The traditional foods that our ancestors enjoyed remain a significant aspect of social and cultural events, yet often it’s only our Elders who are experts in how to harvest, prepare, and preserve these foods. Having the knowledge and skills to access good, healthy foods for ourselves and our families is an inherent right that should be encouraged at the community level.

This was part of the motivation behind three harvesting workshops organized and coordinated by Uu-a-thluk this past summer in the three regions (i.e., Southern Region: China Creek and Broken Group Islands, Central Region: Toquaht Bay, and Northern Region: Nootka Sound and Yuquot). Thanks to a Special Projects grant from the Nuu-chah-nulth Employment and Training Program (NETP), Uu-a-thluk was able to launch this pilot project to better equip Nuu-chah-nulth for aquatic-related employment opportunities. 

“Our hope is that we will make these workshops a yearly event and collaborate with Nations who would like to train members on seafood harvesting, preparation, and preservation,” said Michelle Colyn, Uu-a-thluk Capacity Building Coordinator. “This project will allow us to continue to assert our rights for present and future generations to develop fisheries-related opportunities in concert with Nuu-chah-nulth values and rights.”

Community members in the harvesting workshops learned a range of skills and knowledge such as modern ways of harvesting salmon, crab, prawn, groundfish, and kelp; how knowledge of harvesting ocean resources ties into careers in the fisheries and eco-tourism industries; handling, cleaning, filleting salmon, how to prepare kuutchis salmon (Nuu-chah-nulth salmon barbeque over fire), and preservation methods such as canning.

Figure 1: Northern Region Biologist Roger Dunlop leading a seaweed identification activity (harvesting workshop), Mowachaht/Muchalaht First Nation Science Camp

Participants in the Northern Region workshop canned bull kelp and made bull kelp salsa, while in the Central Region community members learned about the importance of the potlatch for Nuu-chah-nulth governance and for important events. This past summer while the workshop was taking place Toquaht community members were harvesting for a special memorial honouring Bert Mack (Deets–kee-sup), who served as Tyee Ha’wilth (Hereditary Chief) of Toquaht First Nation until 2009. Those taking part in this workshop also learned about how Nuu-chah-nulth would move through the seasons harvesting food during the 13 moons of the Nuu-chah-nulth calendar. Anii-tsa-chist (Larry Johnson), Toquaht fisher and President of the Nuu-chah-nulth Seafood Development Corporation spoke about the importance of being familiar with the “Seasonal Round” or Nuu-chah-nulth calendar.  

“To truly get back to traditional foods it’s important to know why and when different foods are harvested. We’ve been removed from the fishing industry and the coastal way of life,” he said, adding that the residential schools and the shutting out of Nuu-chah-nulth from the commercial fishing industry have significantly contributed to this disconnection. 

Defined by the principles of hišukiš c̓awaak meaning “everything is connected,” as Nuu-chah-nulth we understand our sacred duty to foster healthy relationships with the land, waters, plants, and animals that give us our food. With this comes the necessity to respond to our own requirements for safe, healthy cultural foods and the ability to make decisions over how much and what food we hunt, fish, gather, grow and eat to feed our communities. Field-based training opportunities like the harvesting workshops connect food sovereignty and food security with employment on the water, which is crucial to ensuring the long-term success of fisheries and fisheries related businesses. Engaging the next generation in this understanding often begins with something as simple as a first fishing lesson.

Anii-tsa-chist recalled the thrill of catching salmon on a rod for the first time and how he noticed this in the children who he taught to fish at the harvesting workshop in Toquaht Bay. “Adrenalin takes over and that excitement takes me right back to being a little boy and fishing stickleback in the rivers.” Although he added that this should be but one lesson of many. “Being a fisher isn’t something you learn from one course once a year. It’s a lifetime of things you pick up along the way.” 

All information in this post provided by CCRN Researcher Dawn Foxcroft

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.

Cheryl Chan is a member of the Environmental Change and Governance Group (ECGG); School of Environment, Resources, and Sustainability; University of Waterloo

“I initially became interested in coastal-marine systems and small-scale fisheries through recreational scuba diving” replied CCRN member and recent graduate Cheryl Chan. “I started diving about five years ago. During my initial experiences in the water, I witnessed the challenges that both coral reefs and small-scale fishing communities are facing. I became interested in the relationships between humans and natural systems, and began exploring graduate opportunities to pursue research in this field.” Cheryl completed her master’s degree at the University of Waterloo in the School of Environment, Resources, and Sustainability.  Her thesis, supervised by CCRN member Derek Armitage, examined how a marine protected area influenced the ecosystem services and social wellbeing of a small scale fishing community in Jamaica. Cheryl found that the CCRN network gave her the opportunity to meet mentors and other early career researchers.

Continue reading to learn more about Cheryl’s thesis “Ecosystem Services and Social Wellbeing Linkages: The Impact of a Marine Protected Area in Bluefields, Jamaica” and the insights she gained while completing her master’s degree.

What excites you about the work you did for your thesis?

First, I was excited by the opportunity that I was given to work with communities and to experience a new culture. Ultimately, I found this research to be one of the most trying and rewarding experiences that I’ve ever had. Through my master’s, I was able to see the barriers that prevent the translation of research into practice. I hope to pursue this “gap” further in the next stages of my career. In particular, during my degree, I uncovered my passion for science communication—to become aware of something that I really, truly care for is both exciting and something that I am thankful for.

Did you run into any difficulties during your studies? If so, how did you address them?

I think that being a graduate student is hard for a number of reasons—particularly for me, since I did not complete a thesis or major research project during my undergraduate degree.  It was hard to figure out where to start my research, how to go about it, and how to deal with the isolation that I felt while I was in the field.  Then, there was difficulty in figuring out how my research fit into the larger context of the world, and how—to paraphrase Ghandi—it could shake the world in a gentle way. I found that what got me through the day and through this degree was the strong support that I felt from my research network (including the Environmental Change and Governance Group; School of Environment, Resources and Sustainability at the University of Waterloo; and CCRN) and friends and family back home. However, I’m still trying to figure out how to “shake the world”.

Pelicans perched atop the remains of an abandoned wharf. Since the implementation of the Marine protected area, many locals and fishers have reported witnessing the return of shorebirds.

How does your research affect the community you worked with?

I hope that my research gave the people of Bluefields a safe space to voice their concerns. I hope the community feels that their voices are important and valuable, and that their ideas and concerns can be a catalyst for change. The next step of my work is to provide a brief summary of this research for Jamaica’s Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries. The purpose of this summary is to inform the governance of marine protected areas in Jamaica. Lastly, through sharing the stories of Bluefields with a broader audience, I hope that people will become more aware of the challenges being faced by small-scale fishing communities and Small Island Developing States around the world, and take some form of action on behalf of and/or with these communities.

What do you think are the next steps for learning more about the topics you addressed in your thesis?

I hope to publish a paper or two from my thesis. Is my supervisor reading this? J I think that publishing will be a good opportunity to learn more about the academic literature that defines this field, and the current research that is happening. From a broader and more practical perspective, I want to become involved in projects with civil societies, government, and/or NGOs that relate to the topics that I addressed in my thesis.

How does your research contribute to your field?

I think my research offers new insights into the governance of coastal-marine systems, particularly in the context of marine protected areas and small-scale fisheries. While there is a huge body of literature that already exists in these contexts, my research provides further support for the consideration of social and cultural dimensions in conservation initiatives.

The marine protected area examined in the thesis, with fishing vessels in the foreground and patrol boat docked in the background.

During the summer of 2016, the Alberta-based natural gas company AltaGas diverted a section of the Sipekne’katik River to create a mixing channel. AltaGas aims to dump mine waste in the Sipekne’katik River, drill salt caverns, and store natural gas on land belonging to the Mi’kmaw First Nation. This project threatens the river ecosystem and poses a risk to the health and livelihood of the Mi’kmaw communities in this area. The Peace and Friendship Treaties signed between the Mi’kmaw and colonialists indicate that this land belongs to the Mi’kmaw. Additionally, the treaties guarantee the right for the Mi’kmaw to hunt and fish as usual.

During the summer of 2016, a truckhouse was built on the banks adjacent to the Alton Gas site and eel traps were placed in the diverted section of the river. The purpose of these constructions is to ensure that access to the river, which is protected in the Peace and Friendship Treaties, is available to everyone. Further, these additions act to demonstrate that the Mi’kmaw people and allies are resistant to the Alton Gas project but hope to explore how everyone can come together in peace and friendship.

Featured image was taken by Sadie Beaton

View the complete CCRN’s Bolivia’s Northern Amazon Community Story as a PDF

Alison Macnaughton

Key Messages

• Introduced fish species in the Bolivian Amazon could provide Indigenous communities with livelihood opportunities, but may also be a threat to their critically-important subsistence fisheries through predation and territorial exclusion.

• Local fishery organizations can be strengthed through ongoing dialogue, leadership training, and technical assistance.

• Engaging with local, regional and national level actors and promoting open spaces of dialogue (workshops, round table groups) can help identify common interests, resolve conflicts and support discussion on future planning.

Community Profile

Figure 1: Map of Bolivia showing the Pando and Beni departments(10)

Conservation and Livelihood Challenges

Figure 2: Traditional houses in Baketi community, TCO Cavineño, 2015), and low returns to producers.

Community Initiatives

Since 2011, indigenous communities have worked with researchers from the Asociación Faunagua, World Fisheries Trust, and the University of Victoria (Canada), to better understand the fisheries situation, and identify pathways to improve livelihood and food security in the region.

Figure 3: Explaining local fishing areas, catch and effort, community workshop, TCO Chácobo, 2015

Much of this work has focused on the paiche; providing key information on abundance and impacts, as well as potential for development. So far, these efforts have provided important information on:

• Nutritional status and food security of rural and urban populations and key determinants, including the contributions of fish⁽¹⁾;
• Fisheries and other livelihood activities, and local perspectives about paiche; and
• Fishery value chains, and mechanisms to improve transparency and promote greater economic equity between fishers, middlemen and markets^(7,5)

Figure 4: Mapping the spread of the introduced paiche fish, community workshop, TCO Chácobo 2015

There have also been a range of practical initiatives including:

• Pilot initiatives for value-added fish production, for example the establishment of a cooperative in one of the indigenous communities, where paiche fillets and skins (for leather production) are produced and sold at improved prices;
• Strengthening local fisheries organizations through ongoing dialogue, leadership training, and providing technical assistance, e.g. consolidation of the regional fishers association; and
• Engaging with local, regional and national level actors and promoting open spaces of dialogue (workshops, round table groups) to identify common interests, resolve conflicts and discuss future planning^(8).

Practical Outcomes

Figure 5: Preparing roasted tucunaré (peacock bass), a traditional dish, TCO Cavineño, 2015

• Capacity-building for communities and local organisations to identify and articulate local needs and priorities for development and conservation.
• Development and implementation of resource management plans and other governance tools at a local level.
• More effective engagement in regional planning.
• Support for greater transparency, communication and cooperation between agencies responsible for regulating fishing and fish markets.
• Improving returns to fishers, for example through value-added opportunities or improved pricing structure.

Figure 6: Returning with the day’s catch, TCO Cavineño, 2015

References

Acknowledgements

View the complete CCRN’s Olifants Estuary Community Story as a PDF

Merle Sowman

Key messages

• Fishers of the Ebenhaeser and Papendorp communities in Olifants Estuary have strengthened their voice in negotiations and decisions affecting the estuary and their livelihoods.

• Increased understanding of the importance of the estuary for conservation, livelihood and culture — amongst fishers, government officials and other stakeholders — has led to a greater willingness to work together to achieve socio-economic and conservation objectives.

• Proposed mining activities in the vicinity of the Olifants estuary pose a new threat to the communities and require ongoing vigilance, mobilisation and collaboration to defend rights and the environment.

Community profile

The people of Ebenhaeser were forcibly removed from their farmlands near Lutzville in the Western Cape of South Africa in 1926 and relocated to unfertile lands adjacent to the Olifants Estuary (Figure 1). These communities have been reliant on the estuary for fishing for generations although in recent years reduced catches have resulted in many seeking supplemental livelihoods^(4,5).

Figure 1: Map of the Olifants River Estuary

There areapproximately 120 fishing families that rely on fishing for food and as a contribution to livelihoods. They live in two main villages adjacent to the estuary – Ebenhaeser and Papendorp. The fishers use rowboats and gillnets and mainly fish at night. The main target species is mullet but there is also an incidental catch or “bycatch” comprising a few linefish species such as elf and silver kob.

Conservation and livelihood challenges

The Ebenhaeser and Papendorp communities face several challenges to their livelihoods, including threats to close the fishery and proposals to build a mine adjacent to the Olifants estuary.

Closure of the gill net fishery 

Over the past 20 years, traditional small-scale fishers at the Olifants estuary have been facing threats from fisheries scientists and conservationists to close the gillnet fishery. A government policy published in 2005 required that gillnetting be phased out by 2014, while a draft estuary management plan (EMP) published in 2008, recommended the estuary be declared a no-take marine protected area (MPA). The community rejected both the policy and the draft plan on the basis of inadequate participation in the decision-making process and failure to recognise their socio-economic and cultural rights.

Figure 2: Two of the older fishers from Olifantsdrif with dried fish (bokkoms) in background

Proposed mining adjacent to the estuary 

In April 2016, an Australian mining company, with various subsidiaries in South Africa, submitted a mine prospecting application for heavy mineral sands, including zircon, phosphates, garnet, precious stones and diamonds on two farms that lie adjacent to the north bank of the Olifants Estuary. The proposed mining area is located on land identified as a critical biodiversity area. The southern boundary of the mining area borders on the sensitive Olifants estuary and associated habitats (approximately 15 km in extent) while the western boundary is adjacent to the seashore and extends northwards for approximately 18 km. To the north of the proposed mining area an existing mine is currently operating under the same Australian company.

Fishers at the Olifants estuary, as well as other community members, are particularly concerned about the negative impacts that the proposed mining activities may have on estuarine habitats, water quality and sediment movement as well as scenic views and sense of place. Of particular concern is its effect on local livelihoods and plans for conservation as well as a community tourism development at the mouth of the estuary.

Although the Basic Assessment Report (BAR) for the prospecting phase has indicated that no drilling of experimental holes will take place on the estuary banks⁽³⁾, fishers are concerned that once approved, environmental controls will be ignored. Fishers are also concerned that should prospecting yield favourable results and mining be approved, the company will request permission to extend the mining operation into the estuary and out to sea, as it happened at the existing mine site.

The lack of accessible information, consultation and transparency associated with the initial basic environmental assessment process led civil society to submit objections questioning the integrity of the process and the initial assessment report. Despite these objections, the Minister approved the report, which led to a formal appeal procedure in 2018 where fishers, with support from their local partners, raised objections to shortcomings in the public participation process and the quality of the assessment report. Two of the appeals were upheld by the Minister of Environmental Affairs and the applicant was required to undertake further public consultation and prepare a biodiversity assessment of the estuary. However, a revised report has not changed the fisher community’s steadfast opposition to mining in the area.

Although there is a policy and legislative framework in place to regulate the mining sector, the increasing power of that sector in South Africa (with strong political backing), presents a serious threat to coastal communities like those living adjacent to the Olifants estuary. The people of Ebenhaser and Papendorp are facing threats to their livelihoods and way of life – this time due to mining proposals.

Community initiatives

Working with their community partners, the Olifants Estuary fishing communities are addressing the challenges facing their community.

Challenging threats to close the gillnet fishery

Figure 3: Discussing the boundaries of the Community Conservation Area at a meeting of fishers with social partners, in Ebenhaeser, June 2016

Challenging the mining proposition

Figure 4: Fishers, university researchers and students meeting together on the banks of the Olifants estuary (September 2016)

Legal recognition of fishing communities

Practical Outcomes

• A much greater appreciation of the rights and interests of different users and stakeholders in the Olifants fishery has emerged, which has been useful in discussions with the government regarding future management of the estuary and fishery.

• Increased understanding amongst fishers and government officials of the importance of the estuary for conservation, livelihoods and culture and an initiative to declare a community conservation area at the mouth of the estuary.

• A greater willingness amongst fishers and conservation agencies to work together in a co-management arrangement to achieve livelihood and conservation objectives.

• Increased capacity and empowerment of fishers to challenge unjust proposals, plans and policies and participate in planning and decision-making processes.

• Revision of the Olifants Estuary Management Plan to include fisher’s proposals for management of the fishery.

• The gillnet fishery has not been closed despite government’s intention to close it at end of 2014.

• Strengthening of partnerships between fishers, university researchers and other social partners.

Figure 5: Two fishers with their dried fish catch (locally known as “Bokkoms”)

References

Acknowledgements

View the CCRN’s Nuu-chah-nulth Community Story as a PDF

Dawn Foxcroft, Don Hall and Lissa Cowan Nuu-chah-nulth Tribal Council, Canada; info@uuathluk.ca

Key Messages

* Since the 2009 Ahousaht et al. vs. Canada decision, recognizing the rights of five Nuu-chah-nulth First Nations to fish and sell fish, Nuu-chah-nulth have been developing fishing plans in accordance to their principles, Hishukish Tsawalk (everything is one) and ?iisaak (respect with caring).

* Nuu-chah-nulth’s strong conservation ethic is demonstrated in their successful efforts to protect the herring stocks from commercial harvest along the west coast of Vancouver Island since 2014.

* Nuu-chah-nulth First Nations have been forced to utilize legal actions to protect their resources and

Community Introduction

The west coast of Vancouver Island is a culturally rich and ecologically significant area for the more than seventy-four thousand(1) who call it home. Since time immemorial, Nuu-chah-nulth people have occupied the lands and waters of this coast, hunting, fishing, and gathering the abundant aquatic resources that thrive in the ocean, inlets, bays and rivers. Nuu-chah-nulth territory spans the coast from Brooks Peninsula in the north to Nitinat Lake in the south. Today there are over nine thousand(2) Nuu-chah-nulth people from fourteen First Nations. Before contact with Europeans, Nuu-chah-nulth communities depended solely on this rich environment for their survival, conducting both economic and subsistence fisheries across broad areas of the coast and inland waters.

Figure 1: Map of Nuu-chah-nulth Ha-houlthee (traditional territory)

Conservation and Livelihood Challenges

Following contact with Europeans and the development of commercial fishing fleets, the Nuu-chah-nulth continued to participate in marine and freshwater fisheries. In some communities, as many as 90% of the men fished for their livelihood(3). However, devastating events contributed to a shift in this way of life, severing the relationship between the Nuu-chah-nulth people and their aquatic resources. Significant among these events were Canadian fisheries policies and regulations that diminished and excluded Nuu-chah-nulth participation in Vancouver Island’s west coast fisheries. Today, in most Nuu-chah-nulth communities, only a handful of fishers remain – although as will be described below, Nuu-chah-nulth efforts continue to reverse this situation and to restore fishing as an important part of their economies.

Figure 2: One of the T’aaq-wiihak fishers on the water.

Ahousaht et al vs. Canada

In June of 2003, Nuu-chah-nulth Nations filed a Writ of Summons against Canada and British Columbia seeking recognition of their Aboriginal fishing rights. The trial began in 2006, and included testimony from expert witnesses including Shawn Atleo, former National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, anthropologists, former staff of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), and Nuu-chah-nulth fishers and knowledge holders.

The case was argued that Nuu-chah-nulth have Aboriginal rights to fish and sell fish by their preferred means and in their preferred locations, because fishing provided an economic basis for their communities before contact with Europeans. On November 3, 2009, after 123 days of trial and many months of deliberation, the BC Supreme Court issued its judgment, saying, “At contact, the Nuu-chah-nulth were overwhelmingly a fishing people. They depended almost entirely on their harvest of the resources of the ocean and rivers to sustain themselves.” The decision added that Nuu-chah-nulth people were able to prove a long history of trading and selling fisheries resources, and that this translated into a modern right to “fish and sell all species of fish in their territories.” Through this decision, Ahousaht et al vs. Canada (2009), Nuu-chah-nulth Nations established Aboriginal rights to harvest any species of fish (other than geoduck) from their territories and to sell that fish in the commercial marketplace.

The five First Nations involved in that court decision have been developing fishing plans since 2009. For more than six years, the Nations have submitted these plans to DFO as a part of negotiation efforts toward a Nuu-chah-nulth fishery based on aboriginal rights (referred to as a rights-based fishery). In addition to reflecting Nuu-chah-nulth values, the fishing plans would benefit coastal communities by providing employment, a local source of seafood for consumers, and much needed new revenue into the local economy. Unfortunately, DFO has not accepted Nuu-chah-nulth plans for sustainable, community-based fisheries and has instead offered minimal access, largely through existing commercial fishing regulations and policies. These are the same regulations and policies that the Courts found had cumulatively infringed Nuu-chah-nulth rights. They are also the same regulations and policies which have contributed to the current state of depleted ocean resources.

Community Initiative

Today, the five Nations are negotiating with Canada to design Aboriginal rights-based fisheries that exemplify conservation in their design; they are small-scale fisheries, not heavily capitalized or intensive industrial fisheries. The negotiating body is called T’aaq-wiihak, which means “fishing with the permission of the Ha’wiih (hereditary Chiefs).” Through this body, negotiators are working to reinstate Ha’wiih as decision makers and rights holders in their ha-houlthee (traditional territories). Nuu-chah-nulth Ha’wiih and leaders continue to exemplify a conservation ethic through recommendations and requests to DFO.  This is seen clearly through the efforts of Nuu-chah-nulth Nations toward rebuilding herring on the west coast of Vancouver Island. To this end, the Nations proactively met with DFO to recommend strategies, including maintaining closures to commercial gill net and seine herring fisheries.

Figure 3: Ua-a-thluk Associate Biologist, Sabrina Crowley, shows the thin layer of herring roe during Herring Assessment Training, Barkley Sound.

Unfortunately, in 2014, DFO chose not to implement this recommendation and instead allowed a 10% harvest. In response, Nuu-chah-nulth Nations wrote to the fishing industry urging fishers not to fish for herring on the west coast of Vancouver Island. The Nations called for a meeting with Canada’s Fisheries Minister to discuss their concerns. Ultimately, it was an injunction successfully obtained by five Nuu-chah-nulth Nations that stopped the commercial harvest of herring along the west coast of Vancouver Island for the 2014 season.

Figure 4: Nuu-chah-nulth Nations, host Nations and supporters gather on the steps of Vancouver Law Courts for song, prayer and a few words on the first day of the Justification trial (Ahousaht et al), March, 2015.

In 2015, still seeing a persistent lack of herring, Nuu-chah-nulth Ha’wiih and leaders again advised DFO not to open a commercial herring fishery in their Ha-houlthee for the 2015 fishing season. However, DFO and the commercial herring industry chose an adversarial path like that of the previous year. The Nations again went to court but were unsuccessful in obtaining an injunction, so the herring fishery took place. However, as has been predicted by Nuu-chah-nulth knowledge holders, the herring remained in low abundance and the few commercial herring vessels that came to Nuu-chah-nulth territories to fish left with their holds empty.

Prior to the 2016 herring season, Nuu-chah-nulth Nations and the commercial herring industry reached an agreement through a Letter of Understanding to not fish the west coast of Vancouver Island. This letter of Understanding was presented to the new Fisheries Minister and the Minister eventually agreed to the no-fishing recommendation of the Nations and industry. Nuu-chah-nulth Nations continue to encourage DFO and industry to work collectively on a Herring Rebuilding and Management Framework with long term fishery objectives that all parties can support.

Practical Outcomes

Although the Ahousaht decision has not been implemented fully due to stalling from Canada’s government, the Nuu-chah-nulth are still seeing positive results of rights-based community fisheries from the five T’aaq-wiihak Nations that, since the court decision, have been selling sustainably caught suuḥaa (chinook salmon), caʔinwa (gooseneck barnacles) and p̓uuʔi (halibut) on Vancouver Island’s west coast. Ha’oom, the Nations’ wild seafood brand, is recommended “ocean friendly” by Ocean Wise, and is purchased by conscientious consumers that are mindful of local and global conservation issues.

The Nuu-chah-nulth Ahousaht decision, once implemented to its full extent, will allow the Nuu-chah-nulth, who have protected and harvested on the west coast of Vancouver Island for thousands of years, to strengthen their relationships with these resources. The result will be increased economic opportunities not only for Nuu-chah-nulth communities but also for neighbouring coastal communities. The Nuu-chah-nulth, along with communities in remote coastal areas, are reliant on the ocean for food and transportation. Being a constant watchful eye along the coast, Nuu-chah-nulth elders, fishers, and leadership have an important role in monitoring the ocean resources. Despite this, Nuu-chah-nulth Nations have found that the Canadian government, with Federal management authority over the ocean resources, has not always valued the requests and advice from Nuu-chah-nulth communities.

However, the success of 2016, when the Canadian Federal government agreed not to open the commercial herring fishery, is seen by Nuu-chah-nulth and other coastal Nations as a sign of change from the Canadian government. There is hope of coming closer to the goal of the government acknowledging the authority of Nuu-chah-nulth Ha’wiih and leadership over the resources within their territories, and working collaboratively with Nuu-chah-nulth communities to develop sustainable relationships valuing conservation and livelihoods with their shared sea resources.

References

BCStats. 2013. Sub Population Estimates (used population amounts for Alberni Clayoquot and Strathcona). Accessed December 5, 2016 from: http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/StatisticsBySubject/Demography/PopulationEstimates.aspx

British Columbia. 2014. First Nation Negotiations. Accessed December 5, 2016 from: http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/firstnation/nuu_chah_nulth/default.html

Benson Nookemis. 2008. Benson Nookemis testimony from Ahousaht et al. vs. Canada, June 12, 2008.

A short documentary on fishing rights and traditional livelihoods among the Nuu-chah-nulth First Nations.

Aibek is currently a PhD student at the University of Tübingen in Germany, where he is a member of the team investigating the “‘Social Life’ of a river: environmental histories, social worlds and conflict resolution along the Naryn-Syr Darya”

Aibek Samakov is a CCRN fellow who completed his master’s degree under the supervision of CCRN member Dr. Fikret Berkes. His thesis took a closer look at the two different management practices observed in the Ysyk-Köl area of Kyrgyzstan – sacred sites and the Biosphere Reserve. Aibek’s interest in sacred sites, as a method for conservation, can be contributed to his work with the Aigine Cultural Research Center (Aigine CRC) based in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. “Aigine CRC documented the sacred sites and traditional knowledge throughout the Kyrgyz Republic. My work at Aigine CRC sparked my interest in sacred sites and traditional knowledge and their implications for biocultural diversity conservation,” says Aibek. While completing his thesis the CCRN became a unique platform for networking and learning.

Continue reading to learn more about Aibek’s thesis “Sacred Sites: Opportunity for Improving Biocultural Conservation and Governance in Ysyk-Köl Biosphere Reserve, Kyrgyz Republic,” and the insights Aibek gained while completing his master’s degree.

What was the topic you addressed in your thesis?

In my research, I looked at sacred sites in Ysyk-Köl area of Kyrgyzstan as community conserved areas. Sacred sites represent areas of land and bodies of water which are spiritually and culturally meaningful for local people. The study mapped about 130 sacred sites, which are conserved-through-use by local communities and represent traditional model of conservation. The entire territory of Ysyk-Köl region is formally protected as a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. Thus, sacred sites, as traditional model of community conserved area, are embedded in the formal government-run Biosphere Reserve. I looked at how these two models of conservation (sacred sites and the Biosphere Reserve) co-exist in the same territory and interact with each other. Results indicate that these two models are parallel. However, recognition of sacred sites can improve formal conservation by: a) providing a complementary culture-based set of incentives for conservation, b) fostering a biocultural approach, and c) serving as a communication hub for Ysyk-Köl Biosphere Reserve managers and local communities.

What excites you about the work you did for your thesis?

I was most excited by working with traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) and bridging it with the scholarly domain. This experience convinced me that reinforcing links between TEK and science can bear benefits both for scholarship and on-ground biocultural conservation.

How does your research affect the communities you worked with?

I cannot claim that my research affected the communities in an exceptional way. The sacred sites have been one of the defining elements of kyrgyzchylyk (the Kyrgyz-ness). In local narratives, the sacred sites are usually described from a cultural and spiritual perspective, whereas conservation-related aspect of sacred sites is more of a spin-off effect of sacred sites’ spiritual significance for local people. In my opinion, my research draws local communities’ attention to the ‘instrumental’ value of sacred sites for conservation in addition to their intrinsic value as biocultural phenomena.

What do you think are the next steps for learning more about the topics you addressed in your thesis?

The next steps would be investigating/developing ways for meaningful and equitable inclusion of sacred sites into formal conservation strategies.

Browse Aibek’s Publications to learn more about his work in Community Conservation

Samakov A, and Berkes F. 2017. Spiritual commons: sacred sites as core of community-conserved areas in Kyrgyzstan. International Journal of the Commons. 11(1).

Samakov A, and Berkes F. 2016. Ysyk-Köl Biosphere Reserve, Kyrgyzstan: Sacred Sites Help Improve Conservation in Protected Areas. CCRN Community Story.

Samakov A. 2015. Sacred Sites: Opportunity for Improving Biocultural Conservation and Governance in Ysyk-Köl Biosphere Reserve, Kyrgyz Republic. Master’s Thesis, University of Manitoba, Canada.

3MT Video by Aibek Samakov – “Sacred Sites: Conservation of Nature through Mechanisms Rooted in Culture.”