The Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve (GBBR) sponsored the event, featuring strong youth leadership and a sharing of historical and current experiences through cultural dances and drumming.

Reconciliation in Canada refers to recognizing injustices against Indigenous peoples and their impacts, and committing to forging mutually-respectful relationships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal peoples.

What does a youth perspective of the process of reconciliation have to do with a UNESCO biosphere reserve’s mandate to promote conservation and sustainable livelihoods / development through research, education and training?

Globally, UNESCO sites are called to do their work through the lens of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which Canada signed on to UNDRIP in 2016.  Nationally, Canadian Biosphere Reserves responded to this call in June 2017 by adding reconciliation to their activities. In doing so, they recognize that successfully fulfilling their mandate requires an acknowledgement of the historical oppression of Indigenous peoples in Canada, and a commitment to respecting Indigenous cultures, knowledges and governance systems.  

In the GBBR, the youth’s project is rooted in the idea that land-based education and cultural identity are critical for stewardship success.

“Conservation and stewardship in our community begins with a sense of place and caring for the land”, explained GBBR Executive Director, Becky Pollock. “By sharing Anishinabe (Ojibway) cultural perspectives about our connection to land and water in the only high school in our Biosphere Reserve, we advance a commitment to conservation in our community.”

Book presentation event (left) and student authors Gracie Crafts, Mackenzie Elwes, Sara Burns, Dawson Bloor, and Taylor Judge (right). Photos: Meg Wallace Photography

Indigenous and “mainstream Canadian” students wrote about conserving cultural traditions such as honouring the land and different knowledges, and about reconciling traditional and Western cultures as a step toward healing and the relationship-building that underpins the GBBR’s community conservation and livelihoods initiatives.

The video compilation of the reading and performance is being edited and produced by youth at Parry Sound High School for public viewing soon, with sponsorship from CCRN.

Right: Student author Gracie Crafts reads to 700 elementary school children in Parry Sound. 
Left: Project supporters Dr. Becky Pollock (GBBR) and teacher Patti Jenkins (Parry Sound High School)

Photo credits unless otherwise stated: Georgian Bay Biosphere Reserve on Facebook

Information in this post was provided by CCRN researcher Sharmalene Mendis-Millard, with thanks to Becky Pollock

View the complete CCRN’s Tsitsikamma Community Story as a PDF

Ella-Kari Muhl

Key messages

• The Tsitsikamma area includes local communities whose food security and livelihoods have been impacted negatively by various government actions, notably a no-take marine protected area (MPA).
• While MPAs are promoted as a long-term conservation strategy, no-take MPAs threaten the food security and cultural practices of fishers in areas of low economic opportunity and limited alternative livelihoods or transitional support.
• A lack of communication between the regulating authority (SANParks) and the fishers has increased conflict in the Tsitsikamma area and endangered community members’ food security and livelihoods.
• Participatory monitoring, with formalised consultation with community members, may reduce conflict and strengthen conservation goals.

Community profile

Figure 1: The location of the TNP MPA relevant to the local communities

Conservation and livelihood challenges

The impacts of “no-take” MPA

With the abolition of apartheid and introduction of democracy, it was hoped that the right of small-scale and subsistence fishers would be restored in accordance with their culture and tradition^(10). When the legislative change to a “no take” MPA took place in 2000 under the Marine Living Resource Act 18 of 1998, it was shown to affect not only food security for the fishers and their families but also their cultural identity and heritage ⁽⁷⁾. The Thornham, Stormsrivier, Nompumelelo and Sanddrif communities have been reliant on fishing as a form of food security. With the loss of access to fish, there has been a reported decline in health and increase in crime⁽⁴⁾.

Fishers stated that, in addition, their well-being has been affected by the closure of the MPA, as fishing is part of their identity⁽¹⁾. The current top-down governmental conservation programme, which introduced a no-take MPA as a form of conservation to promote sustainability and biodiversity, was implemented without consultation with the community, and subsequently has elevated conflict between community members and the regulating authority.

Food security, customary rights and livelihood impacts

With no alternative livelihood provided, local village economies remain limited with few economic opportunities available (Figure 2). Local household economies are poor and under severe stress.

In 2016, for example, only 52.6% of households met the financial requirements for food security, which increases fisher’s dependence on marine resources as a supplementary food source. The Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) housing built by the South African government in 2001 to create Nompumelelo village added 480 households to the area, placing additional pressure on resources⁽⁶⁾. The timing of the completion of RDP housing coincided with the delineation of a no-take MPA, thus increased competition for work, and placed strain on local amenities, with already limited public services and health care.

The change in coastal access and legislation has had a negative effect on the community with a loss of livelihoods, fishing and recreational activity. The community describe themselves as being “born on the rocks (coast)”, claiming original ancestry from the indigenous Khoi-san people, indicating a consideration of the coast as a part of their culture and traditions^(1,6).

Many residents in Tsitsikamma have also historically relied on coastal forests for a range of amenities, such as medicinal plants, honey and woods for fuels and building materials, which they are also denied access to.

Figure 2: A former fisher, no longer allowed to access the coast, writes poetry about the sea now.

The lack of recognition as stakeholders and exclusion from the coastline has illustrated that unless social and ecological factors are considered with the design of the MPA, illegal fishing and conflict will continue between SANParks (South African National Parks) and the local communities.

Community initiatives

In 1994, the community created the Tsitsikamma Angling Forum (TAF) to represent local fishers who wanted access to the coast. The TAF have formally petitioned against the TNP in 1976, 1995, 2006, and 2015. They have also worked with a task team comprised of the Kou Kamma municipality and SANParks to reopen the TNP in 2006, 2014 and 2015. The TAF actively protested SANParks in 2007, when 70 members fished illegally in the Tsitsikamma MPA.

Over time, the community has become increasingly mobilized and in 2015, following workshops between the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Oceans and Coasts Branch, the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), SANParks, the local municipality (Kou Kamma) and representatives from TAF, a decision was made to open specific areas within the MPA for fishing with restrictions. The plan to reopen certain areas was approved in December 2015 through promulgation of a government gazette but was then blocked by the Friends of the Tsitsikamma, an association that obtained a court interdict against SANParks, DEA and TAF in January 2016⁽⁹⁾.

Figure 3: Map depicting the three coastal control zones within the Tsitsikamma MPA

Legal recognition of historically disadvantaged residents

Following the closure in January 2016, the TNP MPA was rezoned later in December 2016 in the new government gazette 40511⁽⁸⁾ to allow three controlled fishing areas to be opened (Figure 3). However, the MPA re-opening process has been questioned as consultation was not carried out with local community members and was poorly conceptualized with little practical changes for community member’s food security or livelihoods.

At present, community members are required to purchase a permit. However, older fishers and minors are either prohibited or unable to fish under the new gazette ruling, halting the multi-generational transfer of knowledge. This prevents the oral traditions and teachings of the older generation from passing down to the present. The subsequent absence of SANParks at the controlled zones prevents fishers from communicating effectively with rangers and leads to miscommunication and further resentment towards SANParks.

The challenges and lack of capacity within SANParks reveal the vulnerability of the Tsitsikamma fishing communities and the need to incorporate local ecological knowledge (LEK) and community members into partnerships with researchers and authorities to better manage MPAs.

Practical outcomes

The Tsitsikamma community have issues of food security and a lack of economic opportunities or alternative livelihoods (Figure 4). The creation of the no-take MPA has disrupted a reliance on fish as a contribution to food and cultural practices^(1,5).

The community members have identified five solutions that would be the most beneficial towards restoring trust between community fishers and SANParks (Figure 5).

(1) Collaboration

(2) Transgenerational access to the Tsitsikamma MPA

Figure 4: The Stormsrivier mouth which is located centrally in the park and would be accessible to fishers, however is reserved for tourists.

(3) Education

(4) Communication

To empower fishers and effectively promote collaboration, communication is necessary between relevant government departments, SANParks, and working groups made up of interested parties, scientists and elected community members. Increasing the capacity of and empowering local fishers to participate in decision-making processes leads to practical, real solutions that strengthen ownership and promote care of the resource.

(5) Acknowledgement of customary rights and access rights

In order to improve management, increased understanding of government officials of the fishers’ customary rights and importance of access will foster respect and promote conservation, as well as help reduce tensions and conflict between the two parties.

Future concerns

Dialogue between the community and the regulating authorities is improving; however, for there to be a successful conservation impact, policy makers need to widely consult on proposed changes before implementing them. Top-down processes of government control only serve to further marginalise the community and promote resentment. A working partnership is necessary to establish trust and understanding with an emphasis on local ecological knowledge combined with scientific expertise for better policy and practice.

Figure 5: The Thornham Focus Group members with their list of practical outcomes

References

Acknowledgements

Check out this CCRN funded video produced by CCRN student Ella-Kari Muhl.

Listen to the accounts of local community members as they describe and express the struggles and challenges related to the implementation of the marine protected area, and how the current challenges are endangering the future of the community. The video highlights the values and needs of the local residents, and, through those values, demonstrates indicators and practices that would lead to success

The many activities this year included instruction on fishing with rods and traps, bullkelp harvesting and uses, boat trips into the territories, a visit to an archeological dig, salmon dissections, and role-playing to learn about traditional Nuu-chah-nulth roles such as Ha’wiih (hereditary Chiefs), tsa-tsa-thluk (river keepers), and muschim (community members).  The T’aaq-wiihak fishery was also a focus as campers learned about conservation practices such as fishing openings, quota, and gear restrictions.

The science camps continue to be an important part of Uu-a-thluk’s Capacity Building program as they help connect Nuu-chah-nulth’s younger generations to their territories, resources, teachings, and of course, science.  Initially, Uu-a-thluk developed the successful science camp program to generate more Nuu-chah-nulth fisheries biologists by sparking interest and passion in marine and environmental science at a young age. Today, our goal has expanded to introducing young people to the range of career opportunities possible in aquatic resources

Jared Dick, Uu-at-hluk Central Region Biologist leads fish dissection with Tla-o-qui-aht First Nation camp participants

Recognizing that the majority of the one million sea-going fishers of India belong to the small-scale sector (Articles 1, 15 and 25), the new National Policy on Marine Fisheries (2017) commits to implementing the Voluntary Guidelines on Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries (Article 54.0). It notes, however, that “the fisheries resources from the near-shore waters are fully utilized”, and points to deep-sea waters, where expansion of fishing effort is expected to be possible. Whether sufficient resources are still available in Indian deep-sea waters, and whether this is going to help small-scale fishers is a moot question.

The Blue Revolution that was launched after India’s Independence in 1947 introduced a new, harbour-based trawl fishery that feeds on the same fishing grounds and resources as the sizeable small-scale fishing sector does. Ignoring the existence of customary law that has defined fishing rights and obligations over the centuries, the post-colonial government bulldozed the small-scale sector into submission, dangling before its nose the promise of development. What it has delivered is severe inequality and marginalization. The trawl sector, which employs a minority of fishers, now lands the highest volumes and values of sea produce, while the small-scale sector, which has been struggling to keep up, for example through the motorization of craft, has seen its catches dwindling. This is a result of the decline of the inshore marine ecology through trawling, pollution and the damming of rivers. The industrialization of the coast is also creating new impediments to fishing – new jetties, ports, and pipelines that interfere with fishing operations and create enormous beach erosion (Lakshmi et al. 2012).

Yes, there are laws in place. The Indian government has, for example, decreed that inshore waters are reserved for small-scale fishing, and that trawl vessels must proceed beyond 5 nautical miles from the shore. But implementation is virtually absent, and it is muscle- and money-power that determines the use of ocean resources. And, yes, there is a Pollution Control Board, but it is known for its lack of backbone. And while the National Policy on Marine Fisheries emphasizes the need for conservation of marine resources, government’s record is hitherto poor indeed.

So where does this leave the small-scale sector and its commendable traditions of resource conservation? Many small-scale fishers are desperately trying to paddle along, investing in outboard engines and in new gears, such as mini-purse seines, that seem to hold promise of returns. Many of them are also investing heavily in the education of their children, hoping that they will find their way into other economic sectors than what they often see as a ‘doomed’ fishery. But, as emerged from research result presented at a workshop at the French Institute of Pondicherry on August 26th, 2017, many of these children, failing in their endeavours to find other employment, return in the end to the conundrum of the fishery.

While customary fisheries management, undertaken by village level organizations called ur panchayat continues, it obviously has been losing force. What can one do against the power of industrial fisheries, that has the blessing of government? At the local level, ur panchayats still have substantial influence, and play an important role in safeguarding the wellbeing of small-scale fishing populations (Bavinck 2017). But in the larger scheme of things, and on their own, their authority is negligible.

It is here that alliances with NGOs and other social movements are helping out. The efforts of the National Coastal Protection Campaign (NCPC), the National Fishworkers Forum (NFF), and the International Collective of in Support of Fishworkers (ICSF), all of which possess voice up to level of national government, are publicly raising objections to the usual, biased course of affairs. The Voluntary Guidelines on Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries, adopted by FAO in 2014, provide useful leveraging material for what, in the end, is a long-ddrawn social and political struggle.

The small-scale fishers tucked out of sight along Pondicherry’s avenue are amongst the worst off in India’s marine sector. With only the most simple of craft and gear, and facing the competition of many other small- and large-scale fishers at sea, they lead a basic, hand-to-mouth existence. But they are hanging on, somehow. India’s small-scale fishers are a tough bunch. They are not easily erased.

Author: Maarten Bavinck

References:

Bavinck, M. (2017). Enhancing the wellbeing of Tamil fishing communities: the role of self-governing ur panchayats along the Coromandel Coast, India, In: Johnson, D., T. Acott, N. Stacey and J. Urquhart (eds.), Social wellbeing and the values of small-scale fishing, Dordrecht: Springer.

Lakshmi, A., A. Schiavina, P. Banerjee, A. Reddy, S. Mandeen, S. Rodriguez and D. Apte (2012). The challenged coast of India. A report prepared by PondyCAN in collaboration with BNHS and TISS.

Parthasarathy, D. (2011). Hunters, Gatherers and Foragers in a Metropolis: Commonising the Private and Public in Mumbai, Economic and Political Weekly 46 (50):54-63.

There are 669 UNESCO-designated BRs in 120 countries, including 20 transboundary sites (UNESCO, Accessed July 11, 2017), all with a mandate to promote biodiversity conservation, sustainable development and livelihoods through research, education and training.  At this meeting, Canadian BRs committed to reconciliation as an additional pillar of their mandate, answering the national call for “collective efforts…to revitalize the relationship between Aboriginal peoples and Canadian society” (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2017).  Each person reflected on what reconciliation means to them individually, and breakout groups identified actions for incorporating reconciliation with Indigenous peoples into the governance and activities of Canadian BRs.

Anthony Blair Dreaver Johnston (Mistawasis Nehiyawak in Saskatchewan) and Genevieve Poirier-Ghys (Mont Saint-Hilaire BR) in group discussions about what BRs can do in terms of their governance and activities to meaningfully engage Indigenous peoples in the spirit of reconciliation. Photo credits: Delphine Doucet

Watch this video of participants speaking about what reconciliation means to them

Over 4 days, CCRN researchers Minerva Arce-Ibarra and Sharmalene Mendis-Millard, along with CCRN affiliate Meriem Bouamrane from UNESCO, enjoyed warm hospitality, field trips and engaging discussions with 60 other participants. Minerva spoke about how Mexican BRs are structured and funded differently, and offered her perspective and curiosity as someone starting to learn about the Canadian BR context.  Sharmalene facilitated small group discussions, and Meriem reminded the group of the importance of their work, and how they are not alone; others globally are grappling with similar problems and taking actions that ultimately contribute to UNESCO’s goal of a peaceful world.

Minerva Arce-Ibarra and Sharmalene Mendis-Millard (CCRN); Meriem Bouamrane (UNESCO), Rebecca Hurwitz (Clayoquot Biosphere Trust) and Valerie Courtois (Indigenous Leadership Initiative). Photo credit: Nelson Boisvert

The group learned a bit about Canada’s history, international and national commitments, and injustices Indigenous communities and peoples are still facing that shape the need for reconciliation today.  Representatives from the Pessamit Innu First Nation spoke about their efforts to have their rights respected.  As an example, they are calling for a stop to the practice of generating peak energy from a Hydro-Québec dam on their territory, which is causing severe damage to an important river for salmon and their way of life. To learn more about some of what was discussed, watch Larry McDermott’s CCRN webinar, ‘Indigenous Engagement: Principles to Guide Process and Action for Reconciliation‘, and ‘An Indefensible Privilege: Wiping out the Betsiamites River Salmon to Light Up Cities’ about Pessamit Innu First Nation’s story.

The group also heard a song and stories about the resilience of Indigenous peoples, opportunities for working together for a more sustainable future, and work already underway in several BRs. The Pessamit Innu Nation, for instance, has found value in working with Manacouagan-Uapishka BR on conservation and sustainable development projects for mutual benefit. “Groups like UNESCO can benefit from our Indigenous knowledge to create policies and measures to protect the environment….Our partnership with UNESCO becomes a symbol of honour, it is something our young people can be proud of, and it is proof to the outside world we value our land” said Raymond Rousselot, Band councilor for the Pessamit Innu Nation (CBC July 7, 2017).

Watch Eskasoni First Nation’s Kalolin Johnson sing ‘We Shall Remain (It Wasn’t Taken Away)’

As a bonus, the Canada Coast to Coast to Coast (Canada C3) expedition joined the group for a bit. This was fitting, as Canada C3 participants are engaging in conversations about diversity and inclusion, reconciliation, youth engagement, and the environment, and hoping people across the nation follow their journey of discovery.

CBRA President Jean-Phillipe Messier and group tour the Canada C3 boat. Stan Johnson from Eskasoni First Nation (Bras d’Ors BR) talks with musician Heather Rankin. Photo credits: Laurent Gosselin

Finally, the Pessamit Innu First Nation hosted a special National Aboriginal Day event, showcasing traditional Indigenous foods in outdoor barbeque and gourmet styles, their history, songs, dances, and locally-made crafts. At this community celebration, the Canadian Biosphere Reserves Association (CBRA) unveiled a Call to Action, which, in the words of Sébastien Goupil (Secretary General of the Canadian Commission for UNESCO), “…is a strong reminder that the sites designated by UNESCO in Canada and around the world have the responsibility to actively contribute to strengthening ties with indigenous peoples. Canadian Biosphere Reserves are ideally positioned to show how we move from words to action” (National Celebration in Pessamit Press Release, June 2017).

(Left) Innu Nation Elders at the community celebration on National Aboriginal Day. Photo credit: Nelson Boisvert. (Right) Groups identified actions for how to work toward reconciliation in the coming years. Photo credit: Laurent Gosselin.

Author: Sharmalene Mendis-Millard