Talk:Canadian Internal Waters

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Geography Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.

Untitled

There is a serious problem this page. Canadian Internal Waters refers to all the Internal Maritime Waters inside Canada. Somehow it only talks about the Arctic Ocean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.181.210.62 (talk) 09:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated Text

Nearly the entire written text of the "Disputed" section of this article, is an exact duplicate of the text found at /wiki/Territorial_claims_in_the_Arctic. I believe this needs to be rewritten. 142.177.26.157 02:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's the other way round, Territorial claims in the Arctic is a copy of this. That page is supposed to be an overview and this page is supposed to be the detailed version. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 03:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, are you suggesting the other article should be rewritten? Or is it fine the way it is? 142.177.26.157 22:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well after a second look at the pair of pages I'm not sure which should be the summary and which should be the main article. However, having them both the same doesn't really hurt. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 03:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

reliable sources?

I am concerned that some of the sources used by this article may not fully comply with wikipedia policy.

It is counter to wikipedia policy to link to pages that contain non-authorized copies of copyright material. In particular, while this Globe and Mail article looks like a reference to a valid article, the URL is to a page that does not show the copyright notice.

Alanna Mitchell (Saturday, February 5, 2000). "The Northwest Passage Thawed". Globe and Mail. pp. A9. Retrieved 2008-01-18. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

internal waters are not the same as archipelagic waters

Stop editing my corrections!

Canada claims that all of the water/ice to its north around its islands is "internal waters" where they have the right to deny passage of any foreign vessel, similar to jurisdiction over rivers. (This is not to say they would bar all passage, but it would be their right.)

Archipelagic waters are treated like internal waters except the owning state cannot bar "innocent passage" under normal circumstances. Example, Indonessia and other Southeast Asian nations.

If you doubt this look it up in Wiki's UNLOS article (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea) or on the UNLOS Treaty home page (http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm).

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.90.183.3 (talk) 13:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The main controversy with this idea within Canada stems from the nature of the "waters" between the islands. Canada derives much of its claims from the Inuit who used the ice much as if it were land and so the issue is about whether the ice once melted ought to be continued to be treated as land and for how long. Added to this is the fact that a shipping accident such as an oil spill involving oil getting under the sea ice would be much harder to clean up than an oil spill in consistently open ocean. The cost this adds to the maintenance has led to discussion of a taxation scheme on shipping to pay for any damages caused by the passage's use. As such economically, politically, environmentally, culturally and geographically there isn't a real precedent in international law for the situation in Canada's Arctic Archipelago.

Inside Passage re the Salmon War of 1996

The Salmon War still needs an article, but during it Washington state senator Slade Gorton called on the US government to force the passage, which is often less than two miles wide, to assert that it's international waters and not internal Canadian waters. That's easily citable, I'll try to find it later and write a passage; I've meant to do the Salmon War article for some time now.Skookum1 (talk) 00:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Canadian Internal Waters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160121021541/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=6d4815ac-4fdb-4cf3-a8a6-4225a8bd08df&k=73925 to http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=6d4815ac-4fdb-4cf3-a8a6-4225a8bd08df&k=73925

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:06, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hudson Bay

Does Canada claim Hudson Bay as its internal waters? 2001:8003:9007:8201:B84B:A8B8:5180:FCF2 (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

According to Historic Waters in International Law with Special Reference to the Arctic at JSTOR (free account) yes it does, since at least 1967. If it should be added to the article then the cite would be "Pharand, Donat. “Historic Waters in International Law with Special Reference to the Arctic.” The University of Toronto Law Journal 21, no. 1 (1971): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.2307/825417." The pages 1-14 should be page 2. This seems to agree. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 06:13, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]