DFO destroying Fisheries Science Documents

So where are we on this bit of news? Please read below a News Release by The Green Party of Canada.

Have we lost any research from our waters?

Is Minister Keith Hutchings all over this?

Green Party condemns destruction of world-renowned Department of Fisheries and Oceans libraries

On Tuesday, December 10th, 2013 in

The dismantling of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans library system has taken a dramatic turn, with thousands of valuable books and scientific documents, some dating back to the 19th century, being sent to the dumpster over the past week.
The Green Party of Canada today voiced its condemnation of this reckless destruction of scientific resources. “Consistent with their policy of muzzling scientists, the Conservatives have now moved on to trashing libraries,” said Elizabeth May, Green Leader and MP for Saanich–Gulf Islands. “This administration seems to be deliberately undermining our ability to make good policy decisions by limiting access to scientific evidence.”
Some 40,000 documents from the now-defunct Eric Marshall Aquatic Research Library at the University of Manitoba are currently being relocated to a federal library in the Green Leader’s own riding. “Some of the library’s materials won’t be destroyed, but it is impossible to say just how much we’ve lost,” said May.
“This is the latest in the methodical destruction of fisheries and marine ecosystem intellectual resources,” said Janice Harvey, Fisheries Critic for the Green Party. “The same thing happened last year at the St. Andrews Biological Station, the oldest federal research facility in Canada.”
In addition to a state-of-the-art library facility with thousands of scientific documents, The St. Andrews Biological Station lost its ecotoxicology unit, whose scientists were at the forefront of research into the ecosystem effects of toxic chemicals used in the farmed salmon industry in the Bay of Fundy.
To date, the Harper administration has already shut down or consolidated an additional twelve library systems, serving departments ranging from Natural Resources to Parks Canada.

Dr. Phil Earle responds to Fisheries Minister Keith Ashfield

Below please find a response to Federal Fisheries Minister - Keith Ashfield from Dr. Phil Earle

 

Dear Minister Ashfield, March 1/2012

Part 1  

I would like to respond to your letter in a step wise manner, and I would like for you to answer my comments for the people of this province.

First what does “..we are time and again being out-performed by smaller countries with less access to the resource” refer to? Are you talking about NAFO countries that fish on our shelf, such as Spain? If it is, the answer is Spain has one of the largest fishing fleets in the world which is subsidized nearly a billion dollars a year by the EU to fish around the world.

Further if you and the DFO are inferring that we should therefore increase our efforts to catch more fish it would be a totally wrong conclusion. Our ground fish stocks have never recovered and are at an all-time low of less than 10% of historic healthy levels. We need to stop the fishing destruction that is occurring at present so the stocks can be allowed to recover. That includes the fishing inside our 200 mile EEZ and that of NAFO fleets fishing on the nose and tail of the grand banks.

Quote, “everyone is demanding change in how we manage the resource.” This is a non-specific remark that can be taken in a range all the way from more of the disastrous federal government’s mismanagement that has, and is destroying the resource to reducing government involvement in management while letting more influence in management from improved, prudent, scientific input like is done in other successful countries like Norway and Iceland.

 
“Canadian fishermen remain among the lowest earners in Canada.’ This is because the bulk of our resource and its profits are in the hands of a few powerful, wealthy people who own processing operations, and own quotas which your government gave to them. They operate factory freezer trawlers which have taken thousands of jobs away from inshore fishers while they send unprocessed fish away from our shore planets, giving jobs to foreign nation. Many harvesters’ licences are owned or contorted by corporations so that fishers working at sea have been squeezed out of their incomes by the need of companies to increase their profits.

 
There are people, such as doctors and dentists and the like, living on the main land who have never stepped on the deck of a boat who own fish quota’s, they receive millions of dollars a year from royalties on fish being caught. There is only so much profit that can be taken out of each season of fishing, if large percentages of this limited profit is taken by such ‘outsiders’ there is less and less for our fishers and plant workers.

 
Consider that in 1992, the year of the moratorium, our NL fishery was worth some $350 million and today it is near $900 million but yet our situation is worst then in 92 as we are losing more jobs and plants, fishers and coastal communities. So it’s easy to understand why our fishers are among the lowest earners in Canada, it is just economics 101. You can understand that can’t you?

“Canada’s fishery is becoming a smaller and smaller player on the world stage. We are no longer seeing the abundance of fish that our country enjoyed in the past, so we can no longer rely on the quantity of this renewable resource to create economic prosperity; better management practices are required. Our government has been making strides in helping the fishery.’

Our fishery is smaller because the bio mass of our fish is at an all-time low, the stocks have been destroyed are not allowed to recover because of mismanagement of the federal government. Your government wants to create economic prosperity for the elite few who now control the fishery.

Part 2  

Continuing the same practices that you have created in the past for giant corporations that has destroyed, and is, and will totally destroy the rest of the resource in the future if you continue in the manner you are implying in this letter.

 
The only way you can create further economic prosperity for anyone from our depleted, dying resource is for less and less peoples and corporations to take more and more of the less and less fish. You know what that means don’t you. In 10 years there will be no fishers, no plant workers, no comminutes in coastal NL and lastly no fishing corporations..because there will be no more fish.

Your government has been making strides in one direction, not in the direction of helping the fishery, but in the direct of destroying it, destroying our treasured heritage and our coastal communities, our maritime culture and our family structure. That is a Fact!

In 62 years of confederation you have taken away our spirit fish, by giving it indifferently to foreign countries, denied its access from our coastal people, and allowed cooperate greed to privatize and garbage can our legacy. You and you alone, the federal government of Canada, have destroyed the spirit of my people, whose ancestors were once the greatest fishermen in the world, the greatest sea people that ever lived.

”We must find ways to make the fishery more valuable, profitable and respectful of the resource for future generations.” If by value you mean the economic success of a few large processing companies there will be no respect of the resource, the fish stocks that god gave us, and in a few short years it will be no more. Your concern for “future generations” in that case is not just hollow, political, empty words they are the insensitive, thoughtless comments from a government who conducts themselves with absolute power, that have corrupted it absolutely.

Your corruption of power and ego is so complete that not only will it destroy the opportunities of our “future generations” of children; it would destroy that of your own children. Take a bow to the world Mr. Ashfield; take one for Canada to the world!

And as for the World Bank suggesting what we should do with our fishery for more money, they have a great record of being concerned for the global economy and the plight of the world starving peoples, who are in the 100's of millions. Their 100's of billions in profits and 100's of millions of dollars for salaries to their CEO’s really show how concerned they are for incomes of subsistence fisheries and laborers all over the world. They are concerned because it’s off the backs of labor industries that they cream off their billions, all on the backs of the struggling poor. Take another bow to the world Mr. Minister, for figuring out that you can squeeze out a few more million for the rich by abusing the lives of the fisher people.

All this ”.. means more jobs and more economic growth in our coastal and rural regions.”
The audaciousness of this remark is beyond my ability to express. How dare you write a letter and say such a thing about our fishery and to my people, and put it in our paper the telegram. You talk about more jobs and more economic growth in our coastal communities when you and the federal government are directly responsible in 20 years for destroying our families, fishers and fisheries jobs by the 10's of thousands. 

Part 3  

What you, and the federal government, are advocating in this letter will destroy our coastal way of life. Our NL soldiers fought in the great wars for Canada and the free world. Fought to protect their children’s, and their children’s children democratic rights as written in Canada’s ‘Chartered Bill of Rights’. If there is an ounce of decency anywhere in the halls of parliament or in the hearts of any person or member who works there I ask for it to be used to do the duty they have sworn to do. Administer to the costal people of NL, and their fishery, the principles so outlined in our bill of rights. Save us from the impending future genocide of our coastal way of life.

You asked for my engagement in this letter, of how we can better manage our Fishery for the future and how our coastal people can improve and save their lives. I have given you my honest answer to the best of my ability, so help me god.

Will you answer these questions for my people? The fisher people, the sea people of NL?

Philip Earle
B.Sc., M.Sc., M.D

Harper cheers for twins from Sweden - as Canadian Essential Services are CUT

So President Harper wants to see a hockey game in Boston.

President Harper hitches a ride with the Air-Force 1 wannabe to the USA.

A pleasant picture of President Harper and his daughter in the stands cheering for "Canada's" team is shown by Canadian media - the same media who were restricted to 5 questions during the election campaign.

This at a time when smiling Oh'Flaherty slices jobs and essential services to Canadians. At a time when the the maladroit Minister of Finance happily hops down the steps heading to Parliament; on route to heckling political adversaries who are fighting his draconian cuts.

You see the NHL is a professional sports league that offers a product of unessential entertainment - best described as grown men passing a rubber disc around an ice surface with an aim to shoot it into a net owned by the opposing team. These men are paid millions to break a sweat while skating in 35 to 50 second intervals - and occasionally hit each other with an elbow, stick, or fist.

So at a time when jobs are being cut in Harper's republic, Newfoundland and Labrador is losing a rescue centre, and essential services for Canadians are being trimmed down - the Prime Minister has absolutely NO excuse to use government assets to watch a hockey game.

Do you think Harper is an average Canadian? He should be - he was elected by average Canadians to manage their collective affairs.

Harper is a liar; of that there is no doubt - but Harper is also clearly vindictive - to the point where average Canadians are blaming each other for voting anything but Conservative. It is a real belief in this country that if a particular electoral district voted for anybody but a Conservative - they will be punished with cuts to services and jobs. Worse Canadians believe - if a Province failed to vote for and elect a majority of Conservative seats - that population will be punished.

In Newfoundland and Labrador there is evidence that this is the case and will continue. Harper once said we had an attitude of defeatism and liked welfare - providing the benefit was rich enough. Harper felt completely comfortable abusing his power - while travelling to watch "Canada's" team in the NHL match-up.

Considering all these teams are rostered with individuals that are from everywhere - the PM actually sat in the stands cheering twins from Sweden while Newfoundland and Labrador's player Michael Ryder cleaned Vancouver's clock.

The Prime Minister Harper asked us to ignore "contempt of Parliament" and "violations of the Elections Act" and concentrate on the economy. Well done Harper - you lied again.

Remember Premier Dunderdale this is "your" man. 

What's the Federal Government searching for on Google? Fishery of Newfoundland and Labrador?

Search words used by Federal Government office (The Government Telecommunications and Informatics Service) following the Budget:

"canada budget effect on dfo in newfoundland"

Is the Premier still looking for details? One way or the other Harper will nail Newfoundland and Labrador. 

Penashue tows the well worn Party Line - Follows Hearn and Manning

Well at least we did not have to wait long to see if Penashue would follow Manning and Hearn - yes he did.

Penashue's comment that massive budget cuts were "painful" but "responsible" - is the Conservative line.

With cuts in the Department of Fisheries - recovery of stocks and necessary science for sustainability will be impacted. That cannot really sit well with an aboriginal leader - can it?

As a Labradorian - is Peter concerned that cuts to Defence may spell trouble for Happy Valley-Goose Bay?

The 4 billion dollars budgeted to be eliminated - will mean ramifications to essential services - and Peter supporting that - does not seem to jive.

There is a possibility though - that Peter has made a deal for his people - the Innu - and perhaps the Nation will gain direct benefits from a deal.

The Innu Nation claims to protect its people from outside threats - that does include the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Government of Canada. The Innu Nation has fought industrialization which impacted their traditional life and lands (Lower Churchill). This was fixed by letting the Nation in on the project.

I prefer to let the Nation speak for itself on these issues: Below are statements taken from the Innu Nation site:


...It also made it mandatory for Innu children to attend school and threatened to stop welfare and family allowance payments to families whose children did not attend class.


As a result, many Innu families had to live in the communities for most of the year, despite their concerns that doing so would threaten their migratory way of life and connection to the land.

Innu parents also felt the school curriculum taught their children more about white North American society than their own and worried younger generations were being alienated from their cultural traditions.

Compounding these concerns were a string of post-Confederation forestry, mining, and other industrial developments that occurred on Innu land, but without Innu permission.

Most dramatic among these was the Upper Churchill Falls hydroelectric project, which flooded thousands of kilometers of land in Labrador, including valuable caribou habitat and Innu burial grounds. Although the Innu people used and depended on much of this area for centuries, the provincial government did not consult them before damming the Churchill River.

I do not believe the cuts will impact the Innu Nation or Peter's people - it will however continue to hurt Newfoundland and Labrador. This will be very interesting - and educational.

Cod and who pays?

Below is a response to my fisheries blog yesterday. I believe it is very important to dialogue back and forth agreeing or disagreeing - in an effort to find solutions to significant problems. Please read the response by a reader and my response to it. 

Response

Welcome back Sue. While I love your passion for our province I feel your bent about any of our provincial leaders ability to control or do anything about the fishery is misplaced as we only control processing licences.
Since the fishery is a national/international common property resource and the majority of Canada's population lives either in ON/QU or Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver for all intensive purposes we have no say in how the fishery is managed or controlled. In fact I submit to you that all of the national parties use it as a bargaining chip to better the majority of the population through DFAIT.

Until we start electing Independent federal MP's nothing will change because it is essentially an

National/International Tragedy of our Commons at the hands of our

Tyranny of the majority political system

where by any and all of the national party MP's we elect to represent us on the federal stage will continue to toe their national party lines of doing what is in the best interest of the majority of the population to get their national party elected or re-elected.

We need a veto on fisheries issues in the national party cabinets,and NAFO. Even if we have to do it in conjunction with the maritime provinces.

Wanna make a bet that the 2013 UNLOS deadline will come and pass with the flemish cap being given away and or ownership and control since we already have custodial management being the adjacent state just we all of hte national parties choose not to act on it.


Response to the Response

You will notice that I continue to state the federal government is responsible for the mismanagement and therefore responsible for compensation.
Provincial leaders have the responsibility to go after the feds if they believe we have been wronged.
The federal government is not going to pursue itself.
If you were wronged personally or in business due to mismanagement of a responsibility of the other party you are the only one that could take an action.
While the provincial leaders do not have jurisdiction over many areas (confederation) all provincial leaders fight for fairness and equity for their province.
This case is unique - the feds manage our fish stocks unlike manage the weather in the case of western farming losses year over year. And even though the farms are not the responsibility of the feds (unlike our fishery) they are still compensated year over year.
Regardless of who goes to Ottawa - the federal system will never work for our province.


It is time that this province sought and received compensation for the following:
Loss of economic value of the ground-stocks for ten years.(first ten years tags encarp)
Loss of population = loss of transfer payments (not equalization)
Revenue to the province for increased costs due to increased need for seniors care (once provided for by the moved away family members)
Compensation directly to rural communities for outrageous losses of property value and tax base
Compensation in the form of increased federal presence in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Whistle-Blower - Gross Mismanagement - and the DFO?

We are half way there - Headlines in the Nova Scotia Chronicle Herald says: Ottawa to probe DFO mismanagement claim.

Apparently the DFO has placed a tender call to:

Conduct a fact-finding exercise to determine if there are sufficient grounds to commence an investigation to validate the allegations of gross mismanagement.

Currently the DFO will not reveal the details of the allegation but if there are sufficient grounds to deal with the complaint then all will be made public.

Is it possible this has to do with fish? Our groundfish? Or the Coast Guard?
In either case our crack reporters should get on the ball to find a whistle-blower of their own - to get some information.

PEI drops lawsuit against Feds - Will we pay the Price?

PEI drops Lawsuit against Feds over fisheries management...according to a Canadian Press Story.

The action, launched two years ago by the former provincial Conservative government - challenged the absolute constitutional power of the federal minister to make licensing and management decisions.

It appears the legal challenge - which had no guarantee of being successful - was becoming too costly and apparently the government of PEI and the feds are making some headway in negotiations.

Provincial Fisheries Minister Allan Campbell cited progress on some outstanding issues, such as the herring seiner exclusion line - which the Minister says has been resolved.

Now what's next on the negotiation agenda? According to Ed Frenette - managing director of the PEI Fishermen's Association:

It rests now on negotiations between the two levels of government to increase access to various resources for Island fishers: specifically snow crab, shrimp and ground fish.

So Newfoundland and Labrador fishers - my question is and yours should be - what regional share of crab - shrimp - and ground fish? Now that Loyola Hearn and PEI appear to be cozy - and the law-suit is gone - will we pay part of the price with resources adjacent to us?

Maybe we should sue the feds - we might get some cooperation on our fisheries issues.

Fisheries Broadcast represents the fishery ...

better than all our elected politicians - fish merchants - and industry unions combined. If not for the Broadcast - the fishery would be completely off the sonar. John Furlong puts the tough questions to all parties and properly let's us the listeners make up our own mind.

Despite the attempts of politicians the FFAW and merchants to keep the fishery a secret - the Broadcast continues to bring the news - good and bad to the public. With respect to our federal and provincial lot of politicians and senior bureaucracy - all of which we pay - I have never seen such a cover up of planned resettlement - outmigration - and giveaway of this precious and renewable resource. We - the people - are not supposed to know.

Two things this morning - first the link to the Broadcast - where you can listen to John's interviews with Applebaum and Bevin on the latest NAFO fiasco and a story in the Globe and Mail where the writer describes us this way:

On the domestic front, after fighting against consolidation in the industry for decades, those shell shuckers in the Newfoundland and Labrador government have approved a preliminary agreement for the sale and breakup of FPI Ltd. (FPL-TSX). Some of those assets will likely come High Liner's way.

Thanks to a Sue's Blog reader for pointing out the Globe piece.

Thanks to the Fisheries Broadcast and John Furlong for keeping our history - culture - and future in the public eye. I recommend that all Sue's Blog readers consider adding the Broadcast to their daily regimen of news.

And a big Brick to our politicians who either through ignorance or duplicity are keeping the information from us. When you think about the HOA scandal the Mount Cashel cover-up - the latest healthcare disaster - and the wrongful convictions - and remember nothing good ever comes from keeping the truth from us. Speak now or lose this industry and resource for good.

Bob Applebaum brought 2 things to our Province:

New Update at bottom of Post

First he delivered very disturbing information on NAFO proposed reforms and negotiations and Second he delivered a typical mainland attitude.

Attendance - Poor

The attendance was poor - the usual interested parties - noted scientist - ex provincial government officials - 2 politicians one sitting and one wannabe - Scott Simms - and Siobhan Coady - a few fishermen a couple of people who have been around the fishery for many years and a couple of journalists. Notably there were some young people - I am not sure if they were students interested in the talk or given an assignment to cover it - or if they were youth simply interested in the resource. I know one was there for the latter. From the open-line circuit - there was Morris Budgell - Agnes - Carl Powell myself and of course organizer of the event Gus Etchegary. If one was an independent observer - one could conclude the fishery in the province was perfect - no problem. There were more people there who were not directly involved in the fishery and people retired from government ranks than were directly employed by the resource. All in all maybe 70 or so people.

There is no question that Applebaum had a captive audience and he delivered some very concerning news to say the least. Let me relate his story to you - the reader.
Applebaum was asked to appear in front of a Senate Committee headed by Senator Bill Rompkey - to address potential amendments to the NAFO convention. As Applebaum explains - he has been retired for 10 years - so at the time of the request he was not up on the latest goings on. (That tells me a little right there) If somebody is directly affected by the fishery collapse - or associated with a community being destroyed by the moratorium - that person would not be able to walk away without keeping up on the latest. (However Bob lives in Ontario and has not relied on the fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador for a living.) In either case Applebaum set about getting himself a briefing from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Bob is a lawyer and as he was briefed by department officials he found himself skimming the documents he was provided. While listening and skimming he found the change from a simple majority vote to that of two-thirds. He was shocked and immediately interrupted the briefing to ask department officials about that. They all plead ignorant to the change and some of them scurried out of the room to find out what was going on. According to Applebaum all the experts for Canada missed it - lawyers - delegates - department officials - the whole lot of them. He explained that Canada started out with the right objective - to strengthen NAFO - by changing the simple member objection system to one of arbitration. This apparently is relative to nations agreeing to TAC (total allowable catches and quotas) - only to return to their country and have that country file and objection and set their own numbers. The idea was to change the system into one which has an arbitration board to respond to any nation's objection. He further explained that the panel would not have the right to issue a final decree - but nevertheless it would look better.

Next Applebaum discovered language in an amendment that essentially could give NAFO control inside our 200 mile limit. He was absolutely appalled that this one element which he said was solid (that is we have control to 200 miles) would be opened at all. Upon further research he discovered that this change had come about under very odd circumstances. Number one it was not an objective officially considered at the immediate past NAFO meetings - and in fact it was a passing comment by a Russian official as everybody was walking out the door. Secondly he discovered that the individual who was charged with putting language to that which WAS agreed to was a person within the EU delegation - something which Applebaum said was conflicting.

Throughout his presentation the former Director of DFO's International Directorate expressed surprise and disbelief at what the Canadian officials missed - and that the delegation including reps from Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador were supporting amendments which apparently nobody understood.

There is no question that Applebaum has delivered information which if let go would be disastrous to the Newfoundland and Labrador fishery and he caught red-handed the DFO and Canada either being entirely ignorant or ???

Throughout his presentation - Applebaum kept expressing surprise that this could happen and his shock that no official in the Canadian delegation picked up on it - including Department officials and lawyers advising.

He then let the officials go away and figure out what was going on and they would meet at a later date. When they got together again the people of the Department who claimed no knowledge of the sweeping and damaging changes began to justify those changes. This shocked him further as he noted their explanations were daft and in fact were dangerously flawed. He wondered again - out loud - what could have happened to these people.

He appeared at the Senate Hearings and then wrote a letter to Minister Hearn. He is not sure where the whole works stands at the moment.

The floor was opened for comments and questions and some interesting ones came forth. When I got my turn at the floor - I asked if it was possible that these unbelievable changes and the defence of them were resulting from interference from International Trade and Foreign Affairs. Here's where the mainlander and bureaucrat came out in spades. He first advised me I would not like the answer and then proceeded to state that this feeling was a Newfoundland and Labrador myth. In fact he would rather say that all officials from the Canadian delegation were ignorant - dozens of educated advisers just plain incompetent - rather than admit that the department under his guidance or any of his predecessors and successors buckled to the direction of another department.

Then it became interesting as Gus Etchegary took to the mike to explain to his guest that he was wrong and that in fact he (Gus)was present at meetings where quotas in our fishing zone was bartered to correct and international trade matter.

Applebaum also delivered his opinion that custodial management on the nose and tail of the Grand Banks and the Flemish cap was not real - he said that Loyola found that out when he became Minister - then he used a Department line that custodial management had many meanings. Again Gus took to the mike to take him to task over that.

There is no doubt that Applebaum delivered invaluable information - unfortunately when it came to explaining why the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian NAFO delegation would allow this to happen - he grasped at ignorance rather than nefarious doings by others.

He demonstrated his bureaucratic prowess again when he stated that all NAFO members had only one vote each at the table - to which Jim Winter piped up and said one of the parties had 2 votes. When Applebaum asked which Winter informed him that it was France - one as France and one under st Pierre and Miquelon. To this Applebaum said that was not right because SPM could not be counted on by the French to take their side. Really? Imagine that!

All in all - I say thank-you to Applebaum for picking up on these potentially devastating changes and no thanks for delivering a typical Central Canadian attitude.

The biggest question of all should be - where is Tom Rideout our Great Premier and leaders of the Opposition Parties? These people we pay to look after our interests have apparently done nothing to educate themselves on this most significant matter. They can read - no differently than Applebaum and they have many more staff to conduct research than this retired Ontarian has. Again we go blindly into our future despite the absolute disaster which is our fishery. What's on the BBQ tonight guys?

As for Loyola Hearn - we know where he is - at the bottom of Stephen Harper's heap of discarded PC's - absent Newfoundland guts to fight for us.

Thanks to Gus for organizing the event.

Since I posted this David Bevin Assistant Deputy Minister Fisheries and Aquaculture management - DFO - appeared on Open Line with Randy Simms to respond to Applebaum's presentation. A few things are made clearer by Bevin - One: the Canadian delegation DID NOT pick up on the 2 significant amendments or were up to something else UNTIL Applebaum brought them to task. In other words backpedaling. Next he failed to tell Randy and Randy did not have enough information to ask - what happened to the EU fellow originally responsible for drafting the NAFO documents and finally that we would know nothing from our own paid politicians or from Ottawa unless Applebaum made the situation public. In other words everything normal - at the DFO. There is also a significant difference in legal opinion as it relates to the simple majority versus two-thirds voting mechanism.

For information of readers ... this is a copy of the letter sent by Bob Applebaum to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans - Loyola Hearn. Applebaum pointed out that the letter has been widely circulated.

The Honourable Loyola Hearn

Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

Cc Minister of Foreign Affairs

Minister of Justice



Dear Sir,

I am writing in regard to the current negotiations on the reform of NAFO.

I am a former Director General of the International Directorate in the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, was involved in the Law of the Sea negotiations that resulted in the establishment of the 200-mile zone, and in the negotiations that resulted in the NAFO Convention. A major part of my work in the Department, until I retired in 1996, was in the implementation, year to year, of that Convention.

I spoke at the hearings conducted by Senator Rompkey a few months ago. At those hearings and in a subsequent consultation with DFO officials I raised two major concerns about the texts being developed at that time in the negotiations on NAFO reform:

A) that one of the fundamental, structural provisions in the existing NAFO Convention, the provision that expressly restricted the Fisheries Commission’s management jurisdiction to the area outside 200 miles, protecting Canadian sovereign rights and exclusive control over the 200-mile zone, was being eroded; and

B) that the proposal to change the voting system in the NAFO Convention, to require conservation and allocation decisions to be adopted by a 2/3 majority instead of the existing simple majority, would make it harder for Canada to achieve the adoption of restrictive TAC’s and to protect Canada’s allocation shares.

As regards the first point, it is worth remembering that one of the primary Canadian objectives at the Law of the Sea Conference was to terminate international management inside what is now the Canadian 200-mile zone. The NAFO Convention was negotiated soon after world-wide adoption of 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zones, and there was concern on the part of Canadian governments and stakeholders that, in the effort then underway to control fishing outside 200 miles, nothing be done that could be construed as giving away, to any degree, Canada’s exclusive right to manage inside the 200-mile limit. The NAFO Convention was constructed accordingly to ensure that the Fisheries Commission could not, under any circumstances, even with Canadian government approval, adopt management decisions which applied inside 200 miles. Putting it another way, in the absence of an amendment to the NAFO Convention, it was not possible for a Canadian delegation at a NAFO meeting, even with Canadian government approval, to support, or for the Fisheries Commission to make, a decision of this kind, by consensus or otherwise. TAC’s and quotas adopted by the Fisheries Commission could apply legally only outside 200 miles, and Canada, unilaterally and voluntarily, applied them inside 200 miles so that catches by Canadian fishermen would not be the cause of TAC overruns.

Any idea that an international fisheries commission would have management authority inside the Canadian 200-mile limit would have been inconceivable at that time, both to Canada and to the other States involved in the negotiations.

The foregoing will, I hope, provide the background for my concerns about current developments in the negotiation of NAFO reform. The most recent texts I have seen make it clear that DFO officials have agreed to allow NAFO Fisheries Commission management decisions to apply, legally, inside 200 miles. The terminology now being suggested, "by consensus" is intended to indicate that decisions in this respect cannot be adopted if the Canadian delegation, at the particular NAFO meeting, speaks out against them. However it is a weak term, used in international negotiations to open the door for overriding "hold-outs" when they are a small minority. No matter what terms are used, the current proposed texts expressly provide for international management of fisheries inside Canadian waters.

As regards the proposed 2/3 voting rule, it is difficult to conceive how it is not obvious that this will make it harder to achieve adoption of restrictive TAC’s (more participants will have to be paid off in some way, usually with allocations) and harder for Canada to get decisions that protect its own traditional shares (the most likely source of "pay-off" allocations).

I am aware, Minister, that you have dedicated yourself to NAFO reform, for the purpose of improving international control of foreign fishing outside 200 miles. However I do not believe that you intended to achieve NAFO reform at the cost of Canada’s sovereign rights, and, more particularly, exclusive management rights, inside the Canadian 200-mile limit. I do not believe you want to achieve a NAFO reform that strengthens the ability of the major foreign fishing States to achieve the establishment of TAC’s higher than those required for conservation, to reduce Canadian shares of those TAC’s, and, if the negotiations continue the way they have been going, to determine TAC’s and Canadian and foreign quotas in Canadian waters.



Yours sincerely,



B. Applebaum

Again I want the inspection of all Slaughter Houses in the EU and the USA

Belgium - England - and maybe Germany...as the EU countries line-up to continue push for ban of Seal Harvest.

Belgium has already banned all seal products - England is lobbying the EU for a ban - and now the Agriculture Minister of Germany will introduce legislation.

Horst Seehofer, Germany's agriculture minister, said he has repeatedly urged the European Union to prohibit imports of all seal products, but has grown tired of waiting for action.

He said he will introduce a bill to ban imports in Germany, but it remains unclear when that will happen or if there is political support for a ban.

This from a CP story today.

And what is our Minister doing? Let me remind you - Loyola Hearn is inviting "observers" (protesters) from all over the world to come and watch.

It is time that the Departments of International Trade and Foreign Affairs took a stand. Let's start demanding inspections of all slaughter houses in Europe and the United States.

The games have begun again this year in earnest - these groups need to raise as much money as they can for the next month or so on the backs of our sealers. Fishers in New Brunswick and PEI are also throwing it back at Newfoundland and Labrador to deal with. Atlantica should be fun!

I want Canada to inspect all slaughter houses in Europe and the USA

Listen Loyola Hearn - you are what we call in Newfoundland and Labrador "a wimp".
Just as the seal harvest is about to begin again the money gouging "protest" groups are launching their campaign to kill the industry.

So what is Ottawa going to do? Well now you might have to stay back 20 metres from the harvest site. In fact Loyola says - to the Canadian Press reporter - "We are getting out the information and we are encouraging people to come and see for themselves and then make up their minds."
Enough is enough - we now have Canadian fishers questioning the hunt because their fishing enterprises are bring jeopardized by these opportunistic zealots. It's time the Department's of Foreign Affairs and International Trade got off their a**es and took some real action.

It is time that Canadians demanded to inspect each and every slaughter house in the USA and Europe. We should determine ourselves if the pigs chickens and cows are being raised and then killed humanely. But no - we invite more people to a location which is clearly unsafe - where harvesters are using high powered rifles in an open environment. We put our own people at risk to justify a sustainable and humane taking of seals.

We have New Brunswick and PEI trying to distance themselves from the harvest and have reps from these to provinces nailing Newfoundland and Labrador.

For anybody that has any doubt - this is about fundraising - this is the key event every year and these groups plan to take enough donations off our backs to last them the rest of the year. There is no doubt the largest continual running protest is against this province and our sealers. We have thousands of species around the world at risk and close to extinction - but the largest campaign is against us.

Whatever Loyola says or even believes - his bureaucrats are leading him - by the nose - to another slaughter house - the cessation of our harvest. Wake up Loyola - you're a Southern Shore Boy - you need to protect your people - your culture - and the livelihoods of people you represent.

Let's see if you can get Ottawa to show some muscle and start demanding the same "observation" rights that these people are demanding.

Anne of Green Fables really confused...

On the heels of the PEI Fishermen's Association calling on DFO officials to move off the Island during the seal harvest - because it hurts their tourism - and "they are not killers of seals" - the same group complains about their quota of seals being too low.

Oh yes it's true - this quote from a story in the Daily News in Nova Scotia

The P.E.I. Fishermen’s Association is not happy with this year’s quota of 2,100 animals — an allotment they’ll have to share with sealers from Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and the Magdalen Islands.

and what's worse - there's no affection for their seals!!!

There’s no great affection for grey seals, since they cause extensive damage to lobster gear and other fishing gear, he said.

As one person said to the Fisheries Broadcast and a Sue's Blog reader agreed (see comments in the first story) it's time for Newfoundland and Labrador to get their potatoes from somebody other than Anne of Green Fables.

Anne of Green Fables joins Heather Mills (McCartney)

in protest over the seal harvest.

In an unanticipated move - Anne (PEI Tourism) is joining the ranks of Heather Mills (McCartney)in the fight to stop the seal harvest. It seems the Green Fables are seriously impaired by people who don't approve of the hunt - and Anne is asking the DFO to protect her interests - and leave the Island while the harvest is going on.

According to DFO officials the protesters and "observers" camp in PEI because of geography. ??? OK Therefore DFO feels it's important that they are there to answer questions about the harvest. ???

This is what the executive director of the P.E.I. Fishermen's Association - Ed Frenette - said to CBC about the harvest and his obvious support for the well-being of fishers from other Provinces.

"We've had responses from people around the world saying they refuse to come to P.E.I. during tourism season because they view us as being the killers of seals, when in fact we're not."

Another clear example of trying to have the best of both worlds while pitching any negatives to Newfoundland and Labrador. The PEI Fishermen's Association should just come out with it - do they support the seal harvest or not? Fish or cut bait guys or you are no better than the money grabbing organizations that make their living slitting our economic throats.

So Little Anne is on a mission to boot the DFO off the Island and take a crack at her neighbours in Newfoundland and Labrador while she's at it. In fact if you use your imagination and add a few more tragic moments to the story - one could see Heather Mills playing the role of Anne for a summer or two.

In either case the next time you think of vacationing in PEI - think about the less than hospitable Anne (PEI Tourism) - and how she feels about Newfoundland and Labrador.

NAFO REFORMS SUCCESSFUL???

I read with interest our federal Minister's take on NAFO reforms. Loyola Hearn appears convinced all is well on the high seas because there have been ZERO citations beyond Canada's 200 mile limit. His confidence is a little naive and comes a little too soon (2 months).

Now I don't know if this is proof that foreign vessels are no longer plundering or if the ships they are inspecting are predictable or if they are simply not catching the right vessels. But to believe that greed has been curbed by NAFO reforms - is a little bit naive. The need to break the rules is always present - regardless of what system we are talking about. Now we need to question why realistically we have not managed to detect one violator.

I did find one other disturbing claim in the Minister's News Release

The truth is the new reforms hit vessel owners where it hurts–the wallet. Captains caught significantly misreporting their catch by at-sea inspectors must return to port for inspection.

Tell me what does "significantly misreporting" mean. Is there a threshold of abuse that we do tolerate? Who makes that call? What percentage of a catch is considered okay to be misreported?

Great news for an election - not much else though.

Lloyd's Limerick Land

Well Lloyd a regular reader and contributor to Sue's Blog is beside himself over the various antics of our politicians these days - including Tom's plan for a cod pot when all the bait may go to the "fish farms".

and now he weighs in on the proposed holiday and double billing...

Here's Lloyd's Limerick and I encourage other readers to try their hand at poetically releasing their political frustrations.

O yes,let's have a new holiday,
Celebrate it the John Hickey Way
Bill the IEC,
In that we ,
Can have some fun without having to pay.

First Federal Election Promise???

Breaking News...

Speak up Loyola - tell us what's happening...

Will the DFO and Coast Guard facilities currently located in Charlottetown be moved to Newfoundland and Labrador?

Out of CBC in PEI comes the story that Cardigan MP Lawrence MacAulay wants the DFO and coast guard facilities moved into his riding. The story quotes MacAuley as saying:

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans is considering a move out of Charlottetown, said MacAulay, and he believes Georgetown would be a great location.

Tell us Minister Hearn is this true? Is Newfoundland and Labrador being considered? Minister Rideout do you know anything about this? Is the Province lobbying on our behalf?

One woman from Nova Scotia puts the boots to DFO

Well done Josephine - we could use a few more!

This is the text of a submission by Josephine Kennedy to the Scotia-Fundy Herring Advisory Committee:

Feb. 6/07


* 1. Mr. Chairman and committee members, I’m Josephine Burke-Kennedy. I represent multi-species license holders in Eastern Cape Breton. These licenses include but not limited to the following: lobster, snowcrab, scallop, swordfish, herring gillnet and mackerel. Also, my husband besides holding some of the above licenses has been a purse-seine fisherman for the past 34 years. I have many questions regarding the issue of mid water trawl, not the least is the fact that this method of fishing is capable of complete annihilation of any specie of fish that it targets. Mr. Chairman, there’s a saying, “that if you don’t learn from your past mistakes, history will surely repeat itself”. Unfortunately, those at the Department are doomed to have history repeated. The communities of Louisbourg, Lunenburg, Canso, North Sydney and most of the coastline of Newfoundland have been devastated simply because the bureaucrats in DFO choose to listen to the boys with the suits instead of the men in rubber boots. Long before the collapse of the groundfishery, DFO was told by the fishermen what was about to happen. Did the department listen? We know what the answer to that question is: NO. And who suffered the most because of DFO’s mismanagement. Our fishermen and communities, not the suits. Fishermen told DFO that the groundfishery could not sustain such high quotas but DFO said that the fishery was healthy. What happened, who was right? Mid-water trawl results in too much fish being taken too fast. Our towns of Louisbourg, Canso and North Sydney will never recover because of bureaucratic bungling. The most devastating of all was the wanton destruction of lives. The bureaucrats whose stupid, idiotic decisions caused this devastation should be held criminally liable for their actions. This bureaucratic mis-management cost the taxpayers between 4-5 billion dollars, this money could have went to Health, Education, Child care or Seniors, but instead it was to cover the asses of bureaucratic idiots. DFO you have played Russian Roulette with all chambers full once too often.
* 2. Greg Peacock, you have on numerous occasions when we spoke, said that it wasn’t necessary for a meeting of all sectors of industry including mackerel, swordfish and tuna, because in your words everyone was in agreement with mid-water trawling on small pelagics. Well, if this being the case, why not conduct a vote immediately with a show of hands who is pro mid-water trawling.
* 3. I’ve been trying to understand the department’s burning desire to bring back mid-water trawling on small pelagics. Can you Greg and Claire explain this reasoning! What negotiations have gone on behind closed doors that has encouraged the department to bring back this method?
* 4. My understanding from the department is that there is only one Herring Mid-water trawl license in Scotia-Fundy and that’s limited to <65’. Has the department under the guise of science issued more mid-water trawl licenses for herring?
* 5. Back in the late 80’s early 90’s two Gulf based seiners the “Apollo and the Gemini No.1” rigged up for mid water trawl on mackerel. They weren’t successful in their pursuit of mackerel, instead they requested the department to allow them to midwater trawl on herring and that the allocation come from their own herring purse-seine quota. The DFO said absolutely not. Why was it NO then and yes now.?
* 6. The Department failed miserably in not including other fishing sectors in the discussions regarding this mwtrawl regime. Why did the department only include mackerel fishermen into the discussions when it was in the department’s best interest to do so, and then conveniently leave them out when decisions that would detrimentally affect the mackerel fishermen were made. I believe the department and its senior staff should and must be held personally liable for failure to act in ‘good faith’ and to keep the best interest of the existing fishing sectors first and foremost. Perhaps the time has come for a full inquiry into the decisions made by the department.
* 7. The department’s desire regarding the necessity to acquire science data on the mackerel/herring stocks on the Scotian Shelf, should and is met with a great deal of skepticism. According to the department the acoustical equipment utilized by the “Julieanne 111” isn’t compatible with DFO’s equipment and at this time the department is unable to download or edit the information from this vessel. So can those decision makers within the department explain to me and others how this vessel contributes to the department’s quest for stock assessment of small pelagics on the Scotian Shelf. How does Mid water trawling for science assessment benefit the department more so than the data recovered from purse-seine fishing? To me this has been a Mid water trawl herring fishery in disguise directly from day one. How did signed JPA’s to conduct a Science Survey for Mackeral become a full-fledged herring fishery?
* 8. According to the three year management plan for herring there is a sentence that states : “ DFO retains the right to make decisions in the best interest of the fishery”. Greg, can you explain how allowing Mid water trawling is in the best interest of the fishery and the thousands of people who depend it? Since DFO has abused it’s right, I believe the Minister must remove those DFO personel responsible for putting the entire herring/mackerel fishery in jeopardy. We are not stupid, we all know that 12,000 tons of herring won’t be enough compensation for the “Julieanne 111” let alone four vessels especially when there’s already a power play for quota happening behind the scenes. That power play is ownership.
* 9. Has the department given any consideration or forethought to the large pelagic fishery of Tuna and Swordfish? As the US Eastern Seaboard Tuna/Swordfish industry will attest, their fishery has been dismal due to the lack of food fish for the large pelagic. Common sense, if used, would tell officials that if you annihilate the feed for a specie, then that specie will go elsewhere to ensure it’s survival. The New England Fishery Management Council has restricted mid-water trawl to harvesting herring from June to September. They are allowing however purse seiners to continue to harvest the herring resource. Hence, the move to revamp from Mid Water vessels to purse-seiners. After several conversations with fishermen along the Eastern seaboard of US and informing them of our intentions to have our Conservative government ban midwater trawl on pelagics, they will be meeting to push for total removal of midwater trawls on herring.
* 10. Lobster and Snow Crab fishermen depend on mackerel and herring for bait and as a way to supplement their incomes after our short fishing seasons. Our lobster season in Eastern Cape Breton lasts for 2 months and overlaps with our snow crab season. The added benefit of being able to catch their own supply of bait, helps to lower expenses. Where will the supply of bait for our lobster/snowcrab fisheries come from and at what price? Again we say NO to mid water trawling. A few pounds of herring or mackerel to Lunar may not mean much but to a small fishermen it means the difference between paying the power bill or being in the dark.



My family has never recovered from the closure of the groundfishery. In the

80’s my father became one of DFO’s bureaucratic statistics. Dad had hoped his longline license would be a nest egg for retirement. DFO made sure this didn’t happen. Instead they allowed the mid water trawl vessels to continue the destruction. The result, my father lost his boat because there weren’t any fish to catch. Our family faced total ruin. Thanks to the bureaucrats. My father has never recovered from this ordeal. Dad is 80 years old and working on a deck lobster boat because thanks to DFO his nest egg evaporated. I have a personal thorn in my ass over mid water trawl. I give my solemn word that I will fight mid water trawl with the last breath that I take. My children and grandchildren would never forgive me if I give up now.

And finally, Mr. Banks, don’t take this personally, there’s no place for your mid water trawler or any other in Canada. So when you’re ready to take the ‘Julieanne 111’ back to Scotland, give me a call and I will throw your lines off for you.

Thank you very much.

Point to Ponder:

To the people who have investments large or small, in plants, boats and equipment. What will you do next year when the DFO tells that, sorry guys, we have to put a moratorium on herring? What will you do? What will your investments be worth? We must learn from past mistakes, people lost everything when the cod moratorium announced. Don’t let this happen to you. Remember the bureaucrats said the cod stocks were healthy and that we could never fish them out, the fishermen said the stocks were in danger. Who was right?

Canada uses a "torx" to screw us again!

I was just taking a peek inside the tool-chest of Canada - you know - the kind with several compartments for different tools.

The first compartment marked "Ontario" had a well worn tool belt that holds a hammer - a measuring tape - screwdriver - pliers - level - and a pouch for some nails and screws.

The second compartment marked Quebec had only a little sticker marked "supervisor" and a saw.

Then I spied a compartment called Newfoundland and Labrador - all that was there was the following work order:

1. The supervisor for this job is the Premier of Quebec - Charest
2. The foreman for this job is the Premier of Ontario - McGuinty
3. This project to continue indefinitely until the job is complete

Remove fish from the North East Atlantic - send them wherever you like
Remove train and tracks from Newfoundland
Remove any coast guard or naval vessels
Remove iron ore from Labrador - send to Quebec
Remove nickel - send to Ontario
Demolish federal government offices in Newfoundland and Labrador - rebuild in Ontario and Quebec
Build new transmission lines from Quebec to Ontario
Take new power from the Lower Churchill and deliver to Ontario and Quebec via the new transmission line
Prevent tourists from going to Newfoundland and Labrador by raising rates and refusing to build new ferries
Do not build the Labrador highway
Do not build military installments in Newfoundland and Labrador
Reduce the number of airports in Newfoundland and Labrador
Do not repair wharves and docks in Newfoundland and Labrador
Dismantle Fisheries Products International - deliver to Bill Barry - John Risley - and Ches Penney
Remove any remaining fish quotas and deliver to the Chinese Government - please contact the Minister of International Trade for assistance

You will find the workers for this job waiting in North Sydney in vehicles with Newfoundland and Labrador plates.

Any difficulties please contact the the Office of the Premier Newfoundland and Labrador 709-729-3570 if there is no answer please try the Office of the Official Opposition at 709-729-3391.

If you have difficulties with the workers please contact the Fraser Institute and ask to speak to Brian Tobin the head of Turbot Sculptures and Spinning Wheels.

If you are met by an angry mob - wait one day - and return - they will be gone.

Nova Scotia fights DFO over Scottish Trawler

As the inshore fishers in Nova Scotia fight for their lives - the DFO prepares to "manage" another resources.

Read the story on the fight - at least their fishers are engaged!

Here's a quote from the CBC story:

"There is no place that fish can hide, other than a cave in the water," Josephine Kennedy said before the meeting. "It's like shooting fish in a barrel with a machine-gun."

Read the complete story: PRESS HERE