Latest Fishery Scores: BC 1 - NL 0

Today, June 15, 2010 is the day an official investigation into the collapse of sockeye salmon stocks on B.C.'s Fraser River is scheduled to begin.

The Cohen Commission of Inquiry is touted as being, “…a lengthy and technical probe into the disappearance of almost 10 million fish from the Fraser River sockeye run. The collapse of the stock prompted the federal government to order an investigation to be led by B.C. Supreme Court Judge Bruce Cohen.

According to reports, a discussion paper released in advance of this week's hearings indicates the inquiry will examine everything from fish biology to the organization of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and will attempt to gain a full understanding of the collapse.

One question Ottawa: In 1992 a moratorium was introduced after the collapse of the Atlantic Cod stocks, after 500 years serving as the economic engine of Newfoundland and Labrador. That collapse led, either directly or indirectly, to job losses for about 20% of the province’s workers. Why has there never been an official inquiry held to understand the reasons behind that collapse?

Could it be because the findings are already suspected in the circles of power and that those findings would finally expose to the light of day the way the stocks were mismanaged, sold off, bartered away for votes and foreign “favors” ending once and for all the fantasy Ottawa and DFO have foisted on the public?

In the absence of valid answers I simply ask.

PR by Minister Not a Solution to Overfishing

The Government of Canada has proven, once again, just how ineffectual and useless the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO)truly is.

On Sunday Federal Fisheries Minister, Gail Shea, announced the closing of all Canadian ports to fishing vessels from Greenland and the Faroe Islands because of continued refusal on the part of both nations to respect fishing quotas in the North Atlantic, off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Ports were previously closed for both those nations in 2004 however the ban was lifted by the Harper government in 2008.

The shrimp quota set by NAFO in the area is 334 tonnes however both nations have decided to allow their fishing fleets to catch up to 10 times that amount and with limited monitoring, there is no way of truly knowing how much they might be catching even beyond that amount.

This step by Ottawa is seen in Newfoundland and Labrador as futile gesture since many of the vessels affected are likely to continue fishing the area and visiting the nearby French islands of St. Pierre & Miquelon to access supplies and fuel.

Those islands sit just off the Newfoundland coast but fall under the jurisdiction of France.

For many years fishermen in Atlantic Canada have demanded that the Canadian government and NAFO put a stop to overfishing and illegal practices on the offshore. Those demands continue to fallon deaf ears as Ottawa increasingly hands over more control of the offshore to NAFO member nations (many of which are a part of the EU).

Rather than protecting the marine environment which is so critical to the survival of coastal communities in Atlantic Canada, Ottawa continues to oversee the destruction of fish stocks in favour of improving trade relationships with the Countries involved.

NAFO has traditionally been the toothless tiger of fisheries management outside Canada’s 200 mile economic limit. While NAFO regulators often turn a blind eye to illegal and harmful fishing practices by its members or simply impose token penalties for infractions, the government of Canada, in the face of strong opposition, pushed through changes to NAFO regulations late last year that open the door for NAFO to be granted additional authority inside Canadian waters as well as outside them.

Recent reports by Fisheries officials claim the number of fisheries infractions by foreign vessels have diminished in recent years however locals insist that the lights of fishing boats can be seen offshore at night and appear, as one individual put it, as a “city of lights on the water”.

Many people dispute the position taken by federal officials believing instead that high levels of illegal fishing continue and that the low number of infractions reported are the result of Canada’s handing over many of its patrol duties to vessels from NAFO member countries, the same countries participating in the damaging fishing practices.

As fish stocks continue to be decimated, the closing of Canadian ports to these two small nations comes across to locals as little more than a public relations exercise.

Ottawa may be pretending to be tough for the home audience but in reality little is being done. Instead of sending a strong message to the EU, and other nations involved, through trade sanctions and vessel seizures, Ottawa continues to push hard on its plans for a free trade agreement with the EU in spite of their fishing practices and a recently adopted EU ban on Canadian seal products.

With full scale free trade talks underway on an agreement that is believed to be of benefit of Central and Eastern Canadian exporters, it’s highly unlikely that any real action will be taken to protect the imperilled fish stocks upon which many of the smaller Atlantic Provinces depend.

Winning an Un-Winnable Battle

How do you win an un-winnable battle?

It’s a question that's been on my mind since learning that the Harper government, in spite of Parliament's rejection of new NAFO amendments that could see foreign vessels patrolling Canadian waters, has decided to go ahead and adopt those amendments anyway.

After such an incident there are those who question whether democracy is utterly and truly dead in Canada and whether our sovereignty itself has been bartered away. There are those as well who will see this as the final nail in the Atlantic fishery with NAFO nations freely able to rape the ocean clean once and for all. Already, in some circles, talk has turned to the need for independence and separation from this “undemocratic” Canadian federation.

All I can say to those good folks is that they might want to consider choosing their battles wisely and perhaps, in this instance anyway, the right way to counter Ottawa’s actions is to simply accept them as our new reality while seeking ways to address the underlying concerns on a more local level.

Let’s think outside the box on this one.

Beating our collective heads against an immovable object (the PMO, DFO, take your choice) isn’t going to solve the problem at hand and make no mistake this is indeed a problem.

The Harper government has shown in the past that it has no love for Newfoundland and Labrador and certainly isn’t going to backtrack on a very public decision simply to make Atlantic Canadians happy.

On the other hand, if we could find a way to mitigate the damage, and perhaps even enhance our power position in the fishery, over time, wouldn’t that be a victory in itself?

With that premise in mind, perhaps we should consider working within this new system rather than futilely fighting it without any real hope of victory.

A great example of just such a "novel" approach already exists in the province so there isn't even a need to re-invent the wheel.

A few years ago the provincial government and some local groups felt that the Feds weren’t doing enough to protect our rivers and salmon populations. They argued and fought with DFO for a while until finally deciding the best approach was to simply do something about the problem.

As a result a number of provincially funded wardens were hired and sent forth into the Newfoundland and Labrador wildneress. A public awareness campaign about poaching was started and this campaign led to citizens groups forming their own civilian river watches.

Thanks to these efforts and others salmon poaching in Newfoundland and Labrador is way down from where it was in the past, stocks are generally improving and Newfoundland and Labrador now has far more say in the protection of its rivers than it has had for decades.

Could a similar approach work with ocean stocks? Could this be the answer to so many of the concerns people have expressed about foreign influences on the offshore?

Let’s explore the possibilities for moment.

Instead of battling Ottawa over a decision they aren’t likely to undo we might be better off lobbying the provincial government and our own people to take the bull by the horns (or the fish by the tail) when it comes to fisheries conservation.

If we can find the collective will to act we might see a far different fishery a few years from now.

Every day Cougar Helicopter flights pass back and forth between St. John’s and our oil platforms at the edges of our 200 mile limit. Provincial Airlines planes travel over our Grand Banks on a regular basis every day. The Province’s newly purchased water bombers, when not fighting major fires, will be sitting idle. No doubt these bombers require test flights from time to time to help ensure they’re in good working order. Couldn’t those “test flights” skim over the Flemish Cap just to see what’s going on out there.

With enough eyes in the air reporting back on every fishing boat, row boat or rubber duck near our waters, in a very public manner, nobody at DFO will be able to claim they don’t know what’s happening or deny that anything illegal is going on at all.

The cost of these measures is essentially zero. All it takes is the will to co-operate.

But let’s take it a step further.

What about the countess cargo vessels and oil tankers that ply our waters every day? Couldn’t they be asked, as a courtesy, to help spot questionable fishing boats and report whatever they see? It’s just a quick radio call after all.

What about fishermen themselves?

Since the fishery has always been a major contributor to the province’s economy isn’t it time for Newfoundland and Labrador to invest a few dollars into helping the ground fish stocks recover? It doesn’t have to cost a lot and the return on investment might be surprising.

Most fishermen already know the tricks of the trade. They know where the most important fishing and breeding grounds are. They know where illegal fishing is happening and they know who is involved (both foreign and Canadian). Perhaps it’s time to get them directly involved in the conservation effort on a more formal level.

If Ottawa won’t adequately protect the fish stocks then the province should set aside 2 or 3 million dollars a year (a pittance in the grand scheme of things) to pay for provincial fisheries patrols.

Why not?

Once most fishing captains have caught their quota for the season many of them simply take their boats out of the water and sign up for EI. Why not put yearly contracts out to tender seeking local captains to help patrol our waters once they’re finished fishing?

Of course these “civilian” patrols wouldn’t have any legal authority to stop rogue fishing boats or arrest anyone involved but they could certainly take a page from the same environmental activists who so often branded them as “barbarians” over the seal hunt. They could video tape the offending vessels, request official intervention from on site, provide very public evidence against violators and generally make offender's lives a living hell on the high seas.

Who knows, Ottawa might one day even help defray a small part of the cost should such a plan prove itself effective. After all, if off season fishers are gainfully employed in conservation efforts rather than collecting EI it would not only help remove the “stamp fishery” stigma attached to the industry but the effort could actually lead to savings in the EI system itself.

With enough Newfoundland and Labrador eyes on the water and in the air it might finally become a losing gamble for anyone bent on illegal fishing and I’m willing to bet it won't take long before the risks begin to outweigh the benefits for these culprits and we begin to get things under control.

As for addressing Ottawa’s new found fondness for allowing foreign patrol boats into Canadian waters, well, with countless eyes already on the water what possible excuse could they come up with for asking foreign nations to “invade” our 200 mile limit?

I began my little rant by asking how you win an un-winnable battle. I’ll close by saying that sometimes winning can take on different forms depending on your perspective.

The question we need to ask ourselves is this: Are we trying to win a battle with Ottawa for the sake of winning or are we truly trying to protect fisheries habitat regardless of Federal meddling and mishandling?

A few years ago when inland salmon stocks were in trouble DFO wasn’t stepping up to the plate. Today, thanks to local efforts those stocks are improving and Ottawa has practically abandoned its inland efforts, preferring instead to leave much of it up to the province and the public (not officially of course but the result is the same). In this case the dynamic has shifted and Newfoundland and Labrador has grown in strength.

Perhaps there’s a lesson in this for the future of the offshore as well.

Good-Bye to the Historic Atlantic Fishery

It may sound like a doomsday mentality but the truth is what it is.

The End is Near for the fishing industry in Atlantic Canada. She's gone bye's she's gone!

This week the Parliament of Canada was set to debate the proposed adoption of radical changes to the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) regulations that would see Canada sign onto a plan allowing member nations of NAFO far more control of fisheries management in the Atlantic off our shores than ever before.

The changes have been attacked by fisheries experts throughout Atlantic Canada, including several former high ranking personnel at Canada’s own Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) who have said the proposed changes will erode Canada’s ability to manage stocks inside its own waters and impinge on Canada’s sovereignty in North Atlantic waters.

Instead of listening to the pleading of experts in the area, or even proceeding with the planned 3 hour debate in the House that would have allowed some of those concerns to be expressed and captured on the public record the Harper government introduced a motion to halt the debate just 40 minutes in and now have plans to dispense with the Parliamentary vote altogether and simply adopt the changes.

It seems the deal is done, or soon will be, and with that decision the final nail in the coffin if the Atlantic fishing industry will be hammered home.

While DFO has itself been a master mis-manager of fish stocks over the years at least it’s answerable, to some degree, to Canadian citizens. NAFO on the other hand is not answerable to anyone in Canada and is known for intentionally allowing over fishing and turning a blind eye to illegal fishing activities off our coast.

One doesn’t have to look far to see where NAFO stands on fish stock protection. They have proven time and time again that they are either incapable of or unwilling to protect fish stocks wherever they wield their power. This was proven once again a couple of weeks ago when NAFO made the decision to allow a continuation of a shrimp fishery on the Flemish Cap just outside Canada’s 200 mile economic zone, contrary to the best scientific advice.

In a special meeting in London the organization decided against closing the Flemish Cap shrimp fishery in NAFO area 3M in spite of the fact that the NAFO Scientific Council had advised them that the stock has collapsed and that the fishery should be closed.

During a NAFO vote on the closure six member states supported a European Union proposal to simply reduce the allocated fishing days, a move that will accomplish nothing since the number of fishing days allocated in recent years have not been anywhere close fully utilized. The net result will see no real reduction in the amount of shrimp that will be taken from an already collapsed stock.

With the collusion of the federal government the new NAFO regulations will soon be adopted by Canada, giving the organization even more control over fisheries in the area and permitting them with an opportunity to someday dictate regulations inside Canadian waters as well. It seems that the time to wave a sad good-bye to the Atlantic Fishery and the serene outport way of life in many parts of the region is upon us.

It’s indeed a black day for all of us.

Where Have all the Fishes Gone?

“…In 1992, Ottawa imposed a moratorium on the Northern cod fishery. It resulted in the largest layoff in Canadian history: 30,000 jobs. The latest science says that stock has barely recovered.” – Jeffry Simpson, Globe and Mail, November 13, 2009.

The Globe & Mail article in which Mr. Simpson made that statement was dedicated to discussion of the Canadian government’s recently announced plans to hold a judicial inquiry into declining salmon stocks on the Fraser River in B.C.

Perhaps a judicial inquiry on the BC situation is a good idea but the announcement of one, not to mention the Globe’s comparison of the West Coast issue to the collapse of the East Coast cod fishery, brings to mind a very simple question: Why has an inquiry never been held into the Atlantic fisheries collapse?

Sure, studies have been conducted, scientists have debated the problem for years and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans continues to count all the little fishies in the sea, but where has any of that gotten us?

The fish are still on the missing list.

Eighteen years after the fishery was first closed the ground fish stocks haven’t recovered. Doesn’t that reality alone warrant an inquiry to help uncover not only what led to the collapse but what has been done, or hasn’t been, in the nearly 2 decades since.

The North Atlantic fishery collapse led to 10’s of thousands of people being thrown out of work overnight. In the years that followed entire towns and villages disappeared as the people who lived there were forced to give up their way of life. Ultimately the fisheries collapse led to the largest mass out-migration from any province in Canadian history.

To this day no inquiry has ever been conducted.

Admittedly some steps were taken. Fisheries task forces, committees and the like have come and gone and while those are all well and good they have their limits.

A judicial inquiry, with the power to access official records and question witnesses under oath, whether they like it or not, might be our only hope of ever shedding even a glimmer of light on one of the most devastating economic, commercial, cultural and environmental catastrophes of our collective history.

Did the Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans really mismanage the fish stocks as they’ve so often been accused of doing? Are they mismanaging those stocks even today?

Are politicians, both Provincial and Federal, past and present, at fault for promoting unsustainable levels of fishing with no other goal in mind but to pander to voters?

Did Ottawa secretly barter away fishing rights as a means to improve trade relations with foreign nations and prop up the economy in other parts of Canada?

The questions that might be asked are almost limitless but sadly, to date, the answers have been non-existent.

Why, nearly 20 years into a fishing moratorium, has no official inquiry ever been called?

There are those who believe the time for an inquiry has passed, that perhaps one should have been conducted back in the mid-nineties when the moratorium was put in place. I disagree.

At the time the moratorium was introduced the public was led to believe that a couple of years down the road the stocks would rebound and all would be well again. That didn’t happen and I strongly believe an inquiry now would have the benefit of hindsight when looking for the reasons why.

Nearly 20 years after the fact many of the politicians, bureaucrats, government scientists and DFO staffers who were involved at the time but who might have been hesitant to answer the tough questions are likely to be retired from public life or close to being so today. This fact alone would help loosen stiffened tongues that might not have been as willing to be loosened back in 1992.

The timing is ripe for an inquiry of this nature unfortunately the collective spirit in Ottawa is, as usual, very weak.

The near collapse of salmon stocks on the West Coast is indeed a worthy reason to hold a judicial inquiry and I applaud the federal Conservative government for taking this action so quickly. That said, I can’t help but wonder why Mr. Harper and his recent predecessors (no matter the political stripe) have all been so comfortable in ignoring the devastation of the East Coast fishery.

New Federal Fisheries Minister Embraces Status Quo

As a matter of interest, on November 17, 2008 I sent a letter to the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Gail Shea. The letter was also forwarded to several news outlets, both locally and across Canada, including the Telegram.

The letter was about news reports at the time relating to an assistance call that was made to the Canadian Coast Guard by a foreign fishing vessel plying the Grand Banks. The call concerned an ill crew member needing medical attention.

According to the reports, after receiving the distress call the Coast Guard responded and after traveling some distance toward the location they turned back when they were informed that another foreign fishing vessel in the area had a nurse onboard and was on its way to the scene.

My question at the time, as expressed in my letter, was why two foreign vessels were even there in the first place and perhaps more importantly why, after learning of their existence and already underway, did the Canadian Coast Guard not continue to the area, regardless of the cancellation of the distress call, and determine if any illegal fishing activities were underway.

As I asked the Minister, if there is one foreign fishing vessel making a distress call from the Grand Banks and it is responded to by yet another foreign fishing vessel, wouldn’t that cause the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, NAFO and the Canadian Coast Guard, all of which are responsible for protecting fish stocks, to wonder just how many boats are actually out there and what they are up to?

Well folks, today I finally have a response to my inquiry. Not from the Minister herself, but from one of the minions in the department.

Unfortunately the letter was sent to me via snail mail so I can’t post its original content here. I will however tell you that, as is the case with most bureaucrats, the response from this one is a full page letter that tells me absolutely nothing and never even attempts to answer my question.

I’m not surprised really. I’ve been down this road with Ministers, both federal and Provincial, before. The fact that any response was given at all is a testament to the fact that the Minister’s office was made aware that the letter had been sent to several media outlets, otherwise I doubt I would have heard anything from them.

Come to think of it, perhaps no response at all would have been better than the one provided.

Here are some key excerpts. Consider it your daily dose of political double speak, bafflegab and utter nonsense.

EXCERPT:

“…The department recognizes the advantages of cooperating with other States on issues of international interest and works through the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) to manage and conserve fish stocks outside Canada’s Exclusive Economic Zone. In addition to patrolling Canadian fisheries waters, Canada invests significant amounts in carrying out aerial surveillance and continual, year-round at-sea patrols in the NAFO Regulatory Area (NRA). These patrols are conducted by Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) vessels, with DFO fishery officers onboard, acting in the role of NAFO inspectors, to carry out at-sea boarding and inspections of vessels fishing in the NRA.”

“Regarding your particular concern about the event involving the two Portuguese fishing vessels, the CCG vessel had been tasked, as you correctly identified in your letter…to assist in a Search and Rescue incident…Once it became known that the assistance was no longer required, the CCG vessel was released from this tasking.”

“I hope this answers your question and…” blah, blah, blah.

No it doesn’t.

Nowhere does the letter answer the question asked, why did the Coast Guard vessel, which was already on its way not proceed to the area and check out the activities of those two fishing vessels instead of simply returning to port?

The letter was signed by Paul Steele, Director General of the Conservation and Protection Directorate and was sent on behalf of the Minister of Fisheries, Gail Shea.

Clearly the Minister and Mr. Steele are working every day to put our tax dollars to use. Just what they are using them for we may never know.