Maritime boundary disputes can make fishing rights uncertain because two states may claim authority over the same waters. That does not automatically give fishers from both states equal access—or stop all fishing. Who may fish, under which rules, depends on applicable law and any agreement or provisional arrangement between the states.
How does a disputed boundary affect fishing?
An unsettled boundary can leave overlapping claims about which state may regulate fishing in an area. Fishers may face uncertainty about whether they need a licence, which conservation rules apply, and which state may take enforcement action. The effects can reach beyond vessels to communities that depend on habitual or artisanal fishing.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The practical result varies. A dispute does not automatically suspend all fishing, and customary or traditional access does not necessarily continue unchanged. A claimed line, a line vessels appear to follow, and an agreed legal boundary are different things.
Recommended Free Tools
Who can fish in disputed waters?
There is no general rule that gives fishers from both states equal access simply because the boundary is unresolved. The answer depends on the area’s legal status, the states’ applicable obligations, any existing agreement, and any provisional arrangements they have made. A vessel’s nationality, licence, fishing method, location and the rules in force may all matter.
#1 Best Overall
In an exclusive economic zone (EEZ), the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) gives the coastal state rights concerning living resources, including a role in setting allowable catch and regulating harvesting. UNCLOS Article 62 addresses access by other states to a surplus when the coastal state cannot harvest the entire allowable catch. Such access is subject to agreements or other arrangements and the coastal state’s terms and conditions, including licensing and compliance with its fisheries laws. This is a conditional framework, not a blanket entitlement to fish in a disputed EEZ.
What does UNCLOS say while states negotiate?
UNCLOS Article 74(1) says states with opposite or adjacent coasts are to delimit their EEZ boundary by agreement, on the basis of international law, to achieve an equitable solution. If they cannot reach agreement within a reasonable period, Article 74(2) directs them to the procedures in Part XV.
For the period before agreement, Article 74(3) says: “Pending agreement as provided for in paragraph 1, the States concerned, in a spirit of understanding and cooperation, shall make every effort to enter into provisional arrangements of a practical nature and, during this transitional period, not to jeopardize or hamper the reaching of the final agreement.” Any such arrangement is without prejudice to the final delimitation: it need not settle where the eventual boundary lies.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches2Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems3Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteWhat can a provisional fishing arrangement cover?
States can use practical arrangements to reduce uncertainty while negotiations continue. The details are a matter for the states; there is no single model that applies to every dispute.
Rank #3
- 1 x 12221 Chesapeake Bay Entrance
- 1 x 13205 Block Island Sound and Approaches
- 1 x 12354 Long Island Sound Eastern part
- Charts are professionally printed
- Ships in a cardboard tube
| Arrangement option | What it can address | What fishers need clarified |
|---|---|---|
| Preserve traditional or artisanal access | Continuity for fishers with established use of an area. | Which fishers qualify, where access applies, and what rules govern it. |
| Allocate access or establish a joint fisheries zone | Who may fish in a defined area, potentially including fleets from both states. | Zone limits, licences, seasons, catch rules and enforcement procedures. |
| Coordinate conservation and management | How the states manage shared or mobile fish stocks and fishing activity across the area. | Compatible catch limits, closures, gear rules, reporting and data exchange. |
These are design choices, not automatic rights. A clear arrangement can specify where access applies, who is eligible, how vessels are licensed and monitored, how inspections or notifications work, and how affected fishing communities are treated. It should also make clear that the parties have not prejudged the final boundary.
Why fishing practice alone may not establish a boundary
Vessels’ conduct can be relevant evidence, but it does not by itself prove that states have recognized a legal boundary. In its 2017 judgment in the Ghana–Côte d’Ivoire maritime-boundary case, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) Special Chamber observed that the parties appeared to follow an equidistance line when fishing. It nevertheless found no evidence that they recognized that line as their maritime or fisheries boundary. An apparent working line should therefore not be described as an agreed boundary without evidence of agreement.
Examples of ways states have managed the interim period
Traditional and artisanal fishing access
A United Nations handbook discusses preserving traditional fishing access on both sides of a line, and describes an award involving access by Eritrean artisanal fishers. It also describes a United Kingdom–Denmark (Faroe Islands) agreement establishing a special area with continuing fishing rights. These examples show possible approaches in particular contexts; they do not create a universal rule that customary access must continue in every dispute.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Algeria and Tunisia
The United Nations Treaty Collection records an Algeria–Tunisia agreement on provisional arrangements for delimiting the maritime boundary. It was concluded at Algiers on 11 February 2002 and entered into force on 23 November 2003. The record establishes that the states documented provisional arrangements; it does not, by itself, establish the agreement’s specific fishing rules.
Best Value
- Comprehensive Guide: Complete reference to essential boating safety rules and regulations with easy-to-understand instructions for emergency situations and safety procedures while on the water.
- 100% Waterproof: Built with high-quality, weather-resistant materials to withstand the rigors of outdoor use, ensuring long-lasting reliability on every trip.
- Portable & Lightweight: Convenient, travel-friendly size fits in any equipment bag or can be stowed away on board, allowing you to have it on hand at a moments notice.
- Perfect Gift for All Boaters – Ideal for beginners, seasoned sailors, kids and scouts, and any outdoor enthusiasts looking to master the rules of good seamanship.
Why conservation still matters
Access arrangements need to account for the condition and movement of fish stocks, not just the location of a disputed line. The United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement calls on states to cooperate on compatible conservation and management measures for straddling and highly migratory stocks. It also provides for practical provisional arrangements pending agreement, without prejudicing the final result. This is relevant when such stocks are involved; not every maritime boundary dispute concerns them.
What happens if talks do not resolve the dispute?
UNCLOS Part XV provides dispute-settlement procedures, but the route available in a particular case depends on the treaty obligations and declarations of the states and on the nature of the dispute. Article 297(3) limits compulsory procedures for some disputes concerning a coastal state’s sovereign rights over living resources in its EEZ. Article 298 allows states to exclude certain categories, including some maritime-delimitation disputes, from compulsory procedures, while providing for conciliation in specified circumstances. A fisheries dispute and a boundary-delimitation dispute may therefore face different procedural limits.
A dispute about an EEZ boundary is also distinct from a dispute over sovereignty over an island or other land territory, although the issues can overlap. For any named dispute, the exact claims, applicable agreements and current official records matter; a general description of overlapping claims cannot establish which state’s rules apply to a particular fishing trip.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
