From "INTERNAL LINKS FOR PART B (1945-2000)" at http://www.homestead.com/argumentsandfacts/files/Part_B.htm :
«... This may be another case of how people on the ground get along fine, but governments act like spraying tomcats; the least whiff of a turf challenge can make the fur fly. The border in Smith Sound remained in dispute into the 1970s, with first a Canadian claim on the Carey Islands, and then a quarrel over the nearly invisible Hans Island exactly midways in the channel. The first of these disputes has been settled amicably in Denmarks favor due to physical proximity.
Hans Island, a flat round speck maybe a mile across, is closer to Alert than Thule, and may still be cause for concern. Canadian scientific and exploration activity has been conducted there in the past, but Denmark's Minister for Greenland personally traveled to the island and planted the flag in 1984. Perhaps the island should be made a neutral zone, free of all taxes and customs? ....»
An another
interesting recording is only very briefly mentioning Hans I., from STANDING COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES AND OCEANS of Canada's
debate on Wednesday, October 18, 1995. The chairman (in the fifth line from
below) suggest to stricken the quotes of "boundary disputes" from the record's
transcript, but most probably they simply forgot to do
so...!
www.parl.gc.ca/committees/ocea/evidence/
44_95-10-18/ocea44_blk101.html
«1700
In part
I, Canada's maritime zones, you define the four zones and the continental shelf.
I believe the only thing that's missing is, when you say whichever is
greater...but there's a maximum there.
Dr. Parsons:
Yes.
Mr. Wells: So it's not whichever is the greater
of the two.
Dr. Parsons: My understanding is that
it's a maximum distance of 350 miles. For example, off Newfoundland, the
continental shelf -
Mr. Wells: I was just trying to
make sure so that when we go back and read the material -
Dr. Parsons: This is highly summarized. I think it's
covered in the deck I passed around today, but you're right that it's a highly
summarized version.
Mr. Wells: I was confused by
something on page 2 of the questions and answers. At the end it says that
progress has been made on the development of an international agreement to
protect these stocks. Which agreement are you referring to?
Dr. Parsons: Are you dealing with the question of
beyond 200 miles?
Mr. Wells: Yes.
Dr. Parsons: This is in fact what Mr. Wiseman was
just talking about, which is the highly migratory species and straddling stocks
convention.
Mr. Wells: Has that agreement not been
reached? I thought it was concluded.
Dr. Parsons:
Yes.
Mr. Wells: It says progress has been made. Not
only has progress been made, it's been concluded.
Dr.
Parsons: In August there was agreement at the UN on this convention. There
is a signature process and a ratification process beyond that, which could take
some considerable time.
Mr. Wells: You confused me
by the wording that says progress has been made.
Dr.
Parsons: I apologize.
Mr. Wells: It sounds as
though it's ongoing. So that is the same agreement we're referring to.
Dr. Parsons: Yes, it could have been more specific.
It could have said that -
Mr. Wells: I thought I
might be missing something, that's all.
Mr. Scott:
When Mr. Rochon was speaking, he touched on a subject that was near and dear to
my heart, so I thought I would jump in with one more question.
You talked
about international boundary disputes or border disputes. Do you know basically
how many international marine boundary disputes Canada has at the present time,
which stage of resolve they're at, and how this bill may affect that?
Mr. Rochon: Certainly I can try to answer that.
On the west coast we have a boundary dispute in Dixon Entrance and we have a
boundary dispute in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Both disputes are with the
United States of America. In the Beaufort we have a dispute with the United
States, and we have another dispute with the United States in the Gulf of Maine.
These are long-standing disputes; there are no negotiations currently on any of
these disputes.
There is a dispute in the Lincoln Sea with Denmark, a
dispute between Ellesmere Island and Greenland over Hans Island.
I believe
that's all we've got. There are no negotiations with Denmark on those issues.
Mr. Scott: I'm a little disappointed to hear you
talk about the A-B line as being a boundary dispute, because it was my
understanding that was resolved in 1903.
Mr. Rochon:
That's also the Government of Canada's understanding, but it is not the
Government of the United States' understanding.
Mr.
Scott: I would suggest, with all respect, that we don't call it a dispute.
The Americans can call it whatever they like, but it's established in the
country.
If we start calling it a dispute, it makes our case weaker.
The Chairman: We'll get this stricken from the
record. The word ``dispute'' won't be allowed in the last five minutes, in case
anybody reads the transcript.
Mr. Scott, is there anything else?
Mr. Scott: That's all.
The
Chairman: I think this is a good bill. I think the framework is great, and I
think it's going in the right direction. We have all kinds of support from a lot
of organizations, from NGOs, some provincial governments, etc. Everybody seems
to be happy, but I'm not happy because I'm not quite sure that this bill goes
far enough.»
Jan Hans