Regulatory aspects
jurisdictional gaps in the existing governance framework that potentially can hinder effective ocean management. These factors emphazise
the need for the development of regional spatial frameworks such as the
OPIS, which will help make sense of offshore jurisdictional complexities.
Issues Associated with Creating Georegulations
Clearly, there is a need to sort out the policy quagmire, and geography
provides an excellent organizing framework for doing just that. The reality of the situation is that very few of the US regulations were written
with modern mapping technology in mind. It is not uncommon to
find incorrect, imprecise, or inaccurate boundary co-ordmates published
m the US Federal Register and US Code of Federal Regulations. Such
instances may be the result of simple human error or misinterpretation
of ambiguous legal language, or they may be the result of a lack of
understanding of mapping principles and technologies. Many times,
fundamental cartographic concepts such as scale, resolution, datum, and
projection are not considered. In a paper cartographic world, many of
the inaccuracies associated with mapping a feature are masked by the
scale and width of that feature. Within a GIS these errors can be revealed.
And because digital mapping technologies enable the development
and visualisation of extremely precise maps, it is essential that those
who develop policy understand these important concepts so that the
geographic representation of the legal information is accurate.
Examples of mapping ambiguities include listing co-ordinates without
reference to a vertical or horizontal datum, referencing ambulatory features such as the “wash of the waves at high tide,” “following the 100
lathom isobath,” or using language such as 200 nautical miles from
the baseline.” In the case of this last example, is the correct boundary
200 miles over the surface of the earth, a chord projected through the
earth, or some other mterpretation of the appropriate algorithm? Many
legal descriptions do not give complete mformation to accurately map
the boundary and require the user to be both cartographer and detective.
Offshore maritime boundaries are often referenced by their distance
seaward from a baseline. A normal baseline is comprised of a series of
points along the line of ordinary low water along that portion of the
coast that is in direct contact with the open sea and is mterpreted by the
US to be the same as the mean lower low water (MLLW) line ( Thormahlen,
1999). However, because coastlines vary from smooth to deeply indented
and are interrupted by bays and river mouths, and because the designation
of offshore boundaries may confer significant economic rights, establishment of baselines is often complicated and contentious. A number
of rule-based spatial determinations are used in such cases. These aid
in establishing closing lines across the mouths of bays and rivers, and
help determine the baseline status of islands or intermittently exposed
features fringing the shore. The revenues tied to the resulting lines
make each baseline point of extreme importance. The financial consequence of baseline decisions is evident in the US Supreme Court case
289
jurisdictional gaps in the existing governance framework that potentially can hinder effective ocean management. These factors emphazise
the need for the development of regional spatial frameworks such as the
OPIS, which will help make sense of offshore jurisdictional complexities.
Issues Associated with Creating Georegulations
Clearly, there is a need to sort out the policy quagmire, and geography
provides an excellent organizing framework for doing just that. The reality of the situation is that very few of the US regulations were written
with modern mapping technology in mind. It is not uncommon to
find incorrect, imprecise, or inaccurate boundary co-ordmates published
m the US Federal Register and US Code of Federal Regulations. Such
instances may be the result of simple human error or misinterpretation
of ambiguous legal language, or they may be the result of a lack of
understanding of mapping principles and technologies. Many times,
fundamental cartographic concepts such as scale, resolution, datum, and
projection are not considered. In a paper cartographic world, many of
the inaccuracies associated with mapping a feature are masked by the
scale and width of that feature. Within a GIS these errors can be revealed.
And because digital mapping technologies enable the development
and visualisation of extremely precise maps, it is essential that those
who develop policy understand these important concepts so that the
geographic representation of the legal information is accurate.
Examples of mapping ambiguities include listing co-ordinates without
reference to a vertical or horizontal datum, referencing ambulatory features such as the “wash of the waves at high tide,” “following the 100
lathom isobath,” or using language such as 200 nautical miles from
the baseline.” In the case of this last example, is the correct boundary
200 miles over the surface of the earth, a chord projected through the
earth, or some other mterpretation of the appropriate algorithm? Many
legal descriptions do not give complete mformation to accurately map
the boundary and require the user to be both cartographer and detective.
Offshore maritime boundaries are often referenced by their distance
seaward from a baseline. A normal baseline is comprised of a series of
points along the line of ordinary low water along that portion of the
coast that is in direct contact with the open sea and is mterpreted by the
US to be the same as the mean lower low water (MLLW) line ( Thormahlen,
1999). However, because coastlines vary from smooth to deeply indented
and are interrupted by bays and river mouths, and because the designation
of offshore boundaries may confer significant economic rights, establishment of baselines is often complicated and contentious. A number
of rule-based spatial determinations are used in such cases. These aid
in establishing closing lines across the mouths of bays and rivers, and
help determine the baseline status of islands or intermittently exposed
features fringing the shore. The revenues tied to the resulting lines
make each baseline point of extreme importance. The financial consequence of baseline decisions is evident in the US Supreme Court case
289