next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects
Fisheries: the Enclosing Paradigm Hello 'sust-mar' members, There have been some recent postings on fisheries, EAC's anthropocentric press release on swordfish and tunas, and the notice of the International Ocean Institute conference, plus perceptive comments by Daniel. Some on this list may be interested to have a look at the 1995 Green Web Bulletin #45, "Fisheries and Aboriginals: The Enclosing Paradigm". This particular bulletin, as well as discussing the Aboriginal Fisheries Strategy of the federal government, also attempts to outline the commercial fisheries paradigm within which the AFS must operate. The paper tries to show from a left biocentric perspective, what some features of an ecocentric fishery would entail. This bulletin was an extremely difficult paper for me to write because of its scope. Fortunately eight other ecocentric activists critically reviewed the paper in draft form. The paper is long (about 16 pages) but it is available to movement activists by e-mail. It was part of a 1995 Learned Societies Conference presentation in Montreal. Some extracts from the paper, to give a sense of its flavour, are given below. David Orton * * * * * * * * * * * * Extracts from Green Web Bulletin #45 - Fisheries And Aboriginals: The Enclosing Paradigm ..... Introduction: The same attitudes, capitalist values and kinds of industrial technologies that are destroying the forests of Canada are also at work in the fishery, but the visible consequences have proceeded much further. The Northern Cod on the East Coast has been fished to commercial extinction. In July of 1992, a 2-year moratorium (since extended) was placed on this fishery. The above quotations, relating to the West Coast 1994 Fraser River sockeye runs, show the same commercial extinction paradigm unfolding. Canada pursues economics-driven conservation policies. Individual, commercially valuable fish species, are managed to their maximum human/corporate exploitation. Then, if environmental factors change or there are major errors in management or policy decisions, and if the rules are flouted or manipulated by participants in the commercial fishery, there is ecological and economic disaster. There are factors unique to the commercial fishery not found in forestry. Nevertheless, the same basic value choices confront native people about their participation in demanding and gaining access to the food and commercial fishery. On the native side, what values will natives bring to an increased participation in the commercial fishery? On the non-native side, will aboriginal participation and disputes be resolved from the dominant, human-centered and capital-intensive industrial fisheries resourcist perspective, or from an ecocentric, health of the total marine ecosystem, all-species preservationist perspective? Is the federal government's Aboriginal Fisheries Strategy (AFS) an appropriate response for natives? Is it acceptable to non-natives? Does this Strategy contribute to the long term survival of Canadian marine and fresh water ecosystems, and promote the biodiversity of animal life in such systems? ..... STATE MORE INVOLVED IN THE FISHERY: Due to the extensive state regulatory role in the fishery, and its power to disburse unemployment insurance in this highly seasonal industry, the government is much more involved in the lives of fishers and plant workers, than it is in the lives of forestry and pulp and paper mill workers. The federal (and provincial) governments have strongly influenced, and thus limited, the thinking of fisheries- related organizations. This has been done through various mechanisms. In addition to regulating through various licenses, who can take part in the commercial fishery and which areas can be fished, this influence has been exercised through: a. Direct government grants to organizations representing fishers, e.g. the Maritime Fishermen's Union and the Eastern Fishermen's Federation; b. Bringing fishing organizations into various stakeholder meetings with the promise of some input into dividing up the Fisheries pie; c. Through the power of unemployment insurance, that is, the annual struggle by many fishers and plant workers to obtain enough fishing-related work to qualify to draw benefits in the off-season. ..... SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS AND DENIAL: Workers in the East Coast fishery are classified as inshore, midshore, offshore or plant workers. Like their counterparts in the forestry sector and in the pulp and paper mills, such workers have in the main, with some important exceptions, overwhelmingly defended their own narrow economic interests in a number of different fishing organizations - often self-righteously. They have opposed conservation measures which would cause cut backs in their own personal incomes and denied any personal responsibility for the crisis in the fishery. One particularly glaring example of the supremacy of self-interest, would be the bluefin tuna fishers who, at the end of September 1994, blocked the Canso Causeway between Cape Breton and mainland Nova Scotia for several hours. They were trying to use the travelling public as a lever, to pressure the DFO to reopen this tuna fishery using the 1995 quota! The magnificent Northern bluefin tuna, which can weigh over 400 kilograms, is reported to be down to about 15 percent of its historic spawning population, according to the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas. ..... Public conservation discussions by fishers stay within the parameters of human self-interest. While having serious contradictions, corporate and inshore fishers have come to have a joint vested interest in their exclusive access to the fishery commons, as do timber companies and loggers in accessing the crown land forestry commons. WHAT IS NEEDED FOR NATIVES AND NON-NATIVES TO TAKE THE FISHERY PRESERVATIONIST PATH? (Note: in the bulletin, there are extensive discussions under the following headings.) a. Changing our ethics from anthropocentrism to ecocentrism and manifesting this in all fisheries policies. b. The reinstatement and internalization by fishers and the Canadian public of the view that the oceans are a Commons. c. Establishment of an extensive marine protected areas system. d. No destructive fishing technologies to be utilized. e. No fisher or company to acquire a financial interest by being granted the privilege of fishing the marine commons. ..... Unless aboriginals want to become part of the problem, they must ally themselves with any non-natives who want to take the preservationist path in a bioregional, community- grounded inshore fishery. Some of the possible features of such an ecocentric fishery, which could appeal to natives and non-natives, have been sketched in this paper. Irrespective of Supreme Court rulings or statements in the Canadian Constitution, the actual orientation in the commercial fishery as in forestry, is decided by the dominant corporate interests. These corporate interests, through their government partners, ensure policies are enacted which serve corporate welfare, not ecological or community health. The DFO-drafted AFS, does not challenge corporate control. What it has done, is to help create divisions between small fishers and thus undermine a needed unity necessary for fundamental change in the commercial fishery. Was this the real intent of the Aboriginal Fisheries Strategy? * * * * * * * * * * * *
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects