U.S. Extended Continental Shelf Regions.
see State.gov
From Earth.com by Eric Ralls
The United States successfully claimed an additional one million square kilometers beneath the ocean, expanding its Extended Continental Shelf (ECS) boundaries.
Yes, it’s like America just bought a new basement, one that is almost 60% the size of Alaska.
Mead Treadwell, former lieutenant governor of Alaska and chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission, helps us understand the situation.
“America is larger than it was yesterday.
It’s not quite the Louisiana Purchase.
It’s not quite the purchase of Alaska, but the new area of land and subsurface resources under the land controlled by the United States is two Californias larger,” Treadwell explained.
The Extended Continental Shelf (ECS)
Picture the ocean like a multi-story building that starts at a country’s shoreline. International law gives coastal states clear rights out to 200 nautical miles.
Picture the ocean like a multi-story building that starts at a country’s shoreline. International law gives coastal states clear rights out to 200 nautical miles.
That is the “main floor” of this hypothetical building.
The Extended Continental Shelf (ECS) is what comes next.
The Extended Continental Shelf (ECS) is what comes next.
It covers the seabed and the rocks beneath it beyond that 200-nautical mile line.
This part of our hypothetical is more like the building’s underground levels than extra living space.
A country doesn’t gain new rights to the water column in that area, but it can claim rights to the resources in the seabed and subsoil if it can show the seafloor is a natural continuation of its land territory.
Under the rules, a coastal state can set the outer edge of its continental shelf as far as 350 nautical miles from its baseline.
In some cases, it can go 100 nautical miles beyond the 2,500-meter isobath, which is a line that traces where the ocean is 2,500 meters deep, but only if the science supports it.
A country doesn’t gain new rights to the water column in that area, but it can claim rights to the resources in the seabed and subsoil if it can show the seafloor is a natural continuation of its land territory.
Under the rules, a coastal state can set the outer edge of its continental shelf as far as 350 nautical miles from its baseline.
In some cases, it can go 100 nautical miles beyond the 2,500-meter isobath, which is a line that traces where the ocean is 2,500 meters deep, but only if the science supports it.
Legality of ECS claims
UNCLOS Article 76 provides the playbook for drawing the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles. It explains what evidence counts, how to use geology and seafloor shape to justify an outer limit, and which constraints cap how far the line can go.
The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) acts as the technical referee.
It reviews a coastal state’s submission and checks whether the methods and data meet the standards.
The commission includes specialists in fields like geology, hydrography, and oceanography, because these claims rise or fall on the science.
The commission includes specialists in fields like geology, hydrography, and oceanography, because these claims rise or fall on the science.
Claiming an Extended Continental Shelf
A state can’t just point at a map and declare victory.
It has to build a case, document it, and defend it with evidence that holds up under expert scrutiny.
Coastal states start by collecting data through seafloor surveys.
Coastal states start by collecting data through seafloor surveys.
They use tools like seismic profiling, sediment sampling, and detailed bathymetric mapping to show what the seabed looks like and how it connects to the country’s landmass.
After that, they assemble a formal submission.
After that, they assemble a formal submission.
This package typically includes charts, maps, coordinates, and technical reports that explain the data, the methodology, and the proposed outer limits.
Then the CLCS reviews the submission in depth.
Then the CLCS reviews the submission in depth.
The commission tests the scientific reasoning and may ask questions or request clarifications.
It ultimately issues recommendations.
Those recommendations don’t automatically settle political disputes, but they carry real authority because they reflect a thorough, expert-driven evaluation of the evidence.
Those recommendations don’t automatically settle political disputes, but they carry real authority because they reflect a thorough, expert-driven evaluation of the evidence.
Twenty years of hard work
The U.S. began its quest for an ECS back in 2003.
This effort, which required teamwork between the U.S. State Department, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), was no easy task.
It took them twenty years and involved a massive data collection initiative, but it paid off, big time.
It took them twenty years and involved a massive data collection initiative, but it paid off, big time.
On December 19, 2023, the State Department announced new geographical coordinates of the U.S. ECS, adding massive chunks of territory in the Atlantic, Arctic, Pacific, and more.
The United States and UNCLOS
How might the U.S. attempt to use these rules to further expand the reach of U.S. territory under the Trump administration?
The relationship between the United States and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is complicated, to say the least.
While UNCLOS is often referred to as the “Constitution for the Oceans,” governing everything from maritime boundaries to resource rights and environmental standards, the U.S. has never actually ratified the treaty, even though it played a significant role in drafting it back in the 1970s and 1980s.
There are worries about issues like sovereignty, naval operations, and financial commitments that have created some major roadblocks.
Some senators fear that joining the treaty would mean giving up U.S. rights to the International Seabed Authority and could restrict access for U.S. companies to underwater resources.
On the flip side, military leaders, especially from the U.S. Navy, are all for ratification, arguing that it would help the U.S. tackle excessive maritime claims by other countries and secure navigational freedoms.
Supporters of ratifying UNCLOS believe that joining would boost U.S. influence in shaping global maritime rules and give legal certainty for U.S. claims, especially regarding the Extended Continental Shelf (ECS).
Even though the U.S. isn’t a formal party, it already follows many of the convention’s rules, using its provisions to back up territorial claims and assert navigation rights in international waters, like the South China Sea.
How might the U.S. attempt to use these rules to further expand the reach of U.S. territory under the Trump administration?
The relationship between the United States and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is complicated, to say the least.
While UNCLOS is often referred to as the “Constitution for the Oceans,” governing everything from maritime boundaries to resource rights and environmental standards, the U.S. has never actually ratified the treaty, even though it played a significant role in drafting it back in the 1970s and 1980s.
There are worries about issues like sovereignty, naval operations, and financial commitments that have created some major roadblocks.
Some senators fear that joining the treaty would mean giving up U.S. rights to the International Seabed Authority and could restrict access for U.S. companies to underwater resources.
On the flip side, military leaders, especially from the U.S. Navy, are all for ratification, arguing that it would help the U.S. tackle excessive maritime claims by other countries and secure navigational freedoms.
Supporters of ratifying UNCLOS believe that joining would boost U.S. influence in shaping global maritime rules and give legal certainty for U.S. claims, especially regarding the Extended Continental Shelf (ECS).
Even though the U.S. isn’t a formal party, it already follows many of the convention’s rules, using its provisions to back up territorial claims and assert navigation rights in international waters, like the South China Sea.
Science of exploration
This ambitious venture required a scientific odyssey of epic proportions.
The areas encompassed in this claim include the Arctic, the east coast Atlantic, the Bering Sea, the west coast Pacific, the Mariana Islands, and two regions in the Gulf of Mexico.
Brian Van Pay, Project Director for the State Department, explained further, saying, “Forty missions at sea, going to areas that we’ve never explored before, finding entire seamounts we didn’t even know existed.”
Scientists spent the equivalent of over three years charting new territory; using sonar mapping, geological sampling, and sediment layer analysis.
The outcome, as Van Pay notes, was a submission that aligns with the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) — the legal framework for this claim.
Brian Van Pay, Project Director for the State Department, explained further, saying, “Forty missions at sea, going to areas that we’ve never explored before, finding entire seamounts we didn’t even know existed.”
Scientists spent the equivalent of over three years charting new territory; using sonar mapping, geological sampling, and sediment layer analysis.
The outcome, as Van Pay notes, was a submission that aligns with the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) — the legal framework for this claim.
Importance of UNCLOS and ECS
The implications of this move are multifold.
For starters, the U.S. now has the right to control and potentially exploit resources like oil, gas, and minerals in the expanded territory.
However, it doesn’t mean they can suddenly start fishing further off the coast or start patrolling the new water regions.
However, it doesn’t mean they can suddenly start fishing further off the coast or start patrolling the new water regions.
It’s more like the U.S. government won the mineral rights to some underwater property.
The claim has been shaped carefully to avoid stepping on the toes of other nations, particularly Russia. But there might be a bit of an overlap with Canada, which may call for future diplomacy.
Despite the potential gains, challenges persist.
The claim has been shaped carefully to avoid stepping on the toes of other nations, particularly Russia. But there might be a bit of an overlap with Canada, which may call for future diplomacy.
Despite the potential gains, challenges persist.
The biggest one of these, as mentioned above, is the lack of a formal ratification of UNCLOS by the U.S. Senate.
This gap could potentially limit the international legal weight of the claim.
Moreover, the claim’s validity is dependent on the robustness of the science backing it.
According to Treadwell, “If somebody came back and said, ‘Your science is bad,’ I think the United States would listen. But I don’t think science is bad. I think we’ve had very good science.”
Moreover, the claim’s validity is dependent on the robustness of the science backing it.
According to Treadwell, “If somebody came back and said, ‘Your science is bad,’ I think the United States would listen. But I don’t think science is bad. I think we’ve had very good science.”
Managing the Extended Continental Shelf
There’s more at stake than just economic gain.
There’s more at stake than just economic gain.
The move also widens the U.S.’s jurisdiction to enforce environmental regulations effectively and protect fragile marine ecosystems from unchecked exploitation.
However, balancing these ecological responsibilities with economic interests will prove to be a tricky task.
But, hey, isn’t that part of the thrill?
However, balancing these ecological responsibilities with economic interests will prove to be a tricky task.
But, hey, isn’t that part of the thrill?
As over 75 countries have already defined their ECS boundaries, it’s clear that the world is entering a new era of ocean governance.
So, will this new territory lead to a scramble for resources, or will it enhance cooperation in managing and protecting the world’s oceans?
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
So, will this new territory lead to a scramble for resources, or will it enhance cooperation in managing and protecting the world’s oceans?
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
For now, America has made a bold move, and the rest of the world is watching.
One thing is for sure, though: how we navigate these waters will affect not only our economy but also the health of our oceans, the climate, and our future.
One thing is for sure, though: how we navigate these waters will affect not only our economy but also the health of our oceans, the climate, and our future.
Links :
- State.gov : U.S. Extended Continental Shelf Project
- Colorado Univ : CU Boulder helps define extended continental shelf
- Wilson Center : Five Takeaways from the US Continental Shelf Announcement / Strategic Implication of the US Extended Continental Shelf
- Newsweek : Mapped: US Coast Guard Intercepts Chinese Ship Off Alaska
- GeoGarage blog : The extended continental shelf (ECS) : announcement of U.S. Extended Continental Shelf Outer Limits / From Mare Liberum to Mare Legitimum: In pursuit of safe and secure seas
No comments:
Post a Comment