A Joint Strategic Plan for Management of Great Lakes fisheries: A cooperative regime in a multi-jurisdictional setting
Keywords:
Governance, institutions, cooperation, ecosystem managementAbstract
Two nations, eight states, the province of Ontario, two U.S. intertribal authorities, and the binational Great Lakes Fishery Commission all play a role in managing the Great Lakes fishery. No overarching institution has the authority to compel cross-border cooperation. Rather, the fishery agencies adhere to A Joint Strategic Plan for Management of Great Lakes Fisheries, a voluntary, multi-jurisdictional agreement signed in 1981. This article provides a brief overview of the roles and responsibilities of the management jurisdictions and describes how the Joint Strategic Plan helps agencies cooperate across jurisdictional boundaries. The plan relies on four strategies—consensus, accountability, information sharing, and ecosystem management—to foster cooperation, and to operationalize collective action on both lake and technical committees. The plan is a model for multi-jurisdictional cooperation in a politically fragmented region.
References
Anonymous. 2002. Canada-Ontario agreement respecting the Great Lakes basin ecosystem www.on.ec.gc.ca/greatlakes/default.asp?lang=En&n=EA181825-1#agreement
Anonymous. 2003. http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/aquaculture/code/Code2003_e.pdf National code on introductions and transfers of aquatic organisms
Anonymous. 2004. http://www.cbin.ec.gc.ca/issues/ias/documents/Final_IAS_Strategic_Plan_smaller_e.pdf An invasive alien species strategy for Canada
Anonymous. 2005. www.mnr.gov.on.ca/mnr/pubs/biodiversity/OBS_english.pdf Protecting what sustains us: Ontario's biodiversity strategy. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto
Bogue, M. B. 2000. Fishing the Great Lakes: An environmental history, 1833–1933, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Brown, R. W., Ebener, M. and Gorenflo, T. 1999. “Great Lakes commercial fisheries: Historical overview and prognosis for the future”. In Great Lakes fisheries policy and management: A binational perspective, Edited by: Taylor, W. W. and Ferreri, C. P. 307–354. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.
Busiahn, T. R. 1985. An introduction to native peoples' fisheries issues in North America. Renewable Resources Journal, 3(2): 23–26.
Chiarappa, M. J. and Szylvian, K. M. 2003. Fish for all: An oral history of multiple claims and divided sentiment on Lake Michigan, East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
Cohen, F. S. 1988. Cohen's handbook of federal Indian law, Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
Davis, J. C. B. 1896. Geer v. Connecticut, New York: Banks and Brothers. 161 United States Reports 519
Dochoda, M. R. 1999. “Authorities, responsibilities, and arrangements for managing fish and fisheries in the Great Lakes ecosystem”. In Great Lakes fisheries policy and management: A binational perspective, Edited by: Taylor, W. W. and Ferreri, C. P. 93–110. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.
Fetterolf, C. M. 1980. Why a Great Lakes Fishery Commission and why a Sea Lamprey International Symposium?. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, 37(11): 1588–1593.
Gallagher, H. R., Huntsman, A. G., Taylor, D. J. and Van Oosten, J. 1942. Report and Supplement of the U.S. members of the International Board of Inquiery for the Great Lakes Fisheries, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Gibson, D. 1973. Constitutional jurisdiction over environmental management in Canada. University of Toronto Law Journal, 23: 54–87.
GLFC. 2007. http://www.glfc.org/fishmgmt/jsp97.pdf A Joint Strategic Plan for Management of Great Lakes Fisheries (adopted in 1997 and supersedes 1981 original). Great Lakes Fish. Comm. Misc. Publ. 2007-01. Available at. [accessed–February 4, 2008]
Government of Canada. 2001. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/C-10.15) Canada Shipping Act, 2001(2001, c. 26)
Government of Canada. 2002. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/S-15.3/103526.html Species at Risk Act (2002, c. 29
Government of Canada. 2004. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-14/60751.html Fisheries Act [Canada] (R.S. 1985, c. F-14)
Government of Ontario. 1997. www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Statutes/English/97f41_e.htm Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act (S.O. 1997, CHAPTER 41)
Hansen, M. J., ed. 1996. A lake trout restoration plan for Lake Superior, Ann Arbor, MI: Great Lakes Fishery Commission.
Harrison, K. 1996. Passing the buck: federalism and Canadian environmental policy, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Holmes, J. O. W. 1920. “State of Missouri v. Holland, United States Game Warden”. In Constitutional law. Cases and essays, Edited by: Goldman, S. 255–257. New York: Harper and Row.
Howard, B. C. 1901. [1845]. Pollard v. Hagan. S. K. Williams (Ed.), 44 U.S. Supreme Court Reports 212. The Lawyers' Cooperative Publishing Company, Rochester, NY
Killian, J. H. and Beck, L. E., eds. 1987. The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and interpretation, annotations of cases decided by the Supreme Court of the United States to July 2, 1982, Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress and U.S. Government Printing Office.
Knaebel, E. 1920. New York: Banks and Brothers. Missouri v. Holland. 252 United States Reports 416
Krueger, C. C. and Decker, D. J. 1999. “The process of fisheries management”. In Inland fisheries management in North America, , 2nd edition, Edited by: Kohler, C. C. and Hubert, W. A. 31–59. Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society.
Lamb, B. L. and Lybecker, D. 1999. “Legal considerations in inland fisheries management”. In Inland fisheries management in North America, , 2nd edition, Edited by: Kohler, C. C. and Hubert, W. A. 83–109. Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society.
Lind, H. C. 1981. Washington, D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office. Hughes v. Oklahoma (1979). 441 United States Reports 322
Moore, J. N. 1965. Federalism and foreign relations. Duke Law Journal, 1965(2): 248–321.
Nielsen, L. A. 1999. “History of inland fisheries management in North America”. In Inland fisheries management in North America, , 2nd edition, Edited by: Kohler, C. C. and Hubert, W. A. 3–30. Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society.
Ollivier, M. 1962. British North America acts and selected statutes, 1867–1962, Ottawa: Queen's Printer.
Otto, W. T. 1901. Edited by: Williams, S. K. Rochester, NY: The Lawyers' Cooperative Publishing Company. Mc Cready v. Virginia (1877). 94 U.S. Supreme Court Reports 391
Peters, R. 1901. Edited by: Williams, S. K. 515Rochester, NY: The Lawyers Cooperative Publishing Company. Worcester v. Georgia (1832). 31 U.S. Supreme Court Reports 515, volume 31
Piper, D. 1967. The international law of the Great Lakes, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Rideout, S. G. and Ritter, J. A. 2002. “Canadian and U.S. Atlantic salmon institutions and politics: Where are the fish and who cares?”. In Sustaining North American Salmon: Perspectives Across Regions and Disciplines, Edited by: Lynch, K. D., Jones, M. L. and Taylor, W. W. 93–116. Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society Press.
Ryan, P. A., Knight, R., MacGregor, R., Towns, G., Hoopes, R. and Culligan, W. 2003. Ann Arbor: Great Lakes Fishery Commission. Fish-Community goals and objectives for Lake Erie Special Publication 03-02
Smith, B. R. and Elliott, O. R. 1952. Movement of parasitic-phase sea lampreys in Lakes Huron and Michigan. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 82: 123–128.
Supreme Court of Canada, R. V. Sparrow (1 S.C.R. 1075, 70 D.L.R. (4th) 385, 46 B.C.L.R. (2d) 1)
http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1996/vol1/html/1996scr1_1013.html Supreme Court of Canada R. V. Nikal (1996 1 S.C.R. 1013). Supreme Court of Canada, Ottawa
Thompson, P. C. 1974. Institutional constraints in fisheries management. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 31: 1966–1981.
U.S. Department of State. 1956. “Convention on Great Lakes Fisheries between the United States of American and Canada, TIAS 3326”. In United States treaties and other international agreements, Vol. 6, part 3, 2836–2842. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.
United States Court of Appeals. Lac Courte Oreilles v. Voight, 700 F. 2nd 342. United States 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States District Court, U. S. v. Michigan, 623 F2d 448. United States District Court, Western District, Michigan
USGPO, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, volume 16 U.S.C. 703–712. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C
USGPO, Federal Aid in Sportfish Restoration (Dingell-Johnson and Wallop-Breaux), volume 16 U.S.C. 777–777k. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C
USGPO, Anadromous Fish Conservation Act, volume 16 U.S.C. 757a–757g. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C
USGPO, Endangered Species Act, volume 16 U.S.C. 1531–1544. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C
USGPO, Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act (P.L. 109–270), volume 16 U.S.C. 941–941g. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C
Willoughby, W. R. 1979. The joint organizations of Canada and the United States, Toronto: The University of Toronto Press.
Wyatt, W. 1948. Washington, D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office. Toomer v. Witsell. 334 United States Reports 385
Zimmerman, J. F. 2005. Congressional preemption: regulatory federalism, Albany: State University of New York Press.
Zorn, J. E. 2003. Testimony of James E. Zorn, Policy Analyst of the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission 37–42. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, 2003 June 3 (Serial No. 108–121, June 3, 2003)
Published
Issue
Section
License
Manuscripts must be original. They must not be published or be under consideration for publication elsewhere, in whole or in part. It is required that the lead author of accepted papers complete and sign the MSU Press AEHM Author Publishing Agreement and provide it to the publisher upon acceptance.
