Jeffrey W. Henquinet
home |    
research |    
curriculum vitae |    
publications |    
links |    


Jeff's Research


Analyzing Legal/Policy Rules and Frameworks for Fisheries Management in the Great Lakes Basin: Identifying and Assessing Overlaps, Conflicts, and Gaps

Many people and most fishery managers in the Great Lakes region, believe the goal for Great Lakes fisheries is sustainability. Attaining this goal is made more difficult due to the multiple jurisdictions that share management authority over the Great Lakes fishery and the multitude of activities that affect it. Each authority creates its own bodies of laws, rules and regulations, or legal framework, for the fisheries or activities that impact the fishery. Although, there has been some coordination in the creation of these legal frameworks, the laws are by no means uniform or consistent.

The goal of my research is to assemble the basic legal framework for fishery management in the Great Lakes Basin, specifically, to outline the structure of management authority in the Basin and some of the basic legal mandates and powers of the fishery management authorities. I will outline gaps, overlaps, and conflicts in management authority and legal requirements with respect to the main threats to Great Lakes fisheries. I will survey the literature applicable to Great Lakes fishery management in order to locate and define potential strengths and weaknesses. Data collection will consist primarily of review of legal materials (namely statutes, regulations and policies) and semi-structured interviews with fishery managers to obtain their perspectives on the strengths and weaknesses of the current legal framework.


Public Trust Doctrine

The Public Trust doctrine is many things to many people in the realm of natural resource management and protection. Relic, sleeping giant, environmental savior, and grantor of management authority to name a few. Most would agree that it is a legal doctrine created in Rome and passed through England to Canada and the U.S. It basically states that certain resources are owned in common by the people of a state, and that the state has a responsibility to protect that resource for the benefit of the public. Adopted by U.S. common law courts, the doctrine played a vital role in determining the rights of states and people with respect to navigable waterways. Current use has been nearly non-existent, which is odd given the power that many believe the doctrine possesses. Perhaps it?s under utilization is due to ambiguity in the scope of the doctrine, or to the conflict of political ideologies concerning privatization and resource protection, or something else. Any potential explanations for this nonuse should be explored in order to overcome barriers to its increased use to protect water and fisheries. This research looks at how courts in the Great Lakes provinces and states have interpreted this doctrine, and to what extent it may apply to Great Lakes fisheries.