What I'm more interested in, and have been trying to find this out for a long time and could never get a straight answer, is whether the allocated quota is a fixed number that does not change from year to year, or relative to the run size. Are we expecting a fixed number of fish being allocated to First Nations' FSC fisheries first, regardless whether it is 10k, 100k, or 1 million after spawning escapement is met. Or, are we looking at a % of the run being allocated, then the rest can be distributed to the other sectors?
Don't feel badly Rod. Even the Cohen Commission couldn't get that info. Here's a section of the Cohen Report that describes the process. It's for all salmon, not just Chinook or sockeye.
"Allocation to Aboriginal fisheries
DFO manages allocations in the Aboriginal fishery by providing a given Aboriginal organization access to a certain number of fish, whether presented as an absolute number or calculated as a percentage of the TAC. According to Kaarina McGivney, former regional director, Treaty and Aboriginal Policy and Governance Directorate, having allocations is important because they facilitate fisheries management. She said that having an agreed amount of access provides some stability and understanding for fisheries management.
DFO states that Aboriginal fishing allocations are reached by negotiation with Aboriginal organizations. In these negotiations, DFO staff are provided with “mandates” setting out the maximum number of fish and funding that may be agreed to at a given negotiation. Since 2007, the mandates associated with the FSC fisheries of individual British Columbia Aboriginal groups have been determined by the regional director general. Before that, they were set in Ottawa. Mandates associated with the economic opportunity fisheries continue to require approval from the minister. According to Barry Huber, Aboriginal affairs advisor, BC Interior, DFO, mandates are reviewed annually and can be adjusted if necessary.
Mr. Huber also told me that mandates are not disclosed to Aboriginal groups, as doing so would detract from the negotiations under way. He said that each negotiator needs flexibility, and laying all the “chips on the table” at the start is not a good way to negotiate because it “forces you to be positional right off the bat.” At the end of the negotiations, the agreement reached may include fewer FSC fish or less funding than is stipulated in the mandate, though most are at the top of mandate levels.
The Aboriginal Fisheries Framework contains an articulation of the overall percentage of the available salmon harvest that is to be allocated to First Nations. The actual percentage was not disclosed to the Commission. When I ordered that this percentage allocation be disclosed, I was provided a certificate from the clerk of the privy council certifying that the information and related documentation was a cabinet confidence.
Despite not knowing the percentage of salmon allocated to First Nations in the Aboriginal Fisheries Framework, I did hear evidence on how this percentage is used. According to Ms. McGivney, the percentage allocation covers both FSC fishing and Aboriginal communal fishing for economic purposes. The percentage is to be achieved on average, over a number of years, recognizing that, in years of low salmon returns, the Aboriginal FSC fishery may form a higher percentage of the catch.
According to DFO’s Aboriginal Fisheries Framework, on a year-to-year average, Aboriginal FSC and economic opportunity fisheries are allocated approximately 30 percent of the total salmon harvested in British Columbia. In contrast, the First Nations Panel on Fisheries recommended in its 2004 report, Our Place at the Table: First Nations in the B.C. Fishery, that the government immediately transfer a minimum of 50 percent of all fisheries to First Nations, with the potential that the total may reach 100 percent in some fisheries."
Author
Topic: Draconian Fisheries Closures (Read 91069 times)