Islandgirl
Well-Known Member
Salmon quota topic a hot one
By D.C. Reid, Times ColonistMarch 3, 2010
In a bland announcement in Dec. 31, 2009's Times Colonist, DFO Minister Gail Shea confirmed she was unhappy with the Fraser sockeye collapse. She conceded the numbers were falling the past few years and established an inquiry under judge Brian Cohen.
What was not mentioned was: DFO science figures clearly show problems for 15 years, an eerily similar scenario to that for east coast cod. It is now widely understood that DFO refused to believe and act on its own science and that led to the complete cod collapse. They are now not seeing their B.C. Science, nor confirming they knew the current collapse would happen years before it did -- its own Georgia Strait fry seining established the figures.
But this is an article on an entirely different subject about a simple phrase buried in Shea's tapioca: 'share based fishery' for salmon. Those of us who spend lots of time worrying about salmon cringed when we realized it was an Orwellian rewording of an old concept: individual vessel quotas. I sent a note to query its meaning.
Among other things, a West Coast DFO director wrote back the following: "Share-based systems have been found to improve conservation outcomes and provide a more stable allocation approach for fishers. Clearly defined shares of the allowable catch can be managed in a flexible way to achieve sustainable fisheries, increase economic benefits for fishers, and allow commercial fleets to adjust to changing circumstances."
I wrote 10,000 minister's letters when I worked for government, so I really appreciate a good, sneaky letter. One of the acquired skills is putting two sentences together that have no relation to one another, but they make the reader think they do; or words that imply one thing when they actually mean the opposite. In this case I was saddened at such good scribes-manship.
The shell game on this one is that the quoted sentences imply DFO will talk with aboriginals, sport fishers and commercial seiners. Wrong. They will only talk to aboriginals and aboriginal/non-aboriginal commercial fishers. The catch will be divided by quotas given to each. DFO will not talk to the 300,000 sport fishing sector licences, the biggest contributor to GDP.
This is the same system that completely alienated the public's access to its own halibut, but now brought to salmon. Instead, of 50 per cent of the big flatties for the public, it is a measely 12 per cent, a total abrogation of responsibility to the people of B.C. By DFO. This is the lowest share of all American and Canadian jurisdictions in North America.
In addition, halibut individual vessel quotas created millionaires who were given quota for free, rather than having to buy it. Many owners rent their quota for more than $100,000 per year rather than fish, and sit in Hawaii getting suntans. The system also created a cartel with commercial licences consolidating from 435 to 214 over the years. And the 'market mechanism' for the commercial sector to buy up any spare halibut from the public's dinky share was followed by their trying to set conditions before they would give it back.
Halibut IVQs are totally unacceptable and sport fishermen need to complain just as bitterly as we are doing about the problem on the other end: closed containment for fish farms. Please write to Gail Shea: Shea.G@parl.gc.ca, and complain about her bringing the same flawed, alienating system to salmon. Tell her she must consult the sport sector.
In the salmon debate the public holds one very large card. Of the 37,000 volunteers to salmon enhancement, and the millions of salmon they return, the vast majority are sport fishermen. If these people refuse to allow their efforts to be given to other sectors, we have DFO over a barrel.
© Copyright (c) The Victoria Times Colonist
By D.C. Reid, Times ColonistMarch 3, 2010
In a bland announcement in Dec. 31, 2009's Times Colonist, DFO Minister Gail Shea confirmed she was unhappy with the Fraser sockeye collapse. She conceded the numbers were falling the past few years and established an inquiry under judge Brian Cohen.
What was not mentioned was: DFO science figures clearly show problems for 15 years, an eerily similar scenario to that for east coast cod. It is now widely understood that DFO refused to believe and act on its own science and that led to the complete cod collapse. They are now not seeing their B.C. Science, nor confirming they knew the current collapse would happen years before it did -- its own Georgia Strait fry seining established the figures.
But this is an article on an entirely different subject about a simple phrase buried in Shea's tapioca: 'share based fishery' for salmon. Those of us who spend lots of time worrying about salmon cringed when we realized it was an Orwellian rewording of an old concept: individual vessel quotas. I sent a note to query its meaning.
Among other things, a West Coast DFO director wrote back the following: "Share-based systems have been found to improve conservation outcomes and provide a more stable allocation approach for fishers. Clearly defined shares of the allowable catch can be managed in a flexible way to achieve sustainable fisheries, increase economic benefits for fishers, and allow commercial fleets to adjust to changing circumstances."
I wrote 10,000 minister's letters when I worked for government, so I really appreciate a good, sneaky letter. One of the acquired skills is putting two sentences together that have no relation to one another, but they make the reader think they do; or words that imply one thing when they actually mean the opposite. In this case I was saddened at such good scribes-manship.
The shell game on this one is that the quoted sentences imply DFO will talk with aboriginals, sport fishers and commercial seiners. Wrong. They will only talk to aboriginals and aboriginal/non-aboriginal commercial fishers. The catch will be divided by quotas given to each. DFO will not talk to the 300,000 sport fishing sector licences, the biggest contributor to GDP.
This is the same system that completely alienated the public's access to its own halibut, but now brought to salmon. Instead, of 50 per cent of the big flatties for the public, it is a measely 12 per cent, a total abrogation of responsibility to the people of B.C. By DFO. This is the lowest share of all American and Canadian jurisdictions in North America.
In addition, halibut individual vessel quotas created millionaires who were given quota for free, rather than having to buy it. Many owners rent their quota for more than $100,000 per year rather than fish, and sit in Hawaii getting suntans. The system also created a cartel with commercial licences consolidating from 435 to 214 over the years. And the 'market mechanism' for the commercial sector to buy up any spare halibut from the public's dinky share was followed by their trying to set conditions before they would give it back.
Halibut IVQs are totally unacceptable and sport fishermen need to complain just as bitterly as we are doing about the problem on the other end: closed containment for fish farms. Please write to Gail Shea: Shea.G@parl.gc.ca, and complain about her bringing the same flawed, alienating system to salmon. Tell her she must consult the sport sector.
In the salmon debate the public holds one very large card. Of the 37,000 volunteers to salmon enhancement, and the millions of salmon they return, the vast majority are sport fishermen. If these people refuse to allow their efforts to be given to other sectors, we have DFO over a barrel.
© Copyright (c) The Victoria Times Colonist
