How satellites and big data can help to save the oceans

An illustration of ship traffic in 2015

An illustration of ship movements across the globe in 2015.

Scientists used a technology known as “Automatic Identification System,” which collects data from transponders that broadcast a vessel's location and identity every few seconds or minutes.

Nearly all large ocean-going vessels are required to carry the equipment.

The map above was created from four-and-a-half billion data points from more than 200,000 vessels. (Courtesy Global Fishing Watch)

From Yale by Douglas McCauley


With new marine protected areas and an emerging U.N. treaty, global ocean conservation efforts are on the verge of a major advance.
But to enforce these ambitious initiatives, new satellite-based technologies and newly available online data must be harnessed.

Photo: Global Fishing Watch Over the past century, rampant overfishing, severe pollution, and runaway coastal development have taken a huge toll on the world’s oceans.
Now, however, two major advances in global ocean governance are quietly unfolding, offering hope that the early decades of the 21st century will mark a turning point in which humanity can begin to repair the global seas.

Yet a key question remains: Will the new availability of sophisticated, satellite-based technologies, coupled with the democratization of online data about the health of our environment, help ensure that these positive advancements live up to their potential to protect the oceans?

The first encouraging policy development is the explosive movement by countries around the world to set up massive marine protected areas of unprecedented size.
The biggest of these newly proposed mega-marine protected areas, the Pitcairn Islands Marine Reserve, is three-and-a-half times larger than the United Kingdom, and more than 100,000 times larger than the historical median size for an ocean protected area.
The 19 mega-marine protected areas created or announced in the last six years would comprise an area larger than all the protected ocean areas created previously.
Several huge marine reserves currently being considered would add an additional 775,000 square miles of ocean protection.

The second key development is that the United Nations is now drawing up a treaty that would, for the first time, manage biodiversity across the high seas — the region outside the 200-mile exclusive economic zones of individual nations.
The forthcoming United Nations high seas treaty would be setting new rules for a swath of the ocean 22 times larger than the United States.
These new regulations are focused on preserving marine biodiversity, establishing international ocean reserves, evaluating processes for sharing marine genetic resources, and effectively carrying out environmental impact assessments.

 A visualization of fishing activity across the global oceans during 2012-2013 using satellite tracking technology.

The map is a synthesis of more than 3 billion data points on vessel movements.

(Courtesy of Global Fishing Watch)

In the absence of systems to monitor boundaries, large marine protected areas will be nothing more than huge paper parks.
These bold new policies suggest that decision-makers are finally committed to taking the kind of aggressive actions needed to stay a step ahead of industrialization in the oceans — something we failed to do when industrialization occurred on land.
This issue extends well beyond industrial-scale fishing.
Recent innovation and technological development have now made it possible to take the industries of farming, mining, power generation, and even data center management underwater.
The scope and significance of this mass acceleration of new uses of the ocean cannot be overstated. In 2014, for example, the world began eating more fish from farms than from the wild — a marine reprise of our historic shift on land from hunting wild food to farming.
Mining claims have already been staked to roughly 400,000 square miles of deep-sea ecosystems.

The campaigns to vastly expand marine protected areas and significantly improve international governance of the oceans are extremely exciting.
But both of these important policy movements have an Achilles heel: Laws only matter if you can ensure that people actually follow them.
These new policies cover such vast areas that they render boat, plane, and other traditional forms of ocean observation as obsolete as sextants.
In the absence of systems to watch their boundaries, large marine protected areas will be nothing more than huge paper parks.
Likewise, our efforts to control the exploitation of high-seas biodiversity via the new U.N. treaty will only be effective if we aren’t blind to what is happening in this large and distant part of the ocean.

But just as technological innovation is fueling a rapid acceleration of development in the ocean, high-tech solutions may also hold the key to ensuring that a marine industrial revolution advances responsibly and intelligently.
These advances, when put in the hands not just of governments but also of researchers, citizen-scientists and environmental groups, promise a new era in which we can actively observe and responsibly plan out what’s going on in the world’s seas.

A vital solution lies in the use of satellite-interfacing sensors and data processing tools that are beginning to allow us to watch how ships use the oceans as easily as we track Uber taxis cruising around a city.
Like airplanes, more and more ships now carry sensors that publicly transmit their position so they don’t crash into each other.
We can make use of these same streams of safety data to detect where industrial fishing is concentrated, to watch as seabed mining exploration begins, and to observe how cargo ships overlap with whale migration pathways.

Seaweed aquaculture emerging in the Taiwan Strait. 

Over a two-month period, an enormous new crop of seaweed aquaculture emerges off the shores of Yangshu Island in the Taiwan Strait.

The images were taken as part of the Planet Lab project, which is snapping high-resolution images of the earth every day to track ecosystem changes and development.

(Courtesy of Planet Lab)

Instead of the oceans being a black hole of data, our new challenge is figuring out ways to intelligently and efficiently sift through the billions of data points now pouring in.
Fortunately, smart new algorithms can help pick out specific kinds of vessel behavior from this sea of big data.
Ships leave unique behavioral fingerprints.
For example, purse seine fishing boats make circles around fish schools when setting their nets, while long-line fishing boats travel linearly up and back along the gear they set.

In a recent report in the journal Science, colleagues at the non-profit Global Fishing Watch and I monitored progress as the nation of Kiribati closed a section of its ocean the size of California to fishing.
After six months of observation, we happily saw that all vessels, save one, left to fish elsewhere.
Our group also mapped out the activity of purse seine fishing boats on the high seas of the Pacific — generating the first publicly accessible view of where fishing activity occurs in the very region that the UN high seas convention may consider setting up international protected areas.

A key question ahead is whether governments will realize the value of this new data and act on calls from the scientific community to require that more vessels carry these observation sensors and use them properly.
We estimate that approximately 70 percent of all large fishing vessels worldwide are already equipped with these publicly accessible tracking systems.
Some captains, unfortunately, misuse the tool by turning it off after leaving port or failing to enter proper vessel identification information into the system.
All such noncompliance issues are readily detectable by big data processing.
Imaging satellites can function like space-based red light cameras that snap pictures of law-breakers at sea.
If political will can be mustered to close these loopholes, these observation technologies could shed an immense amount of light on our now-dark oceans.

 Satellite technology is allowing scientists to track an individual ship's movements from above to ensure vessels are staying out of protected waters.

(Courtesy of Planet Lab)

Orbiting in space alongside these ship-tracking satellites is another rapidly growing fleet of nanosatellites that constantly take high-resolution pictures of the earth.
This technology promises to be an important additional piece in the ocean-observation puzzle.
The goal of the groups tending to these flocks of tiny electronic eyes is to be able to take a high-resolution snapshot of the entire earth, every day.
These new imaging satellites may soon allow marine ecologists, ocean conservation groups, and marine park managers to begin to search in near real-time for ships in protected areas, to monitor weekly (even daily) losses of coastal mangrove forests, and to document abuses to coral reefs, such as dredging.
With foresight, the intelligence derived from the vessel tracking systems may eventually be interlinked with these imaging satellites to enable them to function like space-based red light cameras that snap pictures of law breaking at sea as it happens.

Not all next-generation ocean observation has to be based in outer space.
An exciting array of new marine-monitoring technologies is increasingly available that also could be useful.
Aerial drones are beginning to be used to patrol coastal waters.
Fleets of drone ships may follow suit and could help monitor both the health of ocean resources, as well as the behavior of those that harvest them.
Shore- and aircraft-based radar and acoustic recorders that listen for boat noise could also be deployed.

Essential to effectively monitoring and controlling the industrialization of the oceans is democratization of this new ocean-observation data.
Good intelligence on what was happening at sea used to only be the purview of vessel captains.

Now, anyone can keep tabs on the most remote parts of the ocean on their phones.
Global Fishing Watch, for example, is releasing a product this year that will let anyone view and interact with data on fishing from across the global oceans for free.
Planet Labs, a startup that manages the largest constellation of earth-observing nanosatellites, recently released a constantly updated, free library of imagery for all of California – including its estuaries, bays, kelp forests, and nearshore waters.

The challenge ahead, as we enter this new era of improved ocean stewardship and attempt to govern increasingly bigger regions of the ocean, is to ensure that our new policies are actually enforced.
The stakes here are high.
We have to make these emerging protected areas and treaties work, and we must do it soon, if we intend to help the oceans continue to dish out large helpings of food, energy, and wonder.

Links :

• Yale : Why ocean health is better and worse than you think 
• Catapult : Case study : Ending illegal fishing
• GeoGarage blog : How satellite technology is helping to fight illegal fishing / Catapult and Pew Charitable Trusts launch pioneering technology to help end illegal fishing / Google's global fishing watch is using 'manipulated data' / The plan to map illegal fishing from Space / Monitor illegal fishing weirs in the Persian Gulf / Smile! Satellites can see your illegal fishing from space / Can technology end pirate fishing? / How Google Earth is busting Persian Gulf nations for overfishing / West African fishing communities drive off 'pirate' fishing trawlers / Google can track ships at sea ; detailed maps planned of sea bottom / Concern over 'high seas security loophole' 

Canada CHS update in the GeoGarage platform

36 nautical raster charts updated + 2 new charts added

see GeoGarage news

What makes an island ? Land reclamation and the South China Sea arbitration

AMTI island tracker

From AMTI CSIS by Christopher Mirasola 

We have all heard about land reclamation by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in the South China Sea, particularly the southeastern region known as the Spratly Group.
But much less is being said about what the Permanent Court of Arbitration just finished considering for the past week: are artificial islands really islands?
According to the Philippines, the answer is straightforward: No.
In its initial statement of claim, the Philippines asked the Court to invalidate China’s Nine-Dash Line (click here for a good overview of that issue) and determine that eight PRC-controlled maritime features are not islands.
Of these eight features, seven are home to ongoing PRC land reclamation.
The Philippines has a strong case for why the PRC’s artificial islands should not be considered real islands.
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and past decisions by international tribunals suggest that land reclamation will not affect the Permanent Court of Arbitration’s decision because: (1) artificial islands don’t have the legal significance afforded natural islands, and;
(2) land reclamation occurred after the so-called “critical date” when the China-Philippines dispute “crystallized” in international legal terms.

Why This Matters

 Recent land reclamation has dramatically transformed seven disputed maritime features in the Spratly Islands.
These include Mischief, Gaven, Subi, Johnson, Cuarteron, Fiery Cross, and Hughes (McKennan) Reefs.
For example, in 1995, Subi Reef was completely submerged at high tide.
Today, there are 3.9 million square meters of reclaimed land above water at high tide on Subi Reef, and it is home to a pair of wooden barracks, communications array, and helipad.
There are similarly stark changes at each of the other reefs.
Since UNCLOS affords differing maritime based on the geographic characteristics of a given landmass, at first blush these changes could have big implications for both China and the Philippines.
In particular, the Spratlys dispute involves three types of territorial objects at sea:

1. Low-tide elevation: A landmass above water only at low tide. Outside an existing territorial sea it is not entitled to a separate maritime zone.
2. Rock: A landmass permanently above water but unable to sustain human habitation or economic life on its own. It is entitled to a territorial sea and contiguous zone, but not an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or continental shelf rights.
3. Island: A landmass permanently above water that can sustain human habitation or economic life on its own. It is entitled to a territorial sea, contiguous zone, EEZ, and continental shelf rights.

Before land reclamation, Johnson, Cuarteron, and Fiery Cross Reefs were rocks and the other reefs were, at most, low-tide elevations.
After land reclamation, all six features would be considered rocks, if not islands.
So the key question becomes: do we define the reefs’ legal character by looking at the facts from before or after land reclamation?

Artificial Islands Do Not Generate Maritime Entitlements

According to UNCLOS, an island is: “a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide.”
For the Philippines to make its case, it must show that reclaimed land should not be considered “a naturally formed area of land.”
You wouldn’t have to break the English language to find some ambiguity in the UNCLOS definition of an island. It could mean islands formed by natural processes or islands composed of naturally occurring objects.[1] If the second definition is correct, reclaimed land would be entitled to all the maritime zones of an island.
But this expansive interpretation just does not hold water.
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties says that we must give treaty provisions their “ordinary meaning” while remaining mindful of their context, purpose and, if necessary, negotiating history.
Let’s start with ordinary meaning.
The New Oxford American Dictionary’s first entry for the verb ‘form’ defines it as to “bring together parts or combine to create (something).” So UNCLOS’ requirement that an island be naturally formed should mean that an island be created naturally.
It would not make sense to interpret “naturally formed” as a noun.
We can see this is true by looking at other UNCLOS provisions.
For example, Article 60 says that countries may “establish reasonable safety zones around … artificial islands” and that “[a]rtificial islands, installations and structures do not possess the status of islands.”
UNCLOS does not define “artificial island” explicitly, but a definition is suggested by the fact that Article 60 differentiates artificial islands, installations, and structures.
Installations and structures ordinarily include objects built of non-natural materials (like concrete and steel in an oil rig).
By using “artificial islands” as a separate term, UNCLOS states that this is a different type of landmass, one that is made of natural objects (i.e. sand) and not man-made objects (i.e. steel).
If artificial islands are made of natural objects, it would not make sense for UNCLOS to define islands as a landmass also made of natural objects.
The only solution, therefore, is for “naturally formed” to indicate the process by which an island is created.
This interpretation is confirmed by the Convention’s negotiating history.
Although there were initially some scholars who thought artificially formed islands should be treated like natural islands, by 1958 they had largely lost the debate.[2]
In fact, the United States specifically added “naturally formed” before “area of land” during negotiations culminating in the UNCLOS text to eliminate most maritime entitlements for artificial islands.[3]
Since then, scholars have agreed that artificially formed islands should not be granted maritime entitlements.[4]

China claims Hawaii-Micronesia : new 251 dash map

International Tribunals Do Not Consider Construction After the Critical Date 

It is possible, however, that the tribunal will not even have to consider this interpretive question because PRC land reclamation occurred after what is called the “critical date.”
The critical date is the time when “the dispute crystallized”[5] between two parties (here, the PRC and Philippines).
In a dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia regarding Caribbean islands, for example, the critical date was when the two countries exchanged diplomatic notes explicitly claiming sovereignty over the islands after Nicaragua issued oil contracts in the surrounding waters.
A tribunal will generally only consider the facts of a dispute as they existed prior to this date.[6]
It is not clear if the Tribunal will fix a critical date in the Spratlys dispute, or what it will be if it does so.
It may decline to indicate a date because the Philippines is not arguing for territorial sovereignty over these reefs.
But assuming that arbitrators do use the critical date, there are three options: 1947 (when the Nationalist government of China first endorsed the Nine-Dashed Line) sometime in the 1970s (when the PRC alleges that the Philippines first occupied maritime features in the region) or April 14, 2011 (when the PRC responded to a diplomatic note from the Philippines protesting the Nine-Dash Line).
Given the Nicaragua/Colombia dispute this third option seems most likely, but much could be disputed about the merits of each date.
Regardless, it is clear that all three options occurred well before PRC land reclamation began approximately 18 months ago.
The current geographic characteristics of these reefs, therefore, simply would not matter.
It is important to note that the Tribunal has not released the Philippines’ legal briefs, so we cannot be certain what topics have been addressed.
But since more than 3000 pages of briefing materials have been submitted, it is safe to assume that the Philippines has addressed all plausible arguments (both UNCLOS interpretation the critical date).

 Final Thoughts

The China-Philippines arbitration implicates a region in which nearly all neighboring states have sovereign claims.
But while there are a number of difficult legal and strategic issues for the Permanent Court of Arbitration to consider, the legal character of PRC-controlled reefs is not one of them.
Here, if anywhere, a straightforward application of UNCLOS should prevail.
No amount of land reclamation can change a reef into an island, nor entitle them to an island’s maritime zones.

[1] Alfred Soons, Artificial Islands and Installations in International Law, 22 Occasional Paper Series Law of the Sea Institute 17—18 (1974) (Showing scholars have argued in favor of this second position).
[2] Hiran W. Jayewardene, The Regime of Islands in International Law 9 (1990)
[3] Id.
[4] N. Papdakis, The International Legal Regime of Artificial Islands 96–97 (1977); Hiran W. Jayewardene, The Regime of Islands in International Law 9 (1990).
[5] Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012 p. 624, 652.
[6] Yehuda Blum, Historic Titles in International Law 219 (1965).

Links :

• CSIS : Vietnam's island building
• CIMSEC : Paracel islands US interests approaches South China Sea

The Gunhilde Maersk : watch a stunning time lapse of a container ship gliding around the world

The video is a glimpse of the ethereal world inhabited by these ocean behemoths.

From Atlas Obscura by Urvija Banerji

The seemingly mundane life of the behemoth container ship is far more beautiful than one might think.
The above time lapse video follows one such ship on a day's journey as it navigates through sea and port.
In this otherworldly life on the sea, the skies are deceptive: what looks like a sunrise sparkling in the distance turns out to be the bright lights of a port that the ship pulls into.
Even the skies and sea do not look of this earth, and seem to belong to some other planet in a strange galaxy.
Some particularly wondrous moments that the container ship bears witness to on this journey are lightning strikes, a sea "highway" made of red and green buoys, and a game of container Tetris.

Boat tracking simulation around globe

Vendée Globe 2012 online esimulation