there are encounters with the coastguards during transit from the islands towards the North Cays. As opposed to the Colombian Navy that treats the Nicaraguan fishermen they find in Colombian waters well. The associations and co-operatives receive complaints of these cases. The fishermen feel intimidated since the Nicaraguan coastguards have weapons. The problem is with the coastguards but I have no problems with the fishermen of Nicaragua, they are my people, my family. On board the Blue Fin, which is a bigger mother boat of 50 ft. that I use with Orlando Francis Powell, we go to the 82nd Meridian, Cape Bank and Rosalind Bank, close to Honduras and the 15th parallel. These are small group expeditions and we bring little boats. The fishing banks are mostly located where the sea’s depth changes from very shallow to relatively deep. West of Quitasueño these banks are located east of the 82nd Meridian and south of the 15th parallel. But more to the south, to the west of Providencia, they are located on the 82nd Meridian and a little beyond. These are the best areas since Cape Bank is huge and has many resources. We do not need to go farther north to Honduras or south to Costa Rica. We have been carrying out these fishing activities since the 1980s and 1990s. All my life my parents taught me that the sea is an indigenous Raizal territory, it is our ancestral territory that belongs to the people. Artisanal fishing fulfils a social role in the Archipelago; it contributes to local food security as opposed to industrial fishing in which the interest is purely economic. With the Nicaraguan coast, we share the culture, they are very similar
Annex 71
421
to us and we even have relatives there. We have traditionally shared the sea with the Nicaraguans. The Affiant displayed sound mind, expressed himself clearly and signs the present declaration writ with the undersigned Notary Public, once read and approved, his right index fingerprint was set. NOTES: [Signed] The Affiant: CC. [Colombian National ID Card No.] 15.241.603 S.A.I. [Signed and stamped] RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA ERTSW. ______________________________________________ THE WRIT ENDS HERE
Annex 71
422
BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION FOR EXTRA-PROCEDURAL DECLARATION In the city of San Andrés Island, Department of San Andrés, Republic of Colombia, on the twenty-fifth (25) day of October of two-thousand sixteen (2016), in the Single Notary Public of the Notary Circuit of San Andrés Island, appeared: JORGE DE LA CRUZ DE ALBA BARKER, bearing National ID / NUIP #0015241603. [Signed] Autographic signature [barcode] 446jyl68t47a 25/10/2106-10:17:44 Pursuant to Article 18 of Decree-Law 019 of 2012, the affiant was identified by biometric authentication, through the comparison of his fingerprint against the biographical and biometric information of the database of the National Civil Status Registry. These minutes are part of the extra-procedural declaration EXTRA-PROCEDURAL AFFIDAVIT, rendered by the affiant destined to MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS. [Digital signature and stamp] [Stamped and initialled] RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA Single Notary Public of the Circuit of San Andres Island
Annex 71
423
424
=SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE NOTARY CIRCUIT OF= SAN ANDRES ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO DEPARTMENT OF SAN ANDRÉS, PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA============== ADDRESS: AVENIDA FRANCISCO NEWBALL- CENTRO COMERCIAL DANN LOCALES 133- 134- TELEFONOS – 5126119- TELEFAX- 5122112- SAN ANDRES-ISLAND- COLOMBIA==================================== RECEPTION OF AFFIDAVIT In the city of San Andrés, Island, provincial capital of the Archipelago Department of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Republic of Colombia, on the twenty-eighth (28) day of OCTOBER of the year two-thousand sixteen (2016), before the Single Notary Public of the San Andrés Island Notary Circuit, the functions of which are discharged by RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA, ANTONIO ALEJANDRO SJOGREEN PABLO, identified with national identification card number 15.243.804 issued in San Andrés, appeared in order to render an affidavit and stated:-FIRST:-That all the statements set out in this instrument are rendered under oath and aware of the implications of lying under oath.-SECOND:-That he has no impediment to render this affidavit, which he provides under his sole and full civil, criminal or disciplinary liability.-THIRD:-That the statements rendered herein are given freely and voluntarily, and that I have personal knowledge thereof and can attest to them by having witnessed them first-hand.-FOURTH:-That this affidavit was rendered to be submitted and delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia with the purpose of its being included as part of the annexes to the Colombian pleadings before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to the provisions of Decree 1557 of 4 July 1989 in accordance with the General Code of the Proceedings and complementary provisions.-FIFTH:-GENERAL LEGAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION- My
Annex 72
Annex 72:AFFIDAVIT BY MR ANTONIO ALEJANDRO SJOGREEN PABLO,
28 OCTOBER 2016.
(Archives of the Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
425
name is Antonio Alejandro Sjogreen Pablo, I am fifty-two (52) years old, I live in San Andrés Island, at the following address Perry Hill, profession or occupation economist, civil status married.-SIXTH:-As stated, I declare under oath that I am originally from Bocas del Toro, the representative of Association of Fishermen and Farmers of San Andrés and Providencia (ASOPACFA), which is made up of four fishermen associations and four fishermen co-operatives. We cannot go to the North Cays anymore because on several occasions we have crossed the Nicaraguan coastguard big lanchas and they stop us on the way to the fishing banks. They ask for coffee and food but it is a way to intimidate us because we cannot say no. They have their arms and board us. Because of that plenty of our people stopped going to Cape Bank and the North Cays. Gallardo Martinez, a fisherman I personally know, they approached within half a mile of him during one of his fishing trips. Since the 2012 decision, the situation of the artisanal fishermen has worsened because we feel threatened and with little security when we want to go fish in our traditional banks located farther from San Andrés and Providencia. But we have to continue to use and take advantage of the North Cays and Cape Bank because they ensure food security on the islands. We supply these products to the local population through the fishermen cooperatives. Artisanal fishermen rarely sell their products outside of the Archipelago. The problem is with the coastguard of Nicaragua, not the ancestral people that live in Nicaragua. In Little Corn Island, most of the people are descendants from Providencia. We fish with them in the same areas where they go. We have no problems with them. The fishermen have submitted a proposal to the Government of Colombia in order for the right to exploit the fishing zones of the Archipelago to be recognized exclusively for artisanal fishing. This is because there are many foreign boats that fish with predatory means and compressors. The Affiant displayed sound mind, expressed himself clearly and signs the present declaration writ with the undersigned Notary
Annex 72
426
Public, once read and approved, his right index fingerprint was set. [initialled] NOTES. ______________________________________________ [Document bears stamp reading: SINGLE NOTARY PUBLIC OF SAN ANDRES ISLAND Witnessed fingerprint Date: 31 Oct. 2016] [Signed] The Affiant: CC. [Colombian National ID Card No.] 15.243.804 S.A.I. [Signed and stamped] The Notary Public RAFAEL MEZA ACOSTA ERTSW. ______________________________________________ THE WRIT ENDS HERE [Document bears stamp reading: That the biometric system mandated by law was not used and therefore there was no fingerprint digital verification for this act, due to the following reasons: (…) 4. Lack of connectivity Article 3. Resolution 6467 of 2015 S.N.R.] [Stamped and initialled]
Annex 72
427
428
President Daniel meets Juan Manuel Santos in Mexico Sunday, 2 December 2012 | El 19 Digital Both Heads of State met in Mexico during the inauguration of the new president of that country, Enrique Peña Nieto. “We have great affection and respect for the Colombian people. We are brotherly peoples, we will start a fight in search for the unity of Latin America and the Caribbean, and working like that we can overcome any obstacle”, said Daniel to the press, when entering the hotel where president Santos is staying. As Colombian media reports, at the end of the meeting Commander Daniel pointed out to president Santos that Nicaragua will respect the ancestral rights of the Raizales over those waters that now fully belong to our country. “Nicaragua has many native communities. Be sure that we will respect the historical rights that they (the Raizals) have had over those territories. We will find the mechanisms to ensure the right of the Raizal people to fish, in San Andrés, so we can protect those people that live of that territorial sea and also so we can confront drug trafficking in that region”, he affirmed. Moreover, they state that president Daniel Ortega said that there will be no problems in the boundary zone, military actions are ruled out and he sent his regards to the people of San Andrés. “We are sending a message of peace and we are clearly establishing that we will develop communication mechanisms in all these areas that I have mentioned so we can guarantee everyone’s safety, in order to ensure the Raizal people’s right to fish, that industrial fishing can also be guaranteed for those based over there in San Andrés”, said Daniel after his meeting with the Colombian leader. “There is no problem with Colombia, there is communication in all fronts, both sides reject the use of force. The value of this meeting is that we offer a message of peace and tranquillity to the brother country of Colombia and to the people of Nicaragua.
Annex 73
Annex 73:EL 19 DIGITAL, PRESIDENT DANIEL MEETS JUAN MANUEL
SANTOS IN MEXICO, 2 DECEMBER 2012
(Available at: http://www.el19digital.com/articulos/ver/titulo:5824-
presidente-daniel-se-reune-con-juan-manuel-santos-en-mexico)
429
We will develop all the mechanisms for dialogue between the people to guarantee safety to the inhabitants of the region”, added the Nicaraguan leader. As for Santos, he recognized the value of the meeting and assured he will continue to establish “channels of communication” with the Government of Nicaragua.
Annex 73
430
Daniel ratified to Colombia his vocation for peace Managua. Agencies │2 December 2012 President Daniel Ortega, had a 15-minute meeting this Saturday with his Colombian counterpart Juan Manuel Santos, regarding the judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, where he reaffirmed Nicaragua’s peaceful vocation. On his arrival to the hotel where the meeting was held, Ortega said that he will fight for Latin American unity. “We have great affection and respect for the Colombian people. We are brotherly peoples, we will start a fight in search for the unity of Latin America and the Caribbean, and working like that we can overcome any obstacle”, asserted Daniel to the press when entering the hotel where president Santos is staying. After the brief meeting, President Ortega remarked that Nicaragua will exercise its sovereignty beyond the 82 meridian, in the waters recovered after The Hague’s judgment, and ruled out any military action. He announced that it was agreed to “open communication channels to ensure the Raizal people their fishing rights”. He confirmed that there is no problem with Colombian frigates and vessels being in the 82 meridian, because “there is permanent communication between the different authorities located in the zone”. “There is no problem with Colombia, there is communication in all fronts, both sides have rejected the use of force. The value of this meeting is that we offer a message of peace and tranquillity to the brother country of Colombia and to the people of Nicaragua. We will develop all the mechanisms for dialogue between the people to guarantee safety to the inhabitants of the region”, added president Ortega at the end of the meeting. Nicaragua asked Colombia to respect and implement The Hague’s judgment. Dialogue mechanisms were agreed in order to guarantee the rights of the people from San Andrés and the
Annex 74
Annex 74:RADIO LA PRIMERÍSIMA, DANIEL RATIFIED TO COLOMBIA HIS
VOCATION FOR PEACE, 2 DECEMBER 2012.
(Available at: http://www.radiolaprimerisima.com/noticias/general/132040/
daniel-ratifica-a-colombia-vocacion-de-paz)
431
Raizal people, and to protect the maritime reserve that the Court returned to Nicaragua. He also guaranteed that Nicaragua will respect the historical rights of the Raizal people and the people of San Andrés over the region, by implementing development plans such as fishing, for which his government has already announced that they will allow fishing. Likewise, he said, there will be continuous communication with Colombia in this sense. “Nicaragua has many native communities. Be sure that we will respect the historical rights that they (the Raizals) have had over those territories. We will find the mechanisms to ensure the right of the Raizal people to fish, in San Andrés, so we can protect those people that live of that territorial sea and also so we can confront drug trafficking in that region”, he affirmed. Moreover, Nicaragua’s President said that there is no other meeting scheduled in the meantime. President Ortega said that when required, he will meet again with the Colombian President to discuss the issue and that, for now both countries “totally ruled out” using force to exercise sovereignty. What President Santos said For his part, President Santos confirmed that “we will continue seeking for the rights of Colombians to be restored, that The Hague judgment seriously affected.” “We will continue seeking for the rights of Colombians to be restored, that The Hague judgment seriously affected. We met with President Ortega. We explained our position very clearly: we want that the rights of Colombians and the Raizal population, not only in terms of artisanal fishermen rights but other rights, be guaranteed and restored. He understood. We told him that we need to handle this situation with cold head, in a diplomatic and friendly fashion, as this kind of issues should be handled to avoid incidents. He also understood. We agreed to establish communication channels to address all these points. I think this is the most important thing. I think this meeting was positive. Nobody wants an act of war, this is one of the last resources, the way to fix this kind of situations is through
Annex 74
432
dialogue, a reasonable dialogue where both positions are established and clearly expressed. We told him what is our position, we continue seeking mechanisms that are available for the International Court of The Hague and the international diplomacy to restore the rights that the judgment infringed and this does not exclude communications with Nicaragua. These communication channels are a significant complement.”
Annex 74
433
434
Nicaragua exercises peaceful sovereignty over its waters Managua. Radio La Primerísima. | 5 December 2012 (…) “Another preoccupation (of [President] Santos) is the future of the Raizales fishermen, the community inhabitants of the San Andrés Archipelago. It is reasonable that he be worried about the future of the fishermen; because there are fishermen out there who have manifested their fear to sail because now Nicaragua is already displaying its Naval Forces. But the Nicaraguan Naval Forces are instructed not to detain any fisherman... and we have to gradually advance... without affecting the [Seaflower Biosphere] reserve, without affecting the fishermen”, said the Sandinista leader. (…)
Annex 75
Annex 75:RADIO LA PRIMERÍSIMA, NICARAGUA EXERCISES PEACEFUL
SOVEREIGNTY OVER ITS WATERS, 5 DECEMBER 2012.
(Available at: http://www.radiolaprimerisima.com/noticias/general/132322/
nicaragua-ejerce-soberania-en-sus-aguas-en-forma-pacifica)
435
436
Powerful interests want a confrontation with Colombia Managua. Radio La Primerísima. | 21 February 2013 President Daniel Ortega denounced on Thursday that powerful interests are fuelling chauvinism in Colombian people in order to incite a confrontation between Colombia and Nicaragua with a conflict at sea. (…) President Ortega ratified that Nicaragua does not want or looks for a confrontation with Colombia. “We do not want such confrontation to happen. We do not want it, we do not wish it, we do not look for it; but we are forced to continue exercising our national sovereignty in the spaces recovered in the Caribbean.” Addressing General Julio César Avilés, chief of the Nicaraguan Army, President Ortega instructed to apply firmness, but also serenity in exercising national sovereignty in the Caribbean Sea, always favouring dialogue, with the Naval Forces of Colombia or its Air Force which move around those maritime spaces. The solution to the judgment of the International Court of Justice of The Hague, which restores important maritime spaces to Nicaragua in the Caribbean, is not force or deployment of warships, the leader insisted. “I am sure that President Juan Manuel Santos and the Colombian people know that the solution to the Judgment of the International Court of Justice is not using force nor deploying war vessels, war ships there in the zone, but following the path to command the Judgment of the Court, to command it regarding its implementation as it is ordered, as how it applies, Daniel added. He emphasized that certain groups in Colombia have been fuelling chauvinism in the population and that he is confident that the Colombian people will not fall for that game, although many fall into all kinds of manipulation strategies.
Annex 76
Annex 76:RADIO LA PRIMERÍSIMA, POWERFUL INTERESTS WANT A
CONFRONTATION WITH COLOMBIA, 21 FEBRUARY 2013.
(Available at: http://www.radiolaprimerisima.com/noticias/136879/
poderosos-intereses-pretenden-confrontacion-con-colombia)
437
“Political leaders, who aspire to the Presidency, have stated that if they reach the Presidency they will disregard the Judgment, they will not apply it and, in fact, that what they are going to do is to make presence in those spaces, with their Naval and Air Forces to fill out those [maritime] spaces”, Daniel expressed. Commander Ortega stated that those voices constitute a challenge and disrespect to international law. Daniel maintained that… “[i]n this this case…, a congresswoman started saying that the Nicaraguan Army, the Naval Force, was harassing the raizales and not allowing them to fish… and started an aggressive media campaign”, Daniel explained. Raizal fishermen President Ortega proposed to Colombia the creation, as soon as possible, of a mechanism to identify the raizal fishermen so they can keep fishing without problems in the waters that the International Court of Justice reverted to the country in the Caribbean Sea. The head of state reiterated what he has personally expressed to President Juan Manuel Santos, in the sense that the raizal community, living in San Andrés can continue fishing in the Caribbean waters now belonging to Nicaragua and that their rights as native people will not be affected. “I propose President Santos that we create a commission, as soon as possible, to work in delimiting all of this, where the raizal people can fish in exercise of their historic rights”, he stated. He said it would be necessary to work on an agreement between Colombia and Nicaragua to regulate this situation, because right now there is no way to know how many vessels belong to the raizal community and which are related by industrial fishing. He asserted that he is sure that the consultations that the Colombian Government is carrying out with the Court will necessarily lead to search how both countries can agree on a treaty for applying the judgment.
Annex 76
438
Meanwhile, Daniel instructed General Avilés so that Nicaragua patrol boats do not ask for permission to fish to the Raizales’ boats, because the joint mechanisms to ensure their rights to fish has not been established yet. He also expressed that one proposal to solve the issue of the fishing permits for the raizal community is to install in San Andrés island a Nicaraguan consular section, so that from there it could be established with clarity how many raizal fishermen are there, which are their boats, so that they can fish freely. He also said that this mechanism is necessary even for controlling drug-trafficking ships, who disguise as fishermen, a situation which has taken place on several occasions, as Colombians well know. “Immediately, calculating roughly, we will allow raizales to continue fishing, but industrial fishing must ask for permission from INPESCA; we need to find the way to organize that, so that IMPESCA (sic) can communicate with the corresponding Colombian authorities in order to search for mechanisms.” Daniel highlighted. He said that the only problem for implementing such mechanism is the fact that Colombian authorities do not recognise the judgment of the International Court of Justice and that they have conformed a commission of British jurists trying to find alternatives to the judgment of the highest judicial authority.
Annex 76
439
440
Daniel meets with Delegation from Iceland (18 November 2014) Tuesday, 18 November 2014 │Council of Communications and Citizenship (...) In the Caribbean Zone we have a Miskito population, Native Peoples that remain there with their language, traditions and their own territories. We have an Autonomous Regime for this region, and in the last years, from year 2007 until now, around 35.000 square kilometres have been entitled already… Territories that belong to the Native Peoples of the Caribbean Coast of Nicaragua. We also have the Caribbean Sea there, and there we have a dispute for this Caribbean Sea, since the dispute of the British who dominated that zone. Spain never got to reach it, it was the English trying to reach the Pacific Zone, and the Spanish wanting to enter into the Caribbean Zone. They never made it, none of them. There is a huge influence of the British culture and also from Africa, that’s why we have Afro descendant communities… a black population that speaks English and that is mostly settled in Bluefields, also related to some Communities that are located opposite, in some Islands where there is raizal population: the Islands of San Andrés and Providencia. There is an Archipelago of 5, 6 Islands, many Islands, the most important ones being San Andrés and Providencia; those are under the sovereignty of Colombia, as was stated by the International Court of Justice two years ago. We managed to recover a big part of the Territorial Sea there, thanks to that Judgment of the International Court of Justice. And you are meeting us today when we have just heard the Declarations made by the President of Colombia, Juan Manuel Santos, saying that they are going to get in touch with the Nicaraguan Foreign Ministry to start working on what would constitute an Agreement, a Treaty, to implement the Judgment of the Court… Good news! We welcome such good news.
Annex 77
Annex 77:EL 19 DIGITAL, DANIEL MEETS WITH DELEGATION FROM ICELAND,
18 NOVEMBER 2014
(Available at: http://www.el19digital.com/articulos/ver/titulo:23985-daniel-
se-reune-con-delegacion-de-islandia-18-de-noviembre-del-2014)
441
This was an Agreement we reached with the President Santos after the Judgment; we decided so in Mexico two years ago, on 2 December, during the inauguration of President Enrique Peña Nieto. There we met, the Judgment was still fresh, there was lots of press around the Judgment, great expectation. And we agreed that it was necessary to work on reaching an Agreement where the Rights of the Raizal Community be guaranteed, that we were clear, remained under the Sovereignty of Colombia. We, obviously, are going to respect that Principle in the Agreement we are going to work on, respecting everything ordered by the Court regarding the delimitation, the new maritime delimitation in the Caribbean Sea, between Colombia and Nicaragua; providing guarantees to the Raizal population. With the Raizal peoples there has been a good communication, they have been here, in Nicaragua, in several occasions, their Leaders, I met them once looking for an approach. Because lots of our Nicaraguan brothers and sisters who live in Corn Island, an Island opposite Bluefields, and others who live in Bluefields, are descendants of Raizal Families, this is just one Family! (…)
Annex 77
442
President Daniel receives Letters of Credence from the Ambassadors of Colombia, El Salvador, Germany and Italy Friday, 6 November 2015 | Council of Communications and Citizenship (...) And we inherited those conflicts. That is why, Brotherly Peoples like us are forced to go before the International Court of Justice… Colombia and Nicaragua. But after the Court’s Judgment I have had the chance to chat with President Santos and I have found in him the Will of applying that Judgment, that Decision. What happens, logically, and because of what the Judgment itself says: Respect and Assurances for the Raizal People… Here is a Brother from San Andrés! We are the same Blood; we are the same Peoples… San Andrés, Providencia, the cays, Serrana, Serranía (sic), Roncador. At the end, a common Geography, and the same People with the same Dreams, with the same Ideals. In Nicaragua we already fulfilled the National Assembly procedure for enacting the Court’s Judgment as a law… Colombia has to go through this formality. We understand this perfectly. And we understand the contradictions that Domestic Politics impose in each one of our Countries. And we understand that patience is necessary in order to finally reach the conditions for the Court’s Judgment to be ratified by the Colombian Parliament. And there we have engagements, as I said, with the Raizales Brothers regarding their Fishing Rights, which will have to be arranged later. I discussed that with President Santos because he was telling me: And the rights of the Raizal People? Of course we need to arrange those Rights there. The protection of Natural Resources. There is Wealth from the Sea that we now share with Colombia; the same.
Annex 78
Annex 78:EL 19 DIGITAL, PRESIDENT DANIEL RECEIVES LETTERS OF
CREDENCE FROM THE AMBASSADORS OF COLOMBIA,
EL SALVADOR, GERMANY AND ITALY, 6 NOVEMBER 2015.
(Available at: http://www.el19digital.com/articulos/ver/titulo:35409-
presidente-daniel-recibe-cartas-credenciales-de-embajadores-de-colombia-
el-salvador-alemania-e-italia)
443
We have the Will to continue the Dialogue, the communications with the Colombian People and the Government, as we have kept them regardless of those who have tried to boycott them, to stop this Dialogue. (…)
Annex 78
444
Annex 79
Annex 79:CHURCH V. HUBBART,6 U.S.187(1804).
445
Annex 79
446
Annex 79
447
Annex 79
448
Annex 79
449
Annex 79
450
Annex 79
451
Annex 79
452
Annex 79
453
Annex 79
454
Annex 79
455
Annex 79
456
Annex 79
457
Annex 79
458
Annex 79
459
Annex 79
460
Annex 79
461
Annex 79
462
Annex 79
463
Annex 79
464
Annex 79
465
Annex 79
466
Annex 79
467
Annex 79
468
Annex 79
469
Annex 79
470
Annex 79
471
Annex 79
472
Annex 79
473
Annex 79
474
Annex 79
475
Annex 79
476
Annex 79
477
Annex 79
478
Annex 79
479
Annex 79
480
Annex 79
481
Annex 79
482
Annex 79
483
Annex 79
484
Annex 79
485
Annex 79
486
Annex 79
487
Annex 79
488
Annex 79
489
Annex 79
490
Annex 79
491
Annex 79
492
Annex 79
493
Annex 79
494
Annex 79
495
Annex 79
496
Annex 79
497
498
Annex 80
Annex 80:U.N.DOC. A/AC.138/66 AND CORR. 2,24 MARCH 1972.
499
Annex 80
500
Annex 80
501
Annex 80
502
Annex 80
503
Annex 80
504
Annex 80
505
Annex 80
506
Annex 80
507
Annex 80
508
Annex 80
509
510
395 F. Supp. 413UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,v.F/V TAIYO MARU, NUMBER 28, SOI 600, and her Tackle, Apparel, Furniture,Appurtenances, Cargo and Stores, Defendant.UNITED STATES of Americav.Masatoshi KAWAGUCHICiv. No. 74-101 SD, Cr. No. 74-46 SD.United States District Court, D. Maine, S. D.June 17, 1975.[395 F. Supp. 414] Peter Mills, U. S. Atty., John B. Wlodkowski, Asst. U. S. Atty., Portland, Me., Edward F.Bradley, Jr., Land & Natural Resources Div., U. S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Charles E.Kuenlen, National Marine Fisheries Service, U. S. Dept. of Commerce, Gloucester, Mass., forplaintiff. Fred C. Scribner, Jr., Portland, Me., Peter J. Gartland, Wender, Murase & White, New YorkCity, for defendant. OPINION AND ORDER OF THE COURT GIGNOUX, District Judge. These two proceedings arise from the seizure of a Japanese fishing vessel, the F/V TAIYOMARU 28, by the United States Coast Guard for violation of United States fisheries law. OnSeptember 5, 1974, the Coast Guard sighted the TAIYO MARU 28 fishing at Latitude 43-35.9North, Longitude 69-20 West. That point is approximately 16.25 miles off the coast of the State ofMaine and approximately 10.5 miles seaward from Monhegan Island. It is conceded to be withinthe contiguous fisheries zone of the United States. 16 U.S. C. § 1092. The Coast Guard signaledthe TAIYO MARU 28 to stop, but the vessel attempted to escape by accelerating toward the highseas. The Coast Guard immediately pursued and seized the vessel on the high seas at Latitude42-58 North, Longitude 68-24 West, a point approximately 67.9 miles at sea from the mainland ofthe continental United States. The vessel was thereafter delivered to the port of Portland,[395 F. Supp. 415]and on September 6, 1974, the United States filed in this Court a civil complaint forcondemnation and forfeiture of the vessel and a criminal information against the master,Masatoshi Kawaguchi. Both actions charge violations of 16 U.S.C. §§ 1081 and 1091 and seekimposition of the sanctions for such violations provided by 16 U.S.C. § 1082. 1 On October 4,1974, Miho Maguro Gyogyo Kabushiki Kaisha of Shimizi, Japan, a corporation, as the soleowner and party entitled to possesion of the TAIYO MARU 28, appeared through local counseland filed its demand for restitution and right to defend, and an answer to the complaint, in theforfeiture action. 2 On October 18, 1974, the master was arraigned and pleaded not guilty to thecriminal information. 3 Presently before the Court are identical motions for dismissal of the complaint andinformation filed by the claimant in the forfeiture action and the master in the criminal action(hereinafter collectively referred to as defendant). Defendant seeks dismissal of all proceedingson the ground that the Court lacks jurisdiction, since the vessel, unlawfully, was seized on the
Annex 81
Annex 81:UNITED STATES V. F/V TAIYO MARU, CIV. NO. 74-101 SD,
CR. NO. 74-46 SD, 395 F.SUPP. 414 (1975).
511
high seas in violation of the territorial limitations imposed by international agreements on thepower of the United States to pursue and seize foreign vessels and arrest foreign nationals forviolation of its domestic fisheries law. The issue thus presented is before the Court on the basisof the pleadings, supplemental stipulations, and the written and oral arguments of counsel. 4 For the reasons to be stated, defendant's motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction aredenied. I Summary of Facts and Contentions of the Parties There is no dispute as to the events, recited above, which led to the seizure of the TAIYOMARU 28. For the purposes of the instant motions, the following undisputed facts are significant:(1) On September 5, 1974, the United States Coast Guard sighted the TAIYO MARU 28, acommercial Japanese fishing vessel, within waters which the United States claims as part of itscontiguous fisheries zone, and had reasonable cause to believe that the vessel was fishing in thezone in violation of United States fisheries law; and (2) at that point, the Coast Guard signaledthe TAIYO MARU 28 and, after giving immediate and continuous hot pursuit, effected seizure ofthe vessel on the high seas. The United States contends that, by fishing in the contiguous fisheries zone, the TAIYOMARU 28 and her captain violated the Bartlett Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1081 et seq., and the ContiguousFisheries Zone Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1091 et seq., and that international law permits, and UnitedStates law authorizes, the hot pursuit of a foreign vessel from the contiguous fisheries zone andthe seizure of the vessel on the high seas for violation of domestic fisheries law. Defendant'sposition is that this Court lacks jurisdiction over the TAIYO MARU 28 and her master, becausethe vessel was seized on the high seas in violation of the 1958 Geneva Convention on the HighSeas, opened for signature April 29, 1958, 13 U.S.T. 2312 (entered into force September 20,1962), a multilateral[395 F. Supp. 416]treaty agreement to which both Japan and the United States are parties signatory. II The Statutes Involved By the Bartlett Act, enacted in 1964, Congress made it unlawful for any foreign vessel, or forthe master of such a vessel, to engage in fishing within the territorial waters of the United States,or "within any waters in which the United States has the same rights in respect to fisheries as ithas in its territorial waters . . . except . . . as expressly provided by an international agreement towhich the United States is a party." 16 U.S.C. § 1081. 5 The Bartlett Act established criminalpenalties for violators and provided for the seizure and forfeiture of any vessel and its catch foundin violation. 16 U.S.C. § 1082. 6 In enacting the Bartlett Act, the intent of Congress was to fill agap in existing law by making it clear that foreign vessels are denied the privilege of fishingwithin the territorial waters of the United States and by providing effective sanctions for unlawfulfishing by foreign vessels within territorial waters. H.R.Rep. (Merchant Marine and FisheriesCommittee) No. 1356 (1964), U.S.Cong. & Admin.News, 1964, pp. 2183, 2183-84. The BartlettAct did not define the width of the territorial sea, "thereby leaving the opportunity for the UnitedStates to follow the lead of Canada and other nations in establishing a limit beyond the present 3miles for fishery purposes." Id. at p. 2187. The words "within any waters in which the UnitedStates has the same rights in respect to fisheries as it has in its territorial waters" were added inanticipation of the United States extending its fishery jurisdiction out to 12 miles. See H.R.Rep.(Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee) No. 2086 (1966), U.S.Cong. & Admin.News, 1966,pp. 3282, 3289.
Annex 81
512
By the Contiguous Fisheries Zone Act, enacted in 1966, Congress established a fisherieszone contiguous to the territorial waters of the United States and provided with respect to suchzone:The United States will exercise the same exclusive rights in respect to fisheries in thezone as it has in its territorial sea, subject to the continuation of traditional fishing byforeign states within this zone as may be recognized by the United States. 16 U. S.C.§ 1091. 7[395 F. Supp. 417] The contiguous fisheries zone was defined by Congress in the Contiguous Fisheries ZoneAct as having "as its inner boundary the outer limits of the territorial sea and as its seawardboundary a line drawn so that each point on the line is nine nautical miles from the nearest pointin the inner boundary." 16 U.S.C. § 1092. 8 In so defining the contiguous zone, Congressrecognized that the territorial sea of the United States extends three miles from the United States,which is where Thomas Jefferson set the outer limit in 1793 and where "it has remainedunaltered to this day." H.R.Rep.No.2086, supra at pp. 3284-85. See Cunard Steamship Co. v.Mellon, 262 U.S. 100 , 122-23, 43 S.Ct. 504 , 167 L.Ed. 894 (1923) . 9 It was the expressed intentof Congress in the 1966 legislation to "unilaterally establish a fishery zone contiguous to thepresent 3-mile territorial sea of the United States by extending our exclusive fisheries rights to adistance of 12 miles from our shores." H.R.Rep.No.2086, supra at p. 3285. III The Right of Hot Pursuit From the Contiguous Fisheries Zone Defendant makes no contention that the contiguous fisheries zone created by the UnitedStates in the Contiguous Fisheries Zone Act violates customary international law. Defendantalso recognizes that, within the three-mile territorial sea, the United States has the right to prohibitforeign fishing and that Article 23 of the Convention on the High Seas provides express authorityfor the United States to conduct hot pursuit from the territorial sea onto the high seas for thepurpose of apprehending foreign ships which have violated domestic fisheries law within theterritorial sea. And defendant does not contest that the Contiguous Fisheries Zone Act extendedto a zone nine miles from the seaward limit of the territorial sea all the rights with respect tofisheries which the United States previously had in its territorial sea, and that, unless restricted bytreaty, the United States has the right to conduct hot pursuit from a contiguous zone onto the highseas for violations of its domestic law. See The Newton Bay, 36 F.2d 729 , 731-32 (2d Cir. 1929);Gillam v. United States, 27 F.2d 296 , 299-300 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 278 U.S. 635 , 49 S.Ct. 32 ,73 L.Ed. 552 (1928) ; The Resolution, 30 F.2d 534 , 537 (E.D.La.1929); The Pescawha, 45 F.2d221 , 222 (D.Ore.1928); The Vinces, 20 F.2d 164 , 172-73 (E.D.S.C. 1927). Defendant's solecontention is that the United States had no right to conduct hot pursuit from the contiguous zoneand to effect seizure of the TAIYO MARU 28, because the vessel was seized on the high seas inviolation of Article 23 of the 1958 Convention on the High Seas. The Convention on the High Seas provides, in Article 2, that:The high seas being open to all nations, no State may validly purport to subject anypart of them to its sovereignty. Freedom of the high seas . . . comprises, inter alia, bothfor coastal and non-coastal States:. . . . . .(2) Freedom of fishing; . . . Article 5 of the Convention vests "exclusive jurisdiction" in each signatory over its vessels"on the high seas." Article 23 of the Convention, however, recognizes certain instances in which
Annex 81
513
a State[395 F. Supp. 418]may seize a foreign vessel on the high seas, based on hot pursuit:The hot pursuit of a foreign ship may be undertaken when the competent authoritiesof the coastal State have good reason to believe that the ship has violated the lawsand regulations of that State. Such pursuit must be commenced when the foreign shipor one of its boats is within the internal waters or the territorial sea or the contiguouszone of the pursuing State, and may only be continued outside the territorial sea orthe contiguous zone if the pursuit has not been interrupted. . . . If the foreign ship iswithin a contiguous zone, as defined in article 24 of the Convention on the TerritorialSea and the Contiguous Zone, the pursuit may only be undertaken if there has been aviolation of the rights for the protection of which the zone was established. Article 24 of the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, opened forsignature April 29, 1958, 15 U.S.T. 1607 (entered into force September 10, 1964), contains thefollowing pertinent provisions:1. In a zone of the high seas contiguous to its territorial sea, the coastal State mayexercise the control necessary to:(a) Prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary regulationswithin its territory or territorial sea;(b) Punish infringement of the above regulations committed within its territory orterritorial sea.2. The contiguous zone may not extend beyond twelve miles from the baseline fromwhich the breadth of the territorial sea is measured. Defendant asserts that Article 23 of the Convention on the High Seas must be read inconjunction with Article 24 of the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone.The argument is that since Article 24 only authorizes the establishment of a contiguous zone forthe purposes of enforcing the coastal State's customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary regulations,and since Article 23 permits hot pursuit of a foreign ship from such a contiguous zone only for thefour purposes listed in Article 24, the United States was without authority to commence hotpursuit of the TAIYO MARU 28 from within the contiguous fisheries zone for the purpose ofenforcing its fisheries regulations. Both parties recognize that the general rule of law is that the power of the government toenforce a forfeiture or to prosecute a defendant is not impaired by the illegality of the method bywhich it has acquired control over the property or the defendant. Dodge v. United States, 272U.S. 530 , 532, 47 S.Ct. 191 , 71 L.Ed. 392 (1926) ; The Caledonian, 17 U.S. 100 , 4 Wheat. 100,103, 4 L.Ed. 523 (1819) ; The Richmond, 13 U.S. 102 , 9 Cranch. 102 , 3 L.Ed. 670 (1815)(unlawful seizure of property); Frisbie v. Collins, 342 U.S. 519 , 522, 72 S.Ct. 509 , 96 L.Ed. 541(1952) ; Ker v. Illinois, 119 U.S. 436 , 444, 7 S.Ct. 225 , 30 L.Ed. 421 (1886) ; Lujan v. Gengler,510 F.2d 62 , 65-68 (2d Cir. 1975); but cf. United States v. Toscanino, 500 F.2d 267 , 271-79 (2dCir. 1974) (unlawful apprehension of defendant). Defendant relies upon the exception to thisgeneral rule established in Cook v. United States, 288 U.S. 102 , 53 S.Ct. 305 , 77 L.Ed. 641(1933) . In Cook, the United States Coast Guard seized a British vessel, the Mazel Tov, caught inrum-running, on the high seas outside the American jurisdictional limits set by a British-Americantreaty covering the apprehension of prohibition law violators. 10 The Supreme[395 F. Supp. 419]Court held that the United States "lacking power to seize, lacked power, because of the Treaty, to
Annex 81
514
Court held that the United States "lacking power to seize, lacked power, because of the Treaty, tosubject the vessel to our laws. To hold that adjudication may follow a wrongful seizure would gofar to nullify the purpose and effect of the Treaty." Id. at 121-22, 53 S.Ct. at 312 . See also TheGolmaccan, 8 F.Supp. 338 (D.Me.1934) ; The Which One, 2 F.Supp. 890 (E.D. N.Y.1933) ;United States v. Ferris, 19 F.2d 925 (N.D.Cal.1927) (seizure of vessel); Ford v. United States,273 U.S. 593 , 605-06, 47 S.Ct. 531 , 71 L. Ed. 793 (1927) ; United States v. Rauscher, 119 U.S.407 , 430-32, 7 S.Ct. 234 , 30 L.Ed. 425 (1886) ; United States v. Toscanino, supra, 500 F.2d at278-79 (apprehension of defendant). Mr. Justice Brandeis made clear, however, that theexception to the general rule recognized in Cook covers the particular situation where the UnitedStates has by treaty "imposed a territorial limitation upon its own authority." Cook v. UnitedStates, supra, 288 U.S. at 121 , 53 S.Ct. at 312 . As stated in Autry v. Wiley, 440 F.2d 799 (1stCir. 1971) , the Cook doctrine is a "narrow" exception to the general rule; it "applies only toviolations of a specific territorial jurisdictional circumscription set by treaty." Id. at 802. Defendant strenuously argues that the Cook exception destroys the jurisdiction of this Courtin these proceedings because by Article 23 of the Convention on the High Seas, read togetherwith Article 24 of the Convention of the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, the UnitedStates has undertaken a specific obligation not to institute hot pursuit of a foreign ship from thecontiguous fisheries zone for violation of its fisheries law. Defendant's position is that Article 23limits the government's right of hot pursuit from a contiguous zone to the four purposes for whichArticle 24 authorizes the establishment of such a zone, and the enforcement of domestic fisherieslaw is not one of the purposes recognized by Article 24. The Court is persuaded, however, thatneither the language nor the history of the Conventions shows that the signatory parties intendedto limit the right of a coastal State to exercise exclusive fishery jurisdiction within 12 miles of itscoast, to establish a contiguous zone for such a purpose, or to conduct hot pursuit from such azone. Analysis of the text of Article 23 of the Convention on the High Seas shows that the Articleprovides general authority to undertake hot pursuit from a contiguous zone when the authoritiesof the coastal State have good reason to believe that a foreign vessel has violated the coastalState's laws and regulations. It is true that Article 23 permits hot pursuit from a contiguous zone,created for one of the four purposes enumerated in Article 24 of the Convention on the TerritorialSea and the Contiguous Zone, only if there has been a violation of the rights for the protection ofwhich the zone was established. But Article 23 does not in terms deny a coastal State the right tocommence hot pursuit from a contiguous zone established for a purpose other than one of thepurposes listed in Article 24. Nor does Article 24 in terms prohibit the establishment of acontiguous zone for a purpose other than one of those specified in the Article. The language ofArticle 24, relating to the purposes for which a contiguous zone may be established, ispermissive, rather than restrictive. It provides that a coastal State "may" establish a contiguouszone for the purposes of enforcing its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary regulations.Although Article 24 only affirmatively recognizes the right of a coastal State to create acontiguous zone for one of the four enumerated purposes, nothing in the Article precludes theestablishment of such a zone for other purposes, including the enforcement of domestic fisherieslaw. In short, unlike the British-American[395 F. Supp. 420]treaty in Cook, 11 the Conventions in the case at bar contain no specific undertaking by theUnited States not to conduct hot pursuit from a contiguous fisheries zone extending 12 miles fromits coast. The Cook exception, therefore, is not applicable, because the United States has not bytreaty "imposed a territorial limitation upon its own authority." The history of the 1958 Conventions confirms the conclusion that the United States did notspecifically undertake to limit its authority to exercise exclusive fisheries jurisdiction within 12miles of its coast, to establish a contiguous zone for such a purpose, or to conduct hot pursuitfrom such a zone. The Convention on the High Seas and the Convention on the Territorial Seaand the Contiguous Zone were the product of the Conference on the Law of the Sea, convenedat Geneva in 1958 pursuant to Resolution 1105 of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
Annex 81
515
U.N. General Assembly, 11th Sess., Official Records, Supp. No. 17 (A/3572). Although theConference was convened to resolve a variety of matters pertaining to the codification of the Lawof the Sea, most commentators agree that the two principal issues presented for the Conference'sconsideration were the question of the breadth of the territorial sea, and the closely-relatedquestion of whether there should be an additional contiguous zone in which the coastal Statescould exercise exclusive jurisdiction over fishing. See, e. g., McDougal and Burke, The PublicOrder of the Oceans, 524-48 (1st ed. 1962); Fitzmaurice, Some Results of the GenevaConference on the Law of the Sea, 8 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 73, 73-75(1959); Dean, The Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea: What Was Accomplished, 52 TheAmerican Journal of International Law 607, 607-08 (1958). See also Hearings on theConventions on the Law of the Sea, Executives J, K, L, M, N, before the Committee on ForeignRelations, United States Senate, 86th Cong. 2nd Sess., p. 4 (January 20, 1960). The 1958Geneva Conference was unable to achieve agreement on either issue, primarily because of thevolatile political ramifications involved in setting a limit to the territorial sea. 12 In recommendingthat the Senate give its advice and consent to ratification of the Conventions, the Senate Reportfrom the Committee on Foreign Relations made clear that the Convention on the Territorial[395 F. Supp. 421]Sea and the Contiguous Zone did not define the width of the territorial sea, or circumscribe theright of a coastal State to assert exclusive fisheries jurisdiction:This convention does not fix the breadth of the territorial sea. This subject and theclosely related one of the extent to which the coastal state should have exclusivefishing rights in the sea off its coast were hotly debated without any conclusion beingreached. Exec. Rept. No. 5, Law of the Sea Conventions, to accompany Ex. J to N,inclusive, 86th Cong. 1st Sess., p. 4 (1960). It is clear from the foregoing history that, in becoming a signatory to the 1958 Conventions,the United States could not have intended to accept any limitation on its right to conduct hotpursuit for violations of exclusive fishery rights occurring within 12 miles of its coast, since theGeneva Conference could not agree as to whether a contiguous zone could be established forthe purpose of enforcing domestic fisheries law. It is apparent that Congress was well aware of its obligations under the 1958 Conventionswhen the 1966 Contiguous Fisheries Zone Act was enacted, and that Congress perceived noconflict between the Act and the treaty provisions. This is evident from the House Report, whichdiscusses the Conventions and their relationship to the proposed legislation:In 1958, and again in 1960, the Law of the Sea Conferences held in Geneva,Switzerland, left unresolved the twin questions of the width of the territorial sea and tothe extent to which a coastal state could claim exclusive fishing rights in the high seasoff its coast. At the second conference in 1960, the United States and Canada putforward a compromise proposal for a 6-mile territorial sea, plus a 6-mile exclusivefisheries zone (12 miles of exclusive jurisdiction in all) subject to the continuation for10 years of traditional fishing by other states in the outer 6 miles. This compromiseproposal failed by one vote to obtain the two-thirds vote necessary for adoption.Since the 1958 Law of the Sea Conference, there has been a trend toward theestablishment of a 12-mile fisheries rule in international practice. Thirty-nine countriesacting individually or in concert with other countries have extended their fisherieslimits to 12 miles since 1958. H.R.Rep. No. 2086, supra at p. 3286. The Report also notes that, as of July 1, 1966, of the 99 United Nations coastal nations,slightly more than 60 countries asserted a 12-mile exclusive fishery zone, either as territorial seaor as territorial sea plus a contiguous zone. Idem. 13
Annex 81
516
IV Order Since the seizure of the TAIYO MARU 28 on the high seas following hot pursuit from thecontiguous zone was not in violation of Article 23 of the 1958 Convention on the High Seas, and,moreover, was sanctioned by domestic law and in conformity with the prevailing consensus ofinternational law and practice, this Court has jurisdiction to decide the present proceedings ontheir merits. Defendant's motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction are therefore denied. It is so ordered. --------Notes: 1 Jurisdiction of the civil action is predicated on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1345 and 1355; jurisdiction of the criminalaction is based on 18 U.S.C. § 3231. 2 On October 24, 1974, claimant filed an amended demand for restitution, noting a restricted appearance underFed.R.Civ.P.Supp. Rule E(8). 3 The vessel, its captain, and the crew have since been released upon posting a bond conditioned upon thepayment of any penalty or fine which might be imposed in these proceedings. 4 Counsel agree that defendant's alternative motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief canbe granted and for failure to state an offense against the United States present disputed factual questions and are notripe for determination at this time. 5 16 U.S.C. § 1081 provides in relevant part: It is unlawful for any vessel, except a vessel of the United States, or for any master or other person in charge ofsuch a vessel, to engage in the fisheries within the territorial waters of the United States, . . . or within any waters inwhich the United States has the same rights in respect to fisheries as it has in its territorial waters or in such watersto engage in activities in support of a foreign fishery fleet or to engage in the taking of any Continental Shelf fisheryresource which appertains to the United States except as provided in this chapter or as expressly provided by aninternational agreement to which the United States is a party. * * * 6 16 U.S.C. § 1082(a) and (b) provide: (a) Any person violating the provisions of this chapter shall be fined not more than $100,000, or imprisoned notmore than one year, or both. (b) Every vessel employed in any manner in connection with a violation of this chapter including its tackle,apparel, furniture, appurtenances, cargo, and stores shall be subject to forefeiture and all fish taken or retained inviolation of this chapter or the monetary value thereof shall be forfeited. For the purposes of this chapter, it shall be arebuttable presumption that all fish found aboard a vessel seized in connection with such violation of this chapter weretaken or retained in violation of this chapter. 16 U.S.C. § 1082(c) makes applicable to such seizures and forfeitures the existing law relating to seizure,forfeiture and condemnation of a vessel for violations of the customs laws, except when inconsistent with theprovisions of the Act. 7 16 U.S.C. § 1091 reads in full: There is established a fisheries zone contiguous to the territorial sea of the United States. The United States willexercise the same exclusive rights in respect to fisheries in the zone as it has in its territorial sea, subject to thecontinuation of traditional fishing by foreign states within this zone as may be recognized by the United States. 8 16 U.S.C. § 1092 reads in full: The fisheries zone has as its inner boundary the outer limits of the territorial sea and as its seaward boundary aline drawn so that each point on the line is nine nautical miles from the nearest point in the inner boundary. 9 It is not disputed that the territorial sea extends a distance of three miles around Monhegan Island, as well as
Annex 81
517
from the coastline of the mainland. See Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, infra, Art. 10(2). 10 The Mazel Tov was seized more than one hour's sail from the United States coastline. By prior treaty withGreat Britain, the United States had limited its customs jurisdiction over British vessels to offenses which werediscovered within one hour's sail from the coast. 11 See note 10, supra. 12 The position of the United States at the Conference was that the territorial sea should be defined as narrowlyas possible, preferably at the three-mile limit which it had traditionally recognized. In advocating this position, a majorconcern of the United States was to avoid undue limitation of its right to fish off the coasts of other nations. In thisposition, it was supported primarily by the maritime nations, which had traditionally engaged in fishing off foreignshores. Opposition to the American position was centered principally in the Soviet bloc countries and the newly-emerging and underdeveloped countries. When it became apparent that any proposal for a three-mile territorial seawould fail to attract the two-thirds vote necessary for adoption, the United States sponsored a compromise proposalwhich called for a six-mile territorial sea and a further six-mile contiguous fisheries zone. This proposal barely failed ofpassage, and since no other proposal was able to attract a two-thirds vote, the final Conventions do not define thebreadth of the territorial sea, or the extent to which a coastal State may assert exclusive fisheries jurisdiction. Seegenerally Dean, supra at 613-16; McDougal and Burke, supra at 529-48; Hearings, supra at 4-9, 21-22. When the Law of the Sea Conference was reconvened at Geneva in 1960, the participants again were unable toagree on the width of the territorial sea or the extent to which a coastal State could exercise exclusive fishingjurisdiction in the waters off its coast. See generally Dean, Second Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea: TheFight for Freedom of the Seas, 54 Am.J. Int'l L. 751, 779-81 (1960). A joint American-Canadian compromise proposal,in most respects similar to that made by the United States at the 1958 Conference, failed of passage by one vote.See McDougal and Burke, supra at 547. 13 In this connection, it should also be noted that the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the ContiguousZone does not define the breadth of the territorial sea. See Arts. 1, 3 and 6. Thus, nothing in the language of theConvention precludes the United States from claiming a territorial sea of 12 miles, in which it could exercise exclusivefishing rights.--------
Annex 81
518
Annex 82
Annex 82:S. GHOSH, LAW OF THE TERRITORIAL SEA: EVOLUTION AND
DEVELOPMENT, 1988.
519
Annex 82
520
Annex 82
521
Annex 82
522
Annex 82
523
Annex 82
524
Annex 82
525
Annex 82
526
Annex 82
527
Annex 82
528
Annex 82
529
Annex 82
530
Annex 82
531
Annex 82
532
Annex 82
533
Annex 82
534
Annex 82
535
Annex 82
536
(…)
Annex 83
Annex 83:R. C. SMITH, THE MARITIME HERITAGE OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS,
GAINESVILLE, FL, 2000.
537
Annex 83
538
CENTRAL AMERICAN INTEGRATION SYSTEM REGIONAL UNIT FOR THE FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE Regulation OSP-02-09 On Regional Management of Caribbean Lobster Fisheries (Panulirus argus) (…) Article 13. Scuba Diving. The Member States will prohibit the autonomous scuba diving for the lobster fishing, in a maximum period of 2 years, starting from the adoption of this regulation. (…)
Annex 84
Annex 84:CENTRAL AMERICAN INTEGRATION SYSTEM, REGIONAL
UNIT FOR THE FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE, REGULATION
OSP-02-09 ON REGIONAL MANAGEMENT OF CARIBBEAN LOBSTER
FISHERIES (PANULIRUS ARGUS)
(Available at: http://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/mul-100509.pdf)
539
540
(…)
Annex 85
Annex 85:M. J. JARVIS, IN THE EYE OF ALL TRADE: BERMUDA, BERMUDIANS,
AND THE MARITIME ATLANTIC WORLD, 1680-1783, CHAPEL HILL,
2010.
541
Annex 85
542
DANE [National Administrative Statistics Department of Colombia] Table 7 Total population projections per year and genre, according to each department Period 2005 - 2020 (Conclusion) Departments Years 2005 2010 2015 2020 Both Genres San Andrés and Providencia 70.554 73.320 76.442 79.693 Source: DANE. POST-CENSAL STUDIES NO. 7 NATIONAL AND DEPARTMENTAL PROJECTIONS OF POPULATION 2005-2020
Annex 86
Annex 86:NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE STATISTICS DEPARTMENT OF
COLOMBIA – DANE, TOTAL POPULATION PROJECTIONS PER YEAR
AND GENRE, ACCORDING TO EACH DEPARTMENT,
PERIOD 2005 – 2020
(Available at: https://www.dane.gov.co/files/investigaciones/poblacion/
proyepobla06_20/7Proyecciones_poblacion.pdf) 543
544
DANE [National Administrative Statistics Department of Colombia] 13 September 2010 REPORT GENERAL CENSUS 2005 PROFILE Archipelago of San Andrés 39.4% of the residents of the ARCHIPIELAGO OF SAN ANDRÉS identify themselves as Raizal. 0,1 0,0 39,4 0,0 17,6 0,05,010,015,020,025,030,035,040,045,0IndigenousRomRaizalPalenqueroBlack, Mulatto,Afrocolombian orAfrican DiasporaPercentage Ethnic Affiliation
Annex 87
Annex 87:NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE STATISTICS DEPARTMENT
OF COLOMBIA – DANE, REPORT GENERAL CENSUS 2005,
PROFILE ARCHIPELAGO OF SAN ANDRÉS.
(Available at: https://www.dane.gov.co/files/censo2005/PERFIL_PDF_
CG2005/88000T7T000.PDF) 545
546
DANE [National Administrative Statistics Department of Colombia] 14 September 2010 REPORT GENERAL CENSUS 2005 PROFILE Providencia and Santa Catalina, Archipelago of San Andrés 89.1% of the residents of PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA identify themselves as Raizal. 0,2 0,0 89,1 0,0 2,6 0,010,020,030,040,050,060,070,080,090,0100,0IndigenousRomRaizalPalenqueroBlack, Mulatto,Afro-colombianor AfrodescendantsPercentage Ethnic Affiliation
Annex 88
Annex 88:NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE STATISTICS DEPARTMENT
OF COLOMBIA – DANE, REPORT GENERAL CENSUS 2005,
PROFILE PROVIDENCIA AND SANTA CATALINA.
(Available at: http://www.dane.gov.co/files/censo2005/PERFIL_PDF_
CG2005/88564T7T000.PDF)
547
548
UNITED
NATIONS EP
United
Nations
Environment
Program
Original: ENGLISH
Proposed areas for inclusion in the SPAW list
ANNOTATED FORMAT FOR PRESENTATION REPORT FOR:
Seaflower Marine Protected Area
Colombia
Date when making the proposal : October 5th, 2010
CRITERIA SATISFIED :
Ecological criteria Cultural and socio-economic criteria
Representativeness
Conservation value
Cultural and traditional use
Annex 89
Annex 89:PROPOSED AREAS FOR INCLUSION IN THE SPAWLIST, ANNOTATED
FORMAT FOR PRESENTATION REPORT FOR SEAFLOWER MARINE
PROTECTED AREA, COLOMBIA, 5 OCTOBER 2010.
(Available at: http://www.car-spaw-rac.org/IMG/pdf/report_seaflower_
marine_protected_area_colombia.pdf)
549
Area name: Seaflower Marine Protected AreaCountry: ColombiaContacts Focal Point Last name: FRANKE ANTE First name: Rebeca Position: Dirección Territorial Caribe. Parques Nacionales Naturales de Colombia Email: [email protected] Phone: 5754230752Manager Last name: FRANKE ANTE First name: Rebeca Position: Manager Email: [email protected] Phone: 00121122222
Annex 89
550
SUMMARYChapter 1 - IDENTIFICATIONChapter 2 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARYChapter 3 - SITE DESCRIPTIONChapter 4 - ECOLOGICAL CRITERIAChapter 5 - CULTURAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CRITERIAChapter 6 - MANAGEMENTChapter 7 - MONITORING AND EVALUATIONChapter 8 - STAKEHOLDERSChapter 9 - IMPLEMENTATION MECHANISMChapter 10 - OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATIONANNEXED DOCUMENTS
Annex 89
551
Chapter 1. IDENTIFICATIONa - Country:Colombiab - Name of the area:Seaflower Marine Protected Areac - Administrative region:San Andres Archipelagod - Date of establishment:1/27/05e - If different, date of legal declaration:not specifiedf - Geographic locationLongitude X: -81.71751Latitude Y: 12.555066g - Size:65000 sq. kmh - ContactsContact adress: Ministry of Environment, Housing and Terrirotial Development - ColumbiaWebsite: Email address: [email protected] - Marine ecoregion67. Southwestern CaribbeanComment, optionalnone
Annex 89
552
Chapter 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYPresent briefly the proposed area and its principal characteristics, and specify the objectives that motivated its creation :The San Andres Archipelago includes 3 small inhabited islands and a number of uninhabited small cays, atolls, banks, and reefs extending for more than 500 km in the Southwestern Caribbean. The largest island and center of government, San Andres (SAI), is about 800 km northwest of Colombia and 100 km east of Nicaragua. Old Providence and Santa Catalina (OPSC) are 80 km north of San Andres. The Seaflower Marine Protected Area (MPA) is part of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve (UNESCO 2000), which encompasses the total area of the archipelago. The MPA was designed to implement biosphere reserve objectives in significant marine and coastal ecosystems and includes the largest, most productive open-ocean coral reefs in the Caribbean.The MPA includes 2,000 km2 of coral reefs, atolls, mangroves and seagrass beds, including: (i) the barrier and fringing reefs, lagoons, seagrass beds, and mangroves circling the inhabited islands; (ii) Courtown (ESE Cay) - a kidney-shaped atoll 6.4 km by 3.5 km; (iii) Albuquerque (SSW Cay) - a circular atoll with a diameter over 8 km; (iv) Roncador - an atoll 15 km by 7 km with a 12-km reef to windward and 30 km2 of live coral coverage; (v) Serrana - an atoll 36 km long and 15 km wide with a complex reef system 37 km by 30 km, with 75 km2 live coral coverage; and (vi) Quitasueño (Queena) - the archipelago's largest coral structure, 60 km long and 10 to 20 km wide with a 40-km reef wall and 496 km2 of live coral coverage (see annex for maps).Explain why the proposed area should be proposed for inclusion in the SPAW listIt contains the largest, most productive open-ocean coral reefs in the Caribbean. They are particularly complex due to exposure to currents, wave action, and other physical oceanographic factors and include extensive benthic habitats such as barrier reefs, reef lagoons, reef slopes, forereefs, deep coral plateaus, numerous seamounts, and deep coral reefs. Representative examples of other coastal and marine ecosystems found in the Caribbean region are found in the MPA, including mangroves, seagrass and algal beds, soft and hard bottoms, beaches, and the open ocean. As new scientific information becomes available, there is an increasing understanding of genetic and ecological connectivity in the Caribbean, and the role Seaflower plays in this, from both an ecological and an oceanographic perspective. The islands and atolls of the Seaflower MPA have a significant role in water circulation regionally, with the formation of the Yucatan current from the diverted Caribbean current, and the generation of the Colombia-Panama gyro (SE current).The MPA was created in response to a demand from the islander community -- that has depended on marine resources for their livelihoods for centuries -- for improved conservation of marine biodiversity and management to promote sustainable use. The major uses are subsistence, artisanal, and industrial fishing and recreation and tourism (diving, snorkeling, swimming, assorted water sports, marine tours, etc.). The 7th largest MPA in the world, Seaflower's design combined the best available biological and socioeconomic information with strong stakeholder ownership of the MPA's Integrated Management Plan (IMP). The MPA declaration and IMP resulted from a 5-year, highly participatory process led by the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andres, Old Providence, and Santa CatalinaCORALINA, the regional autonomous representative of Colombia’s National Environment System (SINA) for the archipelago and MPA management authority.According to you, to which Criteria it conforms (Guidelines and Criteria B Paragraph 2)RepresentativenessConservation value
Annex 89
553
Cultural and socio-economic criteriaCultural and traditional useChapter 3. SITE DESCRIPTIONa - General features of the siteTerrestrial surface under sovereignty, excluding wetlands: 650 sq. km Wetland surface: 250 ha Marine surface: 65000 sq. km Global comment for the 3 previous fields (optional): The Seaflower MPA includes 65,000 km2. The territory is under the jurisdiction of the Colombian State, with the native community (known as raizales) having tenure rights under the Constitution (Art. 310) and subsequent regulations.b - Physical featuresBrief description of the main physical characteristics in the area: See details below.Geology: The Seaflower MPA includes a series of oceanic islands, barrier reef complexes, atolls and coral shoals, of volcanic origin, linked to the formation of the Nicaraguan Rise and the Caribbean Sea. It is characterized by 2 barrier reef complexes on the windward sides of the main populated islands of San Andres and Old Providence (linked to the smaller island of Santa Catalina by bridge), and a series of atolls and coral banks lined up in a NNE direction that extend for over 500 km. The Seaflower MPA includes Courtown (ESE Cay) - a kidneyshaped atoll 6.4 km by 3.5 km; Albuquerque (SSW Cay) - a circular atoll with a diameter over 8 km; Roncador - an atoll 15 km by 7 km with a 12-km reef to windward; Serrana - an atoll 36 km long and 15 km wide with a complex reef system 37 km by 30 km; and Quitasueño (Queena) - the archipelago's largest coral structure, a half-atoll, 60 km long and 10 to 20 km wide with a 40-km reef wall.Geister and Diaz (1997) estimate that as the islands and atolls appear to be closely linked to the formation of the Nicaraguan Rise and the Caribbean Sea, the early pre-island history may date back to the late Cretaceous period. The islands, atolls, and banks are volcanic in origin, formed from the subsidence of volcanic basements and the capping of sea mounts by carbonates in Tertiary to Quaternary times. The San Andres Trough, a tectonic graben on the lower-Nicaraguan Rise (15° NNE), separates the archipelago from the Middle American continental shelf. The Trough itself is part of a regional tectonic pattern deemed remarkable for its fracture zones.Because of its remote location within the Caribbean region, according to the 2004 World Resources Institute’s (WRI) Reefs at Risk analysis, the Seaflower MPA represents not only one of
Annex 89
554
the most extensive reef areas in the Western Atlantic but also a particularly complex one due to its exposure to currents, wave action, and other physical oceanographic factors. Furthermore, the islands and atolls of the Seaflower MPA play a significant role in water circulation regionally, with the formation of the Yucatan current from the diverted Caribbean current, and the generation of the Colombia-Panama gyro (SE current).Topography: The Seaflower MPA includes slightly over 250 ha of mangroves in 12 coastal, estuarine swamps. Four species – red, black, white, and buttonwood – are found. San Andres is the archipelago's largest island. In 1996, mangroves covered 161 ha. Following education, reforestation, and establishment of protected areas, total mangrove area has increased to close to 200 ha. The Hooker Bight/Honda Bay mangroves are the island’s largest wetland at 51 ha. This ecosystem is protected in the Old Point Regional Mangrove Park. Other mangrove forests are Cocoplum, Salt Creek, Sound Bay, Smith Channel, and Cove Seaside, all of which are protected.In Old Providence and Santa Catalina mangroves covered a total area of 54 ha in 1996. With an area of 30 hectares, the Oyster Creek mangroves are the largest and most productive and form part of the only national park in the archipelago, Old Providence McBean Lagoon. Other small but productive stands of mangroves are Southwest Bay, Old Town, Manchineel Bay, Jones Point, and Santa Catalina.Others: Length of beaches (in km), including islands :a) Length of sandy beaches: 2.4 km in lengthb) Length of pebble or stony beaches: .8 km in lengthc) Length, height and depth of active sand-dunes: 3.8 km2 in area with 2.5-3.5 m in height Mean annual precipitation (in mm) 1700 mm c - Biological featuresHabitatsBrief description of dominant and particular habitats (marine and terrestrial)*: List here the habitats and ecosystems that are representative and/or of importance for the WCR (i.e. mangroves, coral reefs, etc): The Seaflower MPA contains the largest, most productive open-ocean coral reefs in the Caribbean and includes complete extended coral reefs with all associated ecosystems and a high level of habitat representation. Other habitat types include mangrove forests, sea grass and algal beds, soft bottoms, beaches, and open ocean. These offer sea bird and sea turtle nesting sites; fish spawning, nursery, and aggregation sites; habitat for a number of threatened species; and demonstrated local and regional genetic and ecological connectivity.Coral reef formations are particularly complex here as a result of their oceanic location and the heavy wave action and turbulence to which they are subjected as the result of high swells generated by the trade winds over a 2,000 km wave fetch (Geister and Diaz 1997). This is a major influence on coral reef morphology, sedimentology, and reef community structure. There are over 200,000 ha of coral; extensive and diverse benthic habitats include barrier reefs, reef lagoons, reef
Annex 89
555
slopes, fore-reefs, deep coral plateaus, numerous seamounts, and deep coral reefs (Diaz et al. 2000). The MPA features rare and beautiful coral reef formations such as tall pinnacles, steep walls, extensive meander-like Montastrea lagoons, and ribbon reefs with high Acropora coverage.Each site exhibits its own special characteristics. For example, the Old Providence and Santa Catalina reef complex, covering an area of approximately 25,500 ha, is one of the largest in the western hemisphere (Geister and Diaz 1997). The windward reefs of Courtown are considered to be a unique and unusual reef environment (Geister and Diaz 1997) due to the influence of strong waves and currents, turbulences and the presence of an intricate system of caves. Remote areas such as Roncador demonstrate high reef integrity with little anthropogenic influence. Unlike most Caribbean reefs, the dominant reef-building coral at Roncador is Montastraea franksi.In regard to other habitats, there are 12 mangrove lagoons (covering over 250 ha) on San Andres, Old Providence and Santa Catalina, showing classic zoning patterns. They provide habitat, food and refuge to a wide variety of marine and coastal fauna and flora. Productive and healthy seagrass beds (estimated at over 2,000 ha) are also found primarily along the shores of these islands. They stabilize the sea bottom, help control erosion, and provide food, oxygen, and habitat for marine life. Algal beds, soft bottoms, beaches, and the deep ocean are other habitats found in the MPA. Sea turtle nesting occurs on the more isolated beaches. Deep sea areas are largely unexplored but are considered to be important for flows, connectivity, spawning aggregations, larval dispersal and maintaining marine food webs.Detail for each habitat/ecosystem the area it covers: Marine / coastal ecosystem categoriesDetail for each habitat / ecosystem the area covers Size (estimate)Description and commentsunitArea coveredMangrovesEstuarine areasha250The Seaflower MPA includes slightly over 250 ha of mangroves in 12 coastal, estuarine swamps. Four species – red, black, white, and buttonwood – are found.Coral reefsCoralsha218850There are over 200,000 ha of coral; extensive and diverse benthic habitats include barrier reefs, reef lagoons, reef slopes, fore-reefs, deep coral plateaus, numerous seamounts, and deep coral reefs (Diaz et al. 2000).Sea grass bedsSeagrass bedsha2000Productive and healthy seagrass beds (estimated at over 2,000 ha) are also found primarily along the shores of these islands.vOther marine ecosystemsAlgal bedsha4310Terrestrial ecosystemsSize (estimate)unitArea coveredOther terrestrial ecosystemsBeachessq.km29Beaches – 2,940 ha
Annex 89
556
FloraBrief description of the main plant assemblages significant or particular in the area: The Seaflower MPA features 3 seagrass species and 4 mangrove and associated species; including red, white, black and buttonwood mangroves. Native beach vegetation includes The greatest diversity of marine flora occurs within the algae, with Seaflower supporting at least 163 species. Native beach vegetation includes trees such as sea grape, mahoe, and beach almond; shrubs including sea purslane, bay cedar and sea lavendar; grasses and trailing vines.List of plant species within the site that are in SPAW Annex IList of species in SPAW annex IEstimate of population sizeComments if anyList of plant species within the site that are in SPAW Annex IIIList of species in SPAW annex IIIEstimate of population sizeComments if anyCombretaceae: Conocarpus erectusnot givenCompositae : Laguncularia racemosanot givenCymodoceaceae: Halodule wrightiinot givenCymodoceaceae: Syringodium filiformenot givenHydrocharitaceae: Thalassia testudinumnot givenRhizophoraceae: Rhizophora manglenot givenVerbenaceae: Avicennia germinansnot givenList of plant species within the site that are in the IUCN Red List. UICN red list : http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/search You will specify the IUCN Status (CR:critically endangered; EN:endangered; VU:vulnerable).List of species in IUCN red list that are present in your siteIUCN StatusEstimate of population sizeComments if anySyringodium : filiformeUnknownnot givenThalassia: testudinumUnknownnot givenHalodule : wrightiiUnknownnot givenRhizophora: mangleUnknownnot givenRed mangroveAvicennia : germinansUnknownnot givenBlack mangroveLaguncularia : racemosaUnknownnot givenWhite mangroveConocarpus: erectusUnknownnot givenSilver-leaved ButtonwoodCedrela : odorataVU - Vulnerablenot givenSpanish CedarList of plant species within the site that are in the national list of protected speciesList of species in the national list of protected species that are present in your siteEstimate of population sizeComments if any
Annex 89
557
FaunaBrief descript° of the main fauna populations and/or those of particular importance present (resident or migratory) in the area: Seaflower MPA contains some of the largest, most productive and diverse coral ecosystems in the region. With respect to scleractinian coral species, Seaflower supports 48 documented species (of approximately 60-70 species known to exist in the Caribbean). There are at least 54 species of octocorals, including 3 black coral species and 11 undescribed species, with possible high endemism. A total of 44 species of octocorals was identified at Old Providence alone, the highest species diversity in the western Caribbean according to Sanchez et al. (1998). The highest gorgonian density in the Colombian Caribbean (up to 22 colonies per m2) was recorded in 2003 at Roncador (Heinemann et al. 2004).Seaflower has documented just over 300 fish species, of which there is one known endemic fish. A total of 124 sponge species have also been documented. Little research has been conducted on other invertebrates such as molluscs, crustaceans, echinoderms, and tunicates. Of data available, there are at least 2 zoanthid species, 2 anemone species, 3 sea jelly species, 17 echinoderm species, 23 crustacean species, 28 mollusc species, 1 tunicate species and 5 annelid species. The mangroves are home to an endemic mud turtle, and beaches provide nesting sites for 4 marine turtle species.The Seaflower Biosphere Reserve (which includes the Seaflower MPA) has been classified a secondary Endemic Bird Area and declared an Important Bird Area by BirdLife International. Of the 155 total bird species, 21 are classified as shorebirds and 22 as seabirds (see Annex 4).List of animal species within the site that are in SPAW Annex IIList of species in SPAW annex IIEstimate of population sizeComments if anyReptiles: Caretta carettanot givenLoggerheadReptiles: Chelonia mydasnot givenGreen TurtleReptiles: Eretmochelys imbricatanot givenHawksbill TurtleReptiles: Dermochelys coriaceanot givenLeatherbackBirds: Puffinus lherminierinot givenBirds: Falco peregrinusnot givenPeregrine FalconBirds: Sterna antillarum antillarumnot givenLeast TernMammals: Stenella attenuatanot givenPantropical Spotted DolphinMammals: Tursiops truncatusnot givenCommon Bottlenose DolphinList of animal species within the site that are in SPAW Annex IIIList of species in SPAW annex IIIEstimate of population sizeComments if anyMolluscs: Strombus gigasnot givenCrustaceans: Panulirus argusnot givenReptiles: Iguana iguananot givenReptiles: Kinosternon scorpioidesnot givenTabasco Mud TurtleList of animal species within the site that are in the IUCN Red List. IUCN Red List : http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/search You will specify the IUCN Status (CR:critically endangered; EN:endangered; VU:vulnerable).List of species in IUCN red list that IUCN StatusEstimate of Comments if any
Annex 89
558
are present in your sitepopulation sizePanulirus : argusUnknownnot givenCaribbean Spiny LobsterAcropora : palmataCR - Critically endangerednot givenElkhorn CoralAgaricia : agaricites Unknownnot givenLettuce CoralAgaricia : fragilisUnknownnot givenFragile Saucer CoralAgaricia : humilisUnknownnot givenLowrelief Lettuce Coral Agaricia : lamarckiVU - Vulnerablenot givenLamarck's Sheet CoralAgaricia : tenuifoliaUnknownnot givenThin Leaf Lettuce Coral Colpophyllia : natansUnknownnot givenBoulder Brain CoralDendrogyra : cylindrusVU - Vulnerablenot givenPillar CoralDichocoenia : stokesiiVU - Vulnerablenot givenElliptical Star CoralDiploria : clivosaUnknownnot givenKnobby Brain CoralDiploria : labyrinthiformisUnknownnot givenGrooved Brain CoralDiploria strigosa: strigosaUnknownnot givenSymmetrical Brain CoralEusmilia : fastigiataUnknownnot givenSmooth Flower CoralFavia : fragumUnknownnot givenGolfball CoralIsophyllastrea: rigidaUnknownnot givenRough Star CoralIsophyllia : sinuosaUnknownnot givenSinuous Cactus CoralLeptoseris: cucullataUnknownnot givenSinuous Cactus CoralMadracis : decactisUnknownnot givenTen-ray Star CoralManicina : areolataUnknownnot givenRose CoralMeandrina : meandritesUnknownnot givenMaze CoralMillepora : alcicornisUnknownnot givenMillepora : complanataUnknownnot givenMontastraea : annularisUnknownnot givenBoulder Star CoralMontastraea : cavernosaUnknownnot givenGreat Star CoralMontastraea : faveolataEN - Endangerednot givenMontastraea : franksiVU - Vulnerablenot givenMussa : angulosaVU - Vulnerablenot givenMycetophyllia : danaanaUnknownnot givenLowridge Cactus CoralMycetophyllia: lamarckianaUnknownnot givenRidged Cactus CoarlPorites : astreoidesUnknownnot givenMustard Hill CoralPorites : poritesUnknownnot givenFinger CoralSiderastrea : radiansUnknownnot givenLesser Starlet CoralSiderastrea: sidereaUnknownnot givenMassive Starlet CoralSolenastrea : bournoniUnknownnot givenSmooth Star Coral)Epinephelus : itajaraCR - Critically endangerednot givenAtlantic Goliath GrouperEpinephelus : striatusEN - Endangerednot givenNassau GrouperEpinephelus : guttatusUnknownnot givenRed HindMycteroperca: bonaciUnknownnot givenBlack Grouper
Annex 89
559
Mycteroperca : tigrisUnknownnot givenTiger GrouperMycteroperca : microlepisUnknownnot givenGagMycteroperca : venenosaUnknownnot givenYellowfin GrouperPagrus : pagrusEN - Endangerednot givenCommon SeabreamLachnolaimus : maximusUnknownnot givenHogfishLutjanus : analisVU - Vulnerablenot givenMutton SnaperLutjanus : cyanopterusVU - Vulnerablenot givenCanteen SnapperScarus : guacamaiaUnknownnot givenRainbow ParrotfishHippocampus : reidiUnknownnot givenLongsnout SeahorseCarcharhinus : pereziUnknownnot givenCaribbean Reef SharkRhizoprionodon: porosusUnknownnot givenCaribbean Sharpnose SharkGinglymostoma : cirratumUnknownnot givenNurse SharkGaleocerdo : cuvierUnknownnot givenTiger SharkSphyrna : mokarranEN - Endangerednot givenSquat-headed Hammerhead SharkBalistes : vetulaVU - Vulnerablenot givenQueen TriggerfishThunnus : obesusVU - Vulnerablenot givenBigeye TunaThunnus : thynnusEN - Endangerednot givenAtlantic Bluefin TunaGambusia : aestiputeusUnknownnot givenCaretta : carettaEN - Endangerednot givenLoggerheadEretmochelys : imbricataCR - Critically endangerednot givenHawksbill TurtleDermochelys : coriaceaCR - Critically endangerednot givenLeatherbackChelonia: mydasEN - Endangerednot givenGreen TurtleAnolis : pinchotiVU - Vulnerablenot givenCrab Cay AnolePuffinus : lherminieriUnknownnot givenAudubon's ShearwaterPelecanus : occidentalisUnknownnot givenBrown PelicanFregata : magnificensUnknownnot givenMagnificent FrigatebirdSula : dactylatraUnknownnot givenMasked BoobySula : leucogasterUnknownnot givenBrown BoobyCasmerodius : albusUnknownnot givenGreat EgretCasmerodius : albusUnknownnot givenGreat EgretEgretta : caeruleaUnknownnot givenLittle Blue HeronEgretta : tricolorUnknownnot givenTricoloured HeronNycticorax : nycticoraxUnknownnot givenBlack-crowned Night-heronPlegadis : falcinellusUnknownnot givenGlossy IbisPandion : haliaetusUnknownnot givenOspreyFalco : peregrinusUnknownnot givenPeregrine FalconFalco : columbariusUnknownnot givenMerlinFulica : caribaeaUnknownnot givenCaribbean CootAnous : stolidusUnknownnot givenBrown Noddy
Annex 89
560
Sterna : fuscataUnknownnot givenSooty TernSterna : hirundoUnknownnot givenCommon TernSterna : maximaUnknownnot givenRoyal TernSterna : sandvicensisUnknownnot givenSandwich TernSterna : antillarumUnknownnot givenLeast TernCalidris : albaUnknownnot givenSanderlingHimantopus : mexicanusUnknownnot givenBlack-necked StiltVireo : caribaeusVU - Vulnerablenot givenSan Andres VireoMolossus : molossusUnknownnot givenPallas's Mastiff BatStenella: attenuataUnknownnot givenPantropical Spotted DolphinTursiops : truncatusUnknownnot givenCommon Bottlenose DolphinList of animal species within the site that are in the national list of protected speciesList of species in the national list of protected species that are present in your siteEstimate of population sizeComments if anyd - Human population and current activitiesInhabitants inside the area or in the zone of potential direct impact on the protected area: Inside the areaIn the zone of potential direct impactPermanentSeasonalPermanentSeasonalInhabitantsnot givennot givennot givennot givenDescription of population, current human uses and development: The main uses of the MPA are artisanal, subsistence, and industrial fishing and recreationand tourism (diving, snorkeling, swimming, assorted water sports, marine tours, etc.).Activities Current human usesPossible developmentDescription / comments, if anyTourismsignificantunknownDive shops – 12 (30 employees) Boat and jet ski rentals – 8 Tour boats – 6 (45 employees) Launch cooperative – 1 Hotel watersports – 13 “Sun, sand, and sea tourism” Tourists – 350,000 annual average (+90% use MPA)FishingsignificantunknownArtisanal fishing cooperatives – 4 Fishing associations - 4 Registered artisanal – 700 (390 classified as active) Registered industrial - 80AgricultureunknownunknownIndustryunknownunknownForestryunknownunknownOthersnot specifiednot specified
Annex 89
561
e - Other relevant featuresf - Impacts and threats affecting the areaImpacts and threats within the areaImpact and threatslevelEvolution In the short termEvolution In the long termSpecies affectedHabitats affectedDescription / commentsExploitation of natural ressources: Fishingvery importantincreasedecreaseQueen conch Reef fish Shore birdsArtisanal fishers traditionally used fishing methods and practices that were in general sustainable. They have lobbied to limit industrial fishing to selected sites in the Northern Section only and to ban the use of destructive industrial methods such as long lines and drag nets in the entire MPA. However, the sheer number of users and growing poverty now mean that even traditional methods contribute to overfishing. Consequently, MPA management measures include closed seasons for key species such as lobster and conch, protection of spawning sites and aggregations, size limits and quotas, and bans on fisheries of threatened and endangered species such as sea turtles, sharks, etc. in addition to the use of no-entry and no-take zones to balance use with conservation. Fisheries are known to be over-exploited. Research has been carried out on queen conch and some species of reef fish as well as on sea and shore birds, which are sometimes exploited for their eggs. Limited studies are currently being done but more research is needed to improve the quality and availability of scientific information and data to better inform MPA management. In 2009, especially significant was the study that was done on queen conch and information gathered from monitoring of fisheries by the Secretary of Fisheries, but carrying out more research is an urgent need.
Annex 89
562
Exploitation of natural ressources: Agriculturelimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedExploitation of natural ressources: TourismsignificantincreaseincreaseUnsustainable tourism practices such as poor diving techniques, groundings from watercraft, and overuse of popular sites, also impact biodiversity and ecosystem condition.Exploitation of natural ressources: Industrylimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedExploitation of natural ressources: Forest productslimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedIncreased populationlimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedInvasive alien speciesvery importantincreaseincreaseIn addition to the local drivers, marine ecosystems have been increasingly affected in recent years by global drivers of biodiversity loss including introduced species (e.g., lion fish)Pollutionlimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedOtherlimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedImpacts and threats around the areaImpact and threatsLevelEvolution In the short termEvolution In the long termSpecies affectedHabitats affectedDescription / commentsExploitation of natural ressources: Fishinglimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedExploitation of natural ressources: Agriculturelimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedExploitation of natural ressources: Tourismlimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedExploitation of natural ressources: limitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commented
Annex 89
563
IndustryExploitation of natural ressources: Forest productslimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedIncreased populationlimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedInvasive alien specieslimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedPollutionsignificantnot specifiednot specifiedAlthough water quality is improving from better managed waste disposal on land, there is still non-point source pollution in coastal waters from uncontrolled dumping of solid waste, discharge of liquid waste, and runoff of contaminated storm water directly into the sea and mangroves or as carried by gullies.Otherlimitednot specifiednot specifiedNot commentedh - Information and knowledgeInformation and knowledge availableDespite being located within the Western Caribbean Coral Reef Hotspot, one of the world’s top ten regions exceptionally rich in marine species and facing extreme threat, the significant tropical ecosystems of Seaflower have received little scientific attention, except for narrow targeted research. Available information does, however, indicate a wide diversity of fish and marine invertebrates. Seaflower exhibits the highest octocoral species diversity found in the Western Caribbean, and fish and coral diversity comparable to sites outside the Caribbean. Seaflower is also an important site for turtle nesting, seabird breeding and, being at the edge of the western flyway, it is a significant stopover site for 130 migrant bird species.List of the main publicationsTitleAuthorYearEditor / reviewBriefly indicate in the chart if any regular monitoring is performed and for what groups/speciesSpecies / group monitored(give the scientific name)Frequency of monitoring(annual / biannual / etc...)Comments(In particular, you can describe here the monitoring methods that are used)
Annex 89
564
Chapter 4. ECOLOGICAL CRITERIA(Guidelines and Criteria Section B/ Ecological Criteria) Nominated areas must conform to at least one of the eight ecological criteria. Describe how the nominated site satisfies one or more of the following criteria. (Attach in Annex any relevant supporting documents.)Representativeness: Name the type of habitats considered of Caribbean representativeness and their estimatedcover (ha).· Coral reefs – 218,850 ha· Mangroves – 250 ha· Seagrass beds – approximately 2,000 ha· Algal beds – 4,310 ha· Beaches – 2,940 haConservation value: 1) No-entry, with use restricted to research and monitoring (11,600 ha);2) No-take, allowing a variety of non-extractive uses (221,400 ha);3) Artisanal fishing, for use by traditional fishers only (201,500 ha);4) Special use, for specific uses like shipping lanes, large-vessel anchorage, ports, andmarinas or uses with the potential to generate conflict like heavily used water sports areas(6,800 ha); and5) General use, where minimal restrictions apply to preserve MPA integrity and promotemarine conservation.These zones were designed by the community and authorities using an ecosystem-basedapproach to assure the protection of ecologically important areas, and hence of biodiversityhabitat and ecosystem services. Zoning criteria included representativeness, connectivity, keyhabitats, ease of demarcation, likelihood to foster compliance, and the potential to effectivelymeet MPA objectives.Chapter 5. CULTURAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CRITERIA(Guidelines and Criteria Section B / Cultural and Socio-Economic Criteria) Nominated Areas must conform, where applicable, to at least one of the three Cultural and Socio-Economic Criteria. If applicable, describe how the nominated site satisfies one or more of the following three Criteria (Attach in Annex any specific and relevant documents in support of these criteria).Cultural and traditional use: The local raizal community identified the establishment of a multiple-use MPA as the preferred approach to address the problems caused by open access to resources, including diminishing resources, user conflicts and political and social marginalization. The archipelago has a long social and economic history distinct from that of mainland Colombia. Indigenous islanders (now known as raizales) descend from European (mainly English) settlers and Africans (slaves and runaway slaves from other islands) who came to the islands in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. The islands’ remoteness meant that for centuries the community had a high degree of autonomy and self-determination, depending on and managing the marine resources until the latter half of the
Annex 89
565
20th century.The raizal identity is inextricably linked with the marine environment. In a study carried out during MPA planning, nearly 99% of raizal respondents considered traditional fishing essential to their identity as islanders, and as many said that the archipelago’s marine territory was their patrimony and belonged to them by historical right. This sense of ownership and belief that their well-being as a people is linked with the health of the marine environment contributed significantly to the almost universal support for MPA conservation (97% in favor of marine reserves and 96% agreement that marine conservation would benefit them) (Howard et al. 2003).Chapter 6. MANAGEMENTa - Legal and policy framework (attach in Annex a copy of original texts, and indicate, if possible, the IUCN status)National status of your protected area: The MPA was declared in 2005 by the Minister of Environment, Housing, and TerritorialDevelopment (Resolution 107/05) (see Annex 1). The same year, three management sectionsand multiple-use zones (five zone types) were designated by CORALINA in Accords 021/05and 025/05, respectively. Artisanal fishing zones were established by the San AndresDepartment fishing authority (Junta Departamental de Pesca) in Accord 004/05.IUCN status (please tick the appropriate column if you know the IUCN category of your PA): unknownb - Management structure, authorityMinister of Environment, Housing, and Territorial Developmentc - Functional management body (with the authority and means to implement the framework)Description of the management authority Zoning agreements were signed with stakeholders prior to legal designation.MPA declaration:- Minister of Environment, Housing, and Territorial Development Resolution 107/2005 –declared the Seaflower MPA- CORALINA Accord 021/2005 – defined the MPA Northern, Central, and Southernadministrative sectionsOther relevant national laws include :- Congressional Law 99/1993 – defined the national environmental framework,establishing CORALINA and declaring the San Andres Archipelago a Biosphere Reserve
Annex 89
566
- Congressional Law 165/1994 – defined the National Biodiversity Policy- Congressional Law 136/1994 - declared mangroves protected areas throughout the nation- Minister of Environment Resolution 1426/1996 – declared the archipelago’s coral reefsspecial management areasMeans to implement the framework MPA declaration: - Minister of Environment, Housing, and Territorial Development Resolution 107/2005– declared the Seaflower MPA– CORALINA Accord 021/2005 – defined the MPA Northern, Central, and Southern administrative sections Other relevant national laws include :- Congressional Law 99/1993– defined the national environmental framework, establishing CORALINA and declaring the San Andres Archipelago a Biosphere Reserve- Congressional Law 165/1994 – defined the National Biodiversity Policy- Congressional Law 136/1994 - declared mangroves protected areas throughout the nation- Minister of Environment Resolution 1426/1996– declared the archipelago’s coral reefs special management areasd - Objectives (clarify whether prioritized or of equal importance)ObjectiveTop priorityCommentStakeholdersYesImplement effective adaptive management in collaboration with stakeholders and in accordance with the IMP.Financial mechanismsYesDesign and implement sustainable financial mechanisms for the long-term funding of MPA management.Economic activitiesYesRender key economic activities in the archipelago compatible with the objectives, guidelines, and regulations set out in the IMP and associated plans.Monitoring an analysisYesImplement a management-oriented monitoring and analysis system that supports adaptive management and informed decision-making.e - Brief description of management plan (attach in Annex a copy of the plan)The Seaflower MPA and Integrated Management Plan (IMP) were developed in collaboration with local stakeholders, especially those who live off the marine resources such as artisanal fishers and watersports operators, along with other institutions with jurisdiction in the marine area. Not only were stakeholders consulted and involved every step of the way, but they had final decision-making power; meaning that they reached consensus and signed formal agreements on MPA objectives, zoning, and management structure.The general goal of the new project is to fully implement the MPA’s Integrated Management Plan
Annex 89
567
(IMP). The project’s specific objectives are: 1) to implement effective adaptive management in collaboration with stakeholders and in accordance with the IMP; 2) to design and implement sustainable financial mechanisms for the long-term funding of MPA management; 3) to render key economic activities in the archipelago compatible with the objectives, guidelines, and regulations set out in the IMP and associated plans; and 4) to implement a management-oriented monitoring and analysis system that supports adaptive management and informed decision-making.- Draft Seaflower MPA Integrated Management Plan (IMP), Parts I (background), II (management), and III (operations) completed and under participatory review by stakeholders and technical experts- Key Species Conservation Action Plans (shore and sea birds, lobster, sharks, and conch)- Seaflower MPA management structure in place, including Stakeholder and Institutional Advisory Committees with formal agreements 2005Management plan - date of publication : not specifiedManagement plan duration : not specifiedDate of Review planned : not specifiedf - Clarify if some species/habitats listed in section III are the subject of more management/recovery/protection measures than othersHabitatsMarine / costal / terrestrial ecosystemsManagement measuresProtection measuresRecovery measuresComments/description of measuresMangrovesnononoCoralnononoSea grass bedsnononoWetlandsnononoForestsnononoOthersnononoFloraSpecies from SPAW Annex 3 present in your areaManagement measuresProtection measuresRecovery measuresComments/description of measuresCombretaceae: Conocarpus erectusnononoCompositae : Laguncularia racemosanonono
Annex 89
568
Cymodoceaceae: Halodule wrightiinononoCymodoceaceae: Syringodium filiformenononoHydrocharitaceae: Thalassia testudinumnononoRhizophoraceae: Rhizophora manglenononoVerbenaceae: Avicennia germinansnononoFaunaSpecies from SPAW Annex 2 present in your areaManagement measuresProtection measuresRecovery measuresComments/description of measuresReptiles: Caretta carettanononoReptiles: Chelonia mydasnononoReptiles: Eretmochelys imbricatanononoReptiles: Dermochelys coriaceanononoBirds: Puffinus lherminierinononoBirds: Falco peregrinusnononoBirds: Sterna antillarum antillarumnononoMammals: Stenella attenuatanononoMammals: Tursiops truncatusnononoSpecies from SPAW Annex 3 present in your areaManagement measuresProtection measuresRecovery measuresComments/description of measuresMolluscs: Strombus gigasnononoCrustaceans: Panulirus argusnononoReptiles: Iguana iguananononoReptiles: Kinosternon scorpioidesnononog - Describe how the protected area is integrated within the country’s larger planning framework (if applicable)not specified
Annex 89
569
h - Zoning, if applicable, and the basic regulations applied to the zones (attach in Annex a copy of the zoning map)NameBasic regulation applied to the zonei - Enforcement measures and policiesTo address these threats, information gathered in 2009 found that the most pressing management needs were identified to be stronger enforcement and economic development for vulnerable groups; i.e., to establish effective enforcement and compliance structures that are collaborative (community-based), transparent, legitimate, fair, and based on accurate information; and to promote sustainable and alternative livelihoods to alleviate poverty and achieve financial sustainability to support long-term MPA management and generation of local jobs in conservation. These results are in accord with on-going consultations with MPA users in which they consistently identified their main concerns as the need for stronger enforcement to achieve conservation and MPA management objectives, and for the MPA to generate new economic opportunities to alleviate local poverty and improve quality of life.j - International status and dates of designation (e.g. Biosphere Reserve, Ramsar Site, Significant Bird Area, etc.)International statusDate of designationBiosphere reserveyes1/1/00Ramsar sitenoSignificant bird areayes1/1/04World heritage site (UNESCO)noOthers: noCommentsWorld Heritage Site, tentative list 2008, nomination in processk - Site’s contribution to local sustainable development measures or related plansnot specified l - Available management resources for the areaRessourcesHow many/how muchComments/descriptionHuman ressourcesPermanent staff0There is no permanent MPA staff at this time, with personnel dependent on short-term, grantdriven contracts. The Seaflower MPA was the major outcome of a 5-year GEF-World Bank project funded from 2000-05. Funding for MPA implementation has lacked consistency since the end of the VolunteersPartners
Annex 89
570
project, so MPA staff has concentrated on management aspects of education, monitoring, and some ad hoc research. CORALINA personnel in projects related to the MPA have also supported priority management functions such as education, biophysical monitoring, mapping, and targeted research. A team to carry out the new MPA GEF-funded project to strengthen implementation of the Integrated Management Plan (IMP) will lead to the creation of permanent staff by 2014, including substantial staff training. Many CORALINA staff and MPA team members have already received extensive training in MPA Physical ressourcesEquipmentsInfrastructuresFinancial ressourcesPresent sources of funding158000$The MPA has no regular, secure sources of income at this time. Since the conclusion of the project to establish the MPA in 2005, there has been no annual budget specifically for MPA management and implementation and no money has been received from national or departmental government. MPA priorities such as monitoring and education have been carried out through projects primarily funded by the Environment Ministry’s Environmental Compensation Fund (Fondo de Compensación Ambiental). The amount spent on activities related to MPA management averaged US $158,000 yearly for 2006-08. The estimated annual operating budget needed to fully implement the IMP is US $750,000, which is expected to be self-financed by 2014. Additionally, several short-term grants for MPA programs were received in the last few years. Mainly these were from the NOAA Coral Conservation Fund and the White Water to Blue Water Initiative. These allowed ad hoc research and management actions to be carried out.Sources expected in the futureAnnual budget (USD)Conclusion Describe how the management framework outlined above is adequate to achieve the ecological and socio-economic objectives that were established for the site (Guidelines and Criteria Section C/V).Biophysical, socioeconomic and governance effectiveness indicators have been identified in a participatory process, however only few are being measured. See prior comments about the need to evaluate and streamline the many existing monitoring programs and protocols, as well as shifting to a question-based approach to best provide information needed to adequately support adaptive management.This also applies to evaluation. Information management and analysis also need to be improved,
Annex 89
571
with results disseminated to stakeholders. Although consulted presently in an informal way, stakeholders will be formally incorporated into the new evaluation process to improve the transparency, responsiveness, and accountability of MPA management.Chapter 7. MONITORING AND EVALUATIONIn general, describe how the nominated site addresses monitoring and evaluation Results of research and monitoring since 2006 revealed that the condition of most resources has remained the same, while a few have improved or others have even declined, since the establishment of the MPA. For example, in regard to species, a spiny lobster stock analysis showed a fishery that is presently stable but at high risk of overexploitation, and surveys of seabird colonies revealed reductions in numbers. As for ecosystems, monitoring showed that coral condition has remained generally the same, but the condition of some popular reef sites for divers and tourists has declined as have some seagrass beds. Exceptions are mangrove coverage that has grown and queen conch populations that show signs of recovery, both as the result of effective regulation, management, compliance and enforcement, and education.Zones have been mapped and policies to reduce over-fishing, land-based sedimentation, coastal population, and adapt to climate change impacts have been developed. But the lack of financial resources has impacted CORALINA’s ability to achieve MPA objectives and reduce threats. To date the MPA has been unable to slow the decreasing quality of life and growth of poverty in the islands linked to increasing costs of living, unemployment, crime, and ineffective immigration controls. Therefore, a main thrust of the new GEF project is to achieve financial sustainability and eliminate dependence on grants and outside fundingWhat indicators are used to evaluate management effectiveness and conservation success, and the impact of the management plan on the local communities Indicators by categoryCommentsEvaluation of management effectivenessGovernance effectiveness Biophysical, socioeconomic and governance effectiveness indicators have been identified in a participatory process, however only few are being measured. See prior comments about the need to evaluate and streamline the many existing monitoring programs and protocols, as well as shifting to a question-based approach to best provide information needed to adequately support adaptive management. This also applies to evaluation. Information management and analysis also need to be improved, with results disseminated to stakeholders. Although consulted presently in an informal way, stakeholders will be formally incorporated into the new evaluation process to improve the transparency, responsiveness, and accountability of MPA management.Evaluation of conservation measures on the status of species populations within and around protected areaSocioeconomic Evaluation of conservation measures on the status of habitats within and around the protected areaBiophysical Evaluation of conservation measures on the status of ecological processes within and around the
Annex 89
572
protected areaManagement measures However, the sheer number of users and growing poverty now mean that even traditional methods contribute to overfishing. Consequently, MPA management measures include closed seasons for key species such as lobster and conch, protection of spawning sites and aggregations, size limits and quotas, and bans on fisheries of threatened and endangered species such as sea turtles, sharks, etc. in addition to the use of no-entry and no-take zones to balance use with conservation.Evaluation of the impact of the management plan on the local communitiesLocal communities Chapter 8. STAKEHOLDERSDescribe how the nominated site involves stakeholders and local communities in designation and management, and specify specific coordination measures or mechanisms currently in place Stackeholders involvementInvolvementDescription of involvementSpecific coordination measuresComments (if any)InstitutionsyesDecisions are guided by and consulted with the Stakeholder Advisory Committee (SAC) and Inter-Institutional Committee (IIC). There is a special advisory committee that is not involved in general management but meets annually and can be consulted at any time for scientific and technical advice – the International Advisory Board (IAB). Advice can be solicited from the IAB by CORALINA, MPA staff, or at the request of the SAC or IIC.PublicnoDecision-makersnoEconomic-sectorsnoLocal communitiesnoOthersnoChapter 9. IMPLEMENTATION MECHANISMDescribe the mechanisms and programmes that are in place in regard to each of the following management tools in the nominated site (fill only the fields that are relevant for your site)
Annex 89
573
Management toolsExistingMechanisms and programmes in placeComments (if any)Public awareness, education, and information dissemination programmesyesThe MPA provides ample opportunities for environmental education and to build awareness of the significance of marine ecosystems and conservation. One of the major successes of MPA management to date is the variety and extent of its on-going education, outreach, and public involvement programs. First, all management decisions integrate scientific knowledge with indigenous knowledge, which requires bringing scientists and community together on a regular basis. The MPA also employs community promoters, who are well-known to the community and bring together management, scientists, and stakeholders, facilitating grassroots interaction in any number of ways. Informal public meetings are a regular feature of MPA management, with open dialogue encouraged. There are many activities to share information, educate the wider community, and build stewardship and an environmental consciousness. These include the creation and management of public document centers to make information widely available to the community; information management systems; island-wide, diverse meetings and events targeting all stakeholders, ages, and levels of the wider community; media campaigns; local, national, and international presentations; introduction of formal school curricula on coastal and marine ecosystems; and the production of a variety of publications for children and adults, general outreach materials, and peer-reviewed articles. Collective learning initiatives are also developed with local people and scientists through partnership research, advisory groups, community-based monitoring, expert training, etc. For example, community-based monitoring programs in place include ReefCheck, RECON, COSALC, and REEF. Other examples of joint activities include hiring community and volunteers to support research expeditions, community clean-ups, volunteer inspectors, and an adopt-an-ecosystem program (beaches, mangroves, etc.).Capacity building of staff and managementyesCORALINA has consistently invested significant budget and efforts in education about marine ecosystems and conservation, with the MPA being a priority. However, the lack of secure budget and staff (the MPA is not yet financially self-sustainable) can reduce effectiveness of the education process when education and outreach become project-driven. Programs need to be integrated into a comprehensive plan that progresses from theory to action to properly address the needs, levels, and responsibilities of diverse stakeholder groups. See prior answers for more detail on the many education, outreach, and training programs. Because outreach and community-wide education are among CORALINA’s most developed programs, environmental awareness has steadily improved. However, awareness is not enough. Compliance is not as high as it should be, there are many violations in spite of the growing awareness, and the community needs to become more pro-active in regard to conservation, instead of solely relying on CORALINA. Shared responsibility is challenging considering
Annex 89
574
the pressure of daily needs exacerbated by the declining quality of life and growing poverty, but is still a major goal of MPA education.Research, data storage, and analysisnoSurveillance and enforcementyesHuman and material resources need to be substantially strengthened to improve surveillance. As mentioned in earlier sections, this is a main focus of the new GEF MPA project. Legal procedures are well-defined with graduated penalty structures and an education-based approach. Lawyers and managers are very accessible to the public. However, legal procedures are too complicated and bureaucratic, needing to be simplified and streamlined to become more efficient and effective.Participation of exterior usersnoAlternative and sustainable livelihoodsnoAdaptative managementnoChapter 10. OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATIONContact addresses NamePositionContact adressEmail adresswho is submitting the proposal (national focal point)FRANKE ANTE RebecaDirección Territorial Caribe. Parques Nacionales Naturales de [email protected] prepared the report (manager)FRANKE ANTE RebecaManagerMinistry of Environment, Housing and Terrirotial Development - [email protected] when making the proposal : 10/05/2010List of annexed documents NameDescription
Annex 89
575
576
UnitedNationsNationsUnies HEADQUARTERS • SIEGE NEW YORK, NY 10017 TEL.: 1 (212) 963.1234 • FAX: 1 (212) 963.4879 MZN (MARITIME ZONE NOTIFICATIONS) RELEASED ON 11/10/2013 CIRCULAR COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE DIVISION FOR OCEAN AFFAIRS AND THE LAW OF THE SEA OFFICE OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ▬▬▬▬▬▬COMMUNICATIONS CIRCULAIRES DE LA DIVISION DES AFFAIRES MARITIMES ET DU DROIT DE LA MER BUREAU DES AFFAIRES JURIDIQUES
Annex 90
Annex 90:CIRCULAR COMMUNICATION FROM THE DIVISION FOR
OCEAN AFFAIRS AND THE LAW OF THE SEA -OFFICE OF LEGAL
AFFAIRS, NO. M.Z.N.99.2013.LOS, 11 OCTOBER 2013.
(Available at:http://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/
PDFFILES/mzn_s/mzn99ef.pdf)
577
Annex 90
578
Annex 90
579
580
CATBOATS, LANCHS AND CANOES: NOTES TOWARDS A HISTORY OF THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE ISLANDS OF PROVIDENCIA, SANTA CATALINA AND THE CENTRAL AMERICAN AND INSULAR CARIBBEAN BY MEANS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF WOODEN VESSELS Ana Isabel Márquez Pérez1 ABSTRACT The construction and use of wooden vessels by the Raizal islanders of Providencia and Santa Catalina in the Colombian Caribbean constitute an ancient cultural practice. They also offer a glimpse of the islands’ past and their relations with the Central American and insular Caribbean and the use the community has historically made of the archipelago’s maritime territory. This article traces the history of this practice and its current developments, placing particular emphasis on the islands’ ties with the Caribbean region and on the shaping of the Raizal marine territory, features normally ignored by the state, with implications for the islands’ present and future. Key words: Immaterial cultural heritage; Naval construction; Traditional knowledge; The Caribbean; The Raizals. Introduction The construction and use of wooden vessels of law draught in the islands of Providencia and Santa Catalina, Colombian insular Caribbean, encompasses a very particular history, lightly documented and unknown for the country. Originally, these were used in all contexts of daily life, for transporting passengers and cargo, fishing activities and recreation. However, today only few fishing vessels remain in use, and its builders have died or retired, and they still carry out regattas in catboats, a local sport with traditional sailing boats, 1Anthropologist. Researcher from the Colombian Caribbean Observatory – Cartagena de Indias, Colombia. Master in Management of Sustainable Tourism. Candidate to Doctorate in Social Sciences in Development, Agriculture and Society. Centro de Pesquisa em Desenvolvimento, Agricultura e Sociedade (CPDA) – Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro (UFRRJ), Brasil. Email: [email protected]
Annex 91
Annex 91:A. I. MÁRQUEZ-PÉREZ, “CATBOATS, LANCHS AND CANOES: NOTES
TOWARDS A HISTORY OF THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE ISLANDS
OF PROVIDENCIA, SANTA CATALINA AND THE CENTRAL
AMERICAN AND INSULAR CARIBBEAN BY MEANS OF THE
CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF WOODEN VESSELS”, REVISTA
INTERNACIONAL DE HISTORIA POLÍTICA E CULTURA JURÍDICA,
2014.
581
built by artisanal islanders, who have inherited a knowledge now in risk of extinction. The reasons as to why and how can be explained by an evolutionary process of change, influenced by different social and historical processes, a topic poorly discussed within the history of the islands. Considering the importance of these vessels for the live of the inhabitants of the islands, the present document aims at showing the evolution of its construction and use during the 20th century and the time that has elapsed of the 21st century, focusing in the three models still in practice or in the memory of people: canoes, catboats and wooden boats. However, the ultimate purpose is to show how this cultural tradition enlightens a reading of the history of the islands with regard to other places in the Caribbean, Central-American and insular, and its relation with the construction and possession of the marine and maritime territory of the San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina Archipelago, a part of which was transferred to Nicaragua by the International Court of The Hague, by means of its judgment of 19 November 20122, with profound consequences for the inhabitants of the islands. This document arises from a research3 carried out in the islands of Providencia and Santa Catalina, in 2011 and the beginning of 2012, on the construction and use of wooden vessels, considered as cultural heritage, in risk of extinction. The aim thereby was to make an ethnography of the construction and use of wooden vessels, arising from interviews made principally to builders, navigators and owners of boats, and a participating observation in different spaces of the daily life related to the sea, as well as reviewing historical documents and searching for ancient pictures. During the course of this work, we looked into the source of this knowledge, the modes for its transmission, as well as the socio-cultural implications of such practice and the process of loss it currently experiences, in an attempt to connect it with social, historical, political and economic processes in the islands, topics on which this document will expand. 2 International Court of Justice, Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Colombia v. Nicaragua). (The Hague: Press Release. 2012). 3 Márquez, Ana Isabel (2012). Catboats, lanchs and canoes: the construction and the use of wooden vessels in the islands of Old Providencia and Santa Catalina, a cultural heritage at risk. Final report, Research Scholarship COLCIENCIAS. Unpublished.
Annex 91
582
Socio-cultural and Historic Context Before getting into the purpose of this article, I present below a brief analysis about the historical and the socio-cultural context of the islands, which needs to be discussed because it deeply marks who the islanders are today. And because in order to talk about wooden vessels in the islands it is necessary to consider its British, African, Caribbean, fishing and navigating legacy, and its close ties with the Central and insular Caribbean, mainly Nicaraguan and Panamanian coasts and the Caiman Islands, all of which I explain below. All these strokes give us clues about how knowledge and tradition about the construction and use of wooden vessels came to be built as an invaluable intangible heritage and in turn reflects wider social, cultural and historical relations. The Old Providencia and Santa Catalina islands are part of the Archipelago of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina, and are located in the Colombian Caribbean Sea, more than 500 km off the continental coast of Colombia. These islands, with a total of 18 km2, are connected by a pedestrian bridge and form a municipality. Of volcanic origin, mountainous, crossed by streams and surrounded by one of the largest complexes of coral reefs in the Caribbean, including a coral reef measuring 32 kilometres4, the islands hold a hectic colonial past5. Initially, they were colonized by British Puritans coming from Bermuda and England6 in the 17th Century, in an attempt that ultimately failed, and then by British from Jamaica (and 4 Corporation for the Sustainable Development of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina Islands (2001). Management Plan. San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina Islands. Seaflower Biosphere Reserve. San Andres Island: CORALINA. 5 The high topography and the complex arrecifal that surrounding them, made them more defensible, which caused its colonization; see in Kuppermann, Karen Ordahl (1995). Providencia Island 1630-1641: The other puritan colony. New York: Cambridge University Press, p. 26; this book contains a detailed history of the first settling. The reefs continue playing an important role, especially in what here concerns about navigation and fishing. 6 Ibid, p. 28.
Annex 91
583
some from the Mosquitia7) during the 18th Century8. Throughout those centuries they went from hand to hand, between England and Spain, who finally acquired them by signing the Treaty of London in 1786, and assigning them to the Viceroyalty of New Granada (now Colombia)9, who militarily controlled them since 1802. After the independence war against Spain, and because of a local decision, they joined the Gran Colombia in 182210 and became part of Colombia after the Gran Colombia was dissolved once Bolivar died. Because of its geographical situation and the internal conditions of Colombia, until the beginning of the 20th Century the islands remained isolated from the rest of the country, which led to a consolidation of a culture under the influence of the English-speaking Caribbean, where the original colonization came from11, and continued mainly with the arrival of many Jamaicans during the first decades of the 19th century, and of Cayman Islands’ inhabitants from 1830 to 188012. Nevertheless 7 The Mosquitia is the name given to the portion of the Caribbean coast of Central America nowadays Nicaragua, Miskito territory of the aborigines who objected to the Spanish control under the British protectorate; it is also known as Miskita Coast. It was along with the Caribbean coast between Belize and Panama and the islands located nearby, a strongly territory disputed between England and Spain, especially at the end of the 18th century, when it stayed in Spanish hands, except Belize. About this matter Sandner, Gerhard (2003). Central America and Western Caribbean. Conjunctures, crisis and conflicts 1503 - 1984. San Andres: National University of Colombia, p. 328 - 333 and 126-129. 8 For a brief history about the islands see Vollmer, Loraine (1992). "Peopling of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina". In German Marquez and Maria Eugenia Perez (Eds.) (1992). Sustainable Development of the San Andres and Providencia. Prospects and Possible Actions. Bogota: Organization of American States - Colciencias –IDEA National University, p. 114 - 134. More exhaustive is Parsons, James (1964). San Andres and Providencia, a historical geography of the Colombian islands in the Caribbean Sea. Bogotá: Bank of the Republic. 9 Vollmer, Loraine (1992). Op. Cit. p. 122. 10 Robinson, Joy Cordell (1996). Providencia Island, its History and its People, San Bernardino: The Borgo Press, p. 10-13, he affirms that the adhesion was driven by Bolivar through French military men who had liberated the islands under the direction of Luis Aury, a pirate whom Bolivar ordered to leave the island, but the one who accidentally died in Providencia, shortly before this happened. 11 Vollmer, Loraine (1992). Op. Cit. p. 125. 12 Sandner, Gerhard (2003). Op. Cit. p. 329 and Robinson, Joy Cordell (1996). Op. Cit. p. 14.
Annex 91
584
and notwithstanding the isolation, when Panama seceded from Colombia in 1903, the Archipelago reiterated its decision to continue being part of the latter13. However, at least until the signing of the Esguerra - Barcenas Treaty in 192814, the relationships of the islands were mainly focussed on the insular Caribbean and certain places of the Central American coast, inhabited until today by populations who share a cultural heritage similar to the one from the islands, as well as numerous family ties1516. Until then the Mosquitia coast and the Archipelago constituted a political and, most importantly, a cultural unit. This last one still exists and is part of a wider territory, which includes the Central American coasts between Belize and Panama and all adjacent islands like the Bay Islands, the Miskito Cays and the Corn Islands. This territory is inhabited today by Afro-descendant populations with diverse origins in complex coexistence with indigenous population, mainly Miskitos, Kunas and Mayas. It was mainly populated from the Cayman Islands, especially Belize and Honduras (Bay Islands) and from San Andres and Providencia (Corn Islands, Colon and Bocas del Toro, in particular); at the same time, these territories had received British population from the Mosquitia, when the British support 13 Teodoro Roosevelt sent a commission to endeavour the islands joining, it was convenient to the United States, but a commission of distinguished people preferred to continuing the joining to Colombia, according to Sandner, Gerhard (2003). Op. Cit. 331 - 332. 14 Treaty which Colombia ceded to Nicaragua the Corn Islands or Mangle and what is now the Caribbean coast (known as the Mosquitia) of that country and were possessed by Colombia as heir to Viceroyalty of New Granada. In turn Nicaragua recognized Colombian sovereignty over the Archipelago. See in Sandner, Gerhard (2003). Op. Cit. 328-333. 15 For more detailed information about migration in Providencia see Lagos, Adriana (1993). Providencia. Study about the identity, migration and cohabitation. Thesis (Degree in Anthropology) - Faculty of Human Sciences, National University of Colombia, Bogota. See also Sandner, Gerhard (2003). Op. Cit. p. 332, who is based in Parsons, James (1964). Op. Cit. in 1956 he estimates were many islanders inhabiting the islands as well as outside them, with more than 2500 of them alone in Columbus. 16 Marquez, Ana Isabel (2013). "Migrant Cultures in the Colombian Caribbean: the case of Raizals islanders of the Old Providencia and Santa Catalina islands". In Memories, Digital Journal of History and Archaeology from the Caribbean, n. 19, p. 204-229.
Annex 91
585
weakened in the last decades of the 18th century17. It is worth mentioning that between the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, people from various Caribbean islands joined these territories, mainly people from Jamaica and Barbados whose migration was driven by a need of workforce for the Panama’s Canal construction and the fruit plantations (these last ones mainly in Costa Rica)18. All the above populations maintain family ties until today, which is evident in the shared British surnames as Archbold, Bryan or Hawkins. The use of a creole language of English origin which has big similarities and mutual recognition of their familiarity, is demonstrated by testimonies as this one: “We islanders are a community that has lived through a continuous process of cultural integration which started with the establishment of the first groups in the islands: the English and African settlers and it continued with the contact that they established from the beginning with the Miskito Indians from the Central American coast (...). The island community is fully integrated. Actually, we are one big family, both in San Andres and in Providencia, since both communities are joined by family ties. Because of the same type of link we are also relatives with the people from the nearby islands and neighboring coasts.”19 17 About the geography and history of the complex cultural framework between Central America and Western Caribbean see Sandner, Gerhard (2003). Op. Cit. p. 328-333. Also Ratter, Beate (2001). Caribbean Networks. San Andres and Providencia and the Cayman Islands: among the economic integration and cultural and regional autonomy. San Andres - Bogota: National University, Institute of Caribbean Studies – ICFES. 18 Although a minority way, given the large numbers of Jamaicans and Barbadians migrants, the Raizals islanders also participated in these migrations. For more detailed information about migration in Providencia, see Lagos, Adriana (1993). Op. Cit. For information about Caribbean migrations to the Canal, see Thomas-Hope, Elizabeth (1992). Caribbean Migrants. Kingston: University of West Indies Press, and Sandner, Gerhard (2003). Op. Cit. p. 332. 19 Ruiz Maria Margarita and Carol O’Flin de Chaves (1992). San Andreas and Providencia: an oral history of the islands and its people, Bogota: Bank of the Republic, p. 15 – 16.
Annex 91
586
The so-called "colombianization" of the islands, is the process by which the Colombian State tried to change the Archipelago’s culture and society, considering it not related to the Hispanic, Catholic and white political project created by the Andean elites. It began in the first half of the 20th century and affected many of the existing dynamics in relation to the rest of the Caribbean. In 1935, through the Capuchin Mission, the Spanish language was imposed in schools, the English language was prohibited, and Protestant religions started being persecuted. In 1953 President Gustavo Rojas Pinilla declared San Andres a Free Port, stimulating a change process that included, besides the massive migration of mainland Colombians to the islands, plunder and land speculation by the Raizal islanders, discrimination, displacement and acculturation20. Even though these processes affected Providencia and Santa Catalina to a lesser extent, because of its distant location, they still had a major impact21. Despite all the changes, the inhabitants of the islands preserve up to date great part of their traditional lifestyle based on fishing and agriculture, yet with modifications due to different processes of modernization and integration taking place during the 20th century and until now. Today’s Islanders are a mix between African, European, Caribbean from other regions, and Asian populations, with a growing component of continental Colombians. They possess an own language, the Creole, a mix of English with different grammatical structures, apparently with African origin22. The Islanders hold their own culture, characterized by their British colonial history, their African heritage and their relationships, first with the Caribbean and then with Colombia. 20 Vollmer, Loraine (1993). “San Andres Raizal’s Culture”. In Regional Planning Council of the Atlantic Coast (Ed.) (1993). Cultural Map of the Colombia’s Caribbean. Santa Marta: CORPES. p. 125 – 127. 21 Marquez, German (1992). “Summary Introduction”. In Marquez German and Maria Eugenia Perez (Eds.) (1992). Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina. Perspectives and Possible Actions. Bogota: Organization of American States – Colciencias – IDEA National University, p. 8. 22 For detailed information about the Islands’ language see Dittman, Marcia (1992). The Creole from San Andres: Language and Culture. Cali: University of el Valle.
Annex 91
587
Most islanders belong to the Baptist church but now Baptists, Catholics, Adventists, and new Christian cults which have recently arrived, coexist in the islands. Strongly influenced by their environment, the Raizal islanders are seafarers and land people, fishermen, farmers, crab-pickers and sailors, now integrated to the national dynamics through State employments and with one of the highest rates of per capita professionals in the Country. Canoes: an indigenous heritage of the Central American littoral As stated in the introduction, there are three wooden vessels that still remain alive. These canoes (canoe) made from a single trunk, were probably the first vessels used by the Islanders. This seems to be inherited from the indigenous from the Central American coast, especially the Miskitos, who were and are still considered great sailors23. In fact, the references to the Central American canoes appear in early Spanish chronicles, in which vessels made of cedar or kapok, for up to 8 men, and the use of sails and paddles are mentioned24. Even though the Miskitos never inhabited the islands permanently, these operated as a fishing and recollection place, which they often visited due to its proximity to the Central American littoral25. After the British colonization of the Caribbean littoral in what nowadays are Nicaragua, Belize and Honduras, the knowledge that the English acquired about Central American indigenous groups, including the ones related to navigation and construction of canoes from a single trunk, circulated through the rest of the British colonies. According to Smith26 the Central American canoe model was discovered by English woodcutters from the 17th century, and was imported to Jamaica where it was incorporated to the rising turtle fishery which was starting to develop there and in the neighbouring territory of the Cayman Islands. Taking into account the location 23 Thompson, Eric (1949). “Canoes and Navigation of the Maya and their Neighbors”. In The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, v. 79, n. 1/2, p. 74. 24 Thompson, Eric (1949). Op. Cit. p. 69. 25 Vollmer, Loraine (1993). Op. Cit. p. 116 26 Smith, Roger (1985). “The Caymanian Catboat: a West Indian Maritime Heritage”. In World Archaeology, v. 16 n. 3, p. 331.
Annex 91
588
of Providencia and Santa Catalina with respect to the Miskita coast, it is likely that the canoes were also taken towards the islands. With the development of family and work bonds that were established in the course of the centuries to come, this loaning between the archipelago and the Central American coast may have been consolidated. The latter was corroborated by the testimonials obtained in Providencia and Santa Catalina, especially from senior citizens. According to them the majority of the canoes were brought from Central American coasts, with the exception of some that were built in the islands. The place of origin mentioned by the respondents included Colon and Bocas Del Toro (Panama), and the Nicaraguan coast. The wood types used were cedar (Cedrela odorata), kapok (Ceiba pentandra) and mahogany (Switenia sp.). The argument for building them locally seems to be the lack of sufficiently large trees, which were probably cut during the first decades of the colonization. The islands were characterized by fine wood smuggling since the 17th century27 and its use for house and vessels construction28. Jonathan Archbold an 85-year-old sailor and fisherman from Santa Catalina, says that “my father had a small canoe which we used to fish. Back then catboats were not used; people used to buy those canoes in Nicaragua, in Cartagena, around the indigenous places because the indigenous groups were the ones who made them”29 30. It is interesting to add that in the author’s field trip to Baru near Cartagena de Indias (Bolivar) in 2012, artisanal fishermen reported the use of indigenous canoes which came from Panama, mainly from the San Blas archipelago, and that are still in use even though in the last decade they started to disappear31. This contributes to corroborate the importance of 27 William Dampier, who visited the Islands at the end of the 17th century was astonished by the big size of the cedars, which would explain the interest of exploring them; Dampier, William (1927). A new voyage round the world 1697. London. 28 Parsons, James (1964). Op. Cit. p. 40. 29 Interview Archbold, Jonathan. Providencia Island. 19th December, 2011 30 This and all the excerpts of interviews that are presented below are originally in creole, the language of the Islands, and have been freely translated by the author to facilitate the reading. 31 Field work carried out as part of the doctoral thesis "Artisanal fishermen in reefs coral: socio-cultural changes and ecosystems in two traditional communities of the Colombian Caribbean", which is under
Annex 91
589
the Indigenous’ knowledge about navigation in the Caribbean region, as well as the existence of numerous bonds between different fishing villages and sailors of the area. The canoes had multiple functions: they were used to fish, to transport cargo and passengers around the island and for recreational purposes. In contrast to the succeeding vessels which only had one sail, the canoes were harnessed with two or three sails. It is important to remember that after the second half of the 20th century the islands did not have motorways but roads going through the hills, connecting the different zones. These roads were used both by pedestrians and by horses, therefore the canoes were a quick and useful alternative to move from one place to the other in the island. This is how Felipe Cabeza, a 53-year-old captain of a racing catboat and a scuba diving instructor in Free Town, describes it: “For the people from Santa Catalina and those that came before, the vessels were like cars nowadays, when they had to come to downtown or to the Old Town for anything they needed in Providencia, they came rowing by boat”32. Edilberto Barker a 75-year-old canoe captain from Old Town, who died in 2012, said that: “Back in those days, there were no catboats, but canoes. They had three sails. We called the first one the foque (jib); the biggest one, the main (main sail) and then the jigger33. One canoe use to have three sails. The small ones had two sails, but the big ones, used for racing, had three.”34 It is not possible to determine the exact moment in which they stopped using the canoes; nevertheless it seems to have been a slow process during which they were progressively replaced by the catboats coming from the Cayman Islands. According to the people we interviewed, as well as to some visual testimonials we found, the last canoes must have development by the author before the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil). 32 Interview Cabeza, Felipe. Providencia Insland. 16th January, 2012. 33 The author could not find an exact translation to Spanish for this term, but it is likely that it is making reference to the mizzen sail 34 Interview to Barker, Edilberto. Providencia Island. 21st December, 2011.
Annex 91
590
navigated in Providencia’s waters in the 1980s decade. However, during the research at least one person was identified, until 2005, as using a canoe inherited from his grandfather, moment in which it was destroyed by the Beta Hurricane35. Catboats: a material bond with the Cayman Islands The catboat is a type of boat characterized for having the prow and the stern with a similar design (double end boat) and a single removable mast at the tip of the prow; it was especially redesigned by the inhabitants from the Cayman Islands for turtle-hunting purposes. The exact date in which the catboats arrived to the Providencia and Santa Catalina islands is unknown. Nonetheless, the calculations made from the oral testimonies show that it could have been during the first decades of the 20th century. In words of Alban McLean, a 72-year-old fisherman and vessel constructor from Southwest Bay, “The Catboats which came to Providencia are from the Cayman Islands. I cannot remember when, if it was before I was born or when I was a child. I knew where they came from because my father told me how he bought one from the Caymanians, who came to the Cays to hunt turtles, and came here and exchanged them for rum, cane syrup and stuff like that. They brought their catboats and people asked them to bring more at their return in order to sell them, and they would bring them.36. However, before talking more about these vessels, it is important first to introduce to the discussion the Caymanians and their relationship with turtle-hunting, and from there, with different places in the Caribbean including the Central American coast and the Archipelago. The Cayman Islands are three: Grand Cayman, Cayman Brac and Little Cayman. They are located 195 miles to the northwest of Jamaica and 180 miles to the south of Cuba, maintaining today their status as British protectorate. The two smallest islands were discovered by Colon in 1503 and remained 35 Interview Archbold, Mendoza. Providencia Island. 13th January, 2012. 36 Interview McLean, Alban. Providencia Island. 29th November, 2011.
Annex 91
591
as abandoned Spanish colonies until 1655, when the British conquered Jamaica. From there on, but probably before, the Islands began to be visited for turtle-hunting operations, due to the abundance of these reptiles in their waters37. Apparently, the final settlements were established since the 18th century. According to Smith38, the settlement took place because of the importance of the islands as providers of turtle and fresh water for boats, and that is the reason why the first inhabitants were fishermen, shipwrecks’ survivors and military deserters. Shortly after the first slaves came and they were mainly employed in cutting fine wood and for some cotton plantations. Thus, over time a society with a solid maritime tradition was created and turtles became the main economic activity for the inhabitants. According to Parsons39, the Caymanians started hunting green turtles (Chelonia mydas) in their waters, a fundamental nutriment for the colonization process in the Caribbean, and then they began hunting hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricate) in order to stock the European luxury markets. In the 18th century, when turtle fisheries collapsed in the Cayman Islands, the Caymanians moved to Cuba and later to the Central American coast40, where the Miskitos had already been trading turtles with the British for a few centuries. Parsons points out that the presence of Caymanian turtle hunters in Central American waters has been reported since 1837, three years after the slave emancipation from the British colonies; and two years after the establishment of the 37 Williams, Christopher (2010). Caymanianness, History, Culture, Tradition, and Globalisation: Assessing the Dynamic Interplay Between Modern and Traditional(ist) Thought in the Cayman Islands. Cultural Studies Doctoral Dissertation - University of Warwick, p. 1. 38 Smith, Roger. Op. Cit. p. 330 39 To view detailed information on trade in hawksbill in the Caribbean, view Parsons, James (1992). “History of the hawksbill comerce in the Caribbean Coast of Central America”. In Molano, Joaquín (Ed.) (1992). The American Tropical Regions: James Parsons’ Geographic Mission. Bogota: Fondo FEN. 40 According to Jackson, Jeremy (1997). “Reefs since Colombus”. In Coral Reefs, v. 16, p. S28, The green turtle fishery in the Cayman islands crashed in the latter half of the 18th century: “The green turtle fishery in the Cayman islands crashed in the latter half of the 18th century, and was entirely gone by 1800 when the Cayman islanders moved on to do the same thing to the turtles of the Moskito coast”
Annex 91
592
Caymanian colony in the Bahia islands (Honduras). Since this moment, the Caymanian ships went further than Bocas Del Toro (Panama) and started visiting the Northern Cays of the Archipelago: Quitasueño, Serrana and Roncador41. These were places for turtle spawning as well as a seabirds nesting place42, whose eggs were sought after by the regional inhabitants. Following the oral history of the senior citizens from Providencia still alive it is possible to calculate that the migration of the Caymanians to Providencia and Santa Catalina took place in this period, which coincides with the scarce data available43. For example the testimonial from Barrington Watler, an 81-year-old fishermen and farmer from Lazy Hill: “My father was born right here, my grandfather was from Grand Cayman, his name was Bill Freeman Watler, when he came to Providencia he was a young guy and he died here at the age of 110”44. The Caymanians continued in the business of turtle-hunting until 1975, when the prohibition of this practice worldwide ended the business, although in the last decades they had been substituted in importance by the turtle-hunters of Central America. But it is precisely the role of the turtle hunt what is relevant to make reference to the evolution of the catboat. According to Smith45, the catboat arose from the combination of the indigenous and European knowledge and appeared as a model particularly different at the end of 19th century, when the turtle hunting was less than a century away from disappearing. Apparently, the Caymanians combined a mixture of the European sloops with the indigenous canoes in an exclusive design, because of its ease of transport in larger 41 According to Parsons, James (1964). Op. Cit. p. 79-80: “With the scarcity of turtles in the neighbouring waters... residents of Grand Cayman directed her eyes towards the South, to the cays of Miskito, Serrana, Serranilla and Roncador... It was comfortable for the schooners from Cayman... take time in Providencia... These contacts during the 19th century explain the perseverance of several families coming from Grand Cayman in Providencia” 42 These birds are called Boobies, belonging to the Sula gender. 43 Sandner, Gerhard (2003). Op. Cit. p. 329; Robinson, Joy Cordell (1996). Op. Cit. p. 14; Parsons, James (1964). Op. Cit. p. 47. 44 Interview Watler, Barrington. Providencia Island. 14th December, 2011. 45 Smith, Roger. “The Caymanian Catboat”. 330
Annex 91
593
vessels, speed, stability and manoeuvrability for turtle-hunting: the catboat Caymanians. Besides of the functions of turtle-hunting and fishing in general, they accomplished other functions common to life in an island; in this way they were useful to transport cargo and passengers and also for recreation. Its small, stable and resistant design made them appropriate for the transportation around the islands, allowing them to carry a complete load and to be dragged over rough surfaces, as well as into the less-deep sandy bottoms. But turtle-hunting was not an exclusively Caymanian business. In fact, many other villages of the insular and continental Caribbean participated of it almost until the extinction of the species, which brought the worldwide ban on its traffic in 1975. Among them Archipelago islanders hold a special place. They joined the turtle hunting probably since the beginnings of colonization, becoming particularly important during the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th. According to Parsons46, since the second half of the 18th century hawksbill tortoise-shell was already stored in Providencia, and it was first gathered by ships coming from Jamaica that carried cotton in the islands and later, during the 19th century, by North American merchant ships. In the beginning of the 19th century the business seems to have gained much importance for the Archipelago, and it is reported that the settlement of Bocas del Toro (Panama) - with which the islanders continue to maintain strong familiar ties until today - was founded in 1826 by men coming from San Andres and Providencia, who traded turtles47. During this time and until approximately 1940, trade remained principally in hands of Caymanians and people from Providencia, who maintain turtle schooners in which they re-transported the small catboats, that carried out operations even beyond Bocas del Toro and in the zone of the Northern Cays of the Archipelago: Roncador, Serrana and Quitasueño48. These last two are today 46 James Parsons. “History of the Hawksbill’s Comerce”. 210. See also James Parsons San Andres and Providencia 81: “During the 21th century the most valuable load in Providencia and all Central American shores to New York and Boston were the hawksbill” 47 James Parsons. “History of the Hawksbill’s Comerce”. 208. 48 Smith reports series of turtle hunting by Caymanian schooners during the first half of the 20th century. Roger Smith. “The Caymanian
Annex 91
594
territories enclaved within seas now named Nicaraguan by the decision of the International Court of The Hague. This connection based on the shared practice of hunting tortoises and anchored to migrations of Caymanians towards Providencia during the 19th century, established the beginning of a relationship that would imply, among other things, the adoption of the catboats by the people from Providencia and their current migration towards the Cayman Islands49 50. Different testimonies coincide in showing that the Cayman schooners, loaded with the small boats, arrived to the islands in search of provisions, water and rum to continue with their fishing operations; equally, the islands constituted a refuge in case of bad weather, hence turning into an occasionally visited port. Jonathan Archbold tells it this way: "When the Caymanians used to come I was less than 20 years old. They were coming in big vessels loaded with ten catboats. They hunted tortoises in Serrana, Roncador and came here to kill them or when there was bad weather. The Hurricane of 1940 sank two of them trying to go back to Cayman”51. It is necessary to highlight, as said above, that since the 19th century, during the migrations that characterized the end of the slavery in the Caribbean, some Caymanian families arrived to Providencia and Santa Catalina, settling specially in what is today known as Lazy Hill or Saint Philip, creating ties between the two Archipelagos, therefore the islands turned out to be familiar to the Caymanians. It was through these visits that the Catboat”. 332. Parsons states that the protest raised by the Colombian Government in 1931 for the presence of the Caymanians schooners, turtle hunters in the North Cay. James Parsons. “San Andres y Providencia”. 80. 49 Since 1970, with the conversion of the Cayman Islands into a tax heaven, a lot of people from Providencia, descendants of the Caymanians migrated there, taking advantage of their right to the nationality. Since then and until today, they have encouraged the continue both-way migration of a lot people from Providencia and San Andres. For more information about the migration to the Cayman Islands see Adriana Lagos. “Providencia”. 50 The 2010 census of the Cayman Islands reports 529 Colombians living in Gran Caiman, 161 of which possess Caymanian nationality, representing the 1% of the population of the country. Cayman Islands Government. The Cayman Islands’ 2010 Census of Population and Housing Report. Cayman Islands. 2011. 99 51 Interview Archbold, Jonathan. Island Providencia. 19th December, 2011.
Annex 91
595
islanders from Providencia saw the catboats for the first time. According to the recollected information, the Caymanians sold some of their vessels in the islands, but other versions indicate that were people from Providencia who travelled to Grand Cayman and brought the boats. In any case, the small boats were acquired by some and began to be used for fishing. Moreover, the Caymanian catboats started making part of the life of the islands, replacing the canoes in its diverse functions little by little and, with time, island carpenters learned to construct them locally. There is no exact information on the dates in which the first catboats started to be made in the islands. Sadly, almost all the builders died in the last two decades and those who still live do not remember the exac dates. Anyhow, the people who were interviewed seem to agree on the fact that the first catboat were built by a man from Providencia, of Caymanian descent, approximately at the end of the decade of 1950. Alban McLean tells that "several people from Providencia had Caymanian catboats. Later, Mister Pat from Lazy Hill, who learned to construct boats in Colon because he worked in the ships as a carpenter started building them and later Coolie, who was also in Colon, came and started building them as well”52. After them others continued consolidating what would become a tradition of constructing wooden crafts in the islands, which would stem in two different evolutions: first, a new design of the catboats and, second, a type of craft adapted to the use of outboard engines, a technological innovation that arrived to the islands in the decade of 1970 and that slowly replaced the sailing boats. Boats: a local development in response to external innovations The declaration of San Andrés as a Free Port in 1953 dramatically altered the dynamics of the islands and generated, among other phenomena, the definitive incorporation of the Islanders into a market economy. This, in turn, initiated a process of specialization of the handcrafted fishermen which involved a change in the most traditional ways of fishing in the 52 Interview McLean, Alban. Providencia Island. 29th November, 2011.
Annex 91
596
islands53. Likewise, in the middle of the decade of 1970 the first outboard engines started to arrive. These could not be used in designs such as the ones for the catboats, which with its double top lack space to place them. For this reason, at the beginning, some of the catboats were cut in the back and conditioned to support an engine. Then, and as a response to the new necessities other models of wood vessels appeared in the islands. Emilio Archbold, fisherman and carpenter from Freshwater Bay remembers that "there were many people who constructed boats, there was Dito from Lazy Hill, Tony from Santa Catalina, Landel from Mountain, Cado from Free Town. Landel was the one that constructed the most but he already died"54. This boat was named lanch by the islanders, probably an adjustment of the Spanish word lancha, even if the word launch also exists in English. Its design is bigger than that of a catboat with a flatter bottom, more squared than curved ribs, and a flat back part to carry an engine. The wood boats were made principally of pine or abarco imported from the continent, and they did not use cedar nor other types of wood from the islands. Its ribs were composed of two wooden pieces, for which they did not need a more elaborated work, as in the case of the catboats. In words of the builders themselves, they were simpler to construct than the latter, therefore demanding less time. As outboard engines became more popular and more accessible, the wooden boats replaced the catboats that, although not completely disappearing, stopped being the main option for most of the fishermen. By then, in Providencia a beltway was constructed and electricity was introduced, which brought additional changes. Thus, the boats stopped having so much importance since the road lead to the introduction of the first cars, which replaced them as the fundamental way of transport. Only in Santa Catalina they preserved this role until mid-1980, when the footbridge that communicates the islands today was constructed. Nevertheless, it is necessary to point out that still nowadays, the 53 Zandra Pedraza. “We was one family: recopilación etnográfica para una antropología de Providencia”. (Anthropology Thesis. Andes University, 1984) 54 Interview Archbold, Emilio. Providencia Island. 22nd December, 2012
Annex 91
597
vessels constitute a foundation of island life, despite not fulfilling all the functions they formerly did. Until the middle of the 1990’s decade, the boats were the most popular vessel among the Islanders, replacing almost definitively the catboats and the canoes. Nevertheless, due to the introduction of glass fibre vessels, they also started being replaced, since its maintenance made them more expensive. At present, even though several builders are still alive, many of whom are also builders of catboats, none does the job since nobody seems to be interested in this type of vessels. Nevertheless, these have not disappeared completely yet and around the islands it is possible to observe some anchored or fulfilling daily fishing labours. When asked why the persistence of its use, the answer of some fishermen is that they are more stable than the fibre vessels, and that is why they are better for fishing, since they move less and remain still in the place where they are anchored. However, in all likelihood this type of boat will disappear in the coming decades, when those that still exist stop being useful. Anyhow, the appearance of a small branch of local construction of glass fibre boats must also be highlighted, as a practice that mixes the local tradition of constructing boats, originally from wood, and the usage of external knowledge and innovation. This becomes evident in testimonies as the one from Justino Newball, vessel builder and 43-year-old carpenter from Santa Isabel, who tells that "I used to build wooden boats but we stopped because it is not profitable, it requires a lot of maintenance. So we started working with glass fibre. I started constructing boats twenty years ago and working with fibre twelve years ago, approximately"55. Racing Catboats: the persistence of a tradition At this point of the discussion, one could think that, with new realities, the wooden vessels of the islands, as well as its constructors and their knowledge, have disappeared or are condemned to do so. However, there is still one split in history which originated a cultural tradition that, still dynamic, has guaranteed until this day the survival of the wooden crafts: the catboat races (catboat racing). Had this not been the case, it is possible that wooden crafts would no longer exist, as well as 55 Interview Newball, Justino. Providencia Island. 11th January, 2012.
Annex 91
598
other practices and traditions of the population of the island that seemed as though they could not resist the impact of new ways of life in society, just as it happened with its Caymanian predecessors, who disappeared almost completely. In fact, in 1985, Smith wrote about the catboats on the Cayman Islands: “Sadly, the Caymanian catboat has disappeared. The dawn of his existence occurred when his marine resource, for which it was specifically designed for capturing, nearly extinguished, and a restrictive legislation made turtle-hunting a bad business (…) Today, the once isolated Cayman islands, are now incorporated into the world. Marine abilities have lost importance as tourism and banks have provided a lucrative way of life, even though it is culturally poor.”56 Luckily, this observation can be refuted. Although it is true that Caymanian catboats almost disappeared, and with no doubt lost the place they once held in the daily life of the people, during the last decade a few Caymanians have made an effort to rescue some of the knowledge and tradition related to catboats, a situation I personally observed during a visit in 2006 and which can be corroborated by Smith in a personal communication57. Nevertheless, there is one additional reason that challenges this assertion, and it is the survival of the Caymanian catboats in the catboats from Providencia. Indeed, catboats still exist since they were adopted by the island population of Providencia and Santa Catalina, who created a new style, specially designed for competitions, which preserved the same construction process and basic characteristics of the first, even though it experienced some radical changes. The size of the vessels went from 16 or 18 feet to vessels that today reach 27 feet. The beam and the design of the keel converted wide and stable boats into sharp and unstable ones. The sails and poles that were initially fabricated locally, with cotton cloth and wood, are now imported from the United States, made with nylon and aluminium. Finally, the paddles and channels went from being essential to almost expendable. 56 Roger Smith. “The Caymanian Catboat”: 334. 57 Personal communication Smith, Roger. 12th December, 2011.
Annex 91
599
With all these changes, racing catboats became a new vessel that, although inheriting a Caymanian tradition, must be considered from Providencia, given that they were the result of endogenous processes that created a new model customized for specific functions. Elirio Jay, 50-year-old vessel constructor and fisherman from Mountain, states that “today’s catboats from Providencia are very different from the ones coming from Cayman, because the first were used for fishing, thus they had more bulge, for stability. Racing catboats are put on the water and they fall to one side due to the fact that they are very sharp so they can be faster”58. Until today, racing catboats are a social event that gathers people of all ages and areas of the islands, where they bet money and drink beer to the sound of music and excitement (or disappointment) shouts, and where crewmembers and ship owners’ reputation is at stake. Just as constructing a catboat implies a deep knowledge on wood and sea, sailing it implies an additional knowledge where the control of the different boats’ instruments blend together with the understanding of weather elements, specially wind and currents. For Felipe Cabeza, in order to navigate a racing catboat “first, you have to like it and second, you have to practice. You can’t go straight to captain. You have to start like me, first bailer, then helping out with the sail. For you to be captain you must know a lot of stuff, you have to understand the wind, where and how it comes from; you must know how to balance your crew regarding the sail and the wind force; you have to know when to turn the boat and how to maintain the crew in the appropriate location; you must know how to take advantage of your adversary. There is an art to that”59. It’s also important to mention that races have been practiced by the people of the islands for decades, even since the canoe period. Later, catboats were implemented for the same practice and these have been customized to become a specially designed vehicle to race. This customization and the socially relevant events represented by the races, guaranteed the catboats 58 Interview Jay, Elirio. Providencia Island. 22nd December, 2012. 59 Interview Cabeza, Felipe. Providencia Island. 16th January, 2012.
Annex 91
600
to stay as a living tradition and not disappearing from everyday practices, as it happened to its Caymanian predecessors; nonetheless, it seems to weaken gradually. Indeed, while races have become more competitive and bets have gained importance and have become bigger, the races, although still taking place, are no longer a regular event as they were a few years ago. This is Elirio Jay’s opinion, who thinks that “catboat races are ending. Because, if it weren’t for various million pesos, people wouldn’t race. For me, it’s been transformed into a business instead of what it really is: a sport”60. Nevertheless, until today they carry on and attract fans in every occasion, even when years ago they took place almost every Saturday and now happen only a few times a year. Opinions about the future of catboats are divided. While some argue that tradition will disappear, others still hope that the new generations will eventually learn and give a boost to this practice. However, it is important to highlight that even the less optimists are still willing to extend their knowledge to the interested youngsters in the islands. Elvis Henry, captain of racing catboats, eagerly expresses he would like to have the opportunity to teach children how to sail catboats: “There are a lot of things disspearing. It would be an honour for me to be able to teach how to race catboats, even better than my doing my job at the pipeline. I would really love to. And there are a lot of children that would like to learn”61. Conclusion: notes on the history of the relationship between the Islands of Providencia and Santa Catalina with the Central American and insular Caribbean through the construction and use of wooden vessels Throughout this document, the intention has been to show the history of the construction and uses of the wooden vessels in the islands of Providencia and Santa Catalina. This storyline shows that the vessels have played a fundamental role in the daily life of the islands, and they have been used not only for fishing but also for freight and passenger transport and recreation. Even though during the course of time they have lost importance since other ways of transportation have been 60 Interview Jay, Elirio. Providencia Island. 22nd December, 2011. 61 Interview Henry, Elvis. Providencia Island. 13th January, 2012.
Annex 91
601
substituting some of their functions, they are still used in many contexts of everyday life. More so if taking into account that Islanders feel proud of their fishing and marine tradition and that it has been adjusted in time and due to the insertion of new inventions. In this sense, the canoes that were once the most used vessels widely spread among the inhabitants of the islands, were replaced by a sailing vessel technically more elaborated, the catboat, which was later on replaced by wooden boats especially designed to use outboard engines. These were also later replaced by the introduction of glass fibered boats brought, mostly, from outside the islands and made industrially. But although it seems like a simple process, the truth is that every one of these stages was related to specific historical and other situations as well as to new ways of life and local knowledge. Thus, we can see how canoes relate to family and labour relations existing among the islands and the coast of Central America since the beginning of colonization and consolidated during the 19th and 20th centuries. The catboats tell a story about the relationships between Providencia and Cayman Islands and between both territories, turtle-hunting and the northern cays of the Archipelago. And boats, on the other hand, tell us about local developments in response to external processes, such as the imposition of a Free Port in San Andres by the Government of Colombia, through which the islands definitely entered into the market economies, which lead to the specialization of fishermen and the gradual abandonment of agriculture, among other situations. Similarly, each and every one of these vessels says something about the local knowledge that developed in the surroundings. If in the canoes Islander carpenters worked as woodcarvers and finalizers of a project started in the Central American littoral, in the catboats they learned from the Caymanian model and developed their own; and in the boats all the accumulated knowledge created a local result. All of this, consolidating a common tradition and a maritime heritage from the Islands, and reinforcing the relationships between the islands and other regional areas where other fishermen and sailors also inhabit. In this way, what matters are not the vessels themselves but the people, the social relationships and the knowledge associated to them. Without these, none of them could exist,
Annex 91
602
given that not only the constructors, but the fishermen, the boats owners, the captains, the crew and other actors of daily life build history. In fact, talking about the vessels is, in some way, talking about the islands. Likewise, not just the constructors and their knowledge are nowadays endangered but diverse cultural practices and social relationships associated to that, and also captains and crews, although constituting an important and dynamic part in the culture of the island, could disappear with the advance of ways of living associated to the capitalist model and the impact of external economies. On the other hand, all of the above allows us to get a glimpse of what could be called as the raizal maritime ties with the Islands, understood as the diverse relationships of this population with the maritime space, through fishing, sailing, boat construction and the daily and continuous adoption of a territory, all this through a knowledge traditionally acquired for generations. This maritime ties allow us also to look and understand the islands not as an isolated territory but rather as one with strong bonds with other territories, which have been often ignored by Colombia's traditional history. This has brought severe consequences for the islands, such as the recent judgment of the International Court of Justice in The Hague, where a considerable part of the traditional maritime territory of the Raizal Islanders was transferred to Nicaragua, Islanders who have developed a permanent appropriation of these waters since at least the end of the 18th century, and who were nonetheless excluded from the proceedings. Thus, it is quite impossible to think about the islands in a context without making reference to places such as Bluefields, Corn Island, Colon, Bocas del Toro or Georgetown, places that are absent in the imaginary of most of Colombians, but are nonetheless perfectly framed in the mental geography of the Raizal Islanders. Moreover the territory of the islands cannot be understood as limited to the 18km2 properly belonging to the lands of Providencia and Santa Catalina, nor to the reef lagoon and the 32km2 extension of the coral reef, but it also implies to include the northern cays and banks of the Archipelago (Quitasueño, Serrana, Roncador, Seranilla, not to mention Rosalinda Bank, which was ceded) just as much as the open sea areas that are located within the islands and cays, which are also absent in the Colombians' geography regardless of the fact that
Annex 91
603
during centuries fishermen and Islander sailors have been present there and have obtained their nourishment and ways of living from those. In the current context of the litigation proceedings between Colombia and Nicaragua, where Serrana Cay and Quitasueño Bank of the Archipelago are now territories enclosed within the Nicaraguan sea, all of the above takes particular importance due to the fact that the Raizal population is the one who had exercised actual sovereignty over these waters. Historically and up until today, this sovereignty has been ignored by both the Colombian and the Nicaraguan States, who arbitrarily have dismissed the presence of these populations and the multiple relationships between the Raizals and the Anglophone inhabitants of the coast of Nicaragua, both ignored and left out of the conflict, despite being the most affected ones. Therefore, and to end this article, it is important to highlight the need of an Archipelago vision whereby the Maritime ties become an essential concept, allowing own cultural traditions and the characteristics of a population historically bounded to the sea, along with its ways of appropriating the territory, not only land but also maritime, and finally their diverse and strong historical, socio-cultural and territorial bonds with other people and territories possessing also a strong maritime legacy, and those ties are evidenced, foreseen and discussed. Only by doing so will it be possible for the Colombian Nation to understand the future of the Islands’ life, their differential role in the Nation’s building process and the implications that this has had and will have for their future. References Primary sources Interviews Interview to Archbold, Emilio. Providencia Island. 22 December 2011. Interview to Archbold, Jonathan. Providencia Island. 19 December 2011. Interview to Archbold, Mendoza. Providencia Island. 13 January 2012.
Annex 91
604
Interview to Barker, Edilberto. Providencia Island. 21 December 2011. Interview to Cabeza, Felipe. Providencia Island. 16 January 2012. Interview to Henry, Elvis. Providencia Island. 13 January 2012. Interview to Jay, Elirio. Providencia Island. 22 December 2011. Interview to McLean, Alban. Providencia Island. 29 November 2011. Interview to Watler, Barrington. Providencia Island 14 December 2011. Secondary sources Cayman Islands Government (2011). The Cayman Islands’ 2010 Census of Population and Housing Report. Cayman Islands. Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina (2001). Management Plan. Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina. Seaflower Biosphere Reserve. San Andres Island: CORALINA. Dampier, William (1927). A new voyage round the world 1697. London. Dittman, Marcia (1992). The Creole from San Andres: Language and Culture. Cali: Universidad del Valle. Jackson, Jeremy (1997). “Reefs since Colombus”. In Coral Reefs, v. 16, p. S23 – S32. Kuppermann, Karen Ordahl (1995). Providencia Island 1630-1641: The other puritan colony. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Annex 91
605
Lagos, Adriana (1993). Providencia. Study over Identity, migrations and coexistence. Thesis (Anthropology Degree) – Department of Human Sciences, Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Colombia, Bogota. Márquez, Ana Isabel (2013). “Migration Cultures in the Colombian Caribbean: The Case of the Raizal Islanders from Old Providencia and Santa Catalina”. In Memoirs, Digital Magazine of History and Archaeology from the Caribbean, n. 19, p. 204 – 229 Márquez, Ana Isabel (2012). Catboats, lanchs and canoes: Construction and Use of wooden vessels In the Islands of Old Providencia and Santa Catalina, an endangered cultural patrimony. Final Inform Research Scholarship COLCIENCIAS. Not published. Márquez, Germán (1992). “Introduction Summary”. In Márquez Germán and María Eugenia Pérez (Eds.) (1992). Sustainable Development of the Archipielago of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina. Perspectives and Possible Actions. Bogota: Organization of American States – Colciencias – IDEA. Universidad Nacional. Parsons, James (1964). San Andres and Providencia, a historical geography of the Caribbean Colombian Islands. Bogota: Banco de la República. Parsons, James (1992). “History of hawksbill commerce in the Caribbean coast of Central America”. In Molano, Joaquín (Ed.) (1992). The American Tropical Regions: James Parsons’ Geographical Mission. Bogota: Fondo FEN. Pedraza, Zandra (1984). We was one family: Ethnografic recopilation for an Anthropology of Providencia. Thesis (Anthropology Degree) – Faculty of Human Sciences, Universidad de los Andes, Bogota. Ratter, Beate (2001). Caribbean Networks. San Andres and Providencia and the Cayman Islands: Between the Economic Integration and the Cultural and Regional autonomy. San
Annex 91
606
Andres-Bogota: Universidad Nacional, Institute of Caribbean Studies – ICFES. Robinson, Joy Cordell (1996). Providencia Island, its History and its People, San Bernardino: The Borgo Press. Ruiz María Margarita y Carol O’Flin de Chaves (1992). San Andres and Providencia: An Oral History of the Islands and its People. Bogota: Banco de la República. Sandner, Gerhard (2003). Central America and the West Caribbean. Conjuctions, Crisis and Conflicts 1503 – 1984. San Andres: Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Smith, Roger (1985). “The Caymanian Catboat: a West Indian Maritime Heritage”. In World Archaeology, v. 16 n. 3, p. 329 – 336. Thomas-Hope, Elizabeth (1992). Caribbean Migrants. Kingston: University of West Indies Press. Thompson, Eric (1949). “Canoes and Navigation of the Maya and their Neighbours”. In The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, v. 79, n. 1/2, p. 69 – 78. Vollmer, Loraine (1992). “Population Process of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina”. In Márquez Germán and María Eugenia Pérez (Eds.) (1992). Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina. Perspectives and Possible Actions. Bogota: Organization of American States – Colciencias – IDEA. Universidad Nacional, pp. 114 – 134. Vollmer, Loraine (1993). “The Raizal Culture of San Andres”. In Regional Council of Planning of the Atlantic Coast (Ed.) (1993). Cultural Map of the Colombian Caribbean. Santa Marta: CORPES. Williams, Christopher (2010). Caymanianness, History, Culture, Tradition, and Globalisation:
Annex 91
607
Assessing the Dynamic Interplay Between Modern and Traditional(ist) Thought in the Cayman Islands. Cultural Studies Doctoral Dissertation - University of Warwick. Received for publication on 19 February, 2014. Approved for publication on 2 April, 2014.
Annex 91
608
1.CARIBBEAN SEA(See Table No. 2, Graphic 2)The fisheries in the Caribbean Sea represented 25,551,466 pounds landed, equivalent to 23.52% of the totalvolume caught. In this coastline, during year 2014, there was an increase of 52.68%, compared to the previousyear. Resources caught in other measuring units and converted subsequently added up to 28,476 pounds. Themain resources by volume caught were sea jellyfish equivalent to 31.48% of the total, fish with the 24.19%,[Spiny] lobster (tail, whole, meat) with the 15.36%, sea cucumber with 10.26%, [Queen] conch fillet 100% cleanwith 6.34%, coastal shrimp (tail and whole) 6.97% and the blue crab with 5.26%.Table No 2 Reported landings of fishery resources (pounds) CARIBBEAN SEA 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 BIG TOTAL 11.928.053 11.969.615 12.815.289 11,176,544 11,935,289 13,902,630 12,207,688 12,589,596 16,735,109 25,551,466 MARINA 11,927,716 11,969,615 12,815,289 10,901,474 11,562,193 13,572,021 12,041,448 12,483,298 16,686,974 25,522,989 Shrimp tail 3,963,026 2,479,729 2,670,490 1,964,109 2,046,232 1,747,681 1,551,002 1,004,513 976,613 1,402,535 Whole Shrimp 1,171,514 714,997 897,630 360,700 264,159 469,875 429,414 281,169 126,700 195,448 Whole squat lobster 17,954 27,547 9,490 621,052 848,556 88,044 100,209 988,093 124,220 Tail squat lobster 127,510 111,149 246,792 41,448 70,775 60,822 [Spiny] Lobster tail 2,294,731 2,416,536 2,435,994 2,790,168 2,278,143 2,427,200 2,581,215 2,816,567 2,848,989 3,075,379
Annex 92
Annex 92:NICARAGUAN INSTITUTE FOR FISHING AND AQUACULTURE - INPESCA, FISHING AND AQUACULTURE YEARBOOK FOR 2014, JUNE 2015.
(Available at: http://www.inpesca.gob.ni/images/ANUARIO%20PESQUERO %20Y%20ACUICOLA%20DE%20NICARAGUA%202014.pdf)
609
Whole [Spiny] Lobster 2,470 4,238 48,638 217,694 334,364 294,382 550,960 [Spiny] Lobster (head meat) 127,732 142,168 156,994 158,213 153,266 181,378 140,042 162,670 281,289 298,537 Whole fish 4,196,456 4,985,960 5,556,067 4,445,315 3,986,143 5,679,717 4,754,863 5,475,957 5,872,471 6,180,851 [Queen] Conch fillet 155,110 271,016 120,129 278,552 490,759 805,741 761,313 1,034,168 1,330,459 1,618,812 [Queen] Conch leather 425 [Queen] Conch meat 17,014 Whole sea cucumber with viscera 12,069 402,287 428,740 1,583,256 858,883 683,527 828,948 1,517,382 2,621,093 Whole blue crab 2,493 2,112 1,603 1,915 2,362 386,226 568,956 400,205 918,058 1,343,382 Whole jellyfish 451,208 1,452,966 8,043,767 Whole crab 15,631 20,260 9,312 6,610 2,728 6,882 16,180 3,080 8,796 6,904 Grapple crab 892 943 408 982 129 Crab (body, mouth chess) 2,277 Whole squid 77 158 280 Whole octopus 598 3,500 1,154 Clams and whole oysters 52 95
Annex 92
610
OTHER FISHERY RESOURCES REPORTED IN OTHER UNITS CONVERTED INTO POUNDS 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 TOTAL 338 905,922 519,279 275,069 373,096 330,608 166,240 106,299 48,135 28,476 Whole oysters without shell 310 490 640 22,290 27,075 25,035 16,805 15,665 14,335 15,540 Whole [Queen] Conch in the shell 905,432 518,638 173,713 15,847 254,999 100,847 18,108 0 6,074 Whole clam in the shell 28 0 0 Whole blue crab 75,186 330,174 50,574 48,588 72,526 33,800 6,862 Shark fin 3,880 Different resources documented in other units of volume, converted to pounds using conversion factors (See Annexes, Table 1.1)
Annex 92
611
Annex 92
612
The International Journal of Maritime History2016, Vol. 28(1) 64 –80© The Author(s) 2016Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.navDOI: 10.1177/0843871415624095ijh.sagepub.comIJMHArticleA contact zone: The turtle commons of the Western CaribbeanSharika D CrawfordUnited States Naval Academy – History, USAAna Isabel Márquez-PérezAnthropologist, Independent Consultant, ColombiaAbstractTurtle fishing has a long history in the Caribbean. Early Caribbean accounts from New World sailors and adventurers noted an abundance of the marine reptile, which quickly became desired for its delicious meat and beautiful shell. Nowhere was the presence of sea turtle more pronounced than in the adjacent banks, cays and reefs of the Western Caribbean, where Europeans also noted the abilities developed by the indigenous peoples of the region to capture them. By the mid-eighteenth century, English-speaking inhabitants from the Cayman Islands, Jamaica, Nicaragua and the Colombian islands of San Andrés and Old Providence took to the sea in search of green and hawksbill turtles. In doing so, they created a robust maritime commerce and distinctive seafaring culture, which continues to exist in these communities. In this article, we argue that the turtle trade facilitated the creation and recreation of a dynamic contact zone of ongoing transnational and cross-cultural encounters among indigenous, European and Afro-Caribbean inhabitants.KeywordsCaribbean, fishing, seafaring, turtleIn his 1956 publication The Windward Road, Floridian herpetologist Archie Carr mes-merized English-speaking audiences with his whimsical tales of turtle fishing communities along ‘remote Caribbean shores’.1 Traveling from the Caribbean coasts of 1. Archie Carr, The Windward road: Adventures of a naturalist on remote Caribbean shores (Gainesville, FL, 1979 [1956]).Corresponding authors:Sharika D Crawford, Associate Professor of History, United States Naval Academy – History, 107 Maryland Avenue, Mailstop 12C, Annapolis Maryland 21401, USA. Email: [email protected] Isabel Márquez-Pérez, Anthropologist, PhD, Independent Consultant, Freshwater Bay, Old Providence Island, Colombia.Email: [email protected]/0843871415624095The International Journal of Maritime HistoryCrawford and Márquez-Pérezresearch-article2016 by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
Annex 93:S. D. CRAWFORD, A. I. MÁRQUEZ-PÉREZ, “A CONTACT ZONE: THE
TURTLE COMMONS OF THE WESTERN CARIBBEAN”, THE
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MARITIME HISTORY, 2016.
613
Crawford and Márquez-Pérez 65 2. Alison Rieser, The case of the green turtle: An uncensored history of a conservation icon (Baltimore, MD, 2012). 3. Carr, Windward road, 149–57 and 206–36. 4. Charles W. Hale, Resistance and contradiction: Miskitu Indians and the Nicaraguan state, 1894–1987 (Palo Alto, CA, 1994); Bernard Nietchsmann, Between land and sea: The sub-sistence ecology of the Miskito Indians, eastern Nicaragua (New York, 1973); Paula Palmer, ‘What happen’: A folk-history of Costa Rica’s Talamanca Coast (Miami, FL, 2005 [1974]); Harry G. LeFever, Turtle Bogue: An Afro-Caribbean life and culture in a Costa Rican vil-lage (Susquehanna, PA, 1992); James J. Parsons, San Andrés and Providencia: English-speaking islands in the Western Caribbean (Berkeley, CA, 1956); Ana Isabel Márquez-Pérez, ‘Catboats, lanchs, and canoes: Apuntes para una historia de las relaciones de las islas de Providencia y Santa Catalina con el Caribe Centroamericano y Insular a traves del construc-ccion y el uso de embarcaciones de madera’, Passagens: Revista Internacional de Historia Politica e Cultura Juridica 6, No. 3 (2014), 480–503.Mexico and Central America to the Windward Islands of Martinique and Tobago to the Cayman Islands, Carr circumvented the Caribbean Sea seeking to learn about the migra-tory patterns of sea turtles. However, his adventures introduced readers to an eclectic maritime community where turtle made for hearty meals and an intrepid livelihood. Turtlers lived and worked along the coastal edges and the islands in between the Caribbean Sea, which had once served as buccaneer and pirate hideouts. By the mid-twentieth century, during the period of Carr’s visits, it was clear that these turtle fishing communities shared a distinctive seafaring tradition that crossed national boundaries as well as races and ethnicities.What was less visible on the agenda and radar of these scientific communities was the destruction of distinctive Caribbean seafaring cultures and maritime communities, which for centuries relied on turtle consumption and commerce. While scholarly atten-tion has focused on the rise of turtle conservationism, less attention has been given to the role of turtle in the development of these fishing communities.2 Academic studies too often portray the turtlers as fanciful or ignorant characters critical to the destruc-tion of these marine reptiles. With the exception of Archie Carr’s The Windward road, most fail to examine the cultures and maritime knowledge associated with the use of these marine reptiles, which led them to develop transnational, cross-cultural encoun-ters among Central American coastal communities and adjacent small islands in the Caribbean Sea.3Anthropological and cultural geographical analyses of these communities provide a wealth of information on the evolution of the maritime practices of turtling communities. Drawing on studies conducted from the 1970s to the 2000s, it is clear that anthropolo-gists have taken an immense interest in the ethnohistories of turtling communities such as the Miskitu of Tasbapauni in Nicaragua; the Afro-Caribbean communities of Old Harbour, Cahuita, and Turtle Bogue (Tortuguero) in Costa Rica; and the Afro-Caribbean communities of San Andrés and Old Providence in Colombia.4 Yet these studies often document and analyze turtling practices in isolation, within a wider context of indige-nous ethnic traditions, or vis-à-vis nationalist politics. Scholars have tended to perceive these maritime practices largely as an indigenous tradition. They either ignore or downplay the vibrant existence of these traditions in non-indigenous communities, by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
614
66 The International Journal of Maritime History 28(1) 5. Roger C. Smith, The maritime heritage of the Cayman Islands (Gainesville, FL, 2000); Ana Isabel Márquez-Pérez, ‘Povos dos recifes: Reconfiguracoes na apropriacao social de ecos-sistemas marinhos e litorâneos em duas comunidades do Caribe’ (Unpublished PhD thesis, Universidade Federal Rural de Rio de Janeiro, 2014). 6. Gerhard Sander, Centroamérica y el Caribe Occidental: Coyunturas, crisis y conflic-tos, 1503–1984, traducción por Jaime Polanía (San Andrés Isla, Colombia, 2003); Smith, Maritime heritage. 7. Herpetologist Archie Carr Jr. expressed this argument powerfully several decades ago. See Archie Carr Jr., ‘The passing of the fleet’, American Institute of Biological Studies 4, No. 5 (1954), 17. 8. William Dampier, A new voyage round the world (Warwick, NY, 2007 [1697]), 95–7. 9. Smith, Maritime heritage, 52.10. Osha Gray Davidson, Fire in the turtle house: The green sea turtle and the fate of the ocean (New York, 2003), 70.which have maintained many of these traditions.5 Our approach is to showcase the ways turtle fishing techniques and tools became shared from indigenous to non-indigenous fishermen as well as from coastal to island communities. In doing so, we urge readers to consider these mariners as part of a seafaring culture that transcends race, ethnicity and nationality.To deepen our understanding of turtling and to understand how this fishing culture adapted and evolved, we focus on the cultural exchanges among Caymanians and the islanders of San Andrés and Providencia (Colombia). We draw on both written and oral sources, which include early modern Caribbean travel accounts, newspaper articles, government correspondence and unpublished oral histories. We seek to move beyond scholarship that has merely alluded to, or glossed over, the longstanding maritime con-nections among these island communities.6Turtle in the Atlantic worldTurtle was an essential part of the making of the early modern Atlantic world.7 From the moment European adventurers crossed the Atlantic Ocean and ventured to the large and small islands as well as coastlands in and around the Caribbean Sea, they quickly learned that this marine reptile made for a crucial part of their subsistence and provisions. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, New World explorers and settlers found turtle at every corner of the circum-Caribbean. Impregnated turtles congregated at their nesting grounds near the Caribbean lowlands of Mexico and Costa Rica as well as Bermuda and the Cayman Islands, while a variety of turtles grazed on sea grass off the coasts of Nicaragua, Suriname and around the Galapagos Islands (see Figure 1).8 As European sojourners came into contact with indigenous settlements, these newcomers adapted their fishing techniques and developed a taste for turtle. Due to the abundance and easy accessibility of turtle, some chroniclers described seas and beaches as being choked with turtles.9 In 1513, Spanish explorer Juan Ponce de León called a group of small islands west of the Florida peninsula Las Tortugas (later to be known as Dry Tortugas) because his crew once captured 160 green turtles in a single evening.10 Turtle quickly became a crucial staple for mariners and explorers of the Atlantic world. by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
615
Crawford and Márquez-Pérez 6711. Dampier, New voyage, 1. For an assessment of the value of such evidence to historical ecolo-gists, see Andrea Saenz-Arroyo, ‘The value of evidence about past abundance’, Fish and Fisheries 7 (2006), 128–46.12. Dampier, New voyage, 96. Other contemporary accounts noted different varieties of turtle. See, for instance, Alexandre O. Exquemelin, The Buccaneers of America (Harmondsworth, Yet not all types of turtle were appropriate for dietary consumption and European explorers over the years developed a keen knowledge of the various usages of turtle. The earliest records classifying the various marine reptiles found in the region came from adventurers, usually sailors, buccaneers and pirates. William Dampier, an English navi-gator, naturalist and buccaneer who completed three circumnavigations in the late seven-teenth and early eighteenth centuries, offered some of the most detailed accounts of flora and fauna in his chronicle A new voyage round the world, which made his publication an early natural history of the Caribbean.11 After working on a Jamaican plantation and as a woodcutter in the Caribbean coast of Mexico, Dampier joined restless buccaneers who travelled across Panama and the Caribbean lowlands of the Spanish Main. In his voy-ages, this remarkable English seafarer observed and recorded plenty of turtle, dividing them into four general types, which other buccaneers and travelers also observed. These included the trunk-turtle, loggerhead, hawksbill and green turtle.12 Except for the green Figure 1. Map of turtle fishing sites of the Western Caribbean.Image courtesy of Christian Medina. by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
616
68 The International Journal of Maritime History 28(1)UK, 1969 [1685]), 61; Peter Marsden, An account of the island of Jamaica (Newcastle, UK, 1788), 51.13. Rieser, Case of the green turtle, 21.14. Quoted in James J. Parsons, The green turtle and man (Gainesville, FL, 1962), 11.15. Lord George Anson, ‘Abstract of a voyage round the world’, in A new collection of voyages, discoveries and travels: Containing whatever is worthy of notice in Europe, Asia, Africa, and America (London, 1767), 406.16. Olaudah Equiano, The interesting narrative of the life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavus Vassa, the African (London, 1794 [1789]), 217 and 324; Linda A. Newson and Susie Minchin, From captures to sale: The Portuguese slave trade in Spanish South America in the early seventeenth century (Leiden and Boston, 2007), 169–71.17. Edward Long, The history of Jamaica or, A general survey of the antient and modern state of that island with reflections on its situation, settlements, inhabitants, climate, products, com-merce, laws, and government (vol. II) (London, 1774), 517.18. Simon J. Bronner, Grasping things: Folk material culture and mass society in America (Louisville, KY, 1986), 162.19. Glyn Williams, The prize of all the oceans: The triumph and tragedy of Anson’s voyage around the world (London, 2008).20. Anson, ‘Abstract of a voyage’, 407.and hawksbill turtle, these species held neither culinary nor commercial appeal for the inhabitants of the Greater Caribbean basin.Early Caribbean chroniclers explained a variety of reasons why green turtle (Chelonia mydas) was an attractive meat. Exploring the Dry Tortugas (Florida Keys) in the six-teenth century, Sir John Hawkins feasted on green turtle describing its taste as ‘much like veal’.13 By the next century, turtle meat was a provision food for sailors and travelers making return voyages to Europe. Visiting the port of Havana and noting the preparation for disembarkation, English Jesuit Thomas Gage agreed that turtle ‘tasted as well as any veal’ and noted that dried salted turtle meat sustained ‘mariners in all their voyages to Spain’.14 It was clearly a practical food on sailing voyages. Weighing between 200 and 500 pounds, green turtles carried alive ‘lengthen[ed] the store of provisions, and afforded the whole crew a good supply of fresh and palatable food’.15 Mariners also learned to appreciate turtle, which could feed their large crews. This glut of green turtle meat was suitable not only for mariners, but also newly arrived enslaved Africans sent to dive for pearls and cultivate sugar throughout the Caribbean.16Beyond the agreeable taste of the turtle meat, Europeans also believed it healed a variety of ailments. Some considered it a treatment for syphilitic outbreaks and a cure for general health malaise. In his History of Jamaica, Edward Long credited turtle as a pow-erful cure to ‘debilitating maladies’. He wrote, ‘no food whatever contributes more or sooner to the restoration of strength, than a turtle’.17 English settler Thomas Ashe shared Edward Long’s assessment. He opined, ‘It makes as good and nourishing a broth as the best capon in England, especially if some of the eggs are mixed in it’.18 While uncertain of its curative powers, Commodore Anson, an English naval officer who led a squadron around the globe in the early 1740s,19 credited turtle consumption with preventing his crew from succumbing to a ‘fatal disease’. He explained that four months of feeding on turtle proved ‘this diet was at least innocent, if not something more’.20 Dangerous ill-nesses like scurvy often afflicted mariners at sea and some seafarers shared the English by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
617
Crawford and Márquez-Pérez 6921. Arthur Phillip, The voyage of Governor Phillip to Botany Bay: With an account of the colo-nies of Port Jackson and Norfolk Island (London, 1790), 128.22. Sylvanus Urban, The Gentleman’s Magazine, and Historical Chronicle (London, 1753), 10 October 1753, 489.23. Janet Clarkson, Soup: A global history (London, 2010), 115; Rieser, Case of the green turtle, 30.24. Janet Schaw, The journal of a lady of quality (New Haven, CT, 1923), 95.25. Charles Napier Bell, Tangweera: Life and adventures among gentle savages (Austin, TX, 1989 [1899]), 40.26. William Grimes, Appetite city: A culinary history of New York (New York, 2009), 80.naval officer’s suspicion that turtle was a ready cure.21 Whether a necessity or a delicacy, gourmets had included green turtle meat in a number of culinary specialties by the sev-enteenth century.Despite widespread consumption across the circum-Caribbean, turtle meat became most popular in the British Atlantic where the affluent dined on turtle dishes at their luxurious feasts and banquets. By the eighteenth century, turtle soup grew in popularity as wealthy residents from London to Philadelphia to New York to Kingston served the meal at private affairs, while popular restaurants added it to the list of gourmet delica-cies. Prior to 1753, turtle meat was a culinary rarity for London diners. That year, The Gentleman’s Magazine announced that a 500-pound turtle had been served at King’s Arms Tavern and Exchange Alley in honor of Captain Clive in London.22 By the next century, turtle dishes drew a following and the meat was frequently listed on the Alderman’s banquet menus.23 While imported turtle was welcomed with a high fanfare, for some it could not compare to the taste of freshly prepared turtle soup.Janet Schaw, a Scottish traveler to Antigua during the American Revolutionary War, extolled her preference for eating fresh turtle found in the Caribbean Sea. ‘You get noth-ing but old ones there [England] … Here [Antigua] they are young, tender, and fresh from the water where they feed as delicately, and are as great Epicures, as those that feed on them’.24 English demand for turtle meat led to Gunter of London briefly opening a turtle meat cannery on Mosquitia in the mid-nineteenth century.25 Although this venture was short-lived, English-speaking diners of the Atlantic world continued to consume Caribbean turtle. By the twentieth century, turtle soup was routinely served for dinner at the White House and at the most up-market restaurants across the northeastern corridor. Food historian and critic William Grimes insists that turtle soup was the only dish to rival beef steak or a dozen plump half-shelled oysters.26 Three hundred years after the arrival of European explorers, settlers, and enslaved Africans, turtle, like other New World ani-mals, became a quintessential Caribbean commodity.Although less desired for its meat, the hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) or carey attracted turtlers who collected its eggs or stripped its scales to make decorative adorn-ments. The solitary hawksbills are medium-sized turtles often weighing between 100 and 200 pounds grazing off algae and sea sponge. Hawksbill mothers return to the places of their birth to deposit their eggs between March and September. William Dampier provided a highly descriptive account of the hawksbill nesting process. This navigator-naturalist stressed that the location of the deposit is a deliberative process for the hawksbill mother: by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
618
70 The International Journal of Maritime History 28(1)27. Dampier, New voyage, 97.28. Insightful ethnographical and historical accounts of these Caribbean Central American coastal communities are found in Harry G. LeFever, Turtle Bogue: Afro-Caribbean life and culture in a Costa Rican village (Cranbury, NJ, 1992), 202; Palmer, ‘What happen’, 31.29. Parsons, Green turtle, 6; Alfred Moquin Tandon, The world of the sea, translated by Rev. H. Martyn Hart (London and New York, 1869), 364.30. Dampier, New voyage, 96.31. Ephraim George Squier used Samuel Bard as a pseudonynm. Samuel A. Bard, Waikna; or, Adventures on the Mosquito Shore (New York, 1855), 47.32. Robert Hodgson, Some account of the Mosquito Territory contained in a memoir written in 1757 (Edinburgh, 1822).When she had found a place for her purpose, she makes a great hole with her fins in the sand, wherein she lays her Eggs, then covers them up two feet with the same sand which she threw out of the hole, and so returns.27Attuned to the hawksbills’ nesting season, turtlers migrated to banks, cays and coastlines, where they built temporary shelters as they waited for impregnated hawksbills to deliver and bury their eggs in the sand. Residents of the Western Caribbean continued to enjoy hawksbill eggs as witnessed in twentieth-century folk histories of the inhabitants of the Caribbean coastal communities of Cahuita and Turtle Bogue (Tortuguero) in Costa Rica.28 Although hawksbill eggs were savoured, it was the marine reptile’s ornate scales that turtlers most valued.Since ancient Rome, hawksbill shell, better known as tortoiseshell, was admired as a material to make decorative items such as combs, jewelry and mirrors. Much of the tor-toiseshell was found in the Indian Ocean and South China Sea as well as the Philippines.29 After the arrival of New World explorers, the Western Caribbean became an additional site to harvest tortoiseshell. Unlike the green turtle’s thin and flexible shell, the hawksbill has a thick, multicolored shell with thirteen scales. Wherever travellers and chroniclers spotted hawksbill turtles in the banks, cays and reefs of the Western Caribbean, they also noted collecting or observed a trade in the hawksbill’s beautiful shell.30 Visiting Roncador, a Colombian cay in the Western Caribbean, Ephraim Squier explained that the scales were ‘elegantly variegated with white, red, yellow, and dark brown clouds, which are full brought out, when the shell is prepared and polished’.31 Demand was high for tortoise-shell. British settler Robert Hodgson estimated between 6000 and 10,000 pounds of tor-toiseshell was exported to Europe in the eighteenth century.32 The trade in turtle meat and tortoiseshell continued to flourish into the twentieth century as turtlers from small islands like Grand Cayman, Cayman Brac and the Colombian Islands of San Andrés and Old Providence followed the circular migration of the sea turtles and became the leading turtle harvesters of the Western Caribbean.From indigenous to Caribbean turtlemen: The case of the Cayman, San Andrés, and Old Providence IslandersAlthough transatlantic newcomers were not the original turtlers of the Caribbean, they soon aknowledged the importance of turtle for dietary purposes and shared in the by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
619
Crawford and Márquez-Pérez 7133. Exquemelin, Buccaneers, 220.34. Dampier, New voyage, 11.35. Dampier, New voyage, 97; Jacob Dunham, Journal of voyages: Containing an account of the author’s being twice captured by the English and once by Gibs the pirate (New York, 1850), 99.enjoyment of its consumption, and later engaged in a niche, yet robust, commerce in the sale of turtle meat and hawksbill shell. From the moment of their arrival, European sea-farers, explorers and enslaved Africans, as well as their descendants, learned much of how to fish and eat turtle from the indigenous peoples whom they met along and around the Caribbean Sea. Early Caribbean chroniclers wrote superfluously about indigenous turtle fishers and the methods they used to harvest this marine reptile. Perhaps the most celebrated of the indigenous turtlers were the Miskitu on the Caribbean coast of Nicaragua, whose fishing expeditions were reported or repeatedly retold in New World accounts. By the late seventeenth century, buccaneers and European sailors so valued the fishing acumen of the Miskitu that they thought it mandatory to bring them on their voy-ages to guarantee a permanent supply of turtle meat. While European venturers most prized the fishing skill and maritime knowledge of the Miskitu turtlers, these contacts also led to the transfer of cultural and maritime knowledge. Alexandre Exquemelin explained:The Indians often go to sea with the rovers [buccaneers], and many spend three or four years away without visiting their homeland, so among them are men who can speak very good English and French – just as there are many buccaneers who speak the Indian language well. These Indians are a great asset to the rovers, as they are very good harpoonists, extremely skillful in spearing turtles … In fact, an Indian is capable of keeping a whole ship’s company of 100 men supplied with food.33His English contemporary, William Dampier, also relied on the Miskitu fishers and explained why they found themselves drawn to the turtle commons.They are esteemed by all Privateers; for one or two of them in a Ship, will maintain 100 men: So that when we careen our Ships, we choose commonly Places where there is plenty of Turtle or Manatee for the Moskito men to strike.34Miskitu turtlers continued to join the expeditions of New World visitors sojourning in the Western Caribbean (see Figure 2). These native–newcomer contacts undoubtedly helped to transfer pertinent maritime, as well as cultural, knowledge to these newly arrived Atlantic settlers.New World explorers and newcomers frequently commented on the diverse methods indigenous turtlers used to capture sea turtles. Perhaps the most common form was to watch for unsuspecting turtles to make their nocturnal trips to the beach to lay their eggs, while turtlers hid out of sight patiently waiting to pounce from the bushes and turn them over onto their backs.35 A successful capture was not always a certainty in these situa-tions. In his maritime history, Alfred Moquin Tandon, recounted an 1862 story in which a group of sailors had difficulty turning over an impregnated green turtle off Tampico by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
620
72 The International Journal of Maritime History 28(1)36. Tandon, World, 362.37. Descriptions of the turtle trikers are found in Bard, Waikna, 107–8; Bell, Tangweera, 275; Dampier, New voyage, 16 and 41; Orlando W. Roberts, Narrative of voyages and excursions on the east coast and in the interior of Central America (Edinburgh, UK, 1827), 94.38. Tandon, World, 363.Bay in Mexico. ‘Six men seized her … but their united efforts only had the effect of slightly retarding her progress, and she would easily have escaped, had it not been that another party came to their assistance, and they managed to turn her upon her back’, he wrote. The struggle was well-worth it. The green turtle weighed ‘nearly 300 lbs. It had 347 eggs, and furnished food for the whole crew’.36 Another technique required a har-poon to strike turtle.37 In Cuba, turtle fishers used a remora or sucker fish to draw out turtles in the open sea.38 By the seventeenth century, these fishing techniques had been widely shared and dispersed across the Caribbean.Turtle harvesters soon emerged from the smallest islands located near to grazing and nesting grounds in the Caribbean Sea. Seventeenth-century Bermudan mariners may have been one of the earliest Atlantic newcomers to take turtling as a serious economic activity. While green turtles formerly nested around Bermuda, and Bermudan settlers were familiar with turtle for local consumption, historian Michael Jarvis suggests that the Bermudan-sponsored Providence Island Company at Old Providence Island in the Figure 2. Central America: Spearing green turtle on the Musquito [i.e. Mosquito] Coast (W. Trummbull, 1874).Source: Art and Picture Collection, The New York Public Library (1874). Central America: Spearing Green Turtle On The Musquito [I.E. Mosquito] Coast. Retrieved from http://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47e1-08f7-a3d9-e040-e00a18… by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
621
Crawford and Márquez-Pérez 7339. Michael J. Jarvis, In the eye of all trade: Bermuda, Bermudians, and the maritime Atlantic world, 1680–1783 (Chapel Hill, NC, 2012), 231.40. Karen Ordahl Kupperman, Providence Island, 1630–1641: The other Puritan colony (New York, 1995).41. Kupperman, Providence Island, 97–9.42. Frank Griffith Dawson, ‘The evacuation of the Mosquito Shore and the English who stayed behind, 1786–1800’, The Americas 55, No.1 (July 1998), 68.43. Dampier, New voyage, 37.44. C. F. Collett, ‘On the Island of Old Providence’, Journal of the Royal Geographical Society 7 (1837), 207. Michael Jarvis also noted that Bermudan and Caymanian mariners often employed slaves as crew and carpenters to reduce the general costs of their turtling voyages. See Jarvis, In the eye of all trade, 235.Western Caribbean may have developed turtling into a profitable enterprise.39 Landing in 1630, the initial 100 settlers came directly from Bermuda and were sent to transform the lush, green mountainous terrain of Old Providence Island into a privateering base, while Puritan investors envisioned San Andrés as suitable for tobacco or cotton plantations. Although historian Karen Ordahl Kupperman convincingly showed how factionalism and labor struggles with indentured servants and enslaved Africans disrupted the Providence Island Company’s plans, she did credit the failed Puritan colony with establishing longstanding ties between the English and their indigenous allies on the Mosquitia.40Within three or so years, Governor Phillip Bell of Old Providence Island convinced the Miskitu king to allow his son to be educated in England. This would become a peregrina-tion followed by princes into the late nineteenth century. Bell, moreover, sent one of his company’s servants, Lewis Morris, to stay at Mosquitia with the aim of establishing a turtling station. Morris’ presence made a mark at the Miskito Cays as one of the banks was named in his honour.41 By 1640, the Spanish had regained control over San Andrés and Old Providence by driving out the Puritans. Spanish garrisons repatriated settlers to New England, while others relocated to other parts of the British Atlantic world, carrying with them knowledge as to how to catch and trade in turtle meat and tortoiseshell.By the mid-eighteenth century, however, new settlers to San Andrés and Old Providence again turned to harvesting turtle in the surrounding commons. Spanish impe-rial rulers found it difficult to populate the islands with settlers after the British ceded them in 1786.42 They eventually agreed to permit a motley group of English- and Dutch-speaking itinerants from Jamaica and Curaçao, along with enslaved Africans, to remain and settle the desolate and unprotected Caribbean islands of San Andrés and Old Providence. Although it is not entirely clear how these people came to reside on the islands, mariners had long known of these islands as sources for fresh water, green turtle, game, fowl or cedars to repair their brigs, schooners and sloops.43 Within fifty years of the resettlement of both islands, settlers began to grow cotton and cut mahogany, as well as to take advantage of the abundant and accessible turtle in the outlying cays and banks. In 1835, British Captain Beaufort conducted a survey of the eastern coast of Central America and visited Old Providence Island. He noted that half of the 342 settlers were slaves and the bulk of the youth spent six months of the year turtling, exchanging 170 pounds of tortoiseshell annually with Jamaican traders.44 Despite the significance of by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
622
74 The International Journal of Maritime History 28(1)45. Adolfo Meisel Roca, ‘La estructura económica de San Andrés y Providencia en 1846’, Revista Aguaita 19–20 (December 2008–January 2009), 34–5.46. Roberts, Narrative of voyages, 80.47. Dunham, Journal of voyages, 40; Roberts, Narrative of voyages, 90.48. Smith, Maritime heritage, 52.49. Jarvis, In the eye of all trade, 235; Smith, Maritime heritage, 57.50. Jennifer Anderson, Mahogany: The costs of luxury in Early America (Boston, 2013), 95–6.51. William V. Davidson, Historical geography of the Bay Islands, Honduras: Anglo-Hispanic conflict in the Western Caribbean (Birmingham, AL, 1999 [1974), 76–9.52. Parsons, Green turtle, 30.turtle fishing on Old Providence, Colombian economic historian Adolfo Meisel found fewer settlers pursued this economic activity on San Andrés. He noted that only 29 out of 1022 inhabitants were full-time fishermen a decade later on the latter island. Regardless, turtling remained an important part of their livelihood as by 1845 turtlers on Old Providence were harvesting as much as 450 pounds of tortoiseshell a year.45 Perhaps much of that was found on the banks and reefs outlying Old Providence, like Roncador and Serrana, which were known to be frequented by turtlers from that island. San Andrés islanders also hunted turtle and traveled to Provision Island – part of the Bocas del Toro archipelago – to trade in tortoiseshell and other products with visiting traders.46 Soon American and British traders frequented both islands in search of tortoiseshell.47As in San Andrés and Old Providence, turtling has a long history on the Cayman Islands (Figure 3). It was once one of the three largest turtle nesting grounds in the Caribbean. Early New World explorers and chroniclers described the astonishing number of turtle species swarming the low-lying, sandy islands.48 Despite its attrac-tiveness to passing seafarers and buccaneers seeking to refuel their provisions with turtle, neither Spanish nor British imperial authorities took much interest in the islands.49 From the early 1730s, dozens of Jamaicans and Bermudans, and their enslaved Africans, relocated to Grand Cayman to extract mahogany, which became quickly depleted.50 Grand Caymanians moved on to planting cotton, a business that crashed in the wake of the worldwide fall in cotton prices.In 1834, the abolition of slavery led many recently freed Caymanians to migrate and resettle near to turtle grounds along the Caribbean coast of Central America. Since some of the settlers on Grand Cayman were formerly members of the British communities on Mosquitia, which were dismantled under the Anglo–Spanish Treaty of Madrid in 1786, it is unsurprising that Caymanian turtle harvesters returned to a place they knew was plentiful in green and hawksbill turtle. With the depletion of nearby turtle rookeries, Caymanian turtlers moved first to the southern cays of Cuba and later to the Honduran offshore Bay Islands (Roatán), which also led to emigration of recently emancipated Caymanian slaves.51 Travel and colonial reports soon acknowledged that Caymanians were harvesting green turtle in the ‘Miskito Cays’, offshore Caribbean banks and cays from eastern Nicaragua and as far as Bocas del Toro in Panama.52 Within five years of eman-cipation, British petty merchant Thomas Young noted Grand Cayman schooners that visited the Miskito Cays were returning with a rich harvest and supplied ‘Belice [sic] and by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
623
Crawford and Márquez-Pérez 7553. Thomas Young, Narrative of a residence on the Mosquito Shore, during the years 1839, 1840, & 1841 (London, 1842), 17.Jamaica markets with the finest green turtle, and often … hawksbill turtle shell’.53 Caymanian turtlers dominated these turtle grounds until the first half of the twentieth century.Turtle commons as contact zoneAlong the banks, cays and reefs of the high seas and coastal waters of the Western Caribbean, turtlers of all nationalities turned this maritime space into a contact zone, where they competed and traded for resources as well as shared maritime knowledge, formed friendships and created kinship ties. Turtlers regularly interacted with other turtle fishers who visited the same grazing or nesting grounds as they participated in long distance fishing. These interactions varied, but it was common for turtle fishers to argue, share meals or swap stories about their home communities, adventures at sea, or better fishing areas for next season. These frequent encounters led turtlers to migrate, sometimes on a temporary basis, to new communities across the region. Unlike the company-driven West Indian migrations to the Spanish-speaking circum-Caribbean, Figure 3. Map of the archipelago of San Andrés and Providencia/The Cayman Islands.Image courtesy of Christian Medina. by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
624
76 The International Journal of Maritime History 28(1)54. Lara Putnam calls on historians to move beyond the well-documented migration histories of large employers like the United Fruit Company and urges us to examine understudied borderland communities. See Lara Putnam, ‘Borderlands and border crossers: Migrants and boundaries in the Greater Caribbean, 1840–1940’, Small Axe 18, No.1 (2014), 7–21.55. Palmer, ‘What happen’, 35.56. LeFever, Turtle Bogue, 68.57. Smith, Maritime heritage.58. Hazel Robinson, The spirit of persistence: Las goletas en las islas de San Andrés, Providencia y Santa Catalina (San Andrés, 2004).these sporadic migrations, which may have amounted to a few hundred persons, have often been ignored by historians as they were difficult to identify or track.54 Combining scant written records and oral histories published or collected by the authors, we reveal the robust and dynamic encounters among turtlers along the Central American coast and small Western Caribbean islands. These interactions led to a series of cultural exchanges, including cross-national kinship ties via migration and the adoption of turtle fishing techniques, tools and knowledge.Turtling expeditions expanded the geographical awareness of fishermen who occa-sionally emigrated to live closer to their fishing grounds. Traveling alone, or with wives and children, turtlers settled into already established communities and even founded new ones. The southern and northern parts of the Caribbean coast of Costa Rica were the sites of these kinds of turtler migrations over the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. An early example of this phenomenon occurred along the Caribbean littoral adjacent to the Talamanca Mountains. In 1828, Bocas del Toro (Panama) native William Smith, better known as ‘Old Smith’, was one of the earliest to permanently settle along with his wife and children in a beach area known as Cahuita along the Caribbean southern lowlands of Costa Rica. Others soon followed him. In 1903, a thirty-one-year-old turtler named David Alejandro Kayasso came to the area with his uncle and cousin. ‘My people from Nicaragua come here and strike them [turtles] every year, March right until September. They go home, boats loaded. Turtle meat from the green turtle, turtle oil, and hawksbill shell’, he explained.55 Like his relatives, Kayasso intended only to make the annual fishing trip, but became attracted to one or more of the young ladies in the area and decided to settle there. San Andrés turtler and sea captain Walwin Martínez relocated to Turtle Bogue (Tortuguero) with his family in the 1920s after making frequent turtling trips to Costa Rica.56 During those years, the coastal beaches were filled with nesting hawksbill turtles, which attracted turtlers and their families to start a new life in these turtle-rich locales.The historical presence of Caymanians in the archipelago of San Andrés, Old Providence and Santa Catalina, had a remarkable sociocultural relevance for the configu-ration of these islands. The arrival of the first Caymanian immigrants – as early as the mid-nineteenth century – is no longer clear from the collective memories of Caymanian, San Andrés and Old Providence islanders. According to maritime archaeologist Roger C. Smith, Cayman Brac islanders came to know of these islands during their turtling trips to the archipelago’s northern cays of Serrana, Quitasueño and Roncador around 1850.57 San Andrés islanders also visited the Cayman Islands to hire captains or buy schooners.58 These long-distance turtling journeys led Brackers, as they are known, to regularly meet by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
625
Crawford and Márquez-Pérez 7759. Cayman Islands National Archive Oral History Programme (hereafter, CINA-OHP), Herbert Tibbetts Interviewed by Tricia Bodden, 7 April 2004, Cayman Brac; CINA-OHP, Florrie Dixon Interviewed by Heather McLaughlin, 5 February 1991, Grand Cayman.60. CINA-OHP, Capt. Marley K. Rankine Interviewed by Heather McLaughlin, 19 April 2000, Cayman Brac.61. CINA-OHP, Barrington Watler Interviewed by Ana Isabel Márquez, December 2011, Old Providence Island, Colombia. See Ana Isabel Márquez, ‘Culturas migratorias en el Caribe colombiano: El caso de los isleños raizales de las islas de Old Providence y Santa Catalina’, Memorias: Revista Digital de Historia y Arqueología desde el Caribe 10, No. 19 (2013), 217–8.62. CINA-OHP, Waide Excell Watler Interviewed by Heather McLaughlin, 26 November 1996, Grand Cayman.turtlers from San Andrés and Old Providence, while ranging at the cays and banks, and also to visit the island looking for water, staples and other goods. Oral history accounts describe how it was customary during the turtle season to stop at San Andrés and, mainly, Old Providence to refuel for water and provisions or to sell turtle in exchange for goods difficult to procure at home.59 In 2000, octogenarian turtler Marley K. Rankine recalled his visits to the outer lying banks and reefs, as well as San Andrés and Old Providence. On return trips to Cayman Brac, he explained how Caymanians called at Old Providence to refuel for water, to sell turtle or exchange it for goods before carrying the hawksbill to the Jamaican market. ‘Oh, they use’ treat you good. They was glad to see you come. Cause those people love turtle meat. Oh, Lord, if you carry 50 live turtle there you were not coming out with neither one’, Rankine recalled.60These commercial visits also led to Caymanians opting to migrate temporarily or permanently to these islands. Old Providence islander Barrington Watler traced his own ancestry to the Cayman Islands. He explained, ‘My father born here, but my grandfather came from Cayman, he came Providence as a young man and he died here at the age of 110, his name was Bill Freeman Watler’.61 Men like Bill Freeman Watler found it easier to make a living out of fishing, farming and sailing on Old Providence than in the Cayman Islands. Grand Cayman sexagenarian Waide Excell Watler, for example, had three sisters born on San Andrés and explained the impulse behind Caymanian migration.In those days, you know, Grand Cayman was on the tough side of life, so the people went foreign seeking a livelihood. Like they went to Cuba and they went to Nicaragua. They went San Andrés and Colombia, different places, Honduras … they used to refer to it as going ‘on the coast’.62Grand Caymanian Freda Pearson Mitchell explained how her Jamaican grandfather Malcolm refused to ‘settle down’ with her grandmother Lillah, which prompted her to find work in San Andrés, leaving her daughter with her own mother in Grand Cayman. Mitchell explained her mother did not see Lillah ‘again until she was sixteen … from six to sixteen ’cause she [Lillah] went over there and work and had other children’. Her grandmother remained in San Andrés, occasionally sending her gifts and making spo-radic visits to Grand Cayman. A sympathetic Mitchell explained, ‘y’know, some went to Panama, some went to San Andrés, some went to Colombia, some went to Nicaragua, by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
626
78 The International Journal of Maritime History 28(1)63.CINA-OHP, Freda Pearson Mitchell Interviewed by Heather McLaughlin, 23 February 2001,Grand Cayman.64.Sharika D Crawford, ‘A transnational world fractured but not forgotten: British West Indianmigration to the Caribbean islands of San Andrés and Providence’, New West Indian Guide85, Nos. 1&2 (2011), 41.65.Roberts, Narrative of voyages, 94–5.66.Palmer, ‘What happen’, 36.67.LeFever, Turtle Bogue, 135.68.Bard, Waikna, 145.they were … you know, migrating [to] different places’.63 The peripatetic lives of turtlers disturbed some local observers, like the pastor of San Andrés Island’s First Baptist Church, who required Caymanian seamen marrying members of his church to bring two witnesses to testify to the bachelorhood of the grooms.64 Despite these institutional con-straints, it was quite natural for turtlers to migrate and establish new lives within the communities of the turtle commons.Turtling communities of the Caribbean coasts of Central America and the adjacent islands soon adopted and modified indigenous turtle fishing techniques. This is most apparent in the technique of harpoon striking. The skillful Miskitu turtlers captured the admiration of many early chroniclers of the Caribbean. During his time in Mosquitia, Orlando Roberts beautifully described Miskitu strikers at work:The Indian, when near enough to strike the turtle, raises the spear above his shoulder, and throws it in such a manner, that it takes a circular direction in the air, and lights with its point downwards, on the back of the animal, penetrating through the shell, and the point becoming detached from the handle, remains firmly fastened in the creature’s body.65This same fishing technique of striking was found not only among the Miskitu and Kuna of Central America, but also in the Afro-Caribbean communities of Costa Rica, Nicaragua and the Caribbean islands of Colombia. In the 1970s, Paula Palmer interviewed residents of Cahuita, Old Harbour (Puerto Viejo), and neighboring communities about their tur-tling traditions. Samuel Hansell explained how they used apoo, a very hard wood, to make harpoons to strike turtle.66 A decade later, north of these communities, anthropolo-gist Harry LeFever documented the use of harpoons in and around Turtle Bogue (Tortuguero). Emilio Brown of Barra del Colorado explained how he waited to strike turtles during the mating season when the marine reptiles were most vulnerable.67 Oral historical accounts collected from islanders in Old Providence recall the use of peg and staff, a harpoon made of wood and iron used to hunt turtles and sharks. Both locales had received substantial and extended contact with Miskitu turtlers who regularly took south-ern turtling expeditions in the months of June to September. Over the centuries, it is likely that striking became observed and shared by other turtlers seeking green flesh or tortoiseshell in coastal waters.Turtle fishermen engaged in the hawksbill trade needed to remove the ornate keratin scales from the marine animal. A common method found along the Central American coast and coastal islands of the Western Caribbean was scaling.68 In the 1820s, a trader witnessed the process among Kuna turtlers on San Blas Islands (Panama): by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
627
Crawford and Márquez-Pérez 7969. Roberts, Narrative of voyages, 42.70. James Greenwood, The wildman at home: or, Pictures of life in savage lands (London, 1879); Bard, Waikna, 46–7.71. Bell, Tangweera, 276.72. To learn more about Old Providence islanders and the turtle trap net, see Márquez, ‘Povos dos recifes’, 45; Parsons, Green turtle, 32.They collect a quantity of dry grass, or leaves, and then setting the stuff on fire, the heat causes the shell on the back to separate from the joints. A large knife is then insinuated horizontally, and the pieces are gradually lifted from the back, care being not to injure the shell by two [sic] much heat, nor to force it off, till the heat has fully prepared for its separation.69The result was one rather than thirteen broken pieces of tortoiseshell. This technique was considered humane because the turtlers’ goal was to remove the shell not kill the animal; the hope was that the turtle might regenerate the shell or produce more offspring. It more often than not left the hawksbill disfigured and vulnerable to attack. Having witnessed the techniques of the Kuna turtlers, Ephraim Squier also saw the process used by Old Providence islanders involved in the hawksbill trade.70In addition to fishing techniques like striking and scaling, turtlers also adopted and shared tools to capture turtle, notably with regard to fishing nets. Written and oral history accounts suggest that nets were more commonly used by New World newcomers and their descendants. Moreover, observers mainly identified this equipment with Caymanian turtlers, who may have shared it with Old Providence islanders. In the 1840s, British resident Charles Napier Bell observed Caymanian schooners setting turtle traps in the adjacent waters of the Mosquito territory:The nets for this purpose are 80 to 100 fathoms long, and 6 feet wide; the lower edge weighted with lead, and the upper floated with corks. Decoys are placed near the nets, which are great pieces of wood, shaped like a turtle in the act of blowing. The turtle when they rise to blow always looks about over the surface, and seeing the decoys, they approach and get entangled into the net.71Over the decades, Caymanian turtlers made further improvements to the nets, which were called trap ring nets. Colombian islanders on Old Providence also relied on the trap net, which was brought by Cayman Brac turtlers who frequented the North Cays not too far from their island. The presence of this turtling tool confirms a regional connection that has been very seldom documented.72ConclusionSeafaring cultures associated with turtle fishing in the Greater Caribbean once played a significant role, not only in integrating isolated and marginal locales of the region into the wider Atlantic world, but also in building a transnational, cross-cultural maritime community. Indigenous inhabitants as well as descendants of New World incomers quickly learned the gastronomical and commercial value of sea turtles. Green turtle flesh by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
628
80 The International Journal of Maritime History 28(1)nourished indigenous populations and the European sailors, enslaved Africans and their descendants who lived along the eastern lowlands of Central America and on the small archipelagos in the Caribbean Sea. Due to the early destruction of the vital turtle nesting grounds, a consequence of high levels of market demand, many Caribbean turtlers from the Mosquitia, the Caymans and the islands of San Andrés and Old Providence traveled long distances in search of green and hawksbill turtles. In doing so, they crossed national boundaries, exchanged maritime knowledge and extended kinship lines across the circum-Caribbean.Although the importance that turtle once had for the livelihoods of many in the region remains clear in their collective memory, it is equally true that the disappearance of turtling has strong consequences for these societies, which academics from both the social and natural sciences have tended to ignore. Social scientists and conservationists have too often undervalued the importance of turtle and of turtle fishing to the social and cultural lives of these communities. Many of these isolated maritime communities harvested turtle to guarantee a healthy diet over the centuries. In hunting turtle, mariners established familial and friendship ties with other maritime societies and developed, as well as exchanged, a detailed knowledge of turtles and ecosystems in the surrounding maritime environment. Despite the disappearance of turtling as a commercial activity, the seafaring culture continues to leave a deep imprint on these communities and offers many insights into the interconnectedness of the Caribbean basin, and the local and regional dynamics of these societies.FundingFunding in support of research presented here came from the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Summer Stipend, an United States Naval Academy NARC Senior Grant, the Brazilian Ministry of Education PEC-PG Program, and the Instituto Colombiano de Antropología e Historia (ICANH).Author biographiesSharika D Crawford is an Associate Professor of History at the United States Naval Academy. Her research focuses on circum-Caribbean migration, maritime borderlands and the experience of Afro-Latin Americans. Dr. Crawford is the recipient of several prestigious national awards and fellowships. Most recently, she was awarded a Fulbright US Scholarship to Colombia and a NEH Summer Stipend. Her current book project The Turtlemen: Labor, Mobility, and Boundary Crossing in the Maritime Caribbean interweaves environmental, social and labor histories of Caribbean mariners involved in the turtle trade.Ana Isabel Márquez-Pérez holds an undergraduate degree in Anthropology, an MSc in Sustainable Tourism, and a PhD in Social Sciences. She has previously worked on projects related to the cultural and social aspects of small-scale fisheries in the Colombian Caribbean. These include subjects like the traditional knowledge of coral reefs and other tropical marine ecosystems, com-munity diving as a sustainable development tool, traditional navigation knowledge and practices, and ancestral maritime territories. Her current research interests focus on maritime territoriality, ethnic minorities’ territorial rights to the sea, community and traditional management of common natural resources, local knowledge and knowledge exchange. by guest on February 15, 2016ijh.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Annex 93
629
630
FactsheetThe Protocol on Specially Protected Areas andWildlife in the Wider Caribbean (SPAW):Seaflower Marine Protected AreaIdentificationCountry:ColombiaName of the area:Seaflower Marine Protected AreaAdministrative region:San Andres ArchipelagoDate of establishment:1/27/2005Geographic location:Longitude X: -81.71751Latitude Y: 12.555066Date of listing under SPAW:23 October 2012Contacts:Contact adress: Ministry of Environment, Housing and TerrirotialDevelopment - ColumbiaEmail address:[email protected] San Andres Archipelago includes 3 small inhabited islands anda number of uninhabited small cays, atolls, banks, and reefs exten-ding for more than 500 km in the Southwestern Caribbean. Thelargest island and center of government, San Andres (SAI), isabout 800 km northwest of Colombia and 100 km east of Nicara-gua. Old Providence and Santa Catalina (OPSC) are 80 km north ofSan Andres. The Seaflower Marine Protected Area (MPA) is part ofthe Seaflower Biosphere Reserve (UNESCO 2000), which encom-passes the total area of the archipelago. The MPA was designed toimplement biosphere reserve objectives in significant marine andcoastal ecosystems and includes the largest, most productiveopen-ocean coral reefs in the Caribbean.The MPA includes 2,000 km2 of coral reefs, atolls, mangroves andseagrass beds, including: (i) the barrier and fringing reefs, lagoons,seagrass beds, and mangroves circling the inhabited islands;(ii) Courtown (ESE Cay) - a kidney-shaped atoll 6.4 km by 3.5 km;(iii) Albuquerque (SSW Cay) - a circular atoll with a diameter over8 km; (iv) Roncador - an atoll 15 km by 7 km with a 12-km reef towindward and 30 km2 of live coral coverage; (v) Serrana - an atoll36 km long and 15 km wide with a complex reef system 37 km by30 km, with 75 km2 live coral coverage; and (vi) Quitasueño(Queena) - the archipelago's largest coral structure, 60 km longand 10 to 20 km wide with a 40-km reef wall and 496 km2 of livecoral coverage (see annex for maps).Ecological criteriaRepresentatividadValor de conservaciónRarezaNaturalidadHábitats críticosDiversidadConectividad/coherenciaResilienciaCultural and socio-economic criteriaProductividadUso cultural y tradicionalBeneficios socio económicosSPAW criteria metCartagena Convention Protocol of 1999- A SPAW listed site -
Annex 94
Annex 94:SEAFLOWER MARINE PROTECTED AREA – A SPAW LISTED
SITE: FACTSHEET (UNDATED).
(Available at: http://www.spaw-palisting.org/area_public/show/id/31)
631
SeaflowerMarineProtectedAreaPA LISTING :www.spaw-palisting.orgCaMPAM : http://campam.gcfi.org/campam.phpUNEP-CEP : www.cep.unep.org/SPAW-RAC : www.car-spaw-rac.orgManagement structure, authorityMinister of Environment, Housing, and Territorial DevelopmentManagement planThe Seaflower MPA and Integrated Management Plan (IMP)were developed in collaboration with local stakeholders,especially those who live off the marine resources such asartisanal fishers and watersports operators, along with otherinstitutions with jurisdiction in the marine area. Not only werestakeholders consulted and involved every step of the way, butthey had final decisionmaking power; meaning that theyreached consensus and signed formal agreements on MPAobjectives, zoning, and management structure.The general goal of the new project is to fully implement theMPA’s Integrated Management Plan (IMP). The project’s specificobjectives are: 1) to implement effective adaptive managementin collaboration with stakeholders and in accordance with theIMP; 2) to design and implement sustainable financialmechanisms for the long-term funding of MPA management; 3)to render key economic activities in the archipelago compatiblewith the objectives, guidelines, and regulations set out in theIMP and associated plans; and 4) to implement a management-oriented monitoring and analysis system that supports adaptivemanagement and informed decision-making.- Draft Seaflower MPA Integrated Management Plan (IMP), PartsI (background), II (management), and III (operations) completedand under participatory review by stakeholders and technicalexperts-Key Species Conservation Action Plans (shore and sea birds,lobster, sharks, and conch)-Seaflower MPA management structure in place, includingStakeholder and Institutional AdvisorySite descriptionGeneral features of the siteSize: 65000 sq. KmTerrestrial surface under sovereignty, excluding wetlands:650 sq. KmWetland surface:250 haMarine surface:65000 sq. kmNational status of your protected area:MPAMarine ecoregion:67. Caribe del SurouesteCommittees with formal agreements 2005Main fauna populations and/or those of particularimportance present (resident or migratory) in the area:Seaflower MPA contains some of the largest, most productiveand diverse coral ecosystems in the region. With respect toscleractinian coral species, Seaflower supports 48documented species (of approximately 60-70 species knownto exist in the Caribbean). There are at least 54 species ofoctocorals, including 3 black coral species and 11 undescribedspecies, with possible high endemism. A total of 44 species ofoctocorals was identified at Old Providence alone, the highestspecies diversity in the western Caribbean according toSanchez et al. (1998). The highest gorgonian density in theColombian Caribbean (up to 22 colonies per m2) wasrecorded in 2003 at Roncador (Heinemann et al. 2004).Seaflower has documented just over 300 fish species, ofwhich there is one known endemic fish. A total of 124 spongespecies have also been documented. Little research has beenconducted on other invertebrates such as molluscs,crustaceans, echinoderms, and tunicates. Of data available,there are at least 2 zoanthid species, 2 anemone species, 3sea jelly species, 17 echinoderm species, 23 crustaceanspecies, 28 mollusc species, 1 tunicate species and 5 annelidspecies. The mangroves are home to an endemic mud turtle,and beaches provide nesting sites for 4 marine turtle species.The Seaflower Biosphere Reserve (which includes theSeaflower MPA) has been classified a secondary Endemic BirdArea and declared an Important Bird Area by BirdLifeInternational. Of the 155 total bird species, 21 are classified asshorebirds and 22 as seabirds (see Annex 4).Inhabitants inside the area or in the zone of potential directimpact on the protected area:Not given.International status and Date of designationBiosphere reserve: Yes 1/1/00Ramsar site: NoSignificant bird area yes 1/1/04World heritage site (UNESCO): NoOthers: noLinks
Annex 94
632
Annex 95
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 96
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 97
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 98
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 99
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 100
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 101
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 102
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 103
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 104
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 105
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 106
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 107
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 108
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 109
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 110
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 111
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 112
Page intentionally left blank
Annex 113
Page intentionally left blank
FIGURES
673
674
Golfo deVenezuelaLago deMaracaiboLagodeNicaraguaCaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANIsla deCozumelSwan IslandsUtila I.Roatan I.Guanaja I.GrandCaymanLittleCaymanCaymanBracSan Andrés I.ArubaLosMonjesCuraçaoLittle Corn I.Great Corn I.Santa Catalina I.NetherlandAntillesQuitasueñoCaySerrana CayProvidencia I.Roncador CayEast Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysGorda I.Cajones Is.Bajo Nuevo CaySerranilla CayMiskitosCaysELSALVADORCOSTARICAPANAMABELIZEHONDURASMEXICOJAMAICAHAITICUBACOLOMBIANICARAGUA GUATEMALADOMINICANREPUBLICVENEZUELACayman Islands(UK)20°N15°N10°N20°N15°N75°W 70°W 80°W 85°W 75°W 70°W 80°W 85°W THE SOUTHWESTERN CARIBBEAN:A SEMI-ENCLOSED SEA0150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersCoastal information sources:NGA nautical charts: 24460, 24470, 24480, 24490, 26050, 26060, 26070, 28050, 28110, 28120, 28130, 28140, 28150, 28162, 28167, 28190.Colombian nautical charts: 044, 045, 046, 201, 203, 204, 208, 211, 213, 215, 218, 416, 630, 631, 634, with supplemental information collected by theColombian Navy in 2008.Mercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 15°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400Figure 2.1
675
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSerranilla CayGuanaja I.San Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayEast Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerranaCayGorda I.Cajones Is.Bajo Nuevo CayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAPANAMAHONDURASCOLOMBIANICARAGUAVENEZUELA10°N10°N15°N75°W 80°W 85°W 80°W 85°W Seaflower BiosphereReserveBoundary from the2012 ICJ JudgmentJOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)JOINT REGIMEAREA(Colombia / Dominican Republic)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaColombiaCol.Col.HonNic411143222JamaicaColombiaHaitiColombia1AB23456798COLOMBIA’S SEAFLOWER BIOSPHERERESERVE0150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping40012 M Territorial SeaColombiaPanamaFigure 2.2
676
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANGuanaja I.San Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayEast Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerranaCayGorda I.Cajones Is.Bajo Nuevo CaySerranilla CayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAPANAMAHONDURASCOLOMBIANICARAGUAVENEZUELA10°N10°N15°N75°W 80°W 85°W 80°W 85°W Seaflower BiosphereReserveSeaflower Marine Protected AreaJOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)JOINT REGIMEAREA(Colombia / Dominican Republic)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaCol.Col.ColombiaPanamaHonNic411143222JamaicaColombiaHaitiColombia1AB23456798COLOMBIA’S SEAFLOWER MARINEPROTECTED AREA0150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping40012 M Territorial SeaBoundary from the2012 ICJ JudgmentNicaraguaColombiaFigure 2.3
677
Figure 2.4
Page intentionally left blank
Figure 2.5
Page intentionally left blank
Figure 2.6
Page intentionally left blank
SantaCatalina I.ProvidenciaIslandSan AndrésIslandEast SoutheastCaysAlburquerqueCaysEast ReefWest ReefSerranillaCayRoncador CaySerrana CayQuitasueñoCayBajo NuevoCayCaribbeanSea82°W 15°N14°N13°N15°N14°N13°N12°N81°W 80°W 79°W 80°W 81°W 82°W 79°W 1234567891011JOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)IJKColombiaPanamaNicaraguaColombiaColombiaNicaraguaColombiaColombia11AB234565798North CayBolivar CayNAVAL BASE - San Andrés IslandRoncador CaySerrana CaySerranilla CayEXAMPLES OF COLOMBIA’SPRESENCE ON THE ISLANDS OFTHE ARCHIPELAGO06080402004080160120Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International MappingCoastal information sources:NGA nautical charts: 26050, 26081, 26083, 28050.Colombian nautical charts: 044, 045, 046, 201, 203, 204, 208, 211, 213, 215, 218, 416, 630, 631, 634,supplemented with information collected by the Colombian Navy in 2008. Boundary from the2012 ICJ JudgmentSerranilla CayNorth Cay - Alburquerque Cays Roncador CaySerrana CayBolivar Cay - East Southeast CaysColombian Marinesbased on SerranillaMilitary Housingon Serrana CayNaval baseHeliportLight towerLight towerLight towerMilitary housingMilitary housingCommunication towerFigure 2.7
681
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayESE CaysAlburquerqueSerranaCayBajo Nuevo CaySerranilla CayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAPANAMAJAMAICACUBACOLOMBIANICARAGUAHONDURAS10°N15°N10°N15°N20°N75°W 80°W 75°W 80°W Seaflower BiosphereReserveSeaflower MPAJOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaColombiaCol.Col.HonNicJamaicaColombiaCCayman Islands (U.K.)HondurasBABoundary from the2012 ICJ Judgment765432 1 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Lady Aimee 2 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Papa D 3 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Papa D 4 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Trapper 5 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Sea Falcon 6 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Pacific Star 7 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Miss Sofia Acts of Humanitarian Aid andTechnical Assistance provided to:17 November 20132 February 20135 February 201325 September 201330 April 201318 August 20138 November 201310150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400EXAMPLES OF EVENTS IN WHICH THECOLOMBIAN NAVY PROVIDEDHUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE, TECHNICALAID, AND CARRIED OUT SEARCH ANDRESCUE OPERATIONSFigure 2.8
682
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayEast Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerranaCayBajo Nuevo CaySerranilla CayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAPANAMAJAMAICACUBACOLOMBIANICARAGUAHONDURAS10°N15°N20°N10°N15°N20°N75°W 80°W 75°W 80°W CartagenaJOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaColombiaCol.Col.HonNicJamaicaColombiaCCayman Islands (U.K.)HondurasBALunaVerdeArea“INCIDENT” 1 ALLEGED BY NICARAGUA(19 February 2013)0150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400Boundary from the2012 ICJ JudgmentLocation of the ARC “Almirante Padilla”at Pier BN1 of Cartagena’s Naval BaseApproximate location of theunnamed Nicaraguan naval vesselFigure 4.1
683
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayEast Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerranaCayBajo Nuevo CaySerranilla CayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAPANAMAJAMAICACUBACOLOMBIANICARAGUAHONDURAS10°N15°N20°N10°N15°N20°N75°W 80°W 75°W 80°W JOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaColombiaCol.Col.HonNicJamaicaColombiaCCayman Islands (U.K.)HondurasBABoundary from the2012 ICJ Judgment“INCIDENT” 4 ALLEGED BY NICARAGUA(13 October 2013)0150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400LunaVerdeAreaApproximate location of Colombian Naval VesselARC “20 de Julio”Approximate location of NicaraguanNaval Vessel GC-205 “Rio Escondido”Figure 4.2
684
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayEast Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerranaCayBajo Nuevo CaySerranilla CayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAPANAMAJAMAICACOLOMBIANICARAGUAHONDURAS10°N15°N10°N5°N15°N75°W 75°W 80°W MalagaJOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaColombiaCol.Col.HonNicJamaicaColombiaLunaVerdeAreaLunaVerdeAreaLocation of the ARC “Antioquia”at a pier in Malaga’s Naval BaseApproximate location of Nicaraguan-flagged fishing vessel “Lady Dee II”Boundary from the2012 ICJ Judgment“INCIDENT” 9 ALLEGED BY NICARAGUA(7 November 2013)0150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400Figure 4.3
685
CaribbeanSeaSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.SantaCatalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.RoncadorCayEast Southeast CaysAlburquerqueCaysSerranaCaySerranillaCayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICANICARAGUAHONDURAS10°N15°N10°N80°W80°W15°NCosta RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaColombiaCol.Col.HonNicLunaVerdeArea“INCIDENT” 10 ALLEGED BY NICARAGUA(17 November 2013)0751005025050100150Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 15°N)Prepared by: International Mapping200Approximate location of Nicaraguan-flagged fishing vessel “Miss Sofia”Reported location of Colombian NavalFrigate ARC “Almirante Padilla”Figure 4.4Boundary from the2012 ICJ Judgment
686
JOINTREGIMEAREACosta RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaJamaicaColombiaCCayman Islands (U.K.)HondurasBACosta RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaJamaicaColombiaJOINTREGIMEAREACaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.RoncadorCayESE CaysAlburquerqueSerranaCayBajo NuevoSerranillaMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAPANAMAJAMAICACUBACOLOMBIANICARAGUAHONDURAS10°N15°N10°N15°N20°N75°W 80°W 75°W CCayman HondurasBA0150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400QuitasueñoQuitasueñoIntegral Contiguous ZoneCOLOMBIA’S ‘INTEGRAL CONTIGUOUS ZONE’AS SET OUT IN PRESIDENTIAL DECREENUMBER 1946 OF 2013Figure 5.112 M limit
687
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayESE CaysAlburquerqueSerranaCayBajo Nuevo CaySerranilla CayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAJAMAICACUBACOLOMBIANICARAGUAHONDURASPANAMA10°N15°N20°N10°N15°N20°N75°W 80°W 75°W 80°W Seaflower BiosphereReserveJOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaColombiaCol.Col.HonNicJamaicaColombiaCCayman Islands (U.K.)HondurasBABoundary from the2012 ICJ JudgmentSeaflower MPAFigure 8.10150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400PREDATORY FISHING ACTIVITESOF NICARAGUA WITHIN THETERRITORIAL SEA OF COLOMBIAAND THE JOINT REGIME AREASee insetfor detail80°W 16°N Serranilla's 12 M limit provided for inthe 1993 Colombia/Jamaica agreement1323121 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Charlie Junior IV Nicaraguan fishing vessel Captain Alex II 2 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Al John 28 April 20133 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Papa D 28 April 2013Predatory Fishing Activities of Nicaragua within theTerritorial Sea of Colombia and the Joint Regime Area13 January 2013
688
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayESE CaysAlburquerqueSerranaCayBajo Nuevo CaySerranilla CayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAPANAMAJAMAICACUBACOLOMBIANICARAGUAHONDURAS10°N15°N20°N10°N15°N20°N75°W 80°W 75°W 80°W Seaflower MPAJOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaColombiaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaColombiaCol.Col.HonNicJamaicaColombiaCCayman Islands (U.K.)HondurasBA 1 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Pescasa 35 2 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Miss Sofia 3 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Capitán Charlie 4 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Doña Emilia 5a - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Capitán Charlie 5b - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Lady Dee III 5c - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Miss Sofia 6 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Pescasa 35 7 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Diego Armando G 8 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Marco Polo 9 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Capt. Maddox 10 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Miss Joela 11 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Miss Sofia12 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Al John Predatory Fishing Activities of Nicaraguawithin the Seaflower Reserve9 May 20134 July 201323 July 201324 August 20134 September 20133 August 201324 August 20135 October 20135 October 20139 October 201317 November 201323 October 201323 October 201326 November 20130150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400EXAMPLES OF PREDATORY FISHINGBY NICARAGUAN-FLAGGEDFISHING VESSELSBoundary from the2012 ICJ JudgmentSeaflower BiosphereReserveFigure 8.242126, 8,115a, 5b, 7, 9, 10315c
689
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayESE CaysSerranaCayBajo Nuevo CayCOSTA RICAJAMAICACUBACOLOMBIANICARAGUAPANAMA10°N15°N20°N10°N15°N75°W 80°W 80°W Seaflower BiosphereReserveBajo CayBajo CayAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaJamaicaColombiaCayman Islands (U.K.)HondurasABoundary from the2012 ICJ JudgmentSeaflower MPASan San Providencia CayRoncador CaysESE CaysAREA(Jamaica)(ColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaSerranaCayBoundary theSeaflower MPAFigure 8.3JAMAICA20°N20°NCUBA1CUBASerrana’s 12 M TSSee insetfor detailQuitasueñoCaySerranaCaySee insetSee detailfor detail1 - Nicaraguan fishing vessels: 8 February 2016 Miss Sofia, Doña Emilia, Capitán Charlie, Lady PremPredatory Fishing Activities of Nicaraguawithin the Territorial Sea of Colombia80°Cayman HondurasA0150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400EXAMPLE OF PREDATORY FISHING ACTIVITIESOF NICARAGUA WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL SEAOF COLOMBIA AFTER THE CRITICAL DATE
690
CaribbeanSeaPACIFICOCEANSan Andrés I.LittleCorn I.GreatCorn I.Santa Catalina I.QuitasueñoCayProvidencia I.Roncador CayESE CaysAlburquerqueSerranaCayBajo Nuevo CaySerranilla CayMiskitosCaysCOSTA RICAJAMAICACUBACOLOMBIANICARAGUAHONDURASPANAMA10°N15°N20°N10°N15°N20°N75°W 80°W 75°W 80°W Seaflower BiosphereReserveSeaflower MPAJOINTREGIMEAREA(Colombia / Jamaica)Costa RicaPanamaColombiaNicaraguaNicaraguaColombiaCol.Col.HonNicJamaicaColombiaCCayman Islands (U.K.)HondurasBA11 - Nicaraguan fishing vessel Lady Dee I ran aground 16 December 2012Harmful Activities to the MarineEnvironment0150200100500100200300Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 14°N)Prepared by: International Mapping400NICARAGUA’S HARMFUL ACTIVITIESTO THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT IN THETERRITORIAL SEA OF COLOMBIABoundary from the2012 ICJ JudgmentColombiaPanamaFigure 8.4Serrana’s 12 M TSSee insetfor detail1
691
CaribbeanSeaCOSTA RICAPANAMAHONDURASNICARAGUASan Andrés I.Little Corn I.East of GreatTyra CayCayosMan-of-WarGreat Corn I.HarborHeadCaboGraciasa DiosSanta Catalina I.Quitasueño CayProvidencia I.East Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerrana CayRoncador CayGorda I.Cocorocuma Is.Cajones Is.Serranilla CayMiskitosCaysNed ThomasCayEdinburghReefEdinburghCay84°W 82°W 80°W 84°W 82°W 80°W 16°N14°N12°N14°N16°N12°N10°N123456789NICARAGUA’S STRAIGHT BASELINE CLAIMIN THE CARIBBEAN SEA0751005025050100200150Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 12°N)Prepared by: International MappingFigure 10.1
692
General direction of coastCaribbeanSeaCOSTA RICAPANAMAHONDURASNICARAGUASan Andrés I.Little Corn I.East of GreatTyra CayCayosMan-of-WarGreat Corn I.HarborHeadCaboGraciasa DiosSanta Catalina I.Quitasueño CayProvidencia I.East Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerrana CayRoncador CayGorda I.Cocorocuma Is.Cajones Is.Serranilla CayMiskitosCaysNed ThomasCayEdinburghCay84°W 82°W 80°W 84°W 82°W 80°W 16°N14°N12°N14°N16°N12°N10°NPROJECTION OF NICARAGUA'S ISLANDSAND FEATURES ON THE GENERAL DIRECTIONLINE OF ITS MAINLAND COAST0751005025050100200150Nautical MilesKilometersMercator Projection, Datum: WGS-84, (Scale accurate at 12°N)Prepared by: International MappingFigure 10.2
693
CaribbeanSeaCOSTA RICAPANAMAHONDURASNICARAGUASan Andrés I.Little Corn I.Great Corn I.HarborHeadCabo Gracias a DiosSanta Catalina I.Quitasueño CayProvidencia I.East Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerrana CayRoncador CayGorda I.Cocorocuma Is.Cajones Is.Serranilla CayMiskitos CaysNed Thomas CayEdinburgh CayEast of Great Tyra CayMan-of-War Cays84°W 82°W 80°W 84°W 82°W 80°W 16°N14°N12°N14°N16°N12°N10°N876543230 M12 M25 M28 M22 M13 M28 MDISTANCE OF THE STRAIGHT BASELINEFEATURES TO THE MAINLAND COAST0751005025050100200150Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 12°N)Prepared by: International MappingFigure 10.3
694
21,500sq. km.CaribbeanSeaCOSTA RICAPANAMAHONDURASNICARAGUASan Andrés I.Great Corn I.Little Corn I.Punta CastillaHarbor HeadCabo Gracias a DiosSanta Catalina I.Quitasueño CayProvidencia I.East Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerrana CayRoncador CayGorda I.Cocorocuma Is.Cajones Is.Serranilla CayMiskitos CaysNed Thomas CayEdinburgh CayEast of Great Tyra CayMan-of-War Cays84°W 82°W 80°W 84°W 82°W 80°W 16°N14°N12°N14°N16°N12°N10°N89765432130 M12 M25 M28 M22 M13 M28 M85 M44 M75 M27 M84°84°KEY FIGURES RELATED TO NICARAGUA’SSTRAIGHT BASELINE CLAIM0751005025050100200150Nautical MilesKilometersMercator ProjectionDatum: WGS-84(Scale accurate at 12°N)Prepared by: International MappingFigure 10.4
695
CaribbeanSeaCOSTA RICAPANAMAHONDURASNICARAGUASan Andrés I.Little Corn I.East of GreatTyra CayCayosMan-of-WarGreat Corn I.HarborHeadCaboGraciasa DiosSanta Catalina I.Quitasueño CayProvidencia I.East Southeast CaysAlburquerque CaysSerrana CayRoncador CayGorda I.Cocorocuma Is.Cajones Is.Serranilla CayMiskitosCaysNed ThomasCayEdinburghCay84°W 82°W 80°W 84°W 82°W 80°W 16°N14°N12°N14°N16°N12°N10°N84°84°NICARAGUA’S TERRITORIAL SEA AS DERIVEDFROM ITS STRAIGHT BASELINES AS DRAWN INDECREE NUMBER 33-20130751005025050100200150Nautical MilesKilometersMercator Projection, Datum: WGS-84, (Scale accurate at 12°N)Prepared by: International MappingHon.Nic.123456789Nicaragua’s territorial seafrom normal baselinesNicaragua’s territorial seafrom straight baseline claimNicaragua’s internal watersfrom straight baseline claimFigure 10.5
696