Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst ... 23
Results 71 to 99 of 99

Thread: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Cantão - Brazil
    Posts
    12,691

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by sonofswen View Post
    Pacific Northwest...Makah Tribe wants to resume whaling...a whale of a problem?
    https://www.ptleader.com/stories/mak...g-rights,68044

    A spring time 2019 preliminary recommendation by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration suggested allowing three whale kills in even-year hunts and one in odd-year hunts beginning in 2020 over a 10-year period.
    The last legal whale hunt in the U.S. took place in Neah Bay in 1999 after tribal members lobbied for the removal of the gray whale from the federally protected list of endangered species and was granted the right to hunt again.
    We lived in Port Townsend for 5 years, and I remember seeing a picture of Makah tribe members going out in a aluminum boat with high powered rifles...this is all news to me...
    I can't believe this BS:

    Years later when the Makah fell on hard times and were facing starvation, the story goes that the whale, knowing the songs of the Makah and recognizing them as their family, came to them and agreed to lay down their lives to provide sustenance for the people as long as the Makah agreed to protect them in turn and appreciate the sacrifice.
    “Someone asked me, ‘How can you kill your family?’” McQuillen said through tears. “I am not killing my family, they are coming to me. I love them and they love me.”

    This guy sounds like Trump spinning one of his crimes. Really? This is about mutual love? The friggin' whale loves your hypocritical primate arse so much that it comes to you to be killed? You don't have to chase it in a motorboat before you lovingly kill it with your traditional native high powered rifle?

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wow-Ming
    Posts
    20,107

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    "Us white boys" want the resource protected so that it remains productive and lucrative for everybody for generations to come, Chip. The current dispute in St. Mary's Bay is not about native fishing rights, it is about illegally fishing lobsters out-of-season in protected nursery grounds by a few indigenous peoples or their hired accomplices.

    I have posted about the poor state of the cod fishery and about how the harp seal is both the primary predator of cod and the primary host for fish worm which is rampant in the eastern cod stocks, and that with the demise of the seal hunt and decimation of the shark population on the east coast that seal population has exploded, bringing the problems of seal predation on the slowly-recovering cod stocks and the infection of those stocks with fish worm to an all-time high. But I understand that a fellow from the mountains of Wyoming is likely to misunderstand the subtleties of a maritime fishery situation.
    I spent some time in Newfoundland and actually listened to people talking about the cod fishery. There's a pattern that is being repeated with lobsters, etc.: larger craft, fishing deeper and more distant waters, overharvesting, collapse of the fishery.

    While you lot focus on the tribal thing and seals. Can't be anything to do with how you and your society work.
    We're merely mammals. Let's misbehave! —Cole Porter

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    50,896

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip-skiff View Post
    I spent some time in Newfoundland and actually listened to people talking about the cod fishery. There's a pattern that is being repeated with lobsters, etc.: larger craft, fishing deeper and more distant waters, overharvesting, collapse of the fishery.

    While you lot focus on the tribal thing and seals. Can't be anything to do with how you and your society work.
    Did you read, actually read, Michaels posts?
    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    I was talking with a local fisherman/boatbuilder today and got a different, more subtle, take on the dispute in St. Mary's Bay. As is most such situations, it is driven by greed. The federal government gave lobster licenses and boats to various Miq'maw communities to be used by the community for the benefit of the community. Because of the structure of licensing for lobster fishing, each license had to be assigned to a person, not to the community. This was usually the Chief, but chiefs come and chiefs go, but the license stays with the person it was assigned to unless he/she decides to either sell it or abandon it. The license holder, if not chief, can do whatever he wishes with the license. In this case, the license holders are fishing for personal profit, even leasing the boat and license out to other, non-Miq'maw, people in order to not be accountable to the band council. The Miq'maw council has set up a fishery administration council and conservation plan that mostly adheres to Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) guidelines, but it has no authority over non- community fishermen nor do they have any ability to enforce rules out on the water. DFO does not want the enforcement role as that would entangle them in treaty enforcement, which is the purview of the RCMP and Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada. So nobody has the ability to rein in the fishermen who are using the indigenous lobster licenses and boats illegally. In the opinion of my correspondent this morning, this whole situation of illegally fishing out-of-season and on protected spawning grounds has been deliberately created by the Miq'maw band councils, possibly with the regional commercial fisherman's association knowledge, to force DFO's hand into both accepting the Council's conservation and conservation plan, and to force DFO into policing the indigenous fishery.

    Interesting times...
    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    I feel I must reiterate that the issue in play at the moment in St. Mary's Bay is not the right of the Miq'maw to harvest lobsters (which the SW Nova Lobster Fishers Assoc. supports), nor the methods which they use. The issue is that the commercial fishermen believe that the Miq'maw should be required to follow the same scientifically-defined fishing seasons and zones and gear restrictions that the commercial fishers have to, which includes not starting to fish a month earlier than the commercial fleet and not fishing on protected spawning grounds. There is some pretty bold sophistry being employed by the native spokespeople when talking to the press, designed solely to mislead the general public and sway their opinion in favour of the native fishers, to whit:

    The local band chief has said that the Miq'maw start fishing earlier than the proscribed season because in their small, non-mechanized twenty-four-foot boats they cannot compete with the big fifty-foot boats with fancy hydraulic systems that the commercial fishers use. Bullspit. The local band has six fifty-foot boats and licenses for 350 traps per boat that were given to them by the federal government.

    Native spokespersons repeatedly reference the Treaty of 1758 which guarantees their right to make a living from fishing and hunting (although this is the first such treaty, in actuality they mean the Treaty of 1760-61, which includes "...the right to harvest fish, wildlife, wild fruit and berries to support a moderate livelihood ..."). The wild card in this hand is that "a moderate living" has never been defined. The local commercial fishermen insist that it means a moderate living for the crew of each boat; the local Miq'maw chief interprets it as their fleet of boats are free to harvest as much lobsters as they can to provide a moderate living for the entire band population, and if this means fishing out-of-season, soft-shelled and egg-bearing {'berried') females in commercially-prohibited areas, with more than the legal allotment of traps, so be it.

    The local situation has gotten out of hand because the governmental authorities whom can enforce the laws governing the commercial fishery are loathe to attempt to do so with the native fishery because it will trigger a federal court case to define the boundaries - if any - of the native fishery within the commercial fishery boundaries, and such a court challenge will quickly become much bigger and more complicated than merely a local fishery and a local native band, so all the gov't agencies are playing 'hot potato' with the issue. This lack of clarity engenders disputes on the waterfront between the local Miq'maw who believe that they can make their own rules despite the established scientific data and conservation methods, and the regional commercial fishermen's council, which participates in and abides by the conservation plan for the regional fishery and want to preserve the resource by having everyone playing on a level field.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wow-Ming
    Posts
    20,107

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    I read it. Did you read the last paragraph? The part about the Miq'maw making their own rules?

    Did all the scientific data and blah-blah from the government save the cod fishery from collapse, or were they just catering as usual to the fishing interests?

    The court case they're crapping themselves about might help to sort out the issue. Check?
    We're merely mammals. Let's misbehave! —Cole Porter

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    41,906

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Prior court cases (e.g. the Marshall case) haven't done that though, Chip. They've supported the First Nations' peoples' traditional individual rights to hunt and fish for personal subsistence, and expanded that interpretation to provide income/food for up to the whole band. The present position I'm seeing voiced on social media from various First Nations members and organizations is that there's no limit in principle to how that "living" should be defined. "Subsistence" isn't what it used to be.

    The upshot being the voiced opinion that if there is some total allowable annual harvest, that the First Nations fisheries should take as much as they wish first, and whatever is left over may then be shared among non-native fishermen. But that in principle, the First Nations fishers are under no obligation to disclose how much they've harvested, or abide by the regulations which protect breeding stock.

    As a guy deeply involved with biology and natural ecosystem sustainability, I suspect you see how this might be somewhat problematic.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    50,896

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip-skiff View Post
    I read it. Did you read the last paragraph? The part about the Miq'maw making their own rules?
    So, contrary to your posts you agree that it is the tribal self-interest/greed and not whitey screwing the fishery. Yes?
    Did all the scientific data and blah-blah from the government save the cod fishery from collapse, or were they just catering as usual to the fishing interests?

    The court case they're crapping themselves about might help to sort out the issue. Check?
    When did the cod fishery collapse? The 1990s, thirty years ago. Governments have learned some during that 30 tears. You are using a straw man argument.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    21,076

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Chip-skiff, you should read a bit more history about the collapse of the Northern Cod Stock, and the current dispute in St. Mary's Bay over lobster fishing rights before you let your ass hang out in public like this. I could explain both to you (again), but I suspect that you are not in any mood to hear it from me. Here is a hint, though: in both instances the science was/is right.

    Edit to add: Here's a good essay on the timeline and reasons for the Northern Cod stock collapse: https://www.mun.ca/harriscentre/repo...l_102_No_2.pdf
    Last edited by mmd; 09-23-2020 at 05:48 PM.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wow-Ming
    Posts
    20,107

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Having been exposed (through my wife, the lawyer and wildlife biologist) to tribal sovereignty issues over hunting, fishing, etc. in the US, New Zealand, and Canada, I've become familiar with certain common elements.

    One is the claim that tribal people are misusing the resource, often based on local rumors and lies spread by the commercial folks who are really guilty of profitable misuse.

    Another is the claim that "science" is what rules such resource decisions. But the assertion of Canadian government scientists that seals are causing the continued lack of cod reproduction is a counterexample. Agency scientists quite often are captives to the industries they're supposed to regulate. How many millennia did seals and cod coexist? Why did the fishing industry react so strongly against scientific evidence when restrctions were first put in place?

    Finally, you don't seem to understand what a sovereign right to a resource means. Maybe there will be abuse and mistakes, but they will only be slight reiterations of the abuses and mistakes and wholesale plunder commited by the colonial invaders, your people.
    We're merely mammals. Let's misbehave! —Cole Porter

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,512

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip-skiff View Post
    Having been exposed (through my wife, the lawyer and wildlife biologist) to tribal sovereignty issues over hunting, fishing, etc. in the US, New Zealand, and Canada, I've become familiar with certain common elements.

    One is the claim that tribal people are misusing the resource, often based on local rumors and lies spread by the commercial folks who are really guilty of profitable misuse.

    Another is the claim that "science" is what rules such resource decisions. But the assertion of Canadian government scientists that seals are causing the continued lack of cod reproduction is a counterexample. Agency scientists quite often are captives to the industries they're supposed to regulate. How many millennia did seals and cod coexist? Why did the fishing industry react so strongly against scientific evidence when restrctions were first put in place?

    Finally, you don't seem to understand what a sovereign right to a resource means. Maybe there will be abuse and mistakes, but they will only be slight reiterations of the abuses and mistakes and wholesale plunder commited by the colonial invaders, your people.
    Your biases and lack of basic biology knowledge is on display.

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    21,076

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    OK, you're right, I'm wrong; I am only local and heavily involved in the industry while you are far, far away and living in a radically different ecological setting. Also, your lawyer/wildlife biologist wife's advisory capability definitely trumps my daughter's master's degree in marine biology, my brother-in-law's thirty-five-year career as a physical scientist involved in Northern cod stock research, and my close friend's forty-year career as a lawyer specializing in marine resource law. But what do I know, eh? Next time I need guidance on local fisheries issues, I will be sure to call on you, out there in the Rocky Mountains and obviously better-connected and locally informed than anybody I could possibly know, before I speak to any of the ill-informed, corrupt, and obviously incompetent people that I have previously used as advisors on the industry that I cater to. Thanks for correcting the error of my ways, Chip-skiff.
    Last edited by mmd; 09-23-2020 at 10:15 PM.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  11. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    5,341

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    If all fishing or hunting practices except 'indigenous' practices ceased tomorrow, the stocks of fish and all other fauna would begin to trundle back.
    There is no place on earth where indigenous hunting practices alone are depleting stocks - that i know of.

    The problem is not indigenous people hunting out of season - its that this practice is perceived to put 'normal' fishing in jeopardy. I would bet a scientific study would show it doesn't, though clearly it would eat into quotas, and that jealousy is hiding behind the curtains somewhere.

    Some indigenous people may want to practice hunting whales, but they are hardly going to kick start an industry (demand), and they are very unlikely to cause any material depletion in the population. It, and examples like it, are a false equivalent.



    As for the definition of Indigenous, its worth keeping in mind that the origin of this moniker (like Aboriginal here in oz) was usually a colonial force, over which the First Peoples had no choice.
    First Peoples/First Nations is universally the most accepted way of refering to 'Indigenous people', and it explains their relationship to the land. Here in Oz the primary consideration is given to Traditional Owners - First Nations people who have established connections to their very specific place, that can be demonstrated.

    If a person has First Nations heritage, they can lay claim to it. It is the Community that decides if its bonafide or not - not the individual.
    There's a lot of people here in Oz who have recently discovered their Aboriginal heritage, but they were never raised on country, they have not been initiated, they don't follow traditional law - they are almost never accepted as Traditional Owners; in short the First nations communities don't accept them as members of their community (though they do acknowledge they have First Nations heritage). Aboriginal heritage in this instance is simply a nice to have, be proud of it, feel lucky - but you are not a Traditional Owner.

    It can be painful. A friend is clearly an Aboriginal man. But his family history involves a Stolen Generation. Thus he has no knowledge of his original country or his original people/language. He can fish and collect without a license, he is Aboriginal, but he could never hunt dugong, or whales - because he cannot show that this was his traditional practice, he cannot show he is TO, a Traditional Owner.



    In the OP example, there would be without question an argument to be made that the people are not simply engaged in traditional practices, but are competing at a commercial level. This could be based squarely on data like sales. I'm curious as to why this isn't being effective.

    Until it is, I don't think i'll shake the feeling that there's a little green eyed monster involved here. (A green eyed monster with a white face).
    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  12. #82
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    5,341

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by George. View Post
    This guy sounds like Trump spinning one of his crimes. Really? This is about mutual love? The friggin' whale loves your hypocritical primate arse so much that it comes to you to be killed? You don't have to chase it in a motorboat before you lovingly kill it with your traditional native high powered rifle?
    Respectfully George, that smacks of racism.
    You may not agree, but that does not make that persons traditional practices and beliefs invalid.
    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  13. #83
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    21,076

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Gypsie, the issue here is that indigenous peoples are leasing their boats and gear to non-indigenous fishermen to fish out-of-season and in prohibited nursery areas knowing that the governmental agencies that should be policing such actions will not act against native boats for political reasons. The local commercial fishing association took it upon themselves to blockade the wharf & port that these illegal activities are operating from. They have repeatedly and strenuously stated - both verbally and in writing - that they support the indigenous fishery, support the indigenous right to fish, and have welcomed the indigenous fishermen into their association. They just want the illegal fishing in the protected nursery areas using unlicensed traps to stop.

    As for over-fishing, there have been several court cases locally in recent years involving lobsters being dumped on the sides of back roads because the indigenous fishermen have caught more than they can use or sell. Literally tons of them, mostly undersized and egg-bearing females. Greed does not apply only to white people.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  14. #84
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    5,341

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    Gypsie, the issue here is that indigenous peoples are leasing their boats and gear to non-indigenous fishermen to fish out-of-season and in prohibited nursery areas knowing that the governmental agencies that should be policing such actions will not act against native boats for political reasons. The local commercial fishing association took it upon themselves to blockade the wharf & port that these illegal activities are operating from. They have repeatedly and strenuously stated - both verbally and in writing - that they support the indigenous fishery, support the indigenous right to fish, and have welcomed the indigenous fishermen into their association. They just want the illegal fishing in the protected nursery areas using unlicensed traps to stop.

    As for over-fishing, there have been several court cases locally in recent years involving lobsters being dumped on the sides of back roads because the indigenous fishermen have caught more than they can use or sell. Literally tons of them, mostly undersized and egg-bearing females. Greed does not apply only to white people.
    Ah - apologies, i didn't catch that.

    In that case the whole use of the word 'Indigenous' is a complete and utter red herring.
    People are simply breaking the law.

    Its unwise of the Indigenous population to allow it to happen. It won't do them any PR good and really weakens any future defense of their rights. Silly.


    As for the last bit, yes, i agree, an awful occurance but pretty unusual for an indigenous person to do it. I'd like to hear more, its just so unusual.
    However, the white man don't have a monopoly on stupid.
    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  15. #85
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    50,896

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    Gypsie, the issue here is that indigenous peoples are leasing their boats and gear to non-indigenous fishermen to fish out-of-season and in prohibited nursery areas knowing that the governmental agencies that should be policing such actions will not act against native boats for political reasons.
    Are the authorities unaware of this leasing practice? Are they too scared to board the boat and seek the skippers identification and proof of ownership so that they can then decide whether to take action against nonmembers of the community?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  16. #86
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    21,076

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Nick, as I understand it, the DFO - whom have no jurisdiction over native fishing rights - do not want to do anything that would trigger a full-on federal court case over indigenous fishing & hunting rights nation-wide at this time, so they are not intervening. All boats have identification numbers prominently displayed, so if DFO sees a boat it is curious about and discovers from this ID number that it is a native boat, they stand down without further action, as merely boarding the boat would be a trigger for a federal complaint about interference in the native fishery. Coast Guard have jurisdiction over vessel safety, but not over fishing practices, so they are not involved either.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  17. #87
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,512

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Im afraid indigenous people acting without thought for the future is just as common as non-indigenous people doing so. I live in a resource area. Slightly to the north of me is a block of land purchased by an Inuit investment group from the local First Nation. They paid very little for it (or at least the band itself did). The land was immediately logged in its entirety and never replanted. To the East is a gulf island which is mostly band land. It also was clear cut. The government supplied seedlings for replanting. They were mostly left to rot in boxes on the side of the road. There is now a quarry on the island,
    To the West of me is a band where the chief was involved in commercial elk poaching on a large scale. Can't remember if any charges were laid, but I doubt it as the government is as unwilling to place wildlife charges as they are fisheries.
    To the south is a band member who hunts deer commercially year round and sells the meat openly.

    I could go on, but it doesn't really matter. My point is that about 5% of a population acts with total self interest, and the other 95% suffer the consequences. And it doesn't matter what colour the skin is or what God is worshipped. People are the same around the world.

  18. #88
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wow-Ming
    Posts
    20,107

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by Decourcy View Post
    People are the same around the world.
    That is utter self-justifying hogwash. I've done some traveling and can attest that different places quite often act on different values and beliefs.
    We're merely mammals. Let's misbehave! —Cole Porter

  19. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,512

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip-skiff View Post
    That is utter self-justifying hogwash. I've done some traveling and can attest that different places quite often act on different values and beliefs.
    explain what you mean when you say “self justifying” in relation to what I posted

  20. #90
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Cantão - Brazil
    Posts
    12,691

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    People are fundamentally the same around the world. Culture is just a veneer. Beneath it, some are selfish, some are greedy, some are loving, some are truth-seeking...

    The reason for laws and enforcement is the portion that is selfish and mean. It is there in every culture.

  21. #91
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    50,896

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    Nick, as I understand it, the DFO - whom have no jurisdiction over native fishing rights - do not want to do anything that would trigger a full-on federal court case over indigenous fishing & hunting rights nation-wide at this time, so they are not intervening. All boats have identification numbers prominently displayed, so if DFO sees a boat it is curious about and discovers from this ID number that it is a native boat, they stand down without further action, as merely boarding the boat would be a trigger for a federal complaint about interference in the native fishery. Coast Guard have jurisdiction over vessel safety, but not over fishing practices, so they are not involved either.
    So, can they not find out who is operating any specific boat in other ways, and when they are certain that it is leased out of the tribe, then intercept on the fishing grounds?
    I understand the sensitivities, but that cannot be an insurmountable problem if the authorities are willing to do the leg work. How is the illegal catch sold? The dealers must be bent and therefore vulnerable?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  22. #92
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,512

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    So, can they not find out who is operating any specific boat in other ways, and when they are certain that it is leased out of the tribe, then intercept on the fishing grounds?
    I understand the sensitivities, but that cannot be an insurmountable problem if the authorities are willing to do the leg work.
    Ahh, but you see, then the question becomes whether the act of leasing out the licence falls under the law as it exists. It could be a very big can of worms to open.

  23. #93
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    50,896

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by Decourcy View Post
    Ahh, but you see, then the question becomes whether the act of leasing out the licence falls under the law as it exists. It could be a very big can of worms to open.
    Leasing is a straw man. If the skipper of the boat is not a member of the tribe he cannot be protected by the tribes legal ruling, so the skipper falls under the jurisdiction of the authorities. Yes?
    If you lease your car, you are responsible for speeding or drunk driving, not the company from whom you leased the car.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  24. #94
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,512

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    Leasing is a straw man. If the skipper of the boat is not a member of the tribe he cannot be protected by the tribes legal ruling, so the skipper falls under the jurisdiction of the authorities. Yes?
    If you lease your car, you are responsible for speeding or drunk driving, not the company from whom you leased the car.
    Not so simple

  25. #95
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    21,076

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Nick, if the authorities stop and board a native boat and find a non-native fishing it illegally, then the authorities win a small battle. If, however, they stop and board a native boat being operated by natives, then the natives can claim restriction of their aboriginal rights by the federal government which quickly can become a national-level supreme court case. Authorities do not want to risk the latter. It is really just a high-stakes game of 'chicken', and everyone knows on which side the advantage lies. There is also the issue of whether the entire crew of a native boat must be native; if a native deckhand is not available, can the boat owner hire a non-native? If yes, how many of the 5 or 6 man crew must be natives? All? None? Is it illegal for a native boat-owner to lease out his boat? Non-native fishermen do it all the time. Though not common, non-natives will hire a captain and crew to fish their boat under their license sometimes, as long as the boat owner is an active fisherman himself (this often happens when Grand-dad retires but the family wants to keep his license for the not-yet-ready grandson; the boat and license becomes 'owned' by the grandson and the hired crew fishes on his behalf). All of this is non-specified territory AFAIK.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  26. #96
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    50,896

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    Nick, if the authorities stop and board a native boat and find a non-native fishing it illegally, then the authorities win a small battle. If, however, they stop and board a native boat being operated by natives, then the natives can claim restriction of their aboriginal rights by the federal government which quickly can become a national-level supreme court case. Authorities do not want to risk the latter. It is really just a high-stakes game of 'chicken', and everyone knows on which side the advantage lies. There is also the issue of whether the entire crew of a native boat must be native; if a native deckhand is not available, can the boat owner hire a non-native? If yes, how many of the 5 or 6 man crew must be natives? All? None? Is it illegal for a native boat-owner to lease out his boat? Non-native fishermen do it all the time. Though not common, non-natives will hire a captain and crew to fish their boat under their license sometimes, as long as the boat owner is an active fisherman himself (this often happens when Grand-dad retires but the family wants to keep his license for the not-yet-ready grandson; the boat and license becomes 'owned' by the grandson and the hired crew fishes on his behalf). All of this is non-specified territory AFAIK.
    The point that I was trying to make is.
    • The skipper of the boat must be responsible for obeying the regs, not the absentee owner. Him and him alone.
    • If the skipper is a member of the "tribe" they obey the regulations set down by the "tribal" leaders. if they are not then they obey the regulations laid down by the Canadian authorities. Illustrated by my point to Decourcy that the driver, not the owner of a car is legally responsible.
    • There surely will always be a way to be sure who is skipping which boat.

    Am I wrong in any of those three points?

    I see the problem as a parallel to UK government departments. Each department will protect its budget and workload by sloping shoulders onto other departments whenever they can. They have heard of joined up thinking and cooperation but want nothing whatever to do with it.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  27. #97
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    21,076

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Nick, the flaw in your well-presented argument is that the 'regs' that the skipper is supposed to obey do not apply to native boats, and there's the rub. It is essentially a free-for-all if you are a native. Rules and regs pertinent to boat safety and construction are valid, but rules & regs pertinent to fishing season, protected areas, catch limits, and catch restrictions do not apply. Even if the band council promulgates rules for the fishery, the band has no way of enforcing them out on the water - that is the purview of RCMP or Dept. of Indian Affairs, both of whom do not want to create a national legal case by interfering in native's rights.

    I understand your desire to apply logic to the situation, but the situation has arisen because the structure of the legal environment governing the native fishery is, in a word, illogical.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  28. #98
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    50,896

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    Nick, the flaw in your well-presented argument is that the 'regs' that the skipper is supposed to obey do not apply to native boats, and there's the rub. It is essentially a free-for-all if you are a native. Rules and regs pertinent to boat safety and construction are valid, but rules & regs pertinent to fishing season, protected areas, catch limits, and catch restrictions do not apply. Even if the band council promulgates rules for the fishery, the band has no way of enforcing them out on the water - that is the purview of RCMP or Dept. of Indian Affairs, both of whom do not want to create a national legal case by interfering in native's rights.

    I understand your desire to apply logic to the situation, but the situation has arisen because the structure of the legal environment governing the native fishery is, in a word, illogical.
    So, it is the boats' owner who is responsible, not the boats skipper? If the boat is owned by a native, who operates it is irrelevant? Seriously?

    Someone really screwed up.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  29. #99
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    21,076

    Default Re: "Indigenous" vs. other humans

    Now you are starting to catch on...

    ...but there is also a small loophole, described in my post No. 95, wherein the boat owner can be non-native and simply hire a crew to operate the boat. But they have to follow the fishery rules and regs, unlike the native fishermen.

    It is the end result of a regulatory regime that accommodates the native's right to fish carried to its illogical conclusion by the law of unintended consequences, and devilishly difficult to fix.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •