B.C. First Nations Fishing Rights - Supreme Court Ruling

Here in WA the tribes listed in AA's second link get their Food/Ceremonial fish plus 50% of TAC as of 1974.
Reality is that there aren't enough fish to make everyone happy. Deal with it, or as admin said, continue to use the forums for "A dumping ground for unhappiness".
 
Well stated.

I will add that our legal council feels that this decision restricts fn more than it does open doors and that this was a step backwards for those bands.


Yes, having spent most of the evening yesterday reading the judgment, the trial judge was careful to place restrictions on how the fishery was monitored. After all, the plaintiffs were seeking unfettered access to 30% of the chinook and 50% of the coho with no electronic monitoring, ability to dual fish (fish both for FSC and when it suited them commercial); they also wanted to manage themselves, and have DFO have to justify every single management measure. All of that and more was struck down because in essence the judge was savvy enough to see that unfettered access with no central control would lead to significant conservation issues due to over-fishing and also impact the rights of other users (the Canadian Public).

The scary issue really is this Liberal government seeks to prosecute a "reconciliation" agenda that will hand over allocation to FN's as the currency...at the expense of Canadian citizens. So a small group of people will get a disproportionately large share of the fish pie. My only hope is that when the Minister sits down to craft his allocation policy, that he starts to realize the social unrest, the huge impact to the Liberal political value on the west coast, not to mention the economic harm it will bring to Canada. This decision if unwisely implemented by its proponents could actually serve to very negatively impact how FN's and their agendas are played out in the Canadian public in years to come. People will reach a tipping point if this is poorly implemented.
tated.
 
Well stated.

I will add that our legal council feels that this decision restricts fn more than it does open doors and that this was a step backwards for those bands.



tated.

It's a decent ruling for commercial fishermen and their interviners generally got what they sought in my interpretation of the reading. IT basically turns chinook/coho into a meat fishery just like sockeye,pink,chum.

Will wait and see what our Fisheries Minister does with the allocation policy but if it ends up like the current Sockeye,pink,chum. Then Sports fishermen are in for a world of hurt. As we get less then 5% of the Total tack for thoes fisheries.

Commercial Access to Sockeye, Pink and Chum

The commercial industry historically harvested the vast majority of sockeye, pink
and chum salmon. The commercial industry will be allocated at least 95 per cent of
combined commercial and recreational harvest of each sockeye, pink and chum
salmon species. Up to 5% of the remainder will be available to the recreational
fishery in order to allow them predictable and stable fishing opportunities on
sockeye, pink and chum.
It is unlikely that the recreational fishery will reach this
cap in most years. Therefore, any uncaught portion can be harvested by the
commercial fishery. This 95% will be broken out by species.
 
If that's the case then the fish population will suffer. The rec sector puts lots of $$ into stocks. Funding for the PSF will dry up & so will the public pressure for hatcheries.

It won't take long before the stocks are destroyed.

Unregulated commercial & river nets....


Makes me sick... look what we pay for taxes into a country and government that continues to spend it on special interest groups & take, take, take..

This country is a god dam mess in every way...

Next it will be LGBQT fishing rights.
 
... I will add that our legal council feels that this decision restricts fn more than it does open doors and that this was a step backwards for those bands...

While I appreciate your optimism, I do not share it. At all.
Try explaining your position to anyone with Area G Troll (as I am).
Our annual quota has been slashed to 16 thousand pieces (about a week's effort) and the balance that was stripped away is being gifted to these very FN's.

No matter how you slice it, it is damned tough to understand that development as representing a "step backwards" for them.
Sure as hell is for us though.
With this blow, we are basically Finished... :(

Nog
 
ur annual quota has been slashed to 16 thousand pieces (about a week's effort) and the balance that was stripped away is being gifted to these very FN's.

Nog

In this new article it states

https://www.westerlynews.ca/news/west-coast-fishers-see-empty-seas-demand-federal-help/

"“This year, we just found out that our total allowable catch for Area G is 26,200 Chinook. Last year, Area G’s catch was 46,700,” Kimoto said estimating that decrease would equate to a roughly $2 million economic loss."

Is that 26 spilt with different groups? I don't no how its split out

No matter how you slice it, it is damned tough to understand that development as representing a "step backwards" for them.

Yeah, I cant see how First Nations Coast wide won't want a Commercial Chinook Fishery and as per the ruling their entitled to one as long as the recreational fishermen are on the water.

FN just a big slice of a shrinking pie.

My guess is the line out of DFO will be " we were forced to close recreational fishing/commercial fishing areas because we are unable to supply enough fish for all the commercial FN openings required to satisfy all the First Nations Bands needs"

Won't be this year but its coming if stocks don't improve
 
In this new article it states

https://www.westerlynews.ca/news/west-coast-fishers-see-empty-seas-demand-federal-help/

"“This year, we just found out that our total allowable catch for Area G is 26,200 Chinook. Last year, Area G’s catch was 46,700,” Kimoto said estimating that decrease would equate to a roughly $2 million economic loss."

Is that 26 spilt with different groups? I don't no how its split out

That was simply Doug & the paper being optimistic.
Here you will find the real answer:

http://notices.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fns-sap/index-eng.cfm?pg=view_notice&DOC_ID=206836&ID=all

Note: "The catch target for the Area G Fishery in May is 15,700 Chinook salmon."
At this point we have been informed there are no further scheduled openings.

Yeah, I cant see how First Nations Coast wide won't want a Commercial Chinook Fishery and as per the ruling their entitled to one as long as the recreational fishermen are on the water.

My guess is the line out of DFO will be " we were forced to close recreational fishing/commercial fishing areas because we are unable to supply enough fish for all the commercial FN openings required to satisfy all the First Nations Bands needs"

You are starting to get it.
NO recreational fisheries can be considered UNTIL the commercial FN demands have been satisfied.
NO non-FN commercial openings can be considered UNTIL the commercial FN demands have been satisfied.

Combine that with the area exclusions for all non-FN fishers being actively sought by the Haida (with a sympathetic Trudeau noting he is in support) and in the not to distant future, very little fishing will be taking place by anyone other than FN's coast-wide. Every coastal and near coastal band are waiting in the wings with their hands wide open, poised to take advantage of the ruling being discussed here, and the eventual granting of the Haida exclusion zones...

Sad Times...
Nog
 
[1142] Canada put the LTO into context within some of the factors relevant to the Sparrow/Gladstone justification analysis: there are 71 aboriginal groups in British Columbia with a treaty or a treaty claim, and 73 groups with a claim to fish. There are 20 aboriginal groups on the WCVI with communal licences, and 480 such groups in the Pacific Region; there are 76 aboriginal groups on the BC coastline; there are 141 groups with access to Fraser River sockeye. Aboriginal groups hold 41% of the commercial salmon fishery licences, so further mitigation would have to come from non-aboriginal participants. Despite the many interests affected by this fishery, so far the consultation process has been bilateral only.
 
I see your point. I was not focused on the chinook numbers. Looks like the government is offering more glass beads with the state of the chinook stocks.


That was simply Doug & the paper being optimistic.
Here you will find the real answer:

http://notices.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fns-sap/index-eng.cfm?pg=view_notice&DOC_ID=206836&ID=all

Note: "The catch target for the Area G Fishery in May is 15,700 Chinook salmon."
At this point we have been informed there are no further scheduled openings.



You are starting to get it.
NO recreational fisheries can be considered UNTIL the commercial FN demands have been satisfied.
NO non-FN commercial openings can be considered UNTIL the commercial FN demands have been satisfied.

Combine that with the area exclusions for all non-FN fishers being actively sought by the Haida (with a sympathetic Trudeau noting he is in support) and in the not to distant future, very little fishing will be taking place by anyone other than FN's coast-wide. Every coastal and near coastal band are waiting in the wings with their hands wide open, poised to take advantage of the ruling being discussed here, and the eventual granting of the Haida exclusion zones...

Sad Times...
Nog
 
I see your point. I was not focused on the chinook numbers. Looks like the government is offering more glass beads with the state of the chinook stocks.

Perhaps with the springs that is true. In the meantime they force the troller out of existence.
Next they will be looking very hard at the recreational take as there will be no other source to bolster what the FN's demand.

Don't think this will "stall out" with simply springs btw.
If you notice, the announcement stated: "Humphries sets out the parameters for the Indigenous fisheries involving species including a variety of salmon, groundfish, crab, prawn and shellfish."

No idea where this will all end up...

Nog
 
Going to be interesting for sure. The non-aboriginal Area G sector will likely take a hit - that's where most of the commercial allocation will be coming from. Why do I say that. First, they have cash in hand to pay for license buy back. Second, that is the path of least resistance for them. Third, from a votes perspective 300K rec license holders vs a much smaller commercial Area G sector. Fourth, the economic value of rec vs commercial.

Where's the rest coming from....the rec sector. Read the judgment, pretty clearly stated the rec priority access over FN commercial fisheries is "unjustified."
 
a: not demonstrably correct or judicious : not warranted or appropriate
  • unjustified
DFO failed to show why recreational fishermen have priority over commercial fisheries.

I beleive this jusdge would also find that if recreational fishermen chose to sell their catch and DFO tried to take them to court she would find it equally unjustified.

DFO’s argument for the rec fishery was
Very poor.

This could get very messy for DFO management should other areas outside the CDA push for the same decision.
 
Absolutely. The “me too” groups are lining up already. There is a large BUT. That is the judgment clearly stated DFO still had right to set catch allocation, protect conservation, catch monitoring and FNs could not dual fish (FSC and commercial st same time).

It’s not all doom and gloom. I would also add that any time we take these or other issues into a court room it’s highly likely one or both parties risks some aspect of a legal decision that they didn’t exactly bargain for. This is a good example of why going before the courts is a risky strategy ....and costly!
 
Last edited:
Troubled Waters
Every now and again I lapse into believing we live in a democracy. Then something happens to jerk me back to reality. The latest is the BC Supreme Court’s April 19 announcement of a decision respecting the fishing rights of the Nuu-chah-nulth First Nations (there are five of them) on the west coat of Vancouver Island. This would be the case the federal conservative government under Prime Minister Harper allegedly spent $19M dollars fighting from 2006 but the Liberals under Prime Minister Trudeau abandoned almost a decade later. We can thank background issues such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP) and PM Trudeau’s headlong rush to embrace that as the theme for reconciliation for all the alleged atrocities our forefathers brought to bear on the FNs of this province.

Here’s the judge’s decision for those with lots of time and an appetite for masochism:

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/18/06/2018BCSC0633.htm

Lets put this into perspective. A judge has handed over the fish resources of a 9 km wide swath of water that extends from the Brooks Peninsula in the north to approximately Port Renfrew in the south. Somewhere in the 400 page ruling the judge states the area is 160 km long. According to the maps of the Nuu-chah-nulth territories I make the straight line length between Brooks and Renfrew to be double that. It includes notable steelhead streams like the Gold, the Stamp/Somass, the Nahmint, the Nitinat, and the San Juan/Harris.

Nuu-chah-nulth-map.png

The Nuu-chah-nulth territory. The Brooks Peninsula is the end of the dotted line boundary to the northwest. Port Renfrew is near the southern end of the dotted line.
On the demographic side, the judgement notes the plaintiffs’ population is 4,855, which is 46% of the West Coast Vancouver Island FNs, 15% of Vancouver Island FNs, and 7% of British Columbia FNs with reserves in coastal areas. They are 8% of the total WCVI population and 1% of the total Vancouver Island population. Slice it whatever way you want. A very small component of our population has now been given primary access to all fish and shellfish resources not needed for conservation. In fact, if we don’t know it already, we soon will understand that amounts to virtually exclusive access to a lot of fish and fishing in times ahead.

What other natural resource is handed over in this fashion – timber, minerals, water? Why fish (and wildlife?). Why are the fish that we have all paid to have managed (yeah, I know, it ain’t exactly perfect) now the currency of reconciliation? Where else in Canada has this been done? What makes us special? If this was New Brunswick, home of Minister LeBlanc, how long would he last if a similar court decision re-allocated fish in any fashion similar to what BC is now going to experience?

Here’s the press release from Minister LeBlanc that spins the story just right for all the bleeding hearts stretched along the 49th parallel who don’t have a clue what is going on but vote Liberal because that spin has been carefully crafted:

https://www.canada.ca/en/fisheries-oceans/news/2018/04/statement-from-the-minister-of-fisheries-oceans-and-the-canadian-coast-guard-following-the-bc-supreme-court-decision—ahousaht-indian-band-and-nat.html

Please explain the implementation plan to us PM Trudeau and Fisheries Minister LeBlanc. You’re going to turn over the farm to people you would have us believe are going to replace your staff as the fisheries management experts of the future. How’s that model been working for us so far? Could we cite the Fraser example where your trained and experienced professional staff oversee a multitude of FNs and their surgical management of their own people? How are all those sockeye, chinook and steelhead stocks we keep seeing as recommended for listing as Species At Risk doing? I guess that will be next, after we fix the west coast of Vancouver Island. (Better hurry!)

Yes, I know you have the Nisga’a Treaty and the subsequent fisheries management program to hold out as an example. I’ll remind you, however, you’re talking one FN (except for that very small overlap with the Skeena’s Gitanyow FN that concerns Meziadin sockeye ) along a very sparsely populated Nass River and untold millions of dollars paid to high priced non-FN consultants over the past three decades to get that scenario together. And, yes, I’m aware Haida Gwaii where you also have only one FN is very likely next in line. Those are simple. It gets a lot more complex when you get to the Skeena and its multiple FNs. The west coast of Vancouver Island isn’t dissimilar. Then there’s that Fraser again.

Who is going to pay for implementation of this latest court decision? What does the opportunity cost of that look like? What happens to all the other people of every non-FN description who have spent their lives and taxes associated with the same fish and fisheries now handed over? I find it just a bit ironic that some of the voices demanding compensation come from currently licensed commercial fishermen who are going to be ruled off the water to accommodate the new kids on the block. A lot of those voices are FNs who would seem to be double dipping. Are we going to pay them out for the loss of access to fish now re-allocated to FN fishers but re-label their boats so they they get to fish that re-allocation just as if nothing ever changed? That should make for some great relations in those WCVI communities.

In the meantime there will be an unprecedented amount of money spent to get this wonderful new system installed. DFO is not going to just hand over the farm tomorrow, although that might be the most cost effective approach. No, instead they’ll drown everyone in the sea of consultation and process first. The consultants will make some very big money through all of this but that will never be made clear. And, no, there isn’t an unemployed equivalent of DFO’s downtown Vancouver staff sitting around waiting for a call to arms. It will take training, years of it. Look at the ledger for the Nisga’a treaty implementation for an idea of what lies ahead. (On a relative micro scale we might try the Moricetown steelhead mark/recapture population study, now a quarter century old and a few million $$$ spent to produce nary a shred of useful steelhead management information and nothing more than seasonal jobs for a revolving door of local band members.)

If anyone thinks the trend in fish abundance (take your choice – chinook, sockeye, halibut, other ground fish, steelhead, etc.) is going to reverse itself while all this reconciliation unfolds, I say take a serious look around. What we are going to experience is increasing pressure by the fastest growing segment of British Columbia’s population on fish supplies that are nowhere near stable, much less capable of increasing to meet all the demands and expectations coming their way. The first losers will be those of us of the non-FN persuasion. Ultimately there isn’t going to be enough for the FNs either, even if by some magic there is an airtight management system complete with rigid adherence to things like quotas, catch reporting, compliance. Then what?

Getting back to steelhead, where is the province? I may have missed it in that 400 page output by our BC Supreme Court judge but I didn’t detect the word steelhead anywhere. What happens when the gill netting of steelhead begins (again) in the Somass River and the local sales flourish? That would fall squarely between the judge’s goal posts. DFO certainly isn’t going to step forward with a case for steelhead conservation anywhere in this province when they are still supporting a chum roe fishery on top of the last 225 Interior Fraser steelhead. The same story will unfold on the Skeena sooner or later. (Moricetown will be back on line in that regard before we know it.) Has anyone heard a word from either Minister Donaldson or Minister LeBlanc on any of the Draconian measures soon to be levelled against recreational angling there? Even Minister Donaldson hailing from downtown Hazelton, right there in the center of the last and best steelhead fishing in this province, isn’t enough to warrant his presence or voice while his colleagues blunder their way through their own interpretation and application of UNDRIP and reconciliation.

Steelhead and those with enough years under their belt to have watched this unfold are going to know a very different world soon. The people who created it will be nowhere to be found when that inevitability descends.
Bob Hooten
 
... That is the judgment clearly stated DFO still had right to set catch allocation, protect conservation, catch monitoring and FNs could not dual fish (FSC and commercial st same time)...

Certainly. I think most here recognize just how "well" that has been working to date.
Suddenly, with this decision, it's all about to get so much better?
Right...

Nog
 
I know...more doom and gloom. As the saying goes “it is what it is” and we are now entering a new era in how the fishery is managed. We can either stomp our feet, as demonstrated in the summary of the world according to Mr Hooton or we can step back and look more closely at what the judgment actually says and get past the rhetoric.

The judgment clearly outlines what that new reality will be. FNs will have priority access to catch and sell fish commercially. They will however with that new “right” have to play within the commercial fishery rules and catch monitoring set out by DFO. How DFO chooses to manage this will be a testimony either good or bad to their ability to effectively manage.

If DFO is unable or unwilling to take strong leadership it won’t be long before FNs fisheries are fully out of control and the stock will crash. I would suggest that if that is the case there will be little public interest in bailing FNs out or for that matter using public tax payer funds to rebuild stocks. So FNs will have to adopt a resource stewardship approach, otherwise they are no better than those they accuse of decimating the resource

Time will tell on that! Let’s not forget that there are plenty of examples where a DFO managed commercial fishery has decimated stocks to the point of unsustainablity. Look no farther than the East Coast cod fishery.

I’m hopeful our FNs communities will do a better job. After all, in the trial they asked the court to “trust us”. So here’s their opportunity to prove they are trust worthy

The Ministers new Allocation Policy will be the defining line in the sand that sets out who gets what. Let’s hope he remembers his fiduciary duty to protect the interests of all Canadians in a fair minded way.
 
From , Bob Hooten’s blog,
Back on that Nuu-chch-nulth fish allocation decision again. Here is a clip from an email that arrived earlier today in response to my "Troubled Waters" blog at steelheadvoices.com The author, Dr. Ehor Orest Boyanowsky, is a well known wild fish advocate and Thompson steelhead aficionado. Forgive my bias but I think Dr. Boyanowsky's message warrants circulation beyond those on his distribution list.

"This news is as bad as it could possibly be. A tiny race based minority are now the princes of the kingdom recreating the exclusive right of people of a specific racial origin to a vast, previously common property resource as it existed with kings and their immediate relations in Scotland, England and Europe for centuries. That monarchic system, based on the families, the chieftains and lords, who originally owned those lands, was why our forefathers fled for a better life in Canada. For democracy. Good bye democracy and public sport fishing on Vancouver Island. I dread the backlash coming when the implications sink in to the consciousness of BC’s nonaboriginal population - when they stop holding their breath in hoping this will go away.

I hope the law professors and judges who created the climate that allowed this travesty turn over in their graves. That is the problem with allowing people not bright enough to realize the implications of their rulings to possess the ultimate power to determine our destiny. That is why a small group of us founded the Canadian Constitution Foundation when the Nisga’a Treaty was proposed and took it all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada prompting the NDP govt of the time to brand me a racist. Why because I wrote editorials arguing against allowing race based semi sovereign states to be created in BC. How ironic can you get? But unfortunately, we lost and ‘apres moi, le deluge.’ This ruling is not reconciliation, it is the fuel that eventually ignites into hatred."
 
Yes more doom and gloom with no solutions or alternatives. Frankly a waste of energy to go down their rabbit holes. How about working with FNs and DFO to try to help find a way we can all work together. None of the parties are about to go away. So perhaps it’s time to recognize the judgment and how it sets out a new rights based commercial fishery for FNs and work with them as opposed to stomp our feet like cry babies.
 
Interesting comment.
That's why we intervened," said Christina Burridge for the BC Seafood Alliance and Alan Martin for the BC Wildlife Federation. "It's a very complex case, going back almost a decade," they said, "but we intervened to make sure that the Supreme Court of Canada requirement that delineating Indigenous rights required consideration of other rights and interests did indeed take place. We represent the common property right that goes back to Magna Carta."

They added, "the judge's decision is complex, but we are always ready to engage in constructive discussions over how we manage our fisheries to ensure conservation of the resource, enjoyment of eating or catching seafood and economic benefits to all Canadians."
If the BCWF had not intervened then there is a very strong chance there would be no discussions on this matter.
This is not the only case they have intervened in and I expect will not be the last.
You can thank the late Bill Otway who pushed to ensure we were represented in many court cases.

This is now all political and the decisions will come from Ottawa.

The FN are working on a different level than the SFAB.

By the way, like it or not Bob Hooten got the Thompson Steelhead on the list with help from his friends.
That is more than all the groups were able to do over many years.
Check how many politicians he has been to see.

He is showing his frustrations over the lack of concern by any government or in this case court.
You may think it is doom and gloom, but I think he has done a lot.

By the way passing on his thoughts and others via his blog and Facebook is in fact just another form of politics.




Yes more doom and gloom with no solutions or alternatives. Frankly a waste of energy to go down their rabbit holes. How about working with FNs and DFO to try to help find a way we can all work together. None of the parties are about to go away. So perhaps it’s time to recognize the judgment and how it sets out a new rights based commercial fishery for FNs and work with them as opposed to stomp our feet like cry babies.
 
Back
Top