GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACIES AS IMPEDIMENTS TO FISH CONSERVATION

DARDAN GOGA GABRIEL COURCHESNE NORMANDIN CHRISTINE LATOS

OUTLINE

Background of fisheries organizations

Structural Organization of DFO

Paper objectives

Case Studies

Cod Collapse

Nechako River agreement

Cohen Commission

Criticisms of the paper

Hutching’s recommendations

Current State of AffairsHinch 2015

BACKGROUND : Agencies

FRB - Fisheries Research Board (replaced by DFO in

1977)

DFO - Fisheries and Oceans Canada

AGAC - Atlantic Ground-fish Advisory Committee

CAFSAC - Canadian Atlantic Fisheries Scientific

Advisory Committee

NAFO - North American Fisheries Organization

http://static.theglobeandmail.ca/6a3/migration_catalog/article3974937.ece/ALTERNATES/w620/fishfarm_jpeg_760061a.jpeg

STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION OF DFO

Lane, D.E., and R.L. Stephenson. 2000.

DFO

Guided by 5 pieces of legislation: Oceans Act Fisheries Act Species at Risk Act Coastal Fisheries Protection Act Canada Shipping Act

The Department’s values are based on the federal public sector values of:

Respect for democracy Respect for people Integrity Stewardship Excellence

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/Publications/annualreport-rapportannuel/ar-ra0506/images/img1.gif

5

DFO

Events resulting in scrutiny as outlined by Hutchings et al. 1997

1.Extension of Canada’s fisheries jurisdiction to 200 miles in 1977.

Placed responsibility for managing eastern Canada’s ground fish fishers with the

federal government.

2.The reduction of flows of British Columbia’s Nechako River effected by the ALCAN

Legal actions by DFO over concerns in salmon productivity due to reduced flow

Much-criticized-out-of-court settlement on flow regimes reached in 1987

BUDGET ALLOCATION

7

SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENTFisheries science - develops information on the biology and population dynamics of exploited fishes, upon which rational management can be based.

Uncertainties and different interpretations associated with the quality of fisheries data analysis and interpretations.

Science documents have not been developed in close linkage with analyses of policy options

Fisheries Management- consists of establishing and implementing regulations intended to maintain fish abundance at or above conservation targets

Uncertainties in data and alternative hypotheses are often not evident in the science documents which management bases its decisions

Stock assessments often only provide a sigle perception of health of a stock

PAPER OBJECTIVESTo examine :

1. The means by which fisheries science is conducted, interpreted, and publicly presented by the DFO

2. Non-scientific influences on the dissemination of information pertaining to species biology, ecology, and abundance of fish

3. The need for public scrutiny of the influence of senior-level bureaucrats in the management of Canadas natural resources.�

4. Government-administered science in Canada, and its potential for bureaucratic and political interference

CASE STUDY : COD COLLAPSE

Cod fishery has been closed since 1992 except for for small localized fisheries

In 2007, NFLD/Labrador stock listed as endangered by COSEWIC

Other cod stocks listed as threatened or special concern

Primarily caused by growth overfishing as a result of : Tragedy of the commons overcapitalization the ratchet effect

… the collapse of a fishery

10

CASE STUDY : COD COLLAPSE CONTOct 1986 Meeting called at the DFO to consider reasons for discrepancy in cod availability to the inshore and offshore fisheries

“Not only is the train of thought inconsistent but quite often there are no passengers on it” - Dr. George Winters

stock had been overestimated since 1977

CAFSAC’s Response and Research recommendations “ the level of uncertainty in these estimates is not unusual in comparison with the assessment of other cod stocks in north America”

1. Quantify effort and catch rates in the inshore and offshore fisheries2. Assess the validity of the assumptions of the multiplicative model3. Identify potential biases in the research survey data4. Quantify discarding rates and include them in the assessment process5. Determine the fishing selectivity of each major gear type 11

CASE STUDY : COD COLLAPSE CONT

CAFSAC’s 1986 recommendations that had yet to be addressed by 1995 included:

1. A comprehensive analysis of the spatial structure of cod as reflected by survey data

2. The documentation of and errors associated with catch discards from all gear types and an evaluation of the

effects of discarding on abundance estimates,

3. The determination of age- and size-specific vulnerabilities of cod to different fishing gear

Bias in stock status reports and manipulation of public perception

It is expected that sock status report should:

1. Balanced treatment of scientific research that has investigated the reasons for the stock collapses

2. To identify all relevant scientific documents upon which this research is based

CASE STUDY : COD COLLAPSE CONTLegitimization of bureaucracy: the portrayal of “science” as science

Inclusion of fisheries science within a political body can permit analyses presented by that body to be portrayed as being based on science thereby legitimizing govt policy and departmental science

Non-science influences on fisheries research incompatible with normal scientific inquiry included

Govt denunciation of independent work Misrepresentation of alternative hypotheses Interference in scientific conclusions Disciplining of scientists who communicate publicly the results of peer-reviewed

research Misrepresentation of the scientific basis of public reports and government

statements

CASE STUDY: NECHAKO SETTLEMENT

Nechako river original flow: 201 m3s-1

1951: Alcan starts construction of project. Dam built on river Tunnels built in the coast

mountains Result: river flow reduced by

40-50% (1954-1978)

http://blog.wwf.ca/blog/2013/10/09/forgotten-giants-nechako-river/

NECHAKO SETTLEMENT

http://www.ec.gc.ca/inre-nwri/default.asp?lang=En&n=0CD66675-1&offset=6&toc=show

NECHAKO SETTLEMENT

http://www.salmonguy.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Slide1.jpg

http://www.salmonguy.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Slide1.jpg

NECHAKO SETTLEMENT

By 1979: flow at 10% 1980: DFO obtains injunction which forces

a release of at least 33% of original flow 1985: ALCAN petitions Supreme Court

Trials set for March 1987 1986: Workshops are held within DFO to

decide on which flow rate is acceptable for the Nechako river salmonid population

1987: BC government presses for out of court settlement

DFO agrees September 1987: Out of court settlement

concluded Flow decided at 26.5 m3s-1

http://www.tripadvisor.ca/Hotel_Review-g154938-d292237-Reviews-Nechako_Lodge_Aviation-Prince_George_British_Columbia.html

NECHAKO SETTLEMENT - WHAT HAPPENED?

In 1983, ALCAN starts own environmental

impact assessment

In response, DFO creates a team, to work

with ALCAN team

1985: DFO scientists say low water flows

negatively effect salmon populations

“Surprisingly”, the consultants for

ALCAN disagree

NECHAKO SETTLEMENT - WHAT HAPPENED?

1985: Ministry of Ocean and Fisheries meeting A base flow of 62.8 m3s-1, A preferred flow of 124m3s-1.

1986: Meeting of DFO with deputy minister No scientists present Base flow and preferred case.

BUT the minister takes it as the only flow needed is the base flow. Makes it the pleading case

In comparison, ALCAN proposed 19.6 m3s-1

March 1987: 4 day meeting betwen DFO / ALCAN DFO plays nice Tries to find mitigation to low flows

NECHAKO SETTLEMENT - DFO SCIENTISTS NOT HAPPY

Scientists had doubts on intents of DFO

1986: 3 scientists write a complaint on the document

Did not present variability Did not present the differences between

scientists and staff

During the court hearings, told to support minister or “take their game and play elsewhere”

Bureaucracy hampered the process

http://memegenerator.net/instance/59655101

RECOMMENDATIONS

An independent body funded by public money that does not have any political affiliation nor governmental nominations

The organization would: Produce decision tables showing a range of

ecological consequences Display variability Release the information to the public

More transparency More accountability

http://www.helenmowat.com/january-5-2014.html

Criticisms ( Healy 1997; Double day et al. 1997)

Doubleday et al. (1997 )

Stock assessment review process is more open to non DFO employees than suggested

Argue that causes of COD collapse were not misinterpreted and use CAFSACs recommendations reflected that fact

Concerning the reprimand of a DFO scientist, this was justified by Doubleday et al. (1997) by reference to DFO Media �Relations Guidelines

Healey (1997a)

argues that analysis is seriously flawed and that lack objectivity

science has relatively little to offer in those situations for which there is high uncertainty

disagrees that greater independence of science from government would reduce the incidence of such decisions and interference.

22

CURRENT AFFAIRS

Nechako river:

Program in place by the Nechako Fisheries Conservation Program (DFO) to release more water in the summer to reduce water temperatures

In summer of 2009, egg retention at its second lowest level since 1988. However, confidence intervals are within normal numbers

1997: Rio Tinto Alcan applied for second tunnel for more power generation (Kemano completion project)

After pressure from First Nations / Environmental groups, the tunnel is considered backup.

2009 Fisheries and Oceans Canada published the Sustainable Fisheries Framework

November 2014 - Government announced a rebuilding plan for the Southern Newfoundlands Atlantic cod stock in NAFO Sub-Division 3Ps

CURRENT AFFAIRS

The Harper government continues to impede on science and the ability of scientists to communicate freely

Muzzling of scientists 2008 position of the National Science

Advisor eliminated 2011 Government announced 700

Environment Canada positions would be terminated

2012 Omnibus Budget Bill C-38 2013 DFO introduced a new policy

characterizing all department research as ‘confidential’

https://media.zenfs.com/en-CA/blogs/canadapolitics/A-2012-rally-against-the-federal-governments-funding-cuts-to-science.jpg

Half of federal scientists are aware of cases where the health and safety of Canadians (or environmental sustainability) has been compromised because of political interference

25

Case Study: COHEN COMMISSION

2009 - Canadian government organized the

commission of inquiry into the decline of

sockeye in Fraser River, BC

Lots of media attention

2012 - Final report issued after 139 days of

hearings

Cohen made 75 recommendations

Government of Canada has not yet

responded to any of these

recommendations

Dardan Goga

COHEN COMMISSION

Dr. Kristi Miller outlined 7 controversies

1. Muzzling of government scientists

2. Any indication of disease in wild fish used by ENGO’s as “proof” of the negative impacts of salmon farms

3. Dr. Miller escorted by “body guard”

4. Can DFO effectively regulate an industry that they are simultaneously promoting?

5. Do BC salmon carry ISA virus?

6. Why don’t the molecular tests match up?

7. The CFIA PR tidehttp://www.desmog.ca/2013/02/11/federal-government-muzzles-dfo-scientists-new-policy

SUMMARY Government bureaucracy has, through selection of information or loss of information, impeded scientific research:

Examples of Cod fisheries and Nechako River settlement History shows that it can have castastrophic consequences “An environment in which information can be controlled, for whatever reason, is

not one in which the scientific process can exercise its full potential.” (Hutchings et al. 1997)

Unfortunately things have not improved in any significant way since: Cohen commission a recent example of control of information for the fisheries Control of scientific information control has been known to occur in other areas of

scientific research across Canada as well

Hopefully in future years government bureaucracy relaxes its grasp on scientists: Maybe a new government will bring a different philosophy to the availability of

information?

FURTHER INTEREST ON THE TOPIC

DFO website - http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/index-eng.htm

Description of the policy framework pertaining to DFO - http://www.un.org/depts/los/general_assembly/contributions_fisheries/canada_appendices.pdf

Documentary - Salmon Confidential

A funny movie about a village of unemployed fishermen - The Grand Seduction

QUESTIONS ?

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. What role should the government play in fisheries science and

management?

2. Will government research control change if a new party is elected

this year?

3. Do scientists have an ethical obligation to disclose all published

peer-reviewed material to the public?

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

4. How do we find a balance between economic and environmental

concerns when making legislation?

5. What are some solutions for limiting government research

control?

REFERENCES

• Hutchings, J.A., C. Walters, and R.L. Haedrich. 1987. Is scientific inquiry incompatible with government information control? Canadian Journal of Aquatic Sciences 54: 1198 – 1210.

• Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2005. Nechako Fisheries Conservation Program. Technical Data Review 1988 – 2002. Summary.

• Potyrala, M., and B. Nutton. 2011. Nechako River Chinook carcass recovery 2009. Nechako Fisheries Conservation Program Data Report No. M09-2.

• Bradford, M.J. 1993. Trends in the abundance of Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) of the Nechako River, British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 51: 965 – 973.

• Mundie, J.H. and R. Bell-Irving. 1986. Predictability of the consequences of the Kemano hydroelectric proposal for natural salmon populations. Canadian Water Resources Journal 11: 14-25

REFERENCES

Lane, D.E., and R.L. Stephenson. 2000. Institutional arrangements for fisheries: alternate structures and impediments to change. Marine Policy 24: 385-393.

Corbin, C. 2002. Silence and lies: how the industrial fishery constrained voices of ecological conservation. Canadian Journal of Communication 27: 7-32.

Kristi Miller’s Cohen Commission lecture in Cons 486

http://faculty.forestry.ubc.ca/hinch/486/2015/Lectures/Miller%20Class%20Presentation_Cohen%20Inquiry_Feb%206,%202015.pdf

DFO Website

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/index-eng.htm

34