PDA

View Full Version : How should the government mediate this conflict over FN on the Skeena?


Sundancefisher
03-02-2020, 08:10 PM
It seeems since many FN have no signed treaty in BC that the government needs to address it sooner than later.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-with-spotlight-on-indigenous-rights-gitxsan-nation-assert-control/

With spotlight on Indigenous rights, Gitxsan Nation assert control over sport fishing
JUSTINE HUNTER
VICTORIA
PUBLISHED 2 HOURS AGO
UPDATED MARCH 2, 2020

The sport fishing season on B.C.’s coast is gearing up this month, and the Gitxsan Nation in northwest B.C. says it will enforce its own laws, forbidding sport fisherman from accessing the Skeena River within its traditional territory.

As B.C. and Canada seek a resolution to the Indigenous rights and title issues with the Wet’suwet’en in the valley next door, the Gitxsan hereditary chiefs are asking the two levels of government to sit down with them to avoid a possible confrontation over fisheries this year.

The Skeena is an international destination for anglers seeking its steelhead and salmon, but the Gitxsan want the province to stop issuing permits for sport fishing, and warn that fishermen will be treated as trespassers within their traditional territory, which spans 33,000 square kilometres.

“They’re breaking the law by playing with fish, we don’t play with fish, it’s against our culture,” Chief Brian Williams, who also takes the name Simogyat Gwiiyeehl, said in an interview. “When we go fishing, we fish for a reason, and that’s to put food on our table.” He said they are prepared to seize fishing equipment from anglers who won’t respect their ban.

The Gitxsan have, at least since 2014, issued annual declarations about their fishing rights, but the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans and B.C.'s Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (FLNRO) have so far only agreed to talk. As the Wet’suwet’en pipeline dispute erupted into national solidarity protests, however, Chief Williams hopes that they will find some renewed willingness to recognize their rights.

Chief Williams chairs the Gitxsan’s Crisis Management Meeting, which meets monthly to deal with fisheries issues. The province and the federal government routinely send representatives, but he said the players change regularly, “so we’re constantly teaching these people what our culture and our laws are all about.”

Both levels of government have responsibilities – the federal government manages the ocean-going salmon, while B.C. manages freshwater fisheries including steelhead, trout and char. Recreational fishing licences for freshwater fish in B.C. are authorized by the province. Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) determines the timing, quota and methods for freshwater salmon fishing.

The province maintains that the anglers’ licences it has issued remain valid, and that there are enough fish in the water to support recreational fishing in the Skeena watershed. In response to the declaration of the Gitxsan, however, it is advising sport fishermen to “respect First Nations rights and perspectives and seek permission before crossing Indian Reserve lands.”

But those reserve lands amount to a small fraction of the Gitxsan’s laxyip, or traditional territories. And, it ignores the question of whether the Gitxsan have the right to determine who can fish on the Skeena within their traditional lands.

David Haslam, a spokesman for FLNRO, said in a statement that ministry staff are working with the Gitxsan “to understand the collective concerns and see what can be done together." He added: “While the stock assessments at this point in the season for steelhead, trout and char indicate that the regulated recreational fishery can be supported, the stronger downward trends in salmon are deeply concerning.”

DFO officials did not respond to requests for comment, but did provide 2020 stock assessments that predict low sockeye and chinook returns, but healthy coho, pink and chum returns.

The Gitxsan say they have no reason to trust the government numbers on fish returns, and will press ahead to enforce their laws.

“Fish guiding outfits are still bringing clients into the area and sports fisherman are still trespassing," he said. "Any confrontations we’ve had with fisherman, results in them leaving the area peacefully. Sports fisherman from all over the world come here ... and we do want them to understand our laws and understand that they cannot break the Gitxsan law by catch and release. With low fish counts, it’s a bigger crisis now than it has ever been.”

Sundancefisher
03-02-2020, 08:13 PM
This is far from a public lands we can fish if we want. Without a treaty ownership and access is not settled.

Fear is that a conflict will develop.

Isopod
03-02-2020, 10:40 PM
Seems short-sighted. If non-indigenous people are banned from fishing, they have little incentive to support conservation and other initiatives for that waterway, and will focus their attention on other waterways where they are allowed to fish.

According to the BC government site on recreational freshwater fishing:

"100% of your licence fees directly benefit recreational fisheries. Licence revenue goes to the Freshwater Fisheries Society of BC, funding research, conservation and education programs, improving angler access and the provincial stocking program. The Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation receives 100% of the surcharge revenue collected from angling licence sales to provide grants for fish conservation projects."

If I were a fisher in BC and I was banned from fishing certain waterways because of land-claim disputes, I would certainly hope that 100% of my license fees were used to protect waterways where I was actually allowed to fish, and none of my fees were used to protect waterways where certain groups had banned me from having access.

Sundancefisher
03-03-2020, 07:32 AM
Seems short-sighted. If non-indigenous people are banned from fishing, they have little incentive to support conservation and other initiatives for that waterway, and will focus their attention on other waterways where they are allowed to fish.

According to the BC government site on recreational freshwater fishing:

"100% of your licence fees directly benefit recreational fisheries. Licence revenue goes to the Freshwater Fisheries Society of BC, funding research, conservation and education programs, improving angler access and the provincial stocking program. The Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation receives 100% of the surcharge revenue collected from angling licence sales to provide grants for fish conservation projects."

If I were a fisher in BC and I was banned from fishing certain waterways because of land-claim disputes, I would certainly hope that 100% of my license fees were used to protect waterways where I was actually allowed to fish, and none of my fees were used to protect waterways where certain groups had banned me from having access.

I can see that. So maybe the government agrees to share some of that revenue. However if you can’t catch and release that is a problem for conservation.

GMX
03-03-2020, 01:36 PM
I can’t speak for everyone but I’m guessing the public is going to grow very tired of constant disputes for what ever the reason. There will be a breaking point and something horrible is going happen.

If no sport fishing is allowed I sure hope FN fishermen loose their license/ability on the Skeena to sell fish.

Sundancefisher
03-03-2020, 02:27 PM
I can’t speak for everyone but I’m guessing the public is going to grow very tired of constant disputes for what ever the reason. There will be a breaking point and something horrible is going happen.

If no sport fishing is allowed I sure hope FN fishermen loose their license/ability on the Skeena to sell fish.

My feeling in all of these issues... there should be a push to list every issue regardless of size and what FN feels is a reasonable fix.

I suspect any reasonable person will find many reasonable to resolve. Then both parties publicly should start working on it.

It seems there has been way too much procrastinating on likely both sides.

Let’s make 2020 the year they get fixed and we can all move on knowing the facts and how to proceed going forward.

walking buffalo
03-03-2020, 05:11 PM
My feeling in all of these issues... there should be a push to list every issue regardless of size and what FN feels is a reasonable fix.

I suspect any reasonable person will find many reasonable to resolve. Then both parties publicly should start working on it.

It seems there has been way too much procrastinating on likely both sides.

Let’s make 2020 the year they get fixed and we can all move on knowing the facts and how to proceed going forward.

Let's not forget overlapping First Nation's land claims and inter_Nation disputes on transitory resources....

This is not about what First Nations (plural) feel, but what each individual Nation feels, and then what each clan in each Nation, each individual....

One River, several First Nations, some want this some want that....

BC and Canada f'ed up in the most incredible way in not addressing land claims 150 years ago. Each term these governments pushed the pile to the next one... they could have done this decades ago with minimal issues compared to what we are seeing today. Only now are FN's in a position to delay for a better deal.

Reality is that many FNs in BC are now in a place to sue and take action for complete control of land and resources. That is the goal. No Compromise.

I first said it here on AO years ago, and it is still true today, just closer to the reckoning.
BC is screwed.

Bigwoodsman
03-03-2020, 06:32 PM
Put Canada’s warriors up against the FN warriors. Winner takes all. Game over.

BW

Wes_G
03-03-2020, 10:53 PM
I am having a hard time with the last sentence in that article. If fish numbers are low, then how does killing every fish that gets caught make sense? Or is it "fish numbers are low so we want what is left to feed ourselves and sell the rest, because we don't believe in releasing them, then once they are gone we will go after the gov't for mismanagement"

If sport fisherman from all over the world come to catch and release fish the river then it would seem that the tourism side of that is the business that they want to be in, not kicking people out and keeping what's left for yourself to kill.

58thecat
03-04-2020, 06:28 AM
I am having a hard time with the last sentence in that article. If fish numbers are low, then how does killing every fish that gets caught make sense? Or is it "fish numbers are low so we want what is left to feed ourselves and sell the rest, because we don't believe in releasing them, then once they are gone we will go after the gov't for mismanagement"

If sport fisherman from all over the world come to catch and release fish the river then it would seem that the tourism side of that is the business that they want to be in, not kicking people out and keeping what's left for yourself to kill.

Stewards of the land can not be told how to govern this concept.....this is out of thier wheelhouse.

Buckhead
03-04-2020, 08:01 AM
Stewards of the land can not be told how to govern this concept.....this is out of thier wheelhouse.

My ancestors probably went #2 in the forests of our homeland, as well.
That doesn't really make one a Steward of anything except in their imagination.