I agree with Maurice and Martin.  I think Maurice summarized the law
well, and his fourth point is particularly important:  even if you know
the EEZ boundary and are confident that it is internationally valid, it
is not the nation's boundary.  It merely represents the zone within
which exclusive fishing and other economic rights pertain.

Martin's suggestion of indicating the known maritime boundaries and
claims could make for a very informative and useful map.  It seems to me
that what lines you draw depends on the purpose of the map.  As Maurice
said, the outer limit of a state's sovereignty is the seaward boundary
of the territorial sea.  But very few maps for general consumption
indicate the 12-mile (or whatever) boundary or even the baseline on
which the 12-mile limit is calculated.  They usually show the coastline.

If you decide to indicate maritime boundaries, you could consider
showing the baseline, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the EEZ
(though states call it by different names), and/or the continental
shelf.  Any or all of these could prove to be contentious depending on
how the baseline is drawn and whether other states regard it as
conforming to international law, because it is the basis for all the
others (with some exceptions for the continental shelf).  I should think
that you would want to be careful about indicating the status of each of
the lines indicated on the map, that is, whether it is a negotiated
maritime boundary or a unilateral claim and, if the latter, whether it
is disputed.  Of all the possible maritime boundaries, I should think
that archipelagic baselines drawn pursuant to Article 47 of the Law of
the Sea Convention would be the most important and useful to show.
Within these baselines, innocent passage applies, but archipelagic
states exercise sovereignty not only over the surface and the water
column, but also over the seabed, subsoil, living and nonliving
resources, and the airspace overhead.  

I would be interested in hearing what you decide to do and perhaps in
seeing the finished map.

Bill Dunlap




Professor William V. Dunlap
Quinnipiac University School of Law
275 Mount Carmel Avenue
Hamden, Connecticut 06518  USA
 
+1 203-582-3265
+1 203-582-3244 (fax)
mailto:[log in to unmask]
 

-----Original Message-----
From: International boundaries discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Martin Pratt
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 1:20 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Country maritime border defined as EEZ

Dear Damien,

Despite the caveats raised by Maurice Mendelson, I would encourage you
to try and show claimed maritime zones, agreed maritime boundaries and
(where no boundaries have yet been agreed) equidstance lines between
overlapping zones on your map. Even if you end up somewhat
oversimplifying the true picture of maritime jurisdiction in the
southwest Pacific, in my opinion it is still far preferable to adopt
this approach than to draw a series of arbitrary 'boxes' around the land
territory of the states of the region - as far too many atlas publishers
continue to do. Such boxes may have made cartographic sense prior to the
introduction of the EEZ, offering a quick visual indication of which
islands belonged to each state, but today they are unnecessary and
potentially highly misleading. 

There are numerous sources of data on maritime claims and boundaries
around the world. One increasingly useful resource is the VLIZ Maritime
Boundaries Geodatabase at
http://www.vliz.be/vmdcdata/marbound/index.php. It isn't yet nearly as
reliable as General Dynamics' Global Maritime Boundaries Database and it
certainly shouldn't be used for large-scale mapping purposes, but as a
source of data for for small-scale illustrative maps it is worth a look.


Regards,

m a r t i n

==================================
Martin Pratt
Director of Research
International Boundaries Research Unit
Department of Geography
University of Durham
South Road
Durham DH1 3LE
United Kingdom

+44 (0)191 334 1964 (direct line)
+44 (0)191 334 1962 (fax)
[log in to unmask] (email)
http://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru (World Wide Web)
==================================

 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: International boundaries discussion list 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Damien Demaj
> Sent: 25 September 2006 04:11
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Country maritime border defined as EEZ
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I am putting together a map of the Pacific Islands and I 
> wanted to get some feedback on the correct maritime 
> borders/country borders to show for the Pacific Islands.
> 
> Is it correct to define the islands maritime borders/country 
> borders as the Exclusive Economic Zones for each country? or 
> is there other border lines that I should use?
> 
> Some of the more recent Atlases appear to be showing the 
> Pacific Island countries borders as the EEZ. Is this OK to do so?
> 
> If someone could help me out here that would be great.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Damien Demaj