Executive Summary

The purpose of the Atlantic Fisheries Policy Review (AFPR) is to develop a clear and consistent policy framework for the Atlantic fisheries — a vision, objectives and principles that will provide the foundation for the management of these fisheries over the long term. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) also hopes that the management principles, strategies and processes that derive from the new policy will address many of the problems that have plagued the Atlantic fisheries over the past decade.

Reports from industry, the Auditor General and standing committees of the House of Commons and Senate, as well as public consultations, point to four main problem areas:

• Although DFO promotes a conservation-focused approach to fisheries management, the term "conservation" has yet to be adequately defined.
• The role of economic and social considerations in DFO’s fisheries management decisions is unclear.
• Disputes and uncertainty over access and allocations, and disagreements about how these decisions should be made, continue to impede progress on other fisheries management issues.
• The traditional approach to fisheries management in Canada is too paternalistic. Those who exploit and benefit from the resource have little say in its management and insufficient incentive to use it sustainably.

Current fisheries management policies do not deal adequately with these problems. This paper examines the aspects of fisheries management policy and programming that relate most closely to these problems, and outlines principles that might anchor a prospective policy framework for the Atlantic fisheries.

This document is a discussion paper, not a policy framework. The directions it proposes are meant to serve as a springboard for public discussion and debate. The policy framework paper, when it is released, will have benefited from contributions by Aboriginal groups, the fishing industry, provincial governments and other stakeholders and a subsequent review by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Department.

Some of the new directions that could be examined during public consultations may be outside the current legislative mandate of the Department. While we recognize that amending legislation may be necessary, the need to amend the law should not by itself be the reason to refrain from discussing new directions.

Context

The last comprehensive review of management policies for the Atlantic fisheries was completed 20 years ago. There is widespread recognition in government and industry that the current fisheries management policies lack clarity and coherence. There are also concerns that the policy system lacks relevance to current conditions in the fisheries.

The collapse of Atlantic groundfish stocks made clear to government and industry alike that Canada needs a more conservation-oriented approach to fisheries management. The resulting adjustment and capacity-reduction programs should engender a self-reliant and more professional harvesting industry.

Legislated land claims settlements and the courts’ recognition of Aboriginal rights and treaty rights have laid the foundation for an expanding Aboriginal fishery. DFO policy must reconcile respect for Aboriginal fishing rights with the need to conserve fisheries resources and ensure a sustainable fishery for all participants.

The new Oceans Act widens the scope of DFO responsibilities for fisheries management within the broader context of other ocean activities. A system of integrated oceans management is being developed to co-ordinate decisions about the many competing uses of ocean resources and habitat. Increasingly, fisheries management processes will need to dovetail with oceans management processes, and fisheries stakeholders will need to take account of the interests of other users of the oceans in their planning and decision making and vice versa.

Process and Focus of the Atlantic Fisheries Policy Review

With the AFPR, DFO has undertaken to clarify and consolidate existing policy and to develop a more coherent policy vision for fisheries management, one that reflects a modern approach to governance. The policy review will be conducted in two phases. The first phase will define overall policy directions and goals. Key players in the development of these policy directions will include provincial governments, commercial harvesters, both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, aquaculturists, those involved in recreational fisheries, and other stakeholders. The second phase of the review will develop policy instruments and strategies.

The principles and policy directions generated by the AFPR will be consistent with the protection provided to Aboriginal rights and treaty obligations and land claims agreements between Aboriginal groups and the federal government.

Proposed Principles and Policy Options

• Conservation — conservation and sustainable use of fisheries resources should be the top priority of fisheries management.
• Orderly management — the allocation of fisheries resources should be made more stable and predictable by developing and implementing a consistent, fair, credible and transparent process.
• Shared stewardship — stewardship of the fisheries resource should be shared with resource users, including Aboriginal groups and the fishing industry, as well as with other stakeholders, through participatory decision-making processes and structures.

To achieve these objectives, DFO proposes to develop policy in four interrelated areas, namely conservation, economic and social viability, access and allocations, and governance. The new framework will fundamentally change the Department’s role in fisheries management from one of micro-manager, heavily involved in day-to-day operations, to one of policy maker and strategic direction setter.

Conservation

If conservation is to be the top priority in decisions affecting the fisheries, the term needs a precise definition. We propose the following. Conservation means sustainable use that safeguards ecological processes and genetic diversity for present and future generations.

The Department will continue to be responsible and accountable for setting conservation standards and ensuring compliance with them. This could include such things as determining the total allowable catch and harvesting methods, as well as setting the thresholds that will determine when conservation standards are being transgressed. But stakeholders and interest groups should have meaningful input both into setting standards and determining what levels of risk to stocks, and therefore livelihoods, is acceptable. DFO should work more closely with Aboriginal groups, industry groups, provinces and other stakeholders, not only to establish conservation standards, but also to develop resource management strategies to prepare for and mitigate the effects of natural stock fluctuations and changes in environmental conditions.

Managing for conservation means taking elements of the ecosystem into account in decision making, rather than just fish. It also calls for fisheries management plans that incorporate a precautionary approach, one that anticipates possible calamities and includes contingency plans and remedies. Any harvest of a renewable natural resource involves certain levels of risk, and such risks will need to be realistically assessed and accommodated in fisheries management plans. Ecosystem-based research and planning will help ensure that fisheries management plans provide adequately for the protection of fish habitat and other species.

Success at conservation requires both a shared commitment and mutual trust among stakeholders. The Department will need to work to promote a shared conservation ethic and will need to set up new structures to facilitate communication and co-operation. If we want to achieve an appropriate and enforceable legislative and regulatory framework for conservation, resource users should have a role in the development and enforcement of conservation rules. Since the fishing industry has an incentive to curtail illegal fishing and ensure compliance, it could contribute to conservation goals through self-enforcement.

Economic and Social Viability

Fisheries management decisions have important implications for the viability of both the fishing industry and coastal communities. The number of jobs, the stability of those jobs and the incomes they generate are all affected by fisheries management decisions, as is the industry’s overall ability to compete and to thrive. Conservation and sustainable management are the foundation of the industry’s long-term economic viability as well as the social viability of fishing-dependent communities. DFO believes its first responsibility should be to safeguard the long-term viability of the resource base by ensuring that it is exploited sustainably. As such, DFO’s primary focus should therefore be on setting conservation standards and managing marine resources and habitat sustainably. DFO can best provide for the economic and social benefits from the Atlantic coast fisheries by promoting the sustainable use of the fisheries resource through respect for conservation principles.

Within the larger framework of federal and provincial government policies, DFO should create the conditions that enable the fishing industry to contribute both to the viability of individual fishing enterprises and to the national economy. For example, by having a more transparent and open allocation process that provides for increased predictability and stability, the Department can help create the conditions that industry needs to better address economic and social issues.

At the same time, fleets and licence holders need greater flexibility to set their own economic and social objectives and make the decisions needed to implement them. It is possible to establish a fisheries management regime that gives fishery licence holders more latitude to set their own rules within certain established parameters such as meeting conservation requirements and safeguarding the interests of others.

Access and Allocations

Under the current legislative regime, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans has broad discretionary powers to distribute wealth, that is, natural capital in the form of fishing licences and quotas. How this wealth is distributed has significant implications for the economic performance of fishing-dependent communities and the economic viability of individual fishing enterprises, large and small.

DFO is proposing to change the relationship between the Department and resource users to one in which the government works with interested parties to decide together on the best use of fisheries resources. Those decisions must be consistent with DFO’s conservation objectives and with treaties, statutes and international legal obligations. Processes must be established to provide opportunities for the wider public to have a meaningful say in fisheries decision making.

As a second step, it may be important to establish clear and consistent rules and procedures for making allocation decisions, particularly where there are substantial changes in resource abundance. These may differ depending on the different types of fisheries but in each case the rules and criteria will need to be clearly defined and consistently applied to those applicable fisheries.

A third step may be to establish a process for addressing the allocation issues that might arise in the future. It is suggested that the institutional arrangements for decision making on allocations should be re-examined. One option is for industry itself to take over allocation decision making as the integrated fisheries management planning process evolves and to do so with local groups or fleets, possibly using their own dispute-settlement mechanisms. Where industry groups are unable or unwilling to develop and support the processes that will be necessary, or when particular issues generate insurmountable differences between groups, it may be necessary to establish a default position other than the current appeal to the Department and the Minister. This could take the form of an independent, arm’s-length mechanism to make decisions based on clear policy and criteria. Any movement in this direction will take time.

DFO manages fisheries in a way that is consistent with the constitutional protection afforded Aboriginal and treaty rights. Once the Department determines that it is acceptable to harvest a given stock or species, Aboriginal rights to fish for food, social and ceremonial purposes take precedence over other uses of the resource. Moreover, the Department is expected to manage the fisheries in a manner consistent with the provisions of existing treaties and land claims agreements.

For the purpose of this document, the terms "Aboriginal groups" or "Aboriginal communities" includes Indian bands or groupings of bands, Aboriginal organizations and territorially based Aboriginal communities in the four Atlantic provinces, Quebec, and Nunavut.

Governance

New structures and procedures are needed for licence holders and other legitimate stakeholder representatives to be more directly involved in planning and decision making for the overall management of the fisheries at the regional and cross-regional levels. We can achieve this by building on existing participatory decision-making structures and agreeing on a new division of responsibilities. One approach would be to have stakeholders share responsibility for specific tasks and activities. Another would be to have the Department delegate decision-making authority (within specified limits and guidelines) in specific areas to defined groups.

Licence holders could be given a broader role in allocation decision making through changes to the integrated fisheries management planning process. Other refinements to the planning process could enable particular fleets or local fisheries to incorporate economic and social objective setting in their long-term plans. Process changes would also include improved opportunities for participation by other stakeholders. Provinces and territories have a strong interest in this process and, with the signing of the Agreement on Interjurisdictional Cooperation in 1999, we have moved toward a more collaborative and consultative process.

Because integrated fisheries management plans are developed on a stock- specific basis, new structures and procedures will also be needed to enable stakeholders to be more directly involved in regional and cross-regional fisheries management planning and decision making. Mechanisms will also need to be developed for input from others, as well as effective links to the wider integrated oceans management processes.

DFO should support initiatives to build management capabilities among licence holders and other resource users through their professional organizations. A new legislative and regulatory framework could expand the management responsibilities of resource users. Such responsibilities might include making and enforcing rules to achieve conservation and orderly management objectives at the fleet or local level. An expanded co-management system would also require an objective dispute-resolution mechanism.

Integrated management as proposed under the Oceans Act provides additional opportunities for resource users and other stakeholders and interest groups to participate in promoting conservation and sustainability in oceans use. These processes need to be set up and linked effectively to the processes used in fisheries management.

Conclusion

This discussion paper emphasizes conservation, orderly management and shared stewardship as the key objectives, for the management of Atlantic fisheries. To achieve these objectives it will be necessary to clarify the roles and responsibilities of the various participants in fisheries management, including federal government Departments and agencies, provincial and territorial governments, Aboriginal groups, and other resource users. It will also be necessary to define the relationships between them.

Under the fisheries management regime envisioned by this discussion paper, DFO’s fisheries management responsibilities could be focused on the following:

• providing sound scientific advice, determining conservation goals and requirements with participants, and ensuring compliance with these goals;
• designing processes that give resource users and other stakeholders a more active role in fisheries management and decision making and facilitating their participation;
• establishing an orderly management system in which participants share responsibility and decision-making power with the Department and accept responsibility and accountability, where feasible and appropriate, for many aspects of day-to-day fisheries management;
• clarifying and strengthening conservation rules and ethics and promoting the sustainable use of fisheries resources to protect and expand the economic and social benefits generated by the Atlantic coast fisheries; and
• working with other government Departments and agencies, other levels of government, the fishing industry and other users to develop comprehensive policy responses in such areas as the professionalization of fish harvesters, the recognition of legitimate industry organizations and the building of management capabilities in the fishing industry.

Conserving the Atlantic fisheries and using them sustainably are clear priorities for governments, resource users and the Canadian public. These goals provide a foundation on which to construct a comprehensive policy framework to guide fisheries management decision making for the future. A new policy framework for the management of the Atlantic fisheries will provide the vision and the tools to make the Atlantic fisheries viable and environmentally sustainable.