Aboriginal Netting

[Egymcara]

I have a question about aboriginal netting in the province of Alberta;

Why isn't the Alberta government or people in a position to legislate doing more to sustain the fish population being harvested in some bodies of water in Alberta?

I understand sustenance harvesting in order to maintain a way of life. Being a Metis status individual myself, do not understand some of the practices that are allowed today. There is enormous pressure on many lakes that basically punish people not responsible for the inevitable collapse of waterways. Sport fisherman will eventually not even be able to take any fish from lakes at this rate yet aboriginal people are allowed to take enormous amounts of fish whenever they feel like it. This creates obvious friction amongst the general population and fuels even more tension and ethnic divide within our community and society.

We know there are people that harvest to feed families but we also know many people abuse privileges for self gain (refer to recent Cold Lake poaching scandal) or have blatant disregard for life itself. I know people that net fish just because they can and not to feed themselves or others, which is disgusting.

Why don't we protect rivers and spawning bays in order to preserve our beautiful waterways? No matter what rights we have, the population must be able to sustain itself.

I honestly feel like sustenance fishing is an outdated practice and needs to be completely overhauled in order to preserve the fisheries we have learned to love. I just want to open a conversation about this topic because I'm tired of seeing an obvious problem that needs to be addressed.

Thank you!

[Deep]

Agreed.

[Bemoredog]

Because it's not politically feasible. If the government limited Aboriginal catches it would violate provincial treaties (and the Constitution/Indian acts) backed by the supreme court. If the province wanted to modify Aboriginal catch laws it would wind up in the supreme court of Canada and probably be denied. This isn't to say they couldn't try, it just faces a high probability of failure and wouldn't be cheap either. You have to ask yourself, as a government official, are you willing to wear this expensive mistake? Is it in the broader public--not just anglers--interest? The public interest here doesn't mean is it for the greater good of society/environment, but more so would public opinion approve? Public opinion is notoriously ill informed and ignorant, but it's also what gets governments elected--for better or worse.

You could see the headlines now: NDP Spends Millions Trying to Curtail Aboriginal Rights. Cue media firestorm.

Then again, if the province could make a strong case that aboriginal fish catching is actually damaging fisheries, it's possible the court would accept limitations. But this would need to be backed up with strong evidence.

Some facts on aboriginal fishing rights:

Not all aboriginals get a fishing license. They have to prove to the government that they need to fish to sustain themselves. They are also not allowed to set their nets in streams, tributaries, rivers or fish during seasonal closures. They can't fish in stocked lakes either. They must also apply and obtain a license for each body of water that is fished; that is, an aboriginal can't just grab a fishing license and go willy nilly all over Alberta catching fish

Check this out: http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/fishing-hunting-trapping/documents/SustainingSubsistenceFoodFishery-Jan2016.pdf

This isn't to say the whole idea of massive net catching sits OK with me, but right now it's about trying to strike a balance and play nice with the folks who's traditional way of life has been threatened and eroded by European colonization.

Personally I'd need more information on catch rates, common practices and a time series of netting indexes of heavily netted lakes before I could really come to any judgment on whether allowing aboriginals to subsistence fish with seine nets is good/bad.

[Egymcara]

Personally I'd need more information on catch rates, common practices and a time series of netting indexes of heavily netted lakes before I could really come to any judgment on whether allowing aboriginals to subsistence fish with seine nets is good/bad.

Just as a point of reference for this quote. If a body of water is officially deemed collapsed by the Alberta fisheries management, why is it fine for aboriginals to harvest the fish in these waterways? Why are we letting it get to this point in the first place? It isn't like it happens over night and the province is well aware of it.

I'm only bringing light to the fact that harvesting can happen on bodies of water that are collapsed or not open to the public for harvest. Why is netting acceptable when the lake isn't even able to repopulate itself to an "acceptable" level of life?

[cube]

Just as a point of reference for this quote. If a body of water is officially deemed collapsed by the Alberta fisheries management, why is it fine for aboriginals to harvest the fish in these waterways? Why are we letting it get to this point in the first place? It isn't like it happens over night and the province is well aware of it.

I'm only bringing light to the fact that harvesting can happen on bodies of water that are collapsed or not open to the public for harvest. Why is netting acceptable when the lake isn't even able to repopulate itself to an "acceptable" level of life?

I guess for the same reason we still allow fishing tournaments on those lakes.

I understand that they have a written contract/treaty but I would also be in favor of more stringent adherence to the contract in a number of cases. eg in a number of the treaties it mentions access to string to make nets does not mention the right to use monofilament commercial nets.

[rubby_dubb]

they are netting lac la biche and it is stocked.

[Bemoredog]

I'm only bringing light to the fact that harvesting can happen on bodies of water that are collapsed or not open to the public for harvest. Why is netting acceptable when the lake isn't even able to repopulate itself to an "acceptable" level of life?

My understanding is if the lake is closed to the public, then they cannot fish it either. Collapsed fisheries are another issue since it is often only one fish species. For example, the Pike in Travers are considered collapsed/vulnerable, but the walleye and whitefish are fine. The whitefish are abundant. Maybe in cases like this the netting needs to be shut down to prevent by-catch of vulnerable species. But then should regular angling be shut down as well?

[Bemoredog]

they are netting lac la biche and it is stocked.

Lac La Biche was most recently stocked in 2012. This could be why. It is no longer a regularly stocked lake. This seems like a question for F&W though since it does make me wonder what counts as a stocked lake for purposes of aboriginal seine netting.

[cube]

they are netting lac la biche and it is stocked.

Lac La Biche was most recently stocked in 2012. This could be why. It is no longer a regularly stocked lake. This seems like a question for F&W though since it does make me wonder what counts as a stocked lake for purposes of aboriginal seine netting.

It says in the "Sustaining the Subsistence Food Fishery and Conserving Fish Stocks for Future Generations"

"Domestic Fishing Licences are not issued for stocked trout water bodies or flowing waters"

Nothing about stocked walleye being forbidden.

Page 40 of http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/fisheries-management/documents/FishConservationManagementStrategyAlberta-Sep2014.pdf

says basically that since the Alberta gov't (Federal as well) gives the highest priority of any surplus fish after conservation to natives they get to net them before we get to harvest any. We only get to harvest any if there is still surplus after there done netting there quota.

[Talking moose]

I.b.t

[Bemoredog]

It says in the "Sustaining the Subsistence Food Fishery and Conserving Fish Stocks for Future Generations"

"Domestic Fishing Licences are not issued for stocked trout water bodies or flowing waters"

Nothing about stocked walleye being forbidden.

Good catch. But there were rainbow trout stocked there in 2012. So it is kind of confusing.

[Egymcara]

I guess for the same reason we still allow fishing tournaments on those lakes.

Fishing tournaments are very rare nowadays and do not even come close to killing as many fish as netting will/would. I don't agree with fishing tournaments on most lakes either but it is an apples - oranges comparison.

they are netting lac la biche and it is stocked.

Its funny that you mention this lake! I almost included it in my original post. The walleye population has come back strong but isn't high enough to allow harvest, yet aboriginals are allowed to net it as much as they want. The perch and pike population is being destroyed now, being targeted by both fisherman and fish!

My understanding is if the lake is closed to the public, then they cannot fish it either. Collapsed fisheries are another issue since it is often only one fish species. For example, the Pike in Travers are considered collapsed/vulnerable, but the walleye and whitefish are fine. The whitefish are abundant. Maybe in cases like this the netting needs to be shut down to prevent by-catch of vulnerable species. But then should regular angling be shut down as well?

This quote relates to the paragraph I just wrote above but also the fact most lakes are not closed to the public. They will shut down 1 species which then has a chain reaction effect to pressure on other species and then fisherman move on to other lakes/provinces. Its a never ending cycle of mismanagement. Closing 1 species of fish is a like a band aid being put on a gunshot wound!

[Kurt505]

In this day and age there is no need for sustenance harvesting of fish and game. If someone lives the lifestyle where it is required that they do that, where they have no other income (whether it be from employment or welfare), and they do not have access to a store, then they should be able to harvest fish and game, but if they have a job or receive welfare from the government, and they have access to a store, then there is no need for sustenance harvesting, it's just common sense.

[Bemoredog]

In this day and age there is no need for sustenance harvesting of fish and game. If someone lives the lifestyle where it is required that they do that, where they have no other income (whether it be from employment or welfare), and they do not have access to a store, then they should be able to harvest fish and game, but if they have a job or receive welfare from the government, and they have access to a store, then there is no need for sustenance harvesting, it's just common sense.

And according to the government they take this all into account when giving out a license. The document states that when an aboriginal applies they must prove they must rely on subsistence fishing to feed themselves. Each case must be considered separately. Just because you're an aboriginal doesn't automatically guarantee receiving a netting license. That said, I have no idea what circumstances would allow you to claim that you "need to net fish to survive". Seems like you'd have to be living in an extremely remote area.

Just curious: has anyone had experiences with aboriginals using nets? I've never seen it.

[Kurt505]

And according to the government they take this all into account when giving out a license. The document states that when an aboriginal applies they must prove they must rely on subsistence fishing to feed themselves. Each case must be considered separately. Just because you're an aboriginal doesn't automatically guarantee receiving a netting license. That said, I have no idea what circumstances would allow you to claim that you "need to net fish to survive". Seems like you'd have to be living in an extremely remote area.

Just curious: has anyone had experiences with aboriginals using nets? I've never seen it.

Well then I have an aboriginal friend who's a poacher.

[Bemoredog]

Well then I have an aboriginal friend who's a poacher.

Could you explain this a little? Do they not have a license?

[cube]

In this day and age there is no need for sustenance harvesting of fish and game. If someone lives the lifestyle where it is required that they do that, where they have no other income (whether it be from employment or welfare), and they do not have access to a store, then they should be able to harvest fish and game, but if they have a job or receive welfare from the government, and they have access to a store, then there is no need for sustenance harvesting, it's just common sense.

Not saying I disagree with you but they do have a contract/treaty that gives them both.

[Egymcara]

Just curious: has anyone had experiences with aboriginals using nets? I've never seen it.

Netting is very common in northern Alberta and I see it quite frequently when I'm out on the waterways.

And according to the government they take this all into account when giving out a license. The document states that when an aboriginal applies they must prove they must rely on subsistence fishing to feed themselves. Each case must be considered separately. Just because you're an aboriginal doesn't automatically guarantee receiving a netting license.

I know a few aboriginal people that have prominent jobs in the community and even oilfield. Some of them still use nets on lakes and have six figure salaries. Yet another reason why I opened this thread!

[Talking moose]

I know a few aboriginal people that have prominent jobs in the community and even oilfield. Some of them still use nets on lakes and have six figure salaries. Yet another reason why I opened this thread!

what do they say when you tell them what you think about what they are doing?

[Kurt505]

Could you explain this a little? Do they not have a license?

I think he has a drivers license.

He shoots what he wants, when he wants, and he likes to fish so he brings his net with him when he goes to the lake so there is no size or catch limit. Been doing it his whole life and he's in his 69's now. Oh ya, he lives in the city, and was even employed by them for several years.

[Bemoredog]

I think he has a drivers license.

He shoots what he wants, when he wants, and he likes to fish so he brings his net with him when he goes to the lake so there is no size or catch limit. Been doing it his whole life and he's in his 69's now. Oh ya, he lives in the city, and was even employed by them for several years.

Then yea, he's poaching--or at least not playing by the rules. Rules say he's gotta have a fishing license for each lake he fishes on.

I'd say report the guy, but I understand he's your friend. ****ty situation and ****ty to hear about.

[Kurt505]

I wouldn't report him, he's been doing it his whole life he ain't going to change now. He's had more than one run in with Fish And Wildlife and every time he's gotten away with whatever he was doing so I doubt anything will change anytime soon. There's a limit as to how far Fish And Wildlife Derek go and he knows how to work it. He doesn't go crazy and keep hundreds of fish but he'll go out and keep a dozen fish whatever size they are whenever he feels like it. It isn't right, but it is what it is.

[SNAPFisher]

Yep, same stupid post over and over again with same results. If the OP is truly Metis, go and tell your story and talk to F&W to get things changed. Sounds like you might have a louder voice for it. Go for it.

[catnthehat]

This one is headed nowhere but down in a death spiral
Cat