May
2002 Workshop Notes
::: Dr.
Elliott Norse, Marine Conservation Biology Institute :::
Marine Conservation Workshop
May 24, 2002
Cacilia’s Bed & Breakfast, Tlell
10 am - 3 pm
Disclaimer: Please
note that this is a paraphrased record of events. Any misrepresentation
in participants’ comments, questions, and/or responses is
unintentional.

Introduction by
John Farrell (Facilitator):
- Introduction of the hereditary chiefs and
elders and recognition of the two sponsors for the workshop: World
Wildlife Fund Canada (Lynn Lee) and the Haida Fisheries Program (Russ
Jones).
- Welcome to territory by Reynold Russ and a
prayer by John Williams.
- Background and impetus for the workshop:
- Islanders have put a great deal of effort
into terrestrial management (eg. cedar strategy, community forest, and
land use plans) but we are falling short on extending resource
management needs into marine habitats. World Wildlife Fund and the
Haida Fisheries Program are moving this discussion forward.
- Marine conservation is a tool to protect
values that need protection—we need to identify which values
we want to protect and how we want to protect them (eg. herring,
abalone, urchins, geoduck, mariculture/aquaculture). To date the focus
has been primarily on Gwaii Haanas—now it is time to think
outside of the park and consider all the waters surrounding Haida Gwaii.
- Introduction of Dr. Elliott Norse, President
and Founder of the Marine Conservation Biology Institute in Redmond,
Washington.
Presentation by
Dr. Elliott Norse:
- Honoured to be here—“in
this beautiful, special place.”
- Encourages two-way learning—since
1969 he has been training himself about marine conservation, and he is
here to share this knowledge but also to learn himself.
- During his research on blue crabs in the
Caribbean he learned that “the ocean gives life, food, and
the air we breathe.” However he has also noticed that the
ocean is in trouble—things are changing faster and faster
over the past twenty to thirty years. “The things we have
loved and worshiped are disappearing and, in some cases, things we
don’t love are becoming more abundant.”
- Haida Gwaii is an important place because the
sea here is in better shape than in many other places. In other places
excessive nutrients (run-off), pollution, and fishing have harmed the
marine ecosystem. Similarly, on Haida Gwaii things have been taken from
the ocean at unsustainable rates and things that were once abundant are
no longer. However, Haida Gwaii people are an “ocean
people” and everyone here is connected to the ocean directly
(“it is part of you”—in art, on the table
etc.). The question is then, “What do you do about
it?”
- Suggestion to focus on the possibility of using
marine protected areas (MPAs) as a way of bringing back the life and
the wealth of the ocean. People seem to understand the value of
protecting the land, and use terrestrial protected areas to achieve
that, however we haven’t yet adopted this idea for the sea.
- In 1872 the first national park in the United
States was designated. In 1972—a full century
later—the first national marine sanctuary was designated.
Terrestrial national parks serve to protect wildlife, scenic beauty,
and a spiritual connection to place. MPAs, on the other hand, are small
and few and don’t seem to protect very much (“they
mainly keep out oil and gas development”).
- The biggest threat to marine ecosystems is
fisheries—“we’ve taken more than the
ocean can sustain and harmed the capacity of the ocean to
replenish.” MPAs may be a tool to bring back species that are
almost gone.
- In fisheries management in the United States,
fish stocks are managed one-by-one. This is expensive and requires a
lot of science—and even then politicians don’t
always listen to the scientists.
- An alternative may be to look at the ocean in
another way—“We are going to protect certain areas
and agree (for the good of us all) that we won’t take fish
from these areas. Then we watch to ensure no one cheats.” In
this scenario there may be less fishing overall, but fish catches may
also increase because we are protecting the places where fish breed,
grow up, and rear young (thereby allowing fish populations to rebuild).
- Fish leave (disperse from) MPAs in two ways:
- As small adults (spillover). This has been
demonstrated by the experience of “fishing the
line” (the best place to fish is at the edge of a marine
reserve).
- Eggs/larvae are carried away as plankton and
start producing fish in surrounding areas.
- Within a marine reserve where nobody fishes,
“you have more fish and bigger fish.” This is
because 10 fish each weighing 100kg will produce far more eggs than 100
fish each weighing 10 kg. Little fish are concerned with growth, not
with producing eggs. Likewise, large fish can put more energy into egg
production.
- Therefore MPAs are a tool for conserving
biological diversity in which everybody can win. In the short term
people may have to travel farther to fish and may have lower catches,
however the global experience has demonstrated that in 3 to 5 years
things begin to get better. MPAs are fairly recent (1970s) and only now
are we beginning to understand that MPAs can work.
Question: Could you
talk about fish-farming/aquaculture and MPAs? Could you also be more
specific in what sort of discussions you have had with DFO?
- Not an expert on aquaculture, however he will
try to provide a simple answer to a very complex problem/question.
There are essentially two types of aquaculture:
- Aquaculture that feeds itself (eg. clams,
mussels, oysters)
- Aquaculture that you have to feed (eg.
Atlantic salmon)
- The first is not too problematic, but the
second is particularly concerning because of the need for antibiotics,
fish food, impacts of waste etc. There is also justified concern about
wild and farmed salmon mixing following escape from pens due to storms
or human error. One million farmed Atlantic salmon have escaped in the
last ten years in BC and now there is evidence that they are
reproducing in BC streams. Not only are they potentially competing for
habitat, Atlantic salmon can also transfer diseases and possibly
interbreed.
- The goal of MPAs is to conserve and sustainably
manage the ocean (this is the highest priority). You can, however, use
zoning in MPAs and aquaculture may or may not be a part of the
mix—it is up to the communities to decide.
- As far as interactions with Canadian
agencies/government — he is primarily involved in scientific
symposia. He has had some discussions with Parks and DFO, but mainly
communicates with the conservation sector and academics. He is most
familiar with the United States system.
Question: Regarding
MPAs and fishing—I have been involved with the BC Aboriginal
Fisheries Commission and it seems quite clear that the main people
affected by MPAs are local people. There are some local benefits from
fisheries but it generally depends on what people fish. Here we fish
salmon, herring and halibut—how will they be impacted? I can
see the benefits of MPAs for rockfish and abalone, but what about other
species? And tourism? Are there local benefits other than for fishing?
- Let me give an example—there is a
tiny MPA (15 ha) near my home in Washington and divers come from all
over to dive because the fish are more diverse and abundant within the
reserve. The divers spend money to take pictures, on food and
accommodation, and this, in turn, benefits the local economy.
Question: Can you
comment on local management?
- Fish are managed by what we call the stock
assessment paradigm (one-by-one)—this is a risky business and
a weak tool. The best thing about MPAs is that you don’t have
to be a scientist to manage them. All you need is common sense and good
eyes to ensure that people don’t cheat. You also have to
ensure that managers work with local people to follow the rules that
everyone has agreed on.
- We are moving toward more comprehensive
management (commonly referred to as “ecosystem
management”) but we aren’t there yet. MPAs serve as
comprehensive management without all the knowledge of ecosystem
complexity.
Question: What about
rockfish? Is there spillover? What about other species?
- The Marine Conservation Biology
Institute’s chief scientist, Lance Morgan, is working on
rockfish biology—he is particularly interested in spillover
and the dispersal of young (reproduction and movement). Fully protected
marine reserves are ideal tools for rockfish population conservation on
the west coast.
Comment: Let me tell
a story about my nephew and friends waiting for the tide to come
through Skidegate Narrows. They could hear orcas (Skana) and saw eight
whales in a pod. In the bay by the narrows (where there was formerly a
logging camp) the young whales were nearest to the beach, circled by
the females, with the dominant male on the outside. The dominant male
moved up against the boat to demonstrate that he was boss. And then
there was the story last year about the whale that took the salmon from
the reel of a sport fisherman down south. I think the whale must have
been starving. This never used to happen. We need to be aware of what
is happening up in the Arctic Circle and how it impacts the food chain
and these islands. “Herring Storm” was a response
to government-dictated fisheries management, and even though you
can’t catch herring now, the government continues to allow
the fishery. If DFO opens a fishery, the fishermen go because that is
their bread and butter. They have to make a living. The oceans are
being depleted left and right—look at the sport fishery, and
people just keep coming and coming. While DFO and the Sport Fish
Association say one thing, we say another. And it all comes down to an
issue of money—big money controls everything. The Haida have
a right to harvest food for our children but we must prove to ourselves
first that it is not detrimental to the ocean. DFO keeps talking about
‘biomass,’ but what does that really mean? No one
seems to really know. I am in agreement with MPAs as long as the Haida
and commercial fisheries have involvement to work it in an effective
way. Our people have a right to get our food from these islands as our
ancestors did. Some people refer to Haida Gwaii as a
‘rock’—it is not a rock, it is a
beautiful place. But one of these days all it is going to be is a rock
if we don’t do anything.
Comment: The killer
whale that took the salmon from the reel was telling us something about
the sport fisherman. I believe in MPAs, but if it is business as usual
in the rest of the ocean then they will have little impact. We need to
address commercialization outside of MPAs. MPAs are a starting point
and we need to expand this concept. There is a fine line between
progress and destruction, and we’ve gone beyond that line.
DFO purports to have the best data, and even if that were true, the
decision is turned over to the politicians. I think the time to talk is
past, and now it is time for action.
Question: We
can’t do this alone—marine conservation is a global
issue. The Archipelago Management Board is looking at marine
consultation/conservation for Gwaii Haanas, but we really need to look
at all of Haida Gwaii. Are we really that different from other places
in the world?
- Every place is unique but all places have
certain things in common. For example, species composition may be
slightly different but the basic principles are the
same—namely the human heart and our relationship to marine
ecosystems. All over the world communities that are struggling to feed
children with food from the ocean are starting to set up MPAs and it is
beginning to work.
- Perhaps the time for just
talk is over, because now we know enough to begin/prepare to act. It
will take years to see the benefits—I suggest you start big
and talk about all the waters of Haida Gwaii. You have to think about
different places and how to deal with each place (eg. traditional use
in front of villages that has occurred for thousands of years versus
areas that have only recently been fished). You need to consider a mix
of uses in different places—essentially a zoning approach.
You can then return as a community and adjust/shift boundaries etc. as
a result of research and monitoring.
Question: What do you
do about a government that doesn’t listen?
- Speak with one voice and people will listen.
Let me tell a story. There was a father with five boys that constantly
fought and were jealous of each other. One day the father tossed an
arrow to the biggest and strongest boy and told him to break it. The
boy did without any trouble. He then gave a whole pile of arrows to his
son and told him to break them all at once. The boy could not. Others
will listen if you can find a way to work together.
Question: If you zone
a large MPA, don’t you set up the possibility of people
encroaching on the areas that have the highest protection?
- Think of a strawberry patch—if
everyone agrees that the strawberries should be left alone, for the
benefit of everybody, then you can achieve compliance. You can also
invest what money you do have into making sure that people are watching
each other’s behaviour—whether you are dealing with
a large or small area.
Question: Would you
eat bait herring? Do you sport fish? Do your handle herring without
gloves? Did you know that the main ingredient for preserving herring is
arsenic? The arsenic is then fed to salmon, and the salmon are eaten by
whales. There are no studies done on these things. How can lodges claim
they are helping enhance fisheries? At the end of the day, all the
unused bait is dumped. What is the possibility of getting a study off
the ground?
- The Marine Conservation Biology Institute
doesn’t work on pollution or bait preservatives. The issue of
arsenic, however, is very concerning—especially when entering
the food chain. I suggest you contact the David Suzuki Foundation.
Question: Can you
comment on the use of fish size limits for managing fisheries in
Canada?
- On the Atlantic coast people fish for lobsters,
and Maine is the only state where the lobster fishery isn’t
in trouble—why? For three reasons:
- There are a limited number of people in the
fishery, and an agreed set of standards that are obeyed because most
people in the fishery know each other.
- Fishermen have agreed to work with the
government to set standards. They have agreed to (a) only retain
lobsters that have reproduced once, (b) to set an upper size limit to
ensure there are ‘grandfathers/mothers’ that can
reproduce.
- Female breeders are marked (notched) and are
returned to the ocean if they are caught. This strategy protects the
smallest and the biggest lobsters.
Comment: Regarding
the management process—it seems like we constantly wait for
resources to collapse and then we react. On land we could look to the
woodlot management approach whereby there is the requirement for a
15-year plan to get a 5-year license. Perhaps this concept should be
expanded.
Comment: Thanks to
Lynn and Russ for bringing everyone together. I’d like to
comment on local management—the AMB is the best example of
local people being involved in management in all of Canada. We need to
expand on this model. In 1988 there was a signed agreement to establish
both a terrestrial and marine protected area. In the Gwaii Haanas
Agreement (1993), the Government of Canada and the CHN committed to
negotiating a future agreement for a marine conservation area. To date,
a mineral assessment has been conducted, oil companies have
relinquished their rights within the proposed area, and jurisdiction
has been transferred from the province to the federal government. There
are several reasons for the delay in establishing the marine
conservation area:
- MCA legislation is still moving through the
senate (hopefully will be concluded by the end of June 2002).
- Limited funding—need for awareness
building to get people to put pressure on government to invest money
into marine issues.
- Building public support—need for
consultation.
Question: When MPAs
are established, will commercial fishing continue? Can you distinguish
between different types of commercial fishing and their impacts on
marine systems?
- The Marine Conservation Biology Institute is
doing a study on ‘collateral damage’ of various
types of fishing (ten to eleven different types) on species and
habitat. It is clear that bottom trawling and dredging are most
destructive due to the huge quantities of bycatch and the effect of
tearing up bottom habitat (like clear-cutting on land). Handpicking and
long-lining has less collateral damage. Similarly, purse seining may
have more bycatch, but is generally less destructive than certain other
fisheries.
- Zoning may be one approach to address managing
for different fisheries—you could zone areas for the more
destructive fisheries (or perhaps not), zone for fisheries that have
less of an impact, and then zone some fully protected areas (and
science can help identify these areas). The key is a mix of different
zones (there may be up to ten different types of zones). You might want
to consider areas for traditional harvest or areas for sport fishing
(economic interest). And you could extend zones out to the 200-mile
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of Canada.
Comment: Thank you
for your concern about Haida Gwaii. Let’s make sure oil
drilling doesn’t come in. In Alaska, they are still feeling
the effects of the spill ten years ago. All the talk of conservation
will be for nothing if we have an oil spill out there.
Question: Regarding
the herring in the inlet—the inlet is protected, but how do
we protect herring from the gray whales? Haidas only use the thick
spawn on the bottom, whereas the whales kick up the upper levels of the
spawn. I am also concerned about the impact of trawling on spawning
grounds.
- You know more about herring than I do, however
I would add that gray whales have been here longer than people and are
also a part of the ecosystem. This should also be respected.
Comment: Gray whales
haven’t been here long—and the impact of kicking up
the top layer of the herring spawn should be considered.
Comment: We have to
be careful with MPAs that we don’t create a set of zoos that
gives us a warm fuzzy feeling that we have done something good and
carry on business-as-usual elsewhere. We also cannot take a
splatter-paint approach and randomly designate MPAs. We must recognize
the connectivity between marine and terrestrial ecosystems when
considering biological diversity. There is also connectivity at an
international level (eg. connections between the offshore and resident
orcas that extend beyond Canadian government boundaries). We need to
consider these broader linkages as well.
- John Farrell concluded the first half of the
workshop and noted that the post-lunch discussion should focus on
identifying values that we want to see considered in local marine
conservation initiatives.
-----LUNCH BREAK-----
- Lynn Lee spoke of the increasing pressures
around the islands including oil and gas and aquaculture. We should
consider an island community marine-use plan in which we use mapping to
identify values, concerns, and priority areas. There is a clear need
for discussion and from this meeting we hope to identify issues and
take direction from there. In the future we hope to bring in other
speakers that are experts in their field so that both traditional/local
knowledge and scientific knowledge can be utilized. Most important is
that island communities get together.
Comment: We do need
expertise outside our nation (eg. David Suzuki
Foundation)—they can help us understand impacts based on
scientific understanding. We need to adopt a cautionary approach and
prove that new fisheries are not detrimental first (eg. mariculture). I
think science can help to inform the Haida Nation.
Question: Regarding
marine-terrestrial linkages—Gwaii Haanas has the potential to
have a MPA surrounding a terrestrial protected area. These linkages
have been studied by Tom Reimchen in his work on bear/salmon nitrogen
cycling in the forest. We are talking about innovative
processes—about creating a vision and making it happen.
Whether it is based on science or not on science, it feels right. Are
there other ideas or examples of this kind of situation in the world?
- The problems in many MPAs are directly due to
the fact that protection is only in the sea. There are very few MPAs
that have the protection of the adjacent coastline and watershed. The
impacts of the condition of the watershed that drains into the ocean
are immense. There is the additional problem about agency
jurisdiction—often there are two different agencies managing
the land and marine systems.
- For example, the coast of Louisiana (where the
mouth of the Mississippi drains) suffers from huge nutrient discharge
and phytoplankton growth that sucks oxygen from the water and species
are suffocated. These nutrients come from the Mississippi watershed
and, more specifically, from farmers in Iowa and Illinois.
- So you have to think about how to link marine
and terrestrial agencies. The fact that these systems are connected is
a very important principle to remember. There are opportunities on
Haida Gwaii that many people and places don’t have.
Comment: I was just
in the DFO office regarding rockfish protection areas (eg. Frederick
Island). As soon as we touched Langara Island, everybody backed off. We
want to protect an area around Langara to see if rockfish populations
respond. But if we designate protected areas, we then increase fishing
pressure elsewhere, so we also need to limit the number of people
fishing.
- Reducing effort in combination with MPAs is a
very important tool for marine conservation. Monitoring and enforcement
is also key.
Comment: There has
been some focus on groundfish (eg. National Geographic article on
Georgia Strait lingcod). DFO, however, is not monitoring the way they
should be due to lack of funding. The only reason DFO knows what is
happening to groundfish is because people are not able to catch fish.
There is huge political pressure to continue depletion and, despite the
fleet buy-back, the fisheries continue to be depleted. Panic buttons
are hit constantly. The sport fishermen (estimated 20 million in BC)
continue to have a huge impact while commercial fisheries are being
shut down.
Comment: There are a
huge number of groundfish that the sport fishery does not have to
retain. This non-retention policy on groundfish has to be changed. You
exhaust fish and those with swim bladders die when brought to the
surface. We have to stop sport fishing from catch and release and
non-retention—especially of rockfish.
Comment: Perhaps we
should change the rules to be non species-specific—keep your
four fish and go home.
Comment: Yes,
regardless of the weight or size, or if you catch four spring or four
rockfish—that’s it, you go home.
Comment: Last year
the House of Assembly passed a resolution restricting the use of bait.
We have to be wary of science—academics can put anything on
paper. We need to be careful what we choose to listen to (actual facts
versus theoretical assumptions). With respect to mariculture, I am
concerned about the impact of non-indigenous species.
- What you are talking about is what we call
‘reversing the burden of proof.’ What this means is
that if I want to do something then it is up to me to prove that it is
non-detrimental. Err on the side of the resource.
Question: Maybe we
should consider local licenses held by communities and delegated from
there. This ensures local responsibility as a first level of
governing—effectively resulting in area licensing with
community control. That way the community becomes the long-term
benefactor. Is there an actual number in the US being tossed around as
the percentage of area that needs to be set aside?
- We think it would take a minimum of 20% fully
protected MPAs. The number is larger if you begin to talk about
achieving maximum fishery benefits.
- Another way to consider it is to think about
protecting very large areas and very carefully selecting a small
portion of the area for different fisheries. This would mean that the
areas where people fish would be very hard hit but, in theory, would be
replenished by the spillover effect from adjacent protected areas. The
fishing areas would be oriented in strips to ensure maximum contact for
spillover. This is a very radical idea that no one has really
tried—but it could be a very good and effective approach.
- I am talking 20% of the whole—you
must think comprehensively, as if you have jurisdiction over all the
real estate. The bigger you think, the more options you have. Also, the
stronger the management outside the MPAs, the fewer MPAs you need (if
you manage MPAs well, then there is a need for fewer overall).
Comment: It seems to
me we are talking about sustainability and self-sufficiency. First we
must get local control of resources, and then identify our priorities.
- There is no fixed area for the best
MPA—the smaller the area, the more politically palatable and
easier it is to designate but the harder and longer it takes to see the
results. I suggest you start big so that you can make changes if
necessary. If you start small and then prove it is insufficient, then
it might be too late to do something about it.
Comment: We are
really talking about two basic concepts: 1. Burden of
proof/Precautionary Approach: This is very important globally and it
essentially means we err on the side of caution when we don’t
know enough about a resource. This influences most conservation
thinking these days. 2. Adaptive Management: This means we treat
resource management as an experiment and determine if your
decision/approach is working and then make whatever changes necessary
based on the results of your monitoring. This is effectively iterative
and flexible management.
Question: There are
good examples of marine conservation initiatives on these
islands—Gwaii Haanas, rockfish protection areas, abalone
MPAs. With abalone we have conducted public consultation through the
years and communicated what we want to do and how. This has taken a
great deal of time but we recognize that compliance is key. There are a
number of things that can be learned from existing initiatives
on-island. The idea that marine reserves have to include places where
no one fishes is a big issue for First Nations because food and
ceremonial fisheries have priority. Why can’t you have
(large) areas that are lightly exploited, and then smaller areas that
are open to commercial fisheries?
- In the past this was possible because people
who were here for a long time developed ways not to harm fish
populations (otherwise they would starve). Not all indigenous people
were successful—look at Easter Island where the inhabitants
effectively starved themselves. The bottom line is: if you have
effective mechanisms you don’t need MPAs.
- But the world has changed. We now have
- more people,
- who don’t necessarily live in
traditional ways, and
- technology has changed such that we can catch
far more fish than ever before (eg. using GPS). We have changed the
game. We have to constrain ourselves intentionally because we have more
effective tools.
Comment: But the
focus should be on commercial and high-tech fisheries, not on the Haida
people.
- But the places where no one fishes provide our
baselines. There should be a mix, yes, but even traditional fisheries
techniques have an impact on populations. And now there are global
impacts to consider. Haida Gwaii is integrated into the rest of the
world (for example, the price of sea urchin gonads in China has an
impact on the marine ecosystems of Haida Gwaii).
Question: Imagine
there is unanimity on the islands—imagine that the quiver of
arrows in your story is intact. Imagine that there is the confidence to
develop a conservation plan for the islands and confidence to take
control of our resources—what would that piece of work look
like? What resources are necessary?
- There are tools now available that the Chief
Scientist of the Marine Conservation Biology Institute, Lance Morgan,
could speak about much better than I can. Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) provide a very powerful tool in that they produce maps
that can answer questions. GIS allows you to compare one set of
information with another— for example, you can ask
‘where are the places we see gray whales in the
spring?’ and ‘where do we see herring
spawn?’ and then compare them.
- You should also consider what information is at
your disposal:
- There are huge data sets of information
gathered by scientists.
- There are data gathered from
traditional/local knowledge holders in the area. Like scientific data,
traditional knowledge has to be verified, but is equally as important.
- You put these together and you start to see
patterns that can direct your approach to zoning.
Comment: With respect
to local information, a group of people have been working on a Heritage
Tourism Strategy that defines local values. It identifies what is
important to local and Haida people. A lot of work has been done
on-island that needs to be brought together. Perhaps the Heritage
Tourism Strategy could be used as a foundation or template.
- John Farrell suggested that a copy of the
Heritage Tourism Strategy be added to the minutes of this workshop.
Comment: DFO uses
terms like the ‘precautionary principle’ in the
herring fishery yet they make decisions based on
‘projections’ rather than on-the-ground
assessments—this is what they call ‘scientific
management.’ The whole concept of science is not respected
here. Many Haidas have knowledge about stocks, but we also know that
we’re not angels either. At the moment we are embarking on a
land-use planning process with the provincial government and I think
we’ve got to go ahead and do marine planning ourselves. The
people of these islands have to get together (there must be community
support) and the key is to use both science and common sense. It is
interesting to note that in New Zealand where fishermen were violently
opposed to MPAs in the beginning, they are now their greatest
supporters. The bottom line is we need to get busy and move forward.
Comment: Regarding
the size of MPAs—thinking big in government is
‘daring.’ The marine area of Gwaii Haanas is 3400
square kilometers. Movement on the marine side of Gwaii Haanas has been
a tedious and slow process, however there have been some important
steps and hurdles are being cleared. I suggest we start with Gwaii
Haanas and move out from there—to use Gwaii Haanas as a
starting point and then expand to all of Haida Gwaii. I hope you are
not suggesting to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
- I have been hearing a desire to address all the
islands comprehensively—but this is an island decision. If
you take a gamble you will earn the attention and respect of many, as
well as the opposition of some. But look at New
Zealand—opposition can turn to support. So there is no right
answer. I would emphasize, however, that the larger the management
unit, the more flexibility you have. This is clear when you consider
protecting representative ecosystems (if you have big and numerous
units of representative ecosystems, then if you screw up with one then
you still have other options).
Question: I would
like to know more about the relative damage caused by draggers versus
sport fishermen—what scientific information is available on
the levels of impact?
- A large study in the US examining the impacts
of sport fishing is being initiated. With respect to commercial
fisheries, the damage is highly variable. The Marine Conservation
Biology Institute is particularly interested in the impacts of
trawling. As far as sport fishermen are concerned, they highly visible
targets—they tend not to be locals, often do not operate
respectfully, and are generally arrogant. There may be a way to deal
with them directly on Haida Gwaii. Focus on taking control of your own
islands.
Comment: If we speak
strongly and boldly, we pass that on to future generations. The phrase
‘risk-adverse management’ is a great buzzword given
to us by a corrupt government. We need to recognize that words are only
as good as the leadership they come from.
Question: Can you
speak more about global approaches to MPAs?
- The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (GBRMP) in
Australia is very big, involved a national process for designation
(with legislation), and includes the local participation of coastal
communities. Preceding designation there was recognition that local
resources were very important and were being lost (eg. tourism and
aboriginal use were being impacted). The GBRMP is a zoned park 2000 km
long whereby different areas have been designated for different uses.
There are areas zoned for recreation, low-impact fisheries, and
high-impact fisheries. There is no oil and gas development, sand or
gravel mining. It is zoned throughout with varying degrees of
protection (weak/medium/strong).
- There are also examples throughout the world
where government designated MPAs without local community support. These
areas are often wrought with problems. While the central government has
a role to play, local people should decide how to do it best. For
example, in St. Lucia Dr. Callum Roberts looked at a local coastal
zoning plan developed by local fishermen. The result was that fish
catches increased and fishermen are strong supporters of the areas
zoned for protection. The bottom line is that it happens differently in
different places.
- An example of failure might be the case of
Congressman Leon Panetta’s pledge to keep oil and gas out of
Monterey Bay. While oil and gas development was restricted, the promise
was made at the expense of providing no restrictions on fisheries
(which have the primary impact on the bay’s marine
ecosystem). This promise has come back to haunt the ability to
effectively protect Monterey Bay—and it is not what you want
to see here.
Comment: Ten thousand
years ago the population of Haida Gwaii was much greater than today,
but today we have to consider the impacts of the global population.
Considerable changes have occurred that we need to recognize. There are
some very positive things happening—for example, the Heritage
Tourism Strategy is an excellent document that should be ratified by
the CHN. In the herring fishery, DFO assured us that they would utilize
the precautionary principle but their projections turned out to be
wrong. We need to use common sense. Decisions are being made by money
and industry—we need to continue this discussion with island
communities.
Comment: The Tlell
LRUP began with a Tlell map and local people putting their local
knowledge down on paper as a starting point for management.
Comment: It is clear
we are all concerned about the waters of Haida Gwaii—now we
need to consider what areas we want to protect. The Gwaii Haanas
Agreement signed by the Hereditary Chiefs and the President of the CHN
is a unique agreement in all of Canada that sets out the boundaries for
a marine conservation area. There was also an accord signed in Tlell
that stated that all islanders would work together. Similarly, the
Haida and coastal First Nations have an agreement to work together. In
the marine conservation area outlined in the Gwaii Haanas Agreement,
the Haida Nation will continue to do what they have done for thousands
of years. There will be opposition but an MPA such as this gives more
local control. The oceans are in a very serious situation and people
need to know this. Marine conservation is for the benefit of the whole
coast and this needs to be communicated. Strong rules and regulations
also need to be enforced.
Comment: With a
larger management area there is the increased chance that information
can become misinformation. The larger the management area becomes, the
more chance there is for misinformation.
Comment: I am
particularly concerned about the damage done by the sport fishery.
Commercial fishers know that the fish are exhausted by the time they
get to the surface and that they have very little chance of escaping
whatever comes after them following their release. Sport fishermen, on
the other hand, can play ten fish before they take the one they want.
DFO say the death rate of catch and release is 15% (85% survival) but
that rate is calculated when salmon are put in a holding tank to
recover. If they are returned directly to the ocean, then the death
rate is likely to be much higher. There was also a bounty on seals but
not sea lions—why? Sea lions eat more fish. But in the early
1900s the Chamberlain Commission said that this hadn’t been
“proven.” It took until 1938 for Canadian Fisheries
to admit that sea lions eat salmon and halibut (they had only ever
found a rock in the stomach of a sea lion before). Why did it take 48
years after they were first told to “prove” or
admit this? This is what we have to deal with. I know that when a sport
fisherman plays a salmon almost to its death, it won’t return
to its spawning river.
Comment:
I’d like to speak on the role of science. Science is only one
tool in the tool bag. There is also common sense, experiential
knowledge, traditional knowledge, ethics, and values. Science can help
to reduce uncertainty. The ethical foundation of the precautionary
principle is sound, even though it is not in practice all the time and
can be misused. Science is really only one type of knowledge.
- It is important to recognize that the
precautionary principle can be misused and misinformation can be
disseminated. If empirical data is not being respected, this is not
precautionary management—this is nothing but stupid and bad
management.
Comment: We need to
manage adequately given the level of resources we have. My concern
about zoning is that it can create confusion and that people can be
unclear about what to do and where to do it.
- Unfortunately, there are not many examples in
the ocean of zoning for conservation purposes. However, anything you do
creates problems and solves problems. People need to know what they can
do and where. One strategy is to phase in zones—you
can’t achieve 100% success from nothing. You must learn by
doing and making modifications where necessary. People will begin to
understand when you start to separate uses spatially. But everyone
absolutely must know what the fundamental principles are—not
everyone will get it and there will be mistakes, but you can fix them
along the way.
Comment: Innovation
is about intuition and doing things from the heart. We need to have a
vision—this is where the new leaders come from.
- John Farrell wrapped things up by commenting
that the discussion must continue and that we need to start putting
things down on paper/maps (next step).
- Elliott Norse thanked the group for
‘putting up with an outsider and for listening and being
patient—thank you for welcoming me into your home.’
^
top
|