Discussion in 'Conservation, Fishery Politics and Management.' started by agentaqua, Jul 24, 2020.
Now this is a cause IMHO most of us on this forum can agree with and support!
DFO is fundamentally flawed. They have failed big time in the past (e.g. east coast cod), failing big time now (net pen fish farms, west coast salmon, wild salmon policy, east coast lobster, etc, etc...) With DFO not seeing the need to substantially change it is logical to assume they will fail in the future - so why should they continue to exist as is? They really serve no one, except the current party in power and a few powerful lobby groups and don't care much about long term, science based conservation and resource management.
I say it is time to start a defund the DFO movement! What is the alternative - IMHO I say it is time to move the management of all fisheries to the province. True the provincial govt's. are not perfect, but they will be closer to home to exact more accountability and much easier to vote out of office (don't have ON and QC always deciding the election for the rest of us). What do ON and QC care about west or east coast fisheries?
Don't know how DFO could be reformed without dismantling it? Tool many arrogant senior managers and executives that serve only their political masters when told to and their own personal opinions and biases when ever they can. So I say let's get rid of DFO and develop something more responsive and BC based! Sure there are many big challenges to doing this - but what is the cost of doing nothing?
I think its great to want change in DFO, but we would need to get FN onside.
I see Greg Taylor's big mouth in article again as always. I get so tired of Watershed just countering anything that is said. Sorry had to laugh at this quotes:
Despite that, Fisheries and Oceans does a “reasonably good job of managing sustainable fisheries,” said Watershed fisheries adviser Greg Taylor.
“If they enforced their own monitoring and bycatch policies, you’d probably see a lot less pushback from fishermen and conservationists,”
Only an opinion....
Just a matter of time IMHO before FN's will want to change DFO. DFO overtime will fail them as well as it mismanages the salmon populations into the ground like the east coast cod fishery. We need to make changing DFO a political/election issue as DFO only manages for politics now.
Well, I think every user group has serious, numerous legitimate & unresolved complaints about DFO.
I think that since the Fisheries Research Board of Canada was dismantled in 1979 - the minor royalty in the upper echelons of DFO have dictated to the rest of all us peons what was their priorities w/o any real accountability. Unfortunately, that also includes the lower echelons of DFO - who are the ones who most often get to wear the flack jackets for the minor royalty.
One only gets to see a little of the upper-level politics thru ATIP requests - or if one was invited into the same room with the assistant deputy minister and the legions of lobbyists and lawyers from industry that they pander to.
I believe we need to go back to separating the science from the politics in DFO - like what the Fisheries Research Board of Canada did before.
This is the beginning of the Defund DFO Movement.
There are MANY Backers, including quite a few FN's.
There will much more coming out in this regard in the near future.
This is something I am fully supporting and involved with.
The crowns duity when it comes to administering fisheries is built on so many Supreme Court cases plus so many federal laws to rip the thing apart would be a huge task. The fisheries ministers duties and powers are written into so many acts.
Even if you could reform it to more science based you still need to interpret the science.
law says conservation gets priority but it does not say what you actually need to return to have healthy stocks and healthy stocks does not necessary mean abundant fishing stocks.
also defunding DFO does not mean the government would actually be obligated to spend money on fisheries issue.
even if the science arm said we need X
Money to restore a stock. It would still be a political decision to fund that science decision.
so why I agree that reforms are necessary I don’t see a path to taking the responsibility away from the crown and ultimately your still going to be left with political funding decisions.
Yup, no doubt that changing DFO would be very challenging, but the status quo is not sustainable, nor acceptable. Change must come and concerned citizens must push hard and work hard to make it happen!
Just a reminder.
In 1949 Newfoundland joined Canada as a province, and thus Newfoundland's fishery fell under the management of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. The department mismanaged the resource and allowed overfishing.[further explanation needed]
In 1969 the number of fishing trawlers increased, and inshore fishermen complained to the government. This resulted in the government redefining the offshore fishery boundaries several times, and eventually extended its limits from three miles to 200 miles offshore, as part of its claim for an exclusive economic zone under the UNCLOS.
In 1968 the cod catch peaked at 810,000 tons, approximately three times more than the maximum yearly catch achieved before the super-trawlers. Approximately eight million tons of cod were caught between 1647 and 1750 (103 years), a period encompassing 25 to 40 cod generations. The factory trawlers took the same amount in 15 years.
In 1976, the Canadian government declared the right to manage the fisheries in an exclusive economic zone that extended to 200 miles offshore. The government wanted to reverse declining fish stocks by removing foreign fishing within the new inshore fishery boundaries.Fish mortality decreased immediately. This was not due to a rise in cod stocks, but because foreign trawlers could no longer fish the waters. Therefore, when Fisheries and Oceans set quotas, they overestimated the total stock, and increased the total allowable catch. With the absence of foreign fishing many Canadian and U.S fishing trawlers took their place and the number of cod kept diminishing past a point of recovery.
Many local fishermen noticed the drastic decrease of cod and tried to inform local government officials.
In a 1978 white paper, the Newfoundland government stated:
It must be recognised that both the Federal and Provincial Governments, plant workers, and the private sector, which includes fishermen, all have a role to play at influencing and directing the course of development within the fisheries sector. It is essential, therefore, that various interest group conflicts be minimized and that the appropriate measures be taken to ensure that benefits accruing from the exploitation of fish stocks are consistent with rational resource management objectives and desirable socio-economic considerations.
In 1986, scientists[who?] reviewed calculations and data, after which they determined, to conserve cod fishing, the total allowable catch rate had to be cut in half. However, even with these new statistics brought to light, no changes were made in the allotted yearly catch of cod. With only a limited knowledge of cod biology, scientists predicted that the population of the species would rebound from its low point in 1975.
In the early-1990s the industry collapsed entirely.
In 1992, John Crosbie, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans at the time, set the quota for cod at 187,969 tonnes, even though only 129,033 tonnes had been caught the previous year.
In 1992 the government announced a moratorium on cod fishing. The moratorium was at first meant to last two years, hoping that the northern cod population would recover, and along with it the fishery. However, damage done to Newfoundland's coastal ecosystem proved irreversible, and the cod fishery remains closed.
By 1993 six cod populations had collapsed, forcing a belated moratorium on fishing.[further explanation needed] Spawning biomass had decreased by at least 75% in all stocks, by 90% in three of the six stocks, and by 99% in the case of "northern" cod, previously the largest cod fishery in the world. The previous increases in catches were wrongly thought to be due to "the stock growing" but were actually caused by new technologies such as trawlers.
Thank God the Canucks are back playing, at least I have something real to hope for. I've never before had so many depressing conversations with avid recreational fishers who have simply given up hope that DFO respects and cares for the Recreational fishery. There are a lot of people out there who just feel the writing is on the wall that this government and the Department would rather see the recreational fishery wither away than find solutions to create a vibrant fishery that ads value to Canada. Death by a thousand cuts. No one's listening, no one cares is what I hear repeatedly.
What other sector?
It’s time for common sense to prevail DFO!
Chris Bos, President of South Vancouver Anglers Coalition speaking at the Public Fisheries Alliance rally held at the downtown DFO rally on July the 6th. In these tough economic times why is the billion dollar a year plus Public Fishery being needlessly mismanaged? Why are Public fishers not allowed to put food on their families tables? There’s options available, let use them.
Excellent video, let's get it posted all over the social media. Good job!
Separate names with a comma.