Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

National Legislation Relating to Fisheries

  • Chapter
The Legal Regime of Fisheries in the Caribbean Region

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes on Coastal and Estuarine Studies ((COASTAL,volume 7))

  • 32 Accesses

Abstract

Throughout the region it is possible to detect two basically different legal approaches which underlie legislation in the region, including that relating to fisheries. One approach is that of the common law system which is found today in the countries formerly (and, in some instances, still) subject to British rule. The other approach is similar to that of continental Europe and is found in the Dutch, French, and Spanish-speaking countries of the region.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Law of 14 April 1978 (SRS 1978 No. 26) and Decree of 31 December 1980 (No. C14).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Regulation No.14, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Decree amending Article 27 of the Federal Law on Fisheries Development, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Decreto No. 2 1977, Article 4.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Decreto Ley. No. 17, 1959, Article 3 and note also Articles 33 and 52.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Decree of 13 June, 1981, Article 3.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Law of 26 July 1978, Gaceta Oficial Extraordinaria No. 2291.

    Google Scholar 

  8. The Bahamas: Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act 1977, Section 2; United States: Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 1976, Section 3(18). In Puerto Rico, in the Act to create the Corporation for the Development and Administration of the Marine Lacustrine and Fluvial Resources, (1979) No.82, “Optimum use” is defined as “the use which provides the greatest benefit to the public, determined on the basis of all pertinent economic, social, biological, ecological and environmental factors”.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Section 10(1), Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Section 18.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 1976, Section 301.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Article 61(2).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Decreto No. 1681.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ley 1972, Article 38.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Barbados: Marine Boundaries and Jurisdiction Act, 1978. Grenada: Marine Boundaries Act, 1978. Dominica, in the Territorial Sea, Contiguous Zone, Exclusive Economic and Fishery Zones Act, section 8 and in the Antigua and Barbuda in the Territorial Waters Act, 1982, section 10 assert “jurisdiction with regard to … marine scientific research”, though neither specifically covers it in a regulation making power. In Montserrat the Minister may authorise in writing fishing for the purposes of “scientific investigation” and in doing so he may exempt a fishing vessel from the provisions of the Ordinance, or impose such conditions as he thinks fit.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Section 5 in each Act.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Section 6 in each Act.

    Google Scholar 

  18. See Table 6

    Google Scholar 

  19. Section 12(1)(k) in both the Barbados and Grenada legislation.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Under Section 20 of both the Barbados and Grenada legislation.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fisheries Amendment Act, 1977, Section 7. Note to similar effect, the British Virgin Islands Fisheries Ordinance, 1979, Section 7(3).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Decret, 1978, Article 70.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Decreto Ley No. 17, 1959, Article 55.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Mexico: Ley, 1972, Article 38; Honduras: Decreto 154 Article 35. Suriname, Decree 31 December, 1980 (C-14). Article 17.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Article 11, and Annex 2 No. 848/81. This Regulation is similar to previous European Communities Council Regulations dealing with the same subject matter. See for example, No. 3023/79.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Article 10.

    Google Scholar 

  27. FAO Fishery Report No. 212, 1978, paragraph 31.

    Google Scholar 

  28. See for example, Mexico, Ley Federal, 1972, Articles 13 and 38; Colombia, Decreto 1681, 1978, Articles 45, 213; The Bahamas, Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation Act), 1977, section 10; Honduras, Decreto No. 921 Article 3.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Colombia: Decreto No. 1681, Article 213; Haiti: Décret, 27 October 1978, Article 22; Mexico: Ley Federal, 1972, Article 13; Panama: Decreto Ley No. 17, 1959, Article 54.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Décret, 1978, Article 21.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Acuerdo Gubernativo, 16 August 1962; amended by Acuerdo Gubernativo 25 April 1974 and Acuerdo Gubernativo 28 February 1979, Article 6.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Decreto Ejecutivo No. 4675, 14 February 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Decreto Ejecutivo No. 7, 2 July 1965 and No. 3547, 22 February 1974. Decreto Ejecutivo No. 3175, 16 August 1973 repealed by Decreto Ejecutivo No. 5804, 16 February 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Decreto 41, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Decreto Ejecutivo No. 4675, 14 February 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977, Section 10 (4) (b).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 1976, Section 201(c).

    Google Scholar 

  38. The application is to specify “the tonnage, capacity, speed, processing equipment, type and quantity of fishing gear, and such other pertinent information with respect to characteristics of each such vessel” as may be required; “each fishery in which each vessel wishes to fish”; “the amount of fish or tonnage of catch contemplated for each such vessel during the time such permit is in force”, and “the ocean area in which, and the season or period during which such fishing will be conducted”.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Section 204(7).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Section 204(7) A and D.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Decree of 31 December 1980, Article 17.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Barbados: Marine Boundaries and Jurisdiction Act, 1978 Section 12; Grenada: Marine Boundaries Act, 1978, Section 12.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Guatemala, Decreto No. 1635, 1932, Article 82.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Guatemala, ibid. Article 100, Dominican Republic, Ley 5914 1962, Article 8.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Cayman Islands, Marine Conservation (Turtle Protection) Regulations, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Examples of the former are found in the laws of Brazil: Decreto Lei No. 221, 28 February 1967, Article 35; Colombia: Decreto No. 2811, 1974 Article 283, Decreto No. 1681, 1978 Article 176 No. 12; Article 213 No. b; Costa Rica: Ley No. 190, 1948, Article 27, Decreto Ley No. 363, 1949, Article 9; Honduras: Decreto No. 154, 1959, Article 27, Articles 42-44; Guatemala: Decreto No. 1635, 1932, Article 75; Mexico: Ley Federal, 1972, Article 48; Nicaragua: Decreto No. 11, 1961, Article 3; Dominican Republic: Ley No. 5914, Articles 6, 7 and 45a; Venezuela: Ley, 1944, Article 20; Barbados: Marine Boundaries and Jurisdiction Act, 1978 Section 12; Grenada: Marine Boundaries Act, 1978 Section 12. Examples of countries which have established in the context of the general fishing laws specific closed seasons for fishing are: Guatemala (loc. cit. Articles 77, 81, 82, 83), Haiti (Décret, 1978, Article III, for lobsters), Honduras (loc. cit., Article 41).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Examples of the former are: Colombia Decreto No. 1681, 1978, Article 123 No. c; Costa Rica: Ley No. 190, 1948, Article 27; Guatemala: Decreto No. 1635, 1932, Article 73, Article 90; Mexico: Ley Federal 1972, Article 38; Nicaragua Decreto No. 11, 1961, Article 3; Dominican Republic: Ley No. 5914, 1962, Article 7, 27; Venezuela: Ley, 1944, Article 20; Panama: Decreto Ley No. 17, 1959, Article 11. Examples of specific dispositions of this kind in the general law are: Guatemala, Decreto No.1635, Article 68, fish; Article 69, oysters; Article 70, crabs; Article 71 and Article 101, turtles; Dominican Republic, Article 49, lobsters.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Brazil: Decreto Lei No. 221, 1967, Article 39; Colombia: Decreto No. 2811, 1974, Article 182 No. f; Decreto No. 1681, 1978, Articles 175, 213, No. d; Costa Rica: Ley No. 190, 1948, Articles 13, 28; Guatemala: Decreto No. 2811, 1974, Article 182, No. f; Decreto No. 1681, 1978, Articles 175, 213, No. d; Costa Rica: Ley No. 190, 1948, Articles 13, 28; Guatemala: Decreto No. 1635, 1932, Articles 64, 65, 86, 94; Haiti: Décret, 1978, Articles 32, 50; Dominican Republic: Ley No. 5914, 1962, Articles 8h, 45b.

    Google Scholar 

  49. See for example Costa Rica: Decreto Ley No. 363, 1949, Articles 7, 8; Guatemala: Decreto No. 1635, 1932, Articles 66, 89; Haiti: Décret, 1978, Articles 30, 40, 51; Dominican Republic: Ley No. 5914, 1962, Articles 7d, 45g; European Communities Council Regulation No. 2527/80 laying down technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources which applies in part to the waters off the French Departments of Guyana, and off Martinique and Guadeloupe. The principal concern of this Regulation is with fishing outside the region.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Barbados: Marine Boundaries and Jurisdiction Act, 1978, Section 12; Bermuda: Fisheries Act, 1972, Section 7(2). Grenada: Marine Boundaries Act, 1978, Section 12; Suriname: Decree of 31 December, 1980 Article 17(2); The Bahamas: Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977, Section 9(4). In Antigua and Barbuda Territorial Waters Act, 1982, Section 19, there is a power to make regulations “relating to the grant of permits and the conditions to be attached thereto for fishing by nationals of foreign States and by means of foreign ships”.

    Google Scholar 

  51. No. 1681 of 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Decreto Ley No. 2811 of 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Section 7(1) in both Acts.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Barbados: Marine Boundaries and Jurisdiction Act, 1978, Section 5; Grenada: Marine Boundaries Act, 1978, Section 5.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Antigua and Barbuda: Territorial Waters Act, 1982, Sections 10, 19; Dominica: Territorial Sea, Contiguous Zone Exclusive Economic and Fishery Zones Act, 1981, Section 8.

    Google Scholar 

  56. See further, above p. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Ley No. 190, Article 29.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Ley No. 5914, 1962, Article 29.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Decreto No. 154, 1959, Articles 50, 51 (which makes a distinction between land based and marine based pollution).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Ley 1944, Article 44.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Decreto Ley No. 17, 1959, Article 35.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Costa Rica (Ley No. 190, 1948, Article 13), Colombia (Decreto No. 1681, 1978, Article 175), Nicaragua (Decreto No. 11, 1966, Article 4), Venezuela (Ley, 1944, Article 22), Panama (Decreto Ley No. 17, 1959, Article 29.)

    Google Scholar 

  63. Costa Rica, ibid., Article 13, Colombia, ibid., Article 176, Venezuela, ibid., Article 23. In one case (The Bahamas, Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977, Section 18(1) there is a power to “restrict” the possession on board of such substances.

    Google Scholar 

  64. (Colombia (Decreto 1681, Title B, Chapter I); Costa Rica (Ley No. 190, Article 15); Haiti (Décret, 1978, Article 38); Nicaragua (Decreto No. 11, 1961, Article 3) Dominican Republic (Ley No. 2914, 1962, Article 45); Venezuela (Ley, 1944, Article 20); Virgin Islands (United Kingdom) (Fisheries Ordinance, 1979, Section 4).

    Google Scholar 

  65. E.g. Virgin Islands (United Kingdom) Marine Parks and Protected Areas Ordinance, 1979, which applies in territorial waters, and the Cayman Islands Marine Conservation Law, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Costa Rica (Decreto Ley No. 363, 1949, Article 9 modified by Decreto Ley No. 739, 1949) and Haiti (Décret, 1978, Article 12) prohibits the capture of porpoises and dolphins; the Dominican Republic (Ley No. 5914, 1962, Article 8) and Honduras (Decreto No. 154, 1959, Article 49) prohibit the capture of manatees.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Colombia: Decreto No. 376, 1957, Article 4; Costa Rica: Decreto No. 190, 1962, Article 3; Haiti: Décret, 1978, Article 6; Mexico: Ley Federal 1972, Article 6; Nicaragua: Decreto No. 557, Article 11; Honduras: Decreto No. 194, 1959, Article 4; Dominican Republic, Ley No. 594, 1962, Article 3; Panama: Decreto Ley No. 17, 1959, Article 4.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Decreto No. 1681, Article 13.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Acuerdo Gubernativo, 28 February 1979, Article 20.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Decreto No. 376, 1957, Article 5.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Costa Rica: Decreto No. 363, Article 1; Colombia, Decreto No. 363, 1957, Article 5; “pesca comercial de ribera”, Mexico (Ley, 1972, Article 11).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Decreto No. 210, October 1965, Article I, amending Decreto No. 202, October 1965, Article I.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Decreto Lei, No. 68, 459, 1971, Article I.

    Google Scholar 

  74. For example, Dominican Republic, Ley No. 5914, Articles 23 and 24, Venezuela, Ley, 1944, Article 14; Colombia, Decreto No. 1681, Article 8.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Suriname merely issues “licences” whether to locals or foreigners (Decree of 31 December 1980), though different registries are maintained, and different fishing rights are granted, in respect of foreigners.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Section 7, Fisheries Protection Regulations, 1976, enacted under the Fisheries Protection Ordinance, cap. 98.

    Google Scholar 

  77. The Regulations of 21 October 1977 set out in the schedule the following fees

    Google Scholar 

  78. Any fishing boat operating in the fishery zone but not doing so from a base in Guyana. $100,000.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Any foreign owned fishing boat exceeding 100 feet in length operating in the fishery zone from a base in Guyana. $50,000.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Any foreign owned fishing boat less than 100 feet in length operating in the fishery zone from a base in Guyana. $12,500.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Any Guyanese owned fishing boat exceeding 100 feet in length operating in the fishery zone from a base in Guyana. $5,000.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Any Guyanese owned fishing boat less than 100 feet in length operating in the fishery zone from a base in Guyana. $2,500.

    Google Scholar 

  83. See Section 3 Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 1976 which defines fish so as not to include highly migratory species, while the latter term is defined as “species of tuna which in the course of their life cycle, spawn and migrate over great distances in waters of the ocean”. Section 202 does however authorise the Secretary of State to initiate and conduct negotiations for the purpose of entering into international fishery agreements which inter alia provide for “The conservation and management of anadromous species and highly migratory species”. The Bahamas Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977, Section 2 defines “fishery resource” as not including tuna, though section 2(2) provides that the “Minister may, by notice published in the Gazette, declare any species of living organism to be a fishery resource for the purpose of this Act.” This would allow for tuna to be declared a fishery resource.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Ley Federal 1976, Article 5.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Décret 1978, Articles 28, 29.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Decreto No. 1470, 1961, Article 5.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Decreto No. 1681, 1978, Articles 40, 55.

    Google Scholar 

  88. See below, p.82

    Google Scholar 

  89. Maritime Boundaries Act, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Section 7(1) though it is a defence to a prosecution under the Ordinance, if the fishing was for the purpose of scientific research: Section 7(2).

    Google Scholar 

  91. Barbados: Marine Boundaries and Jurisdiction Act, 1977, Section 11; Grenada: Marine Boundaries Act, 1977, Section 11.

    Google Scholar 

  92. The Fisheries Amendment Act, 1977, Sections 7, 16.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Discussed further, below pp.70 et. seq.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Decreto 1681, 1978, Article 23.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Decreto No. 8, 1976, Article2.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Decreto No. 41, 1977, Article 2.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Decreto Ejecutivo No. 8081A.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Fishery Resources (Conservation and Management) Act 1977 Section 9(2)(a).

    Google Scholar 

  99. Maritime Boundaries Act, 1977, Section 25(1).

    Google Scholar 

  100. Decree of 31 December 1980, Articles 2, 3, 4, 6.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Ley No. 5914, Articles 18, 22.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Acuerdo, 1979, Article 13.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Decreto Ley No. 363, 1949, Articles 21, 22.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Acuerdo, 1979, Article 26.

    Google Scholar 

  105. No. 3023/1979.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Ley Federal, 1972, Article 37.

    Google Scholar 

  107. See Article 297(3), Montego Bay Convention, and discussion above p.36.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Fisheries Ordinance, 1979, Section 7.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Discussed below Part IV.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Dominica, Territorial Sea, Contiguous Zone Exclusive Economic and Fishery Zones Act, 1982, Section 8; Antigua and Barbuda, Territorial Waters Act, 1982, Section 10.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Antigua and Barbuda, Section 11; Dominica, Section 9.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Decree No. 2, 24 February 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Decreto No. 921, 13 June 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Article 37.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Act of 10 February 1976 Article 7.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Article 8.

    Google Scholar 

  117. Fishery Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  118. American Fisheries Promotion Act, 1980, Section 230 amending the Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 1976 Section 201(d).

    Google Scholar 

  119. American Fisheries Promotion Act, 1980, Section 23, amending Section 201(e)(l) of the Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Maritime Boundaries Act, 1977 Section 3.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Honduras, Decreto No. 154, 1954, Article 20. On the other hand, Honduras now recognises the objective of optimum utilisation of the living resources, and that it may issue licences or permits to foreigners to fish in its exclusive economic zone in accordance with existing legislation and “such legislation on the subject as may hereafter be issued” (Article 3, Decreto No. 921, 13 June, 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  122. Decreto No. 557, 1961, Article 43.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Mexico: Ley 1972, Article 26; Costa Rica: Ley No. 190, 1948, Article 7, modified by Law No. 2304, 1958. In Brazil, the Maritime Court is empowered to grant certificates of ownership of fishing boats to “native born or naturalized Brazilians or to companies organized in Brazil” (Decreto Lei No. 221, 1967, Article 8) though provision is made in the later law (Decree No. 68, 459, 1971) for the leasing of foreign fishing vessels with the approval of the Ministry of Agriculture, provided that Brazilian born citizens hold most of the capital, that there is a portion of local crew on board, and other conditions, including a general condition that leasing will not “create a privileged condition for foreign vessels” and where the operation brings about an “actual and indispensable increase in exports or in supplies to regions of insufficient production” (Article 4).

    Google Scholar 

  124. See above p.65

    Google Scholar 

  125. Decree of 31 December 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Article 5.

    Google Scholar 

  127. Article 19.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Decreto Ley, 1959, No. 17, Article 6.

    Google Scholar 

  129. Ley Federal, 1972, Article 37.

    Google Scholar 

  130. (Decreto No. 1681, Article 40). In Brazil, foreign fishermen are exluded from waters within 100 miles of the coast and from exploiting Crustacea and other living resources closely dependent on the seabed (Decreto Lei 68, 459, 1971, Article I).

    Google Scholar 

  131. Ley Federal, 1972, Article 37.

    Google Scholar 

  132. Decreto No. 1681, Article 46.

    Google Scholar 

  133. Ley No. 6267, 1979, Decreto Ejecutivo No. 10905A for a general discussion on the freedom of navigation in zones of extended jurisdiction in the Caribbean region, see L.D.M. Nelson, The Exclusive Economic Zone and the New Law of the Sea, in Proceedings of an International Seminar, Kingstown St. Vincent, on Problems of Development and Ocean Management in the Eastern Caribbean p.13 (Dalhousie) Ocean Studies Programme 1982). See also W.T. Burke, Fisheries Regulations under Extended Jurisdiction and International Law FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No 223. Rome, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  134. Decreto No. 9996-S. 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  135. Decreto 1681, Article 46.

    Google Scholar 

  136. Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977, Section 19(2).

    Google Scholar 

  137. Decree of 31 Dec. 1980, Article 28.

    Google Scholar 

  138. Article 58.

    Google Scholar 

  139. Maritime Boundaries Act, 1977, Section 25(2). Though Section 19 states: The President may by order — (a) extend, with such restrictions and modifications as he thinks fit, any enactment for the time being in force in Guyana or any part thereof to the exclusive economic zone or any part thereof; and (b) make such provisions as he may consider necessary for facilitating the enforcement of such enactment, and any enactment so extended shall have effect as if the exclusive economic zone or the part thereof to which it has been extended is a part of the territory of Guyana. Potentially this section would permit the application of laws interfering with the freedom of navigation. Section 21 however provides: In the exclusive economic zone and the air space over the zone, ships and aircraft of all States shall, subject to the exercise of Guyana of its rights within the zone, enjoy freedom of navigation and overflight. If “rights” is interpreted as referring to exclusive economic zone rights as recognised in international law, then no problems arise. On the other hand, if “rights” here includes the power under Section 19 or Section 19 is interpreted as overriding Section 21, then Guyana would have the power to interfere with the freedom of navigation of all vessels.

    Google Scholar 

  140. Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977, Section 9. United States: Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 1976, Section 201, as amended in 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  141. Decree of 24 February 1977, Article 4.

    Google Scholar 

  142. European Communities Council Regulation No. 848/81 Article 2.

    Google Scholar 

  143. Barbados: Marine Boundaries and Jurisdiction Act, 1977, Section 11; Grenada: Marine Boundaries Act, 1978, Section 11.

    Google Scholar 

  144. Decree of 31 December 1931, Article 23

    Google Scholar 

  145. Article 4.

    Google Scholar 

  146. Ley 1944 Article 26, Decreto No. 829, 1975, Article 75.

    Google Scholar 

  147. Acuerdo, 1979, Articles 14, 15, 34, 46.

    Google Scholar 

  148. Décret, 1978, Article 141.

    Google Scholar 

  149. Barbados: Marine Boundaries and Jurisdiction Act, 1978 Section 14; Grenada: Marine Boundaries Act Section 14.

    Google Scholar 

  150. Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation Act) 1977, Section 3.

    Google Scholar 

  151. Fisheries Act, 972, Section 2.

    Google Scholar 

  152. Decreto No. 1681, (1978) Articles 207-212.

    Google Scholar 

  153. Decreto No. 1874, 2 August 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  154. Ley No. 190, 1948, Article 24.

    Google Scholar 

  155. Fisheries Ordinance, 1982 section 2.

    Google Scholar 

  156. Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 1976, section 311.

    Google Scholar 

  157. Section 311(6). The same section also sets out the powers of authorised officers.

    Google Scholar 

  158. Decree of 31 December 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  159. Costa Rica; Decreto Ley No. 739, 1949, Article 17; Guatemala; Decreto No. 1635, 1932, Article 41; Acuerdo, 28 February 1978, Article 45; Colombia; Decreto No. 1681, 1978, Article 197.

    Google Scholar 

  160. Article 42.

    Google Scholar 

  161. Fisheries Regulation Act, 1904-1977, Section 24.

    Google Scholar 

  162. Décret 1978, Article 19.

    Google Scholar 

  163. Barbados: Marine Boundaries and Jurisdiction Act, 1978 Section 11(2) & (3); Grenada: Marine Boundaries Act, 1978, Section 11(2) & (3).

    Google Scholar 

  164. Maritime Boundaries Act, 1977, Section 25(1).

    Google Scholar 

  165. Section 24(3).

    Google Scholar 

  166. Section 39.

    Google Scholar 

  167. Fishery Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977, Section 13.

    Google Scholar 

  168. Section 19.

    Google Scholar 

  169. Decreto Ley No. 363, 1949, Articles 11, 12, 13.

    Google Scholar 

  170. Acuerdo 28 February 1979, Articles 40, 41, 42.

    Google Scholar 

  171. Décret 1978, Articles 131, 137.

    Google Scholar 

  172. Decreto Ley No. 17, Articles 28-32, 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  173. For instance, in the case of Colombia, Decreto No. 1681, Articles 181-184; Mexico, Ley 1972 for the catch; Nicaragua, Decreto No. 11, 1961, Article 6; Guyana Maritime Boundaries Act, 1977, Section 24(4); Section 27(4), (5), (6) and (7); Guatemala, Acuerdo 1979, Article 43; Mexico, Ley 1972, Articles 91, 92, 93, (for the fishing gear) and particularly in the cases of subsequent offences (Guatemala Decreto No. 1635, 1937, Article 39; Dominican Republic, Ley No. 5914, 1962, Article 49) or only for certain types of offences (Haiti, 1978, Articles 131, 132). Panama, Decreto Ley No. 17, 1959, Article 31. In The Bahamas Fishery Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977 provisions regarding seizure, detention and arrest are set out in the Act, Sections 13 and 14, while the first schedule sets out in some detail specific provisions relating to forfeiture. In Montserrat, the gear, fish, fish product, or the vessel may be forfeited upon conviction: Fisheries Ordinance, 1982, Section 16.

    Google Scholar 

  174. Article 73 is discussed above p. 32.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Australian National University, PO Box 4, Canberra, Australia

    William R. Edeson (Faculty of Law)

  2. Apartado 4104, Carmelitas 1010a, Caracas, Venezuela

    Jean-François Pulvenis

Authors
  1. William R. Edeson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jean-François Pulvenis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1983 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Edeson, W.R., Pulvenis, JF. (1983). National Legislation Relating to Fisheries. In: The Legal Regime of Fisheries in the Caribbean Region. Lecture Notes on Coastal and Estuarine Studies, vol 7. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-50969-8_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-50969-8_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-12698-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-50969-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation