PDA

View Full Version : The Cod Wars



Alan D. Hyde
01-27-2005, 10:38 AM
Where do these matters stand now? mmd and others?

(Courtesy of www.seashepherd.org (http://www.seashepherd.org) )

Sea Shepherd to Return to the Cod Wars

By Captain Paul Watson

Back in 1994, I engaged in a debate with Canadian Fisheries Minister Brian Tobin. During the course of the debate, I offered a solution to stopping the foreign drag trawlers on the Nose and the Tail of the Grand Banks.

Why not discourage bottom trawling by sinking some eco-sanitized boats, automobiles, metallic and concrete structures on the fishing grounds? Doing so would prevent the setting of the trawls and at the same time would provide much needed habitat for fish recovery on the Banks.

Tobin’s response was that the idea was ridiculous and would prevent the Canadian trawlers from returning to the Banks after the Cod populations recovered. Tobin was, of course, absolutely convinced that the moratorium would result in cod stock recovery.

It is the opinion of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, based on nearly three decades of observation of the Newfoundland fishing industry, that the destruction of the Cod was caused by three factors.

1. Over fishing: the unrestricted over-exploitation of fish on the Grand Banks by Canadian and foreign drag trawlers.

2. Destruction of habitat: the virtual scouring of the bottom of the sea across the Grand Banks. Bottom trawlers have laid waste or destroyed essential fish habitat.

3. Mismanagement: The incompetence of the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans and their unwillingness to address the issues of over fishing and destruction of habitat.

The important thing is to find solutions. Scape-goating the seals will do nothing but buy time for further mis-management by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. What is needed are real solutions for restoration of a healthy eco-system on the Grand Banks.

The single most important step that can be taken towards this solution is to place structures on the Banks, beginning with the Nose and the Tail. These structures will provide sheltered habitat for fish recovery and prevent the utilization of bottom trawlers. The net-rippers can work. The fish need shelter.

The second step is to encourage low-tech fishing techniques. Heavy gear utilization should be replaced with a hook and line fishery. This is the method used on the Grand Banks for hundreds of years prior to the destructive deployment of the trawls. This approach will create more fishing jobs due to a reduced take of fish. The cost of Cod will be increased, and rightfully so. A market for fish will not be jeopardized by cost. The scarcity of Cod justifies higher prices.

The restoration of small family fishing practices could create increased jobs by taking less fish with a higher price tag for the fish. This can be accomplished by utilizing all fish caught in high-end markets. In this way, a fisherman need only catch and sell a small number of fish to earn a healthy income.

At the same time, a new and healthier approach needs to be taken towards harmoniously utilizing resources from a maritime eco-systems. Towards this end, it must be understood that there are more than just three species utilizing this eco-system. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans acts as if there are only three factors – humans, seals and cod. However even a simplified biodiversity chart illustrates the interrelationship and interaction of hundreds of species, each and every one impacting on every other species. It must also be understood that it is the human species that is the major disrupting species, primarily because it is the only non-marine species and a relatively recent predator on the Banks.

The seals, for example, perform a very important role in maintaining a healthy eco-system. The value of this contribution by the seals can be observed historically. Cod fish populations are now less than 1% of the numbers five centuries ago when there were also millions more harp, hood, grey, and harbor seals. One of the reasons for this is that seals eat many species of fish. The largest predation of Cod is caused by other species of fish, including older cod. Seals impact the populations of predatory fish, taking middle sized fish primarily and not taking much smaller or much larger fish. This allows for the younger and smaller fish to increase their chances of growing and it allows the larger and older fish to survive by decreasing energetic competition from the mid-size fish. The seals are a gauntlet that the fish have run for tens of thousands of years and this has evolved as a benefit for healthy and viable fish populations.

The only factor that has been introduced into the natural balance of prey and predator relations has been the introduction of what amounts to an introduction of an exotic species. In this case the exotic species is an overpopulated terrestrial primate armed with highly technological tools for mass extraction.

Another contribution of seals is that their numbers are a source of nutrients from fecal material, annual afterbirth, and natural demise. Seal bodies provide protein for zoo-plankton and small fish and invertebrates. This is a formidable source of nutrients and these nutrients are part of the foundation of a large plankton base of the maritime food pyramid.

Humans on the other hand, extract but don’t significantly replenish. It can be argued that fish offal is a source of replenishment but this material would have been returned to the system without human intervention. The only new materials introduced by humans are hydro-carbon pollutants like spilled oil, fuel, and plastics, chemicals, pesticides and agricultural runoffs.

Today in Canada, there is serious consideration being given to the need for dropping net-ripping structures on the Banks. If Canadian bureaucratic history is a guide, this talk will continue without action for a few more years. After all, a Royal Commission will most likely be needed and there will be challenges and counter challenges, court cases, and endless editorializing and debate. During this time the Cod will decline further.

Thus, it makes sense for non-governmental organizations to initiate this program.

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society intends to do just this. In 2004, the Sea Shepherd flagship R/V Farley Mowat will transport some experimental structure to the Nose or the Tail of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. This structure will be designed to provide shelter for marine eco-systems and to rip nets. It will be dropped in an unmarked area in order to act as a deterrent to foreign trawlers still active in these areas.

We are long past the time for the need to take action on this issue. There must be an initiation of this idea and the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society intends to initiate the action.

There is nothing illegal about dropping structure outside of the limits of Canadian territorial waters. If Canada seeks to physically stop us, as the government attempted to do when Sea Shepherd chased trawlers from the Banks in 1993, the question can be asked: Why does the Canadian government act to stop conservation measures outside of the 200 mile limit, but takes no action to stop exploitation activities?

In 1993, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society ship Cleveland Amory intervened against Cuban and Spanish drag trawl operations on the Nose and Tail of the Grand Banks. The Cuban trawler Rio Las Casa was ordered to leave the Banks by myself as Captain of the Cleveland Amory.

During this time, the Cleveland Amory was shadowed closely by ships of the Canadian Coast Guard and the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Although I did not cause any property damage nor did I cause any injury, I was arrested by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and charged with three counts of Mischief and some lesser offenses. My arrest took place outside of the territorial limit.

My trail in 1995 revealed numerous hypocrisies by the Canadian government and I was acquitted of the charges. It was a great waste of Canadian tax dollars and it was interesting to note that Canada paid the expenses of the Cuban captain and some crew to fly to Newfoundland to testify against a Canadian conservationist who had interfered with an illegal foreign drag trawl operation.

After my 1993 intervention, Brian Tobin orchestrated a grand charade with the Spanish trawler Estai that made it appear that Canada was getting tough with the foreign trawlers. Lost in the self congratulatory back-patting and patriotic cheering over the token intervention was the fact that Canada financially compensated the owners of the Estai for lost revenues and apologized for the action. And, after all was said and done, the trawlers continued to plunder the banks, and Tobin went on to profit from the feel-good publicity to become the big enchilada in Newfoundland.

I believe it was our 1993 intervention that motivated the Tobin intervention shortly thereafter. Canada had to be seen as doing something on the heels of an attempt by a conservation organization to take on a responsibility that Canada was avoiding.

It is now time for the Canadian government to be motivated again. An action must be initiated to expose the Canadian government’s failure to act once again.

The Canadian Coast Guard can be counted on to cite the dropping of the structures as a threat to navigation and vessel safety. The Mounted Police will be called upon to protect the safety of these vessels and most likely I will be arrested again and charged with some absurd counts of Mischief once more. The Canadian taxpayers will be asked to pay the bill for yet another ridiculous trial for which I will most like be exonerated and for which the Crown will appeal up the ladder in a glorious waste of time and resources.

But hey, it’s a thankless dirty job but someone’s got to do it.

Captain Paul Watson
Founder and President
Sea Shepherd Conservation Society
www.seashepherd.org (http://www.seashepherd.org)
paul@seashepherd.org

***

Alan

Meerkat
01-27-2005, 12:47 PM
What's a political thread doing here? :confused:

Popeye
01-27-2005, 12:49 PM
here ya go .. read this .

The Makah, the Whale and Eco-Salvation

This week was the scene of an interesting, even rare collision. It is not often the armies of environmental purity and protection -- the friends of the Earth -- run up against their spiritual mentors; those who have been with the land longer than anyone else, the aboriginals. However the killing of a grey whale by the Makah tribe in what the Makah claimed was an act of profound meaning, very clearly incensed and horrified some environmental groups. It was quite a spectacle. On that, all will agree. The great animal pursued, harpooned, then dispatched by very contemporary .50 calibre bullets; blood in the roiling water and towed to shore where the carcass was cut -- some of it eaten with a chaser of diet Coke -- and some of it given away.

If this was a ritual, a grand traditional ceremony, it clearly lost in the sublimity scales; veered more to an episode of "Flipper" than "Moby Dick." However, the whale is environmental royalty, and saving the whales is the Eucharist sacrament of environmentalism. The rainforest, the panda, the dolphin and the whale; and of these four, the greatest is the whale. (Gunshot)

Not even Newfoundland's poor, battered and supine seal hunt has the PR propulsion of the whale as a symbol. The seal has only cute; the whale has grandeur. The whale is everywhere. It is the darling of the world. It is petted and patted; watched, videotaped, bannered and postered. It is the 'eco' in eco-tourism. There are whale songs, whale books, whale watchers and whale movies. Who can -- try as hard as we may -- forget Hollywood's blubbering sentimentalities "Free Willy 1" and "Free Willy 2"?

But in the great chain of being, when it comes to who watches the Earth, who is more sensitized, by history and practice, to preservation and protection; to a reverence of the natural and a wholesome relation with the world's creatures; who may claim superior moral rank to First Peoples? They are the people whose very identity is a fusion with Earth, air and water in a way that we, who came later, can only guess at.

This is a truth long respected by environmentalists themselves. Indeed, what is environmentalism but a pale, latter day homage to what the aboriginal peoples have lived for all their history? The Makah say the revival of a whale hunt is necessary for their spiritual well-being. Well who are we, or the environmentalists, to say any differently? To call it an outrage or a sham or a deep cruelty is to import late 20th-century attitudes of a very sophisticated and largely urban character. Earth first is very Second Cup: an attempt to impose them on people who clearly think very differently. It's condescending, and it's arrogant in a way that is very out of tune with the benign respectful posture that is supposedly characteristic of environmentalism. And it is too, very much a very up-to-date return to the grand missionary style of interaction with native peoples. Only this time, the message is not religion; it's eco-salvation. The pictures may have been ugly; the spectacle did have its contradictions. But neither we, nor the environmentalists, have earned the moral ground on which to lecture the Makah on going about their business with the Earth or its creatures.

-- Rex Murphy.

[ 01-27-2005, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: popeye ]

Alan D. Hyde
01-27-2005, 01:04 PM
Meerkat, some fisherman do their fishing from boats.

That makes this subject, to my mind, boat-related.

But if you just wear hip waders, I understand... :D

Alan

Donn
01-27-2005, 01:20 PM
<marquee> http://smile.smilies.nl/1758.gif http://smile.smilies.nl/1771.gif http://smile.smilies.nl/1758.gif http://smile.smilies.nl/1771.gif http://smile.smilies.nl/1758.gif http://smile.smilies.nl/1771.gif</marquee>

Meerkat
01-27-2005, 03:14 PM
Darn it - now Donn's breeding! :D

Popeye
01-28-2005, 10:35 AM
Seems to me a new preacher has rode in on his high hos and begun tell'n us yokels how to fish.

thanks, but no thanks. we only been at it for 500 years, where is he from , toronto?

mmd
01-28-2005, 03:05 PM
Although I share the distaste for modern bottom-trawl practices shown here, the idea of deliberately placing obstacles on the sea floor to snag fishing gear shows, at best, profound ignorance of the jeopardy to the fishermen that these actions would cause, and at worst, a criminally cavalier attitude to the health and safety of those fishermen who are merely trying to make a living. The concept is akin to spiking trees to curtail forestry - a form of terrorism made semi-acceptable by placing the three letters "eco" in front of it. Regardless of the good intentions within, any action that places at risk the health and safety of innocent persons merely practicing their trade is criminally irresponsible and should be prosecuted as such. I certainly do not want my government taking such wantonly dangerous actions on my behalf.

If you want to make a difference, write - no, CALL - your elected representatives today and pursuade them to take this issue seriously and apply pressure internationally to stop fishing NOW in these sensitive locations.

This is a matter for world court decision and international enforcement; however, with the most powerful nation in the world publicly expressing distain for the world court and refusing to comply with previous decisions for reasons of self-interest, it is unlikely that lesser states, when shown such examples of seeming national turpitude, will comply with rulings that they deem against their own self-interest. So here we sit, watching as one of the most prolific marine environments in the world gets bulldozed into a gravel wasteland because no-one has clear title to the geography and no-one wants to lose face by conceding profits for the common good. Shame on us all.

Our grandparents had the choice of how large a fish they should bring home. We are now making the choice of what alternative under-utilized species of fish we bring home. At our current rate of depleting the oceans' fish stocks, it seems that the option that will be available to our grandchildren will be which colour of sea-slime they put in their soup.

Possibly the actions of people like Paul Watson will have a positive effect by bringing the light of media attention upon the issue, but I don't want to have the news of a Portuguese fisherman being cut in half by a parting trawl warp being an exclaimation point in the message.

Alan D. Hyde
01-28-2005, 03:37 PM
Nor do I.

Thank you, Michael.

Alan

John E Hardiman
01-28-2005, 04:15 PM
Forewarned is forearmed.

Trawler Hazard/Capsize Guide (http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice%20Updates/MGN/mgn0265/PF%20Version/mgn0265.pdf)

Meerkat
01-28-2005, 04:20 PM
I'm in favor of the fish habitat, notices to mariners and then caveat emptor as it where. There's a shortage of fish, not of portugese fishermen. Whey they pay for the cost of sustaining a fishery, then let them have a say in how it's done.

George Roberts
01-28-2005, 04:57 PM
mmd ---

You wrote:

"the idea of deliberately placing obstacles on the sea floor to snag fishing gear shows, ..."

I believe the idea is to stop the fishing. You place the obstacles and tell people the obstacles are there.

It is the fisherman's choice to fish and risk snaggin or to not fish.

There are certainly better options. Patrolling the area, warning boats away and arresting those who refuse to leave is one.

John E Hardiman
01-28-2005, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by George Roberts:
I believe the idea is to stop the fishing. You place the obstacles and tell people the obstacles are there.

It is the fisherman's choice to fish and risk snaggin or to not fish.That never worked here in the US, and I doubt it will work in the less moral rest of the world. I know of US fishermen going into restricted firing range waters under the cover of darkness (like he thought he could hide) "because that's where the fish are" snag his gear and sue in civil court for damages. Likewise a friend's USCG cutter chased a Russian trawler caught red handed fishing out of season in US EEZ waters (not territorial) all the way to Russian territorial waters while they were refused permission to board (kind of funny I understand with the cutter cruising lazy circles around the trawler as it made full speed for home with diplomatic traffic flying back and forth). So I don’t think there is a real solution unless you want to get into a “bumper boat” war like the UK/Iceland or a real shooting war like the US tuna fleet and Ecuador in the ‘70’s.

LandLubber No More
01-31-2005, 09:48 AM
Until I ran away and joined the NAvy, I was immersed in the Cod fishery on Canada's east cost. My family has (and still does) earned it's living from the atlantic for the past couple of centuries. Paul Watson, in my opinion, spouts just enough fact to hide his militant conservationism. The man doesn't want a sustainable fishery, he wants it stopped, his opinion about seals and their inpact on fish species is one side of a multi-sided issue. The idea of placing obstacles on the sea bed is just plan crazy IMHO. Unless you have an obstacle placed every couple hundred yards, a good captain will have them all charted and easily avoid them. We are talking about quite a large area so placing enough obstacles to stop trawling is impossible. My view of this man's motives is very biased (I admit it freely) I have seen first hand the misleading info he argues his case with, it has tarnished a whole generation of Fisherman in Newfoundland. Frankly, if he told me the sun was shining, I would have to look out a window to check for myself before I believed him.

My 2 cents worth.

Popeye
01-31-2005, 10:24 AM
If Foreign interests were allowed, nay invited, to back a fleet of tractor trailor floats onto the Ford parking lot in Oakville and steal every last new car that rolled off the production line, and, while on their way home, from Canada, blazed flat the wheat fields of Saskatchewan and became fond of suculent roast Alberta piggies which they scooped from the farmers pens...

er ..

What would be your response then?

[ 01-31-2005, 11:25 AM: Message edited by: popeye ]

LandLubber No More
01-31-2005, 10:54 AM
I am not denying there is a huge problem. Gov Policies which made no sense, international issues which we flip flopped on and basic human greed all were part of the Cod fishery collapse. My issue is not with the cause, it is with the man and the organization. Right now he sounds like he has the best interest of Fisherman in mind, that will last as long as it forwrds his cause. Then he will walk over them to achieve his view of how the world should be. His take on Seals is an example of this. I was part of the fishery when he and his idealogical cohorts told lie after lie about the Canadian Seal Hunt. Now he mixes lies with some facts to get the support of those he scorned a few years ago. I want no part of him or his organization.

Popeye
01-31-2005, 11:05 AM
for my geographically challenged friend in Idaho, here is a map of the Grand Banks shelf, as you can see, it is a few days steam past bonnie Nova Scotia.


http://www.awesomestories.com/movies/stories/perfect_storm/images/grand.banks.run.jpg

mmd
01-31-2005, 12:05 PM
Here's some good reading on the subject:

A Recent Account of Canada’s Atlantic Cod Fishery (http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/kids-enfants/map-carte/map_e.htm#map)

To the Last Fish: The Codless Sea (http://stjohns.cbc.ca/features/CodFisheries/)

Underwater World – Atlantic Cod (http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/zone/underwater_sous-marin/atlantic/acod_e.htm)

Greenpeace's take on the subject (http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/cbio/cancod.html)

George Roberts
01-31-2005, 02:41 PM
John E Hardiman ---

I am not against a shooting war. I suppose more rational heads will prevail. The result being the fishery never recovering.

Since I am a vegetarian, I don't eat enough fish for it to matter.