5 Vancouver Island native bands get commercial fishery

[profisher]

That is the problem...the same as what is happening on the Fraser. The government should be loud and clear that this deal comes with agreement by the bands that all poachers will be prosecuted to the full extent of Canadian law and that the bands must not interfere with that process.

 

[agentaqua]

How about using some common sense here. Natives are human beings with the same faults as the rest of us. Before Euopeans arrived they weren't living under a capitalist system and therefor there was no financial or status gains to be had by over harvesting whatever. In fact they gave their possessions away to show their power and position within the bands. Now they find themselves having to adapt to our way where it is very dog for himself and your gains mean someone else fails. The only difference with the natives is they get special treatment under our system which has and will continue to allow the human fault called greed to run rampant. It would be no different if we had the special rights. This has to end!! We need to mutually agree to one set of rules under one system.

I agree with most of your post, profisher. However, I don't believe I personally have the right to dictate to another culture how they should govern themselves. That's up to them, and always has been throughout history. I don't believe the current system works for me, either - for that matter. So if another culture with strong historic concervation value can help offset the sh*t the Harper Gov't and the Capitalist system is dealing out (accepting also that the Communist system is worse) - Well, I'm okay with that...

 

[finaddict]

I agree with most of your post, profisher. However, I don't believe I personally have the right to dictate to another culture how they should govern themselves. That's up to them, and always has been throughout history. I don't believe the current system works for me, either - for that matter. So if another culture with strong historic concervation value can help offset the sh*t the Harper Gov't and the Capitalist system is dealing out (accepting also that the Communist system is worse) - Well, I'm okay with that...

The right to dictate to another culture, that is not even part of the equation. Conservation and fair distribution (whatever that is) is what matters. I am not a believer (regardless of the propaganda) that aboriginals were conservationists. They were subsistence harvesters and used what they needed for the size of their band. Considering the population at the time, there was excess capacity in the biomass to support the harvest. They simply did not have the numbers to overharvest, but that does not mean they would`t have if they had the technology. The difference is that the capitalist system goes waaaaaay beyond what is needed for those who are in the food chain locally and expects that there is capacity for the entire world. remove the capital part of the harvest (i.e. the commercial harvest) and I suspect you would find there is sufficient capacity in the system to keep the FN`s FSC and the recreational fisheries fully satiated.

 

[cheech]

We were warned about this last year. Definitely could be problematic. 1 problem is that 'native' poaching will go un-punished. CP will NOT charge abos with fisheries offenses.
Over fishing by abos will result in dumpage as is the case in Pt Alberni every season with sockeye. Could be the end of the fishery is now in site.
Now, maybe if the fleet had trouble getting out and setting nets and so on or, if they had no market for their catch, couldn't buy fuel etc. They might get discouraged and go lay down.

 

[Big Green Machine]

We were warned about this last year. Definitely could be problematic. 1 problem is that 'native' poaching will go un-punished. CP will NOT charge abos with fisheries offenses.
Over fishing by abos will result in dumpage as is the case in Pt Alberni every season with sockeye. Could be the end of the fishery is now in site.
Now, maybe if the fleet had trouble getting out and setting nets and so on or, if they had no market for their catch, couldn't buy fuel etc. They might get discouraged and go lay down.

The band in PA turned in one of their own members for poaching so there is evidence that there is accountability.

 

[finaddict]

The band in PA turned in one of their own members for poaching so there is evidence that there is accountability.

Turn in one, turn a blind eye to a hundred others. And even if charged (which he wasn't) it wouldn't go anywhere anyways . Isn't a DA in the country that will try a native on fishery related offenses.

Still if we as recreational anglers want to keep in the game, we need to bite our collective tongues, bite the bullet and align with the soon to be new owners of the resource.

 

[Aces]

The band in PA turned in one of their own members for poaching so there is evidence that there is accountability.

He was just the sacrificial lamb. Probabaly wasn't paying his "fee" to the band. This band is systematically wiping out the Alberni Valley salmon runs. Semi truckloads of gillnet salmon leave PA for the Prairies almost nightly. My neighbor who just took early retirement from DFO because he couldn't stand it anymore told me the volume of fish that band ships is staggering.

 

[searun]

This is the thin edge of the wedge. Those commercial fish are coming out of your recreational IQ. We have an "expected catch" of 60,000 and the commercial troll fleet still has their same IQ, so where do you think those fish are coming from. Worse still, each of the FN communities has a "Me Too" clause built into the treaty process. Ergo this is the beginning of the end of recreational fishing as you have known it. To be clear, think about the cumulative impact when each treaty nation bellies up to the bar for their share!

Just watch over the next 2 decades to see where this lands. Shawn is right on the mark, and we should pay close attention to this. Never mind fighting over Fraser chinook, that is a small road bump compared to this issue.

 

[agentaqua]

This is the thin edge of the wedge. Those commercial fish are coming out of your recreational IQ.

Actually, there is no ITQs for rec fishers. The only fish that has recreational quota is halibut - administered by the IPHC NOT by DFO. It's actually a problem when trying to estimate recreational take as many areas often only receive a rough estimate from creel surveys every 5 years or so. There are a few areas that have annual creel surveys - but geographically - they are mostly in more urban areas.

 

[trophywife]

The writing is definitely on the wall and I think FN will own the resource in the near future. So IMO as Rec anglers you either learn to work together or lose out completely.

"The Cohen commission heard testimony from DFO officers that as much as 97% of the First Nations FSC catch may find its way into the black market and get sold illegally."

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/11/05/salmon-inquiry-ignores-native-poaching/

sting operations should be done to shut down the buyers. if the fn have no where to sell this may help.

 

[searun]

Illegal sale of FN fish isn't the issue we should get side tracked on here. They can now sell them legally, which in and of itself isn't a bad thing, rather it is who is giving up their fish to allow this to happen? When you can't go fishing because there is no TAC for sport salmon is when the rubber will hit the road here. That's the danger

 

[Leadline]

This all comes out of BC's coast wide quota. Determined by IPHC.
Programs like PICFI and ATP are DFO tools to gradually transfer the Canadian quota over to Aboriginal Nations. The Federal government buys quota from (usually retiring commercial fishers) and distributes it to FN groups whether the FN band plans to fish it or lease it or to their liking- as long as it's in their hands.
If FN's are charged with selling undeclared commercial fish, food fish, or wasting, the charge goes back to the band rather than court because of their undetermined rights because of a lack of FN agreement on legally binding treaties. Then the band decides what they themselves should do about the charge. At this point the DFO fisheries officer abandons the issue. If you buy from FN's illegally and you're not FN, then you will be charged and convicted like any other Canadian.

If you want to find someone in DFO, look at their directory. You can find anyone you like, their office, and chain of command:
http://sage-geds.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/cgi-bin/direct500/eng/TE?FN=index.htm

Here is an article with one of the higher-level BC DFO decision makers, and his view on these issues:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...ission-the-rights-and-privillages-of-fishing/
Quoted from the article:
-“The public of Canada have rights?” Keith Lowes, lawyer for the B.C. Wildlife Federation and the B.C. Federation of Drift Fishers, asked Barry Huber.
Barry Huber is an aboriginal adviser in the DFO in British Columbia who is now on special assignment to develop “co-management” arrangements with natives for the fragile fishery.
-“Yes,” Huber replied.
-“Including the right to fish recreationally?” Lowes said, adding conversationally that he believed Huber himself is a recreational fisherman.
-“I have a privilege,” Huber said carefully.
-Clearly taken aback, Lowes said, “You say public fishing is a privilege, not a right?”
-“Yes,” said Huber.

Then you could ask- What is the difference between 'food fish' and 'commercial fish'?. Which opens up a whole other bag of worms like- Are people fishing for their families 'food fishers' whether FN or not? And- Are guides and lodges 'commercial fishers'?

Access to resident fishers and their food fish for sustenance should play a part for any Canadian living here, no matter what race or colour, especially on the coast.
Look at the east coast of Canada - they are not even allowed to set a trap in front of their house to catch and eat a lobster with their kids.

 

[Aces]

Actually, there is no ITQs for rec fishers. The only fish that has recreational quota is halibut - administered by the IPHC NOT by DFO. It's actually a problem when trying to estimate recreational take as many areas often only receive a rough estimate from creel surveys every 5 years or so. There are a few areas that have annual creel surveys - but geographically - they are mostly in more urban areas.

No, i'm pretty sure there is a quota on Chinook sportsfishing. We just havn't caught it in recent years

 

[OldBlackDog]

And there you have it: First Nations are inherently better than others (the sort whose people know what is right but may do the wrong thing anyway) and the government man negotiating with them on behalf of the rest of us fully concurs with that.

And you pay his salary..

This all comes out of BC's coast wide quota. Determined by IPHC.
Programs like PICFI and ATP are DFO tools to gradually transfer the Canadian quota over to Aboriginal Nations. The Federal government buys quota from (usually retiring commercial fishers) and distributes it to FN groups whether the FN band plans to fish it or lease it or to their liking- as long as it's in their hands.
If FN's are charged with selling undeclared commercial fish, food fish, or wasting, the charge goes back to the band rather than court because of their undetermined rights because of a lack of FN agreement on legally binding treaties. Then the band decides what they themselves should do about the charge. At this point the DFO fisheries officer abandons the issue. If you buy from FN's illegally and you're not FN, then you will be charged and convicted like any other Canadian.

If you want to find someone in DFO, look at their directory. You can find anyone you like, their office, and chain of command:
http://sage-geds.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/cgi-bin/direct500/eng/TE?FN=index.htm

Here is an article with one of the higher-level BC DFO decision makers, and his view on these issues:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...ission-the-rights-and-privillages-of-fishing/
Quoted from the article:
-“The public of Canada have rights?” Keith Lowes, lawyer for the B.C. Wildlife Federation and the B.C. Federation of Drift Fishers, asked Barry Huber.
Barry Huber is an aboriginal adviser in the DFO in British Columbia who is now on special assignment to develop “co-management” arrangements with natives for the fragile fishery.
-“Yes,” Huber replied.
-“Including the right to fish recreationally?” Lowes said, adding conversationally that he believed Huber himself is a recreational fisherman.
-“I have a privilege,” Huber said carefully.
-Clearly taken aback, Lowes said, “You say public fishing is a privilege, not a right?”
-“Yes,” said Huber.

Then you could ask- What is the difference between 'food fish' and 'commercial fish'?. Which opens up a whole other bag of worms like- Are people fishing for their families 'food fishers' whether FN or not? And- Are guides and lodges 'commercial fishers'?

Access to resident fishers and their food fish for sustenance should play a part for any Canadian living here, no matter what race or colour, especially on the coast.
Look at the east coast of Canada - they are not even allowed to set a trap in front of their house to catch and eat a lobster with their kids.

 

[IronNoggin]

No, i'm pretty sure there is a quota on Chinook sportsfishing. We just havn't caught it in recent years

Yes, there is.
But in fact we have caught it, and gone "over" in recent memory...

Cheers,
Nog

 

[Gong Show]

Where even to begin with this quote...

Fishtofino: Pre-contact aboriginal population estimates for BC vary widely with some estimates ranging from a conservative 200,000 to more than a million. Most authorities put the figure at a conservative 300,000. By post-contact 1929, the population had dropped to 22,000. The Kwakwaka'wakw population alone was reduced From a pre-contact population estimated to be 19,000 to about 1,000 by 1921 primarily by waves of epidemics. Similarly, the precontact (1775) population of Snunéymuxw people is believed to have been about 5,000. In 1838 a census figure was 1,000. All these pre-contact people had to eat something. it wasn't from Overweightea.

So how did they generate and conserve these pre-contact populations and societies?

Were the economies based on the "rape-pillage-and-plunder" corporate mentality? Or was there some other social dynamic at work like what is now termed "sustainability" or "conservation"?

The populations of Pacific salmon seemed to be abundant until at least the 1950s or so.

What have we done, in comparison? Whose dictionary doesn't include "sustainability"?

Over the 10,000-14,000 years of settlement in North America - The aboriginal peoples or "First Nations" developed their own societies that had built within their practices and governance ways to ensure that the resources did not get depleted. This is especially true for the aboriginal groups in what is now called BC. There were some failures, particularly in the marginal areas of the American South-West where some groups got populated past what the marginal land could provide when climatic changes made the land less productive. Same goes for the large city-states of the Incas and Astecs - although the Spanish Conquistadors also had an influence in the decay of those civilizations.

BUT overall - aboriginals within Canada were the original "conservationists" long before that word was coined, and long before Europeans and Colonization arrived.

In some areas, some groups still have a functioning hereditary system that performs a similar function that it did many thousands of years ago protecting against over-extraction. In many areas, that system is now but a distant memory.

We have all been impacted by Colonization and subsequent to that - the Capitalist system that needs continual "growth" and new resources to fuel the Stock Market. The problem is - we only have 1 planet to use - only 1 spaceship to inhabit. We can't keep expanding our resource needs indefinitely. I think we have a much bigger problem than what happens when we acknowledge the developing co-management input from a group of peoples that want the resources to last for their kids and their grandkids. These peoples are NOT the enemy.

Sorry, no.

That all sounds nice and is based upon a good story told by those that benefit financially from the myth.
If you want real evidence, accepted by our courts, please look at the Kapp original decision.
Natives have abandoned operating fish weirs. This is not conservation. They lacked the technology and the markets to do more damage.
This myth needs to stop.

There has never been native protection from native over extraction. The majority of native settlements were not year round. They had summer villages and winter villages. They followed the food. This can be sustainable as long as you have lots of resources and land with not so many people.

You make some very bold claims; natives governance ensured resources did not get depleted; natives are conservationalists and the hereditary system that protects against over extraction. Please cite something that backs this up.
Currently the market system will accept all the natural resources that it can be provided with. The natives are very involved and want to be even more involved in regulating their extractive practices of natural resources. This system cannot be abolished.
Natives are not that different from the rest of us, if they have an opportunity to better their lives, they will take advantage of it. They are not the enemy, they are also not the saviors of the environment.

All non-natives are not planet crushing resource rapers and likewise all natives are not the earth's only chance to become a happy spaceship.

 

[Gong Show]

Great question BGM! Possibly - is the short answer. Most FN bands are set-up to fail in one way or another. Mostly it is financial. Most bands lack the appropriate financial resources to attract and retain the appropriately trained and experienced professionals that can make a difference and compete with other governmental officials on their level to affect real change. Some bands have alternative and additional revenues from outside sources (oil, real estate, etc.) that give them that leaway to hire and retain these professionals while slowly working their own people into those jobs through training and education. Unfortunately those bands with adequate resources to do this are far and between. Sounds like the OFNA might be one of those. Tsawwassen maybe another. That's why it is really in nobodies interest to keep the reserves poor, illiterate, and w/o real options. Nobody -that is - except our government who want a free hand in giving everything away to China for free so they can fluff-up their stock market portfolio. Remote, resource-based communities that make decisions on a different timeline other than quarterly shareholder profits and elections - and have a real say in co-management decisions - are a real threat to this government.

This is another myth. Plenty of money is earmarked for natives from both levels of government. Until the bands financial governance is open and transparent, the current system will prevail.
It is in certain peoples' interest to keep the majority of natives poor, unfortunately that is their leaders. Native leadership is worried about threats to their government.
If natives came clean with their own issues, then we could move forward together. As long as the blame whitey/government/colonial genocide arguments work, there is no need to take that hard step of reforming their own institutions which are broken by any standard.