Edited transcripts from the workshop
Vulnerability in Coastal
Communities: Adaptations to
Change and Planning
for the Future
August 23-25, 2003
Change Islands, Newfoundland and Labrador
CENTRE FOR COASTAL STUDIES • SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Authors
Allison Catmur, Sociology Department, Memorial University of Newfoundland
Kyla McGrath, Political Science Department, Memorial University of Newfoundland
Maureen Woodrow, Executive Officer, Global Environmental Change and Human Security
Project, Carleton University.
We would like to thank the following people and organizations for making this event a success:
Steering Committee
Doug House, Department of Sociology, Memorial University
Patricia Gallagher, Director, Centre for Coastal Studies, Simon Fraser University
Maureen Woodrow, Executive Director, Global Environmental Change and Human Security
Project, Carleton University
Wallace Bown, General Manager, Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation, Change Islands
John Peckford, Deputy Mayor, Change Islands
Herb Bown, President, Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation, Change Islands
Kyla McGrath, Political Science Department, Memorial University
Sponsors
Linking Science and Local Knowledge Node of the Oceans Management Research Network
(OMRN), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia
The Global Environmental Change and Human Security Project (GECHS), Carleton University,
Ottawa, Ontario
Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation, Change Islands, Newfoundland and Labrador
Simon Fraser University, Centre for Coastal Studies
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Department of Industry, Trade and Rural
Development
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Fisheries Products International
Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and Labrador
Kittiwake Economic Development Corporation
Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Special thanks are extended to the people of Change Islands for their warm hospitality and for
sharing their experiences and ideas.
-1-
INTRODUCTION
Over the past decade, rural Newfoundland and Labrador suffered greatly from the closure of the
fishery and the resulting out-migration of its people. The goal of the “Vulnerability in Coastal
Communities: Adaptations to Change and Planning for the Future” workshop held on Change
Islands on August 23-25, 2003 was to build an understanding about the vulnerabilities and
adaptations within the rural coastal communities of the province, draw lessons from best adaptive
practices, and develop guidelines for coastal community-based approaches to achieve future
sustainability.
The workshop was co-hosted by the Linking Science with Local Knowledge Node of the Ocean
Management Research Network (OMRN), the Global Environmental Change and Human
Security Project (GECHS) and Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation The Linking Science and
Local Knowledge Node of the Ocean Management Research Network is committed to building
capacity for coastal and ocean resource management at the local level. It is a group of natural and
social scientists with their government, First Nations, community, industry and non-governmental
organization partners who work together to assist in the development of sustainable ways of life
in coastal communities. The Global Environmental Change and Human Security Project project
works with communities and regions internationally to understand adaptations in areas that are
environmentally, socially and economically vulnerable as the result of changes in the
environment. The partnership between the two networks of researchers brings a comparative
international dimension to the issue of sustainable livelihoods in coastal communities. Locally, a
partnership with the Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation – which works to preserve and
promote the unique heritage structures of Change Islands – was formed to ensure that the local
community was a full participant in this international event.
Change Islands (inc. 1951) is a group of islands off the northeast coast of Newfoundland located
in Notre Dame Bay between Twillingate and Fogo Island. In the past, many of these islands were
inhabited but at present the local population is concentrated on what are known as the North and
South Islands. The focal point of the community is the tickle that separates the two Islands,
which are now connected by a wooden bridge. Fishermen have inhabited Change Islands since
the latter half of the eighteenth century when the Labrador fishery rose to prominence. By the
beginning of the twentieth century, it was a prosperous settlement with a population of over 1,000
people. They fished the adjacent North Atlantic waters or worked in the many large merchant
premises that were established in the coves, on the rugged shores, and on the many adjacent
smaller islands. With the introduction of modern fishing technology and the recent closure of the
northern cod fishery, the population census has declined to 360 in 2001
(www.stagesandstores.com).
This community served as a perfect location for the workshop as it exemplifies many of the
common problems that trouble coastal communities in Newfoundland and Labrador. The
organizers felt that it was crucial to hold a workshop on vulnerability in a vulnerable coastal
community to enable participants to experience the concerns of the community from those who
live within it.
-2-
SUNDAY, AUGUST 24TH, 2003
WELCOME
Patricia Gallaugher, Co-Investigator, Linking Science and Local Knowledge Node, Ocean
Management Research Network, Simon Fraser University, BC.
Maureen Woodrow, Executive Director, Global Environmental Change and Human Security
Project, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON.
Patricia Gallaugher, Co-Investigator, Linking Science and Local Knowledge Node, Ocean
Management Research Network, Simon Fraser University, BC.
“Where I come from, living a productive life isn’t based on wealth. It is living in a
culture so rich it haunts those who leave; where people are unpretentious and genuine.”
Tracey O’Reilly, Newfoundlander, Edmonton.
National Post, Letter to the Editor.
August 15th, 2003
The Ocean Management Research Network was established three years ago by the Social Science
and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) in partnership with the Department of Fisheries and
Oceans. These two organizations realized that science alone will not resolve the situation in
Canada in terms of ocean and coastal resource management, sustainability, and conservation.
The network represents an effort to address these issues by bringing together natural and social
scientists, government and community. The aim of the OMRN is to “create and share knowledge
for the application of critical thinking and best practices in oceans management in Canada.”
The OMRN is structured around three central research topics or “nodes” based at three Canadian
universities that guide the work of its members across the country. The Vulnerability in Coastal
Communities conference was organized by the Linking Science and Local Knowledge node
based at Simon Fraser University. The other two nodes are the Integrated Management node and
the Sustainability node, based at the University of Manitoba and Memorial University of
Newfoundland respectively.
The Linking Science and Local Knowledge node seeks to “facilitate communication and
knowledge exchange between natural and social scientists and local stakeholders, both to achieve
integrated sustainable management of coastal areas, and to build capacity at all levels to
implement new forms of governance.” The node focuses on three key themes: marine
conservation, economic diversification and building capacity for decision making.
This is the final year of the OMRN. There is a need to work on new ideas for extending the life
of the network. Working together and sharing experiences is critical because most of the
problems that people are facing in Change Islands are the same problems that people are facing
on the west coast of Vancouver Island, in Alert Bay, in Prince Rupert, on Cape Breton, in
Moncton and in rural New Brunswick. From coast to coast to coast, we hear the same stories
revolving around efforts to help coastal communities survive.
-3-
Maureen Woodrow, Executive Director, Global Environmental Change and Human
Security Project, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON.
“I personally believe that rural communities are the fabric of society, the fabric of our
Canadian nation, and if it disappears, we are going to lose a lot.”
It was decided to host the conference on Change Islands to expose participants to the realities of
life in a vulnerable community in the hope to gain a deeper understanding of what vulnerability
means. Questions that conference participants should think about while exploring the community
of Change Islands include:
• What kind of future can a community like Change Islands have?
• How can a community such as Change Islands survive given that present social and
economic situation and the trend towards globalization?
• What kinds of adaptations could take place to preserve this and other rural communities?
• How can we plan for a viable, sustainable future?
OPENING ADDRESS
Yvonne Jones, Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and Minister responsible for the Status of
Women, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
“ I know, what it is like from a government perspective to go through a transition in the
fishery, but I have also experienced it personally with my family. I grew up in the fishery
and I come from a long generation of fisher people. I feel that when I came into this
portfolio, I came with a great deal of knowledge of how the industry works, and
knowledge of how the people who were the recipients and the workers in the industry in
Newfoundland and Labrador felt on a daily basis. I can certainly relate, not only as the
daughter of a fishing family, but also as a counsellor who was very much involved with
the transition to NCARP and the TAGS programs.”
The provincial Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture works closely with the federal
government on joint management issues. Together, we are looking for solutions on how to
manage the fishery through the changes that have occurred. A pressing issue that we currently
face is how to rebuild the communities that have suffered as a result of the Moratorium and make
them viable for the future.
The fishery has shaped the fabric of Newfoundland and Labrador society and culture. Now, in
her role as provincial minister, Yvonne Jones looks at the issues surrounding the fishery on a
broader scale than she used to – at the provincial level instead of at the regional level of Southern
Labrador and the community where she grew up.
The fishing industry and the entire province of Newfoundland and Labrador are weathering a
crisis caused by the Moratorium. This crisis has hit the small coastal communities the hardest.
Last year there was a new closure, and currently there are many concerns with regards to the crab
and shrimp fisheries. Many people responded to the collapse of the cod fishery by gearing their
operation towards shellfish - shellfish became a panacea. As a result, any change in the shellfish
industry will have serious repercussions.
The province is facing tremendous challenges, but it is not facing them alone. Impacts from
collapsed fisheries are being felt internationally. There are many similarities to the situation in
Newfoundland and Labrador, but there are also some differences. In the case of Newfoundland
-4-
and Labrador, out-migration is a particular challenge. The spread out pattern of settlement, with
60% of the population concentrated in the Northeast Avalon, presents its own set of challenges.
The mentality of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, which includes the insecurities felt by
people in the coastal communities, hinders progress. The fishery has shaped the province and in
particular, its rural communities and the fishery is now threatened causing people to worry.
The key to success is for the province to build a more co-operative approach to governance with
the federal government and with communities. Communities must work harder to have their
voices heard, to achieve this co-operation, to work towards diversification, and to regain control
of the fishery. At times like this, dedicated, energetic leadership with a vision and long-term
commitment is critical. We are seeing this strong leadership in many parts of the province. For
example, Agnes Pike is a leading woman in society who is working on building confidence in the
communities in lower Labrador. This leadership is also evident in Change Islands with the
creative Stages and Stores Enterprise and Heritage Foundation.
In the province, many things have been taken for granted because they did not have any apparent
value at the time. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians must begin to reassess the simple things
around them that may have a hidden value. For example, rare plants in the province are of great
value. The small fruits in the province – blueberries, bakeapples and partridgeberries for
instance – have great potential. The fantastic rock formations across the province are other assets
that are often unacknowledged. We must try to understand and appreciate the value of things that
in the past have been taken for granted.
Aquaculture is very important to the province, but aquaculture projects cannot occur in every
community. Given the right incentives, the capacity can grow; but it will take federal and
provincial governments and communities investing together for the long term. Tourism is also a
growing industry that has grown tremendously in the past few years. Visiting Newfoundland and
Labrador is “good for the soul.” Adventure tourism and cultural tourism are important for the
future of the province. Projects such as the restoration of the stages and stores in Change Islands
are an investment in the future. This is a good example of a way in which the fishery of the past
is being transported into the present and can be transformed to be productive for the future. The
infrastructure exists, and it is up to the community to utilize it.
In order to achieve success, a strong partnership between the provincial and federal governments
and the communities is essential. By working collectively, the vulnerabilities can be overcome.
The government of Newfoundland and Labrador is willing to work with rural regions overcome
their challenges.
OCEAN MANAGEMENT – VULNERABLE COASTAL AND OCEAN RESOURCES
Global Perspective : Voices from the outside
Gert Van Santen, Sr. Policy Advisor, Rural Development, World Bank (Retired).
Bonnie McCay, Cahir, Department of Human Ecology, Cook College, Rutgers the State
University and Directior, New Jersey Centre for Environmental Indicators
Gert Van Santen, Sr. Policy Advisor, Rural Development, World Bank (Retired).
“My family comes from an island in the Netherlands so I feel right at home here on
Change Islands.”
-5-
The small-scale fisheries of the world are extremely important. The International Centre for
Living Aquatic Resources Management (ICLARM) estimates that 51 million people are involved
in the catching and processing of fish around the world, and over 95% of these people are
involved in the small-scale fishery (80% of them in Asia). It is further estimated that these smallscale fisheries of the world account for about 40% of the world’s marine and inland fish catches.
Nevertheless, in most countries, the small-scale fishery is neglected by administrators, politicians,
and academia. The industrial fishery receives all the attention; particularly regarding fisheries
management issues and fish stocks in the temperate waters. The result is a lack of knowledge
regarding what makes the small-scale fisheries effective and sustainable compared to the
industrial fisheries. Issues surrounding the small-scale fishery sector are highly politically
charged and this often results in administrators and politicians being reluctant to tackle them.
Some argue for little interference, insisting that a laissez-faire approach will allow the market to
determine the future of the sector.
A rich fishery existed in the coastal regions of Holland during the Middle Ages. The small boat
fishery of the area utilized the same technology over a period of 500-600 years and licenses and
permits restricting the number of fishers. The main purpose was to limit the supply of fish and
assure high quality, as well as protect critical spawning grounds. Soon, rulers and cities became
aware of the advantages of rent sharing, and the fishery became a long-term source of public
revenue as well as private benefits.
Starting in the early 15th century, a new industrial fishery focussed on salted herring spread
throughout much of the North Sea. Holland was at the fore of this new development and as a
result, held a prime economic position in Europe in the 17th century.
The small-scale fishery in Holland remained coastal and traditional, focusing on local markets.
Innovations focused on improvements in vessels, safety and fish preservation, and little was done
to enhance efficiency. Both the small-scale and the industrial herring fisheries were heavily
controlled, with much local jurisdiction over quality, quantity, and price of the catch as well as on
number of licences and the nature of the technology and the crew.
Since the 1970s, four major Dutch herring companies developed as a result of European Union
(EU) subsidies and Dutch tax concessions. These make up the largest fleet of pelagic trawlers in
the world. The herring stocks quickly declined – a sign of the destructive impact of subsidyenhanced production-oriented EU and local policies. The fleet began fishing for other species for
export and Holland began importing most of its herring from Scandinavia. Nevertheless, four
major Dutch companies continued to be involved in the profitable processing and distribution of
the herring. In the mid-1990s they made a deal with the Scandinavian suppliers stating that these
countries would continue to catch the fish, processing would be handed over to Danish
companies, and the Dutch would be in charge of wholesaling. Today, the Dutch wholesalers act
like a cartel, determining the quantity of fish to be caught on a weekly basis, and ensuring that the
Dutch market gets just enough herring to satisfy demand while avoiding the costs of big buffer
stocks and losses. Transfer prices are mutually agreed, and there is the incentive to slightly
undersupply the Dutch market to let retail prices inch upward.
After the Second World War, the Dutch also became the major producer of North Sea flatfish
with its modern and powerful fleet of beam trawlers. This fleet is based out of four traditional
fishing villages where local producer organizations regulate participation in the fishery. EU
quota arrangements were introduced after the 1980s.
-6-
Early mistakes in the Dutch fishery included the tax and subsidy arrangements that resulted in
over-investment and over-capacity. More recently, however, the Dutch have been able to avoid
the mistakes of the past. Since the 1980s, the size of the fleet has diminished, partly due to the
EU policies aimed at reducing fishing overall efforts. This reduction, combined with the Dutch
handling of transport and marketing of the flatfish, has resulted in the flatfish being the most
profitable product of the entire sector. The Dutch companies dominate at the flatfish auctions,
thereby controlling the prices, which have increased steadily.
Despite the early mistakes, the Dutch fishery is alive and healthy today. The key factors that
have contributed to the success of this fishery include the informal linkage between production
and marketing as well as the production organizations that have been relatively well organized
and increasingly effective in influencing fishery policy at the national and EU level.
The most intensive small-scale fisheries of the world are found in Indonesia and the Philippines.
There are three categories of small-scale fisheries in these regions: those that have been least
affected by external pressures, those that are being destroyed by external pressures, and those that
have managed to survive by changing the parameters of their governance and management
systems.
Some of the coastal fisheries in Indonesia and the Philippines still utilize a traditional technology
to supply a traditional market through a traditional set of intermediaries who handle the market
and provide credit. For the most part however, this system has been destroyed because some
people believed the system to be exploitative. Growing markets in China and Japan, combined
with the improved transportation and new, often inappropriate, technologies (e.g.: cyanide
fishing), led to over-fishing in most places. Local management systems collapsed due to external
encroachment, and in many places, the local fishery has been destroyed. Now, the fisheries
provide a meagre and declining income to a growing population of small-scale fishers. Some of
the most productive fisheries in the world (such as those of the Java Sea and the Sulu Sea) are
declining and may be destroyed by the intensive fishing effort.
The replacement of the local system of single intermediaries with other methods such as auctions,
foreign traders, or multi-trader arrangements has contributed to the decline. The fishermen are
not organized to handle the preservation and distribution of their catch, and so the traders control
the auctions and the market.
In the small island fisheries of the Pacific, often the decision-making and conflict resolution fell
to the respected elders. External pressures leading to population growth and the introduction of
foreign and industrial fishers have transformed these traditional arrangements. Many of these
reef fisheries are now threatened.
Another interesting case study is Japan. The fishery in Japan is a well-integrated, well-planned,
and strategically developed fishery. Starting approximately 100 years ago, the fishers were
organized into local co-operatives responsible for the management of all aspects of fishing
activities, the marketing of the product, as well as the fish culture activities. The result has been
profitable and stable small-scale fishing sector. The country developed extremely high standards,
and they avoid excessive exploitation of the resources. Several generations of fishermen and cooperative managers now possess the knowledge and skills necessary to manage the local fisheries.
Different levels of wholesalers and retailers link the co-operatives to national markets, and most
provide a fixed quantity of fish to specific retailers. Co-operatives have incentives to maintain
local fish stocks at their most productive level, achieving income growth through quality
improvement and value-added processing. Technological improvements have focussed on vessel
-7-
seaworthiness, safety and speed, as well as on reducing operating costs and improving the quality
of the product.
The Japanese fishery is a good example of how small-scale fisheries can be successful given
appropriate governance. The system is geared specifically to the Japanese situation, and is based
on Japanese concepts of corporatism, group loyalty and mutual obligation, capital formation and
national and international trade.
A final example of a successful small-scale fishery is the tuna fishery of the Maldives. They
have developed a particular system of processing tuna which is greatly esteemed by the Sri
Lankans. They trade the processed tuna with Sri Lanka in exchange for rice, oil and other
necessities. There have been some disruptions in this trade in the past, and policy-makers
decided that the country should not remain dependent on a single export commodity and the
single market. They invited Japanese and Korean interests to purchase fresh tuna from their local
fishing fleet and to start a canning operation.
The local technology was adapted to adjust to the new requirements brought about by the demand
for fresh tuna. The country experienced a huge increase in production due to the mechanization
of boats. The fleet soon out-produced the local collection and storage system. The country was
able to prohibit the introduction of modern seining technology, and stuck with the small-scale
pole and line technology which was far more efficient and cost-effective, and provided more local
employment and value-added while at the same time preserving the local fishing culture of
outlying islands.
In both the preserved and fresh tuna fisheries, the country has made use of a fixed price system.
After experiencing trouble with the foreign owned freezing and canning operations, they decided
to handle these sectors through a state-owned company. The main problems have surrounded the
inadequate and badly organized collection arrangements, processing capacity constraints, and
political interference in the company running the fishery plants. These problems draw attention
to the importance of dependable links between production and marketing at every stage of
development in the small-scale fisheries, and the equally important need for transparent
management.
External and internal political pressure to open-up the fishery and processing to foreign interests
points to the political risks of creating a profitable and effective ‘closed’ small scale fishery.
There has been pressure to introduce a laissez-faire policy framework, which would potentially
destroy island communities. Tempting offers from outside the country pose threats to the
economic base of the local small-scale fishery. The problem of migration from outlying islands
would be intensified, and private companies would use their monopoly power to push down the
prices of fish, reducing the net domestic benefits including employment that the current system
distributes to many local communities with virtually no alternative employment opportunities.
Based on the analysis of these and other cases, it can be argued that the following 10 key
attributes must be present for the small-scale fisheries of the world to be successful and
sustainable:
• Static exploitation of local stocks at levels well below biologically optimal levels;
• A carefully analyzed selection of technology and technological improvements;
• Controlled investment;
• Controlled entry and exit of labour, and careful organization of fishermen at the local,
regional and national level.
• Effective governance that provides:
-8-
•
•
•
1. Protection of local small-scale fisheries, and control of all other fisheries activities
that operate in its vicinity;
2. Support functions (research, extension) at the local, regional, and national level;
Local leadership with sufficient background and experience, or access to externally
available knowledge, to handle the political, cultural, financial, scientific and technical
aspects of governance activities, conflict management, and sector planning;
A direct, stable link between fish production and processing/marketing, with preferably
negotiated transfer prices; and
A global system identifying fish produced by sustainable small-scale fisheries, and
providing premium prices for such products to producers.
It is critical to recognize the impact of political decisions on the fisheries. There are many
examples of places where people have made decisions to develop economies in a certain way, yet
these plans are not always the best for the fishery. Planning is sometimes more appropriate than
laissez-faire, which can be a dangerous model - especially in the fishery. Many economies have
done well by opting for interplay between control and the private sector. Protection for the smallscale fisheries should come from above, but local leadership is essential and must be
strengthened.
“Laissez-faire environment, open markets, market determined pricing, unregulated trade
and investment flows, open access to resources and unregulated labour will destabilize
and eventually destroy most small-scale fisheries.”
“Any belief that small scale fisheries can function in an environment of benign neglect, as
is happening all over the world, may be politically and administratively convenient, but is
intellectually dishonest, morally wrong, and very dangerous for the future of the sector and
the fishermen involved in it.”
Bonnie McCay, Chair, Department of Human Ecology, Cook College, Rutgers the State
University and Director, New Jersey Centre for Environmental Indicators.
“My first visit to this area was in 1970 when I came to the meetings of the Learned
Society in St. John’s. Travelling across the Trans-Canada Highway, I listened to a CBC
radio interview with Parzival Copes, a distinguished economist who was speaking about
the problems of rural Newfoundland. 1970 was a long time ago. I stayed for a while that
summer and then I came back and lived on Fogo Island for a while. I have been coming
back to Fogo Island ever since.”
The issues and problems facing rural Newfoundland are sometimes spoken of in terms of the
Tragedy of the Commons which refers to problems of open access. What McCay learned back in
the 1970s still applies in the province today. She conducted her research at a time when
Schumacker’s book “Small is Beautiful” was popular in discussions about rural development.
Her focus in the 1970s was on appropriate technology in the fishery. The predominant opinion
was that technological changes should be appropriate to the local communities. The long-liner
fishery of Change Islands and Fogo Island were a great example of the need for appropriate
technology in the fishery.
The Fogo Island Co-operative was formed to produce these long-liners locally using local
materials. The long-liners were improved in a traditional way, and the traditional production unit
- the family fishery - continued using this new technology. In the mid-1970s, the local fishers
had noticed that the catch per unit effort was decreasing and “water-hauls” were becoming
-9-
common. These were indications of a problem. Appropriate technology programs had neglected
two things: First, the need for appropriate resource management; and second, the need for local
autonomy and control over critical decisions about the nature and direction of development
ensuring this development is appropriate for the community. Although long-liners were needed
and considered an appropriate technology, people on Fogo Island were pushing for a fish plant
not for long-liners. They did not want more fish, they wanted to get value-added from the fish
they had. Meanwhile, it was the governments and companies that were pressuring and
manipulating what the new co-operative was doing.
The concepts of “vulnerability and resilience” in terms of small coastal communities in the
province are important to understand. They can be thought of in terms of health. Health is the
“freedom from disease and the freedom from trouble” but also the “ability to come back when
you’ve had trouble” or the ability to “weather the storm” and “rally from insults”. It requires the
ability to make the “appropriate investment towards an important goal” and to “avoid major and
irreversible choices.”
The coastal communities in Newfoundland and Labrador are vulnerable because of the decline in
northern cod and other species (salmon for example). The fishery is central to these communities
- they are fisheries dependent. They have few alternatives and they have a long history in the
fishery. It is embedded in the culture - people acquire their identity, the sense of who they are,
from fishing. The fishery requires some aspect of the commons, and therefore, the commons is a
very critical part of the past, present and future of coastal communities – both the commons on
land and the commons at sea. It is here that the question of tragedy of the commons arises.
Should access to the commons be open and equitable, or should it be controlled?
The vulnerabilities expressed in terms of the tragedy of the commons are as follows:
• mismanagement,
• moving down the food chain, and
• tragedies in other sectors of the economy that results in fewer options for the people of
coastal communities; e.g. privatization and industrial transformation of the forest
economy.
These vulnerabilities reduce the options and the flexibility of the people to respond to change.
They take a toll on the health or “resilience” of these communities.
Consider the concept of “fishing heritage”. There are many reminders of the long history of the
fishery in these communities. If we consider the concept of heritage, we note that “heritage”
implies that something is gone. There is evidence that much of our heritage within and outside of
the fishery is gone or is being neglected. For example, stages and stores in Newfoundland have
deteriorated. Meanwhile, we attract tourists in an effort to compensate for these losses.
It is crucial to redefine and protect what is important to Newfoundland and Labrador coastal
fishing communities. To help achieve this we can ask ourselves the following questions: Who
does this heritage work? Whose value is it assigned to? What is the interplay of values? With
what results? What are these “heritage” features for? We must recognize the ceremonial value of
this heritage. Take, for example, the Stages and Stores restoration and preservation project on
Change Islands. For one, the purpose of this restoration and preservation of heritage features is to
attract tourists. Also, it helps to redefine and protect what is important for local people and to life
in coastal fishing communities. Other aspects of this heritage includes things such as houses,
schools, stages and stores, festivals, music, trails, crafts, etc.
History is important. Individual communities like Change Islands and Fogo Island each have a
very powerful history, as does the province as a whole. For example, there is the history of
-10-
merchant control and resistance movements in the fishery, the Fisheries Protective Union, Joey
Smallwood, and the resettlement program. Also it is important to what the responses to
challenges were in the past. On Fogo Island, The Fogo Process was an interesting initiative in
which a documentary film was used to promote community development. It was made possible
by the National Film Board, the MUN Co-operative Extension, and local leaders on Fogo Island.
This process has come to be known across the country and around the world.
In 1967, the Fogo Island Co-operative (at first a ship-building and producer’s co-op) was
established. The history of the Co-op is one of working hard at diversification. Diversification is
part of “weathering the storm,” or building up resilience and avoiding irreversible decisions. The
Co-op wanted to establish a longliner fishery beyond cod, and in 1979 they entered into freshfrozen production. They have done work around the snow-crab fishery, moving it from a
supplementary fishery to a full-time fishery. Recently, the Co-op has also focussed activities on
the shrimp fishery which began in 1998. In 2000, a plant was licensed to process shrimp. The
concept of “flexible specialization,” which refers to, for example, producing for East Asian niche
markets, has become a guiding principle.
It is important to have institutions like the Fogo C-op that can help people by becoming a source
of planning for an uncertain future. These plans might include diversification, product
development, job creation and labour management.
In practice the changes that have occurred in the provincial economy have led to:
1. People struggling to meet their bills and increasingly needing to rely on emplyment
insurance to survive.
2. Serious problems with the fisheries including unstable stocks.
3. People entering the snow scab fishery which requires them to fish in smal boats further
from the shore in dangerous conditions.
4. An increased commitment to large-scale costly technology (e.g – from 20 ft boats to 64 ft
boats, from wooden skiffs to steel vessels).
5. An increased cost to enter the fishery (e.g. from $5,000 - $10,000 to millions of dollars)
which limits access to the fishery.
Economic changes also cause social changes. Equal shares become, for instance, 70/30 splits
(“boat” versus “crew” where crew members get as little as 4% of net proceeds). These types of
splits cause a move from home ownership to morgaged homes, and a reliance on offshore buyers
to finance the purchase of boats. These are only some of the social costs.
Vulnerabilities spawned from this phenomenon include fewer jobs, fewer hours for those with
jobs because of increased efficiency of plants. Also, there has been an increase in competition –
particularly surrounding the crab fishery which further aggravates the situation. These
circumstances have led to out-migration which is another major crisis facing the province.
Discussion and Questions from Global Perspective, Voices from the Outside
Omar Chouinard (University of Moncton): They tried to control the market in the Fogo Island
case, but can anyone compete with the driving force of the market?
Gert Van Santen (World Bank): It is important to try to exert some amount of control over the
market. In Norway, the salmon fishery is in big trouble because of over-investment and a lack of
control over the market which results in too much dumping. However, taking control does not
necessarily mean one community controlling what they produce. If small communities came
together, their products could be sold at higher prices. Co-operatives are one way that people can
-11-
come together to exert some control over the market. It might be possible to exert some control
by coming together as a province, or even as a country. You produce fish on your own terms –
the appropriate quantities, etc. The problem is people are going far away to sell their product in
places they could not have even dreamt of going before – and this is crazy.
“Producing fish, as far as I am concerned, is not necessarily that important. It has to fit
into creating sufficient benefits for people to be able to live in that community, and that is
what a lot of people forget.”
Richard Haedrich (Memorial University): Scale is very important in the fishery. A single
community may not be able to do it alone. It is critical that we think at the level of the
ecosystem. At this level there are universal rules. With regards to diversification, in certain sorts
of systems, diversification may actually reduce the options rather than increasing them. For
example, if we start to fish too many low value species, we risk putting the whole system in a
worse state.
Herb Bown (Stages and Stores Foundation): With regards to co-operatives and controlled
marketing, would this go against international trade agreements?
Gert Van Santen (World Bank): Globalization can be very dangerous, and it is not the solution
for the majority of people in the world. In terms of the fishery, one possibility to address this is a
certification process whereby there would be a stamp on product from sustainable communities.
These products would be sold at higher prices. Higher prices are not a problem - look at Japan they have the highest prices in the world, and yet on average they eat 80 kilos of fish per year. In
West Africa they are trying to compete in world markets - this is crazy. They should be focusing
on producing smaller amounts on their own terms - high quality product for the local markets,
with a certification process. It cannot be done at the local level, it must be done at the national
level - thus politics is crucial.
Larry Felt (Memorial University): Surprisingly, he cod moratorium had little impact on the
world price. What are the first few steps for government or the community to move in the
direction of controlled marketing? At the policy level, how do you manage a fish crisis and how
do you break into the global market? Given the scale of these factors, what are the first two
things to be done on the part of the government?
Bonnie McCay (Rutgers the State University): A starting point would be for all fisheries to be
harvested at a lower level. Next, diversification in the fishery would be desirable. There are
different markets. Cod is a low-value species, crab and lobster on the other hand are valuable.
There needs to be a system in which people find value in downsizing.
Gert Van Santen (World Bank): In West Africa they are creating fisheries councils at the local
and national level that are linking with Ministries. In Senegal, they are trying to get a Fisheries
Commission started. It is difficult to get policy changes that go against the grain if the fishery is
not a big part of the economy. Therefore, in those places where the fishery is not a big sector, it
is in big trouble. In Newfoundland, as in Senegal and Mauritania, the fishery is very important it is a huge part of the economy. Political decisions at the national level concerning the overall
economy, etc., are critical.
Mike Warren (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador): The fishery is extremely important
in this province, but it is not nationally (i.e.; at the federal level). This is a critical issue that the
province is working on. The fishery needs to be given priority at the national level.
-12-
Bruce King (Change Islands, former plant employee): For years, there have been male capelin
dumped at the community dump. This year, there has been a decline in capelin stocks. Is this
kind of waste seen elsewhere in the world?
Gert Van Santen (World Bank): Most waste occurs in temperate waters. In India, for example,
they have a large shrimp fishery. In most shrimp fisheries in temperate waters, they dump most
of the fish that is caught and keep only the shrimp. In India, they catch and keep everything.
Waste is a bigger problem in developed countries. One question we should be asking is what can
we do with this waste? Can it be put to use in aquaculture?
Bonnie McCay (Rutgers the State University): An important question to ask is should capelin
even be caught for commercial purposes? In the past they would check the percentages of male
and females, the quality of the fish, etc., before the trap was drawn. They would only be brought
in when the roe was ready. All the fish should not be brought in. This is a good example of local
people paying attention to what is going on in the ecosystem. The fish should only be brought in
when it is ready for market.
Richard Haedrich, Biology Professor, Memorial University of Newfoundland
The ocean is a complex web of interdependencies. None of the systems in the ocean can operate
in isolation - there are repercussions everywhere. Each species is part of a food chain, which in
turn are part of wider food webs. A missing
The Sad Story of the Northern Cod Fishery
link in one food chain will have an impact
on other species connected to that food
LANDINGS, Tonnes (Thousands)
chain and in the larger web. We must begin
1000
to view the fishery in terms of this
Sampling period
800
ecosystem web - as an ecological
phenomenon.
600
400
200
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
YEAR
Size and CPUE for cod (Gadus morhua)
100
CATCH
SIZE
Gm/individual
2000
80
60
1500
40
1000
20
500
0
78
80
82
84
86
Year
-13-
88
90
92
Number/tow
People are a part of the ecosystem equation
too. We need to have an appreciation of the
human role in the problem. Cod fish play a
central role in the whole ecosystem. When
commercial stocks decline, other noncommercial stocks also decline. For
example, the biomass of dominant
commercial species such as cod and
flounder has decreased. Connected with
this, rays, sharks, pouts and wolfish have
also declined. These were not
commercially fished - the decline is
attributable to an ecological problem. In the
Northern Gulf of St. Lawrence fisheries,
cod stocks are down and shrimp stocks are
up. This is an indication of the nature of the
codfish as a significant predator in the
ocean.
Metric tons x 1000
On the human side of the equation, the
How groundfish landings have changed
population of Newfoundland and Labrador
is declining, a trend closely related to the
decline of the groundfish fisheries. The
1200
Northern Peninsula has experienced a great
1000
decrease in population since the
800
Labrador
Moratorium. After the 200-mile limit was
Grand Banks
600
established, this same area had experienced
NS/St. Lawrence
an increase in population. Changes in the
New England
400
ecosystem have far-reaching implications,
200
and the impacts are visible in these small
0
coastal communities of the province. A
1955
1965
1975
1985
1995
Year
change in the nature of the fishery also
accompanies the changes in the ecosystem,
and this has socio-economic implications for communities. The decline in cod and the increase in
shrimp, for example, results in one fishery
being replaced by another. This trend is
People are a part of the equation too
also evident in the expansion of the snow
1000s of people
crab fishery.
600
30
500
28
400
26
Fishermen are a great source of information
Nfld & Lab
300
24
N Peninsula
about the ocean ecosystem. For a long time,
200
22
fishermen had been saying that the size of
100
20
200-mi EEZ
Moratorium
the cod was going down. Landings of cod
0
18
1966
1971 1976
1981
1986
1991
1996
were down, and catch per unit effort
Year
(CPUE) of crab was up. It has been
determined that there is a correlation
between smaller cod sizes and the increase in crab catch. Size is important because only larger
codfish will predate on the crab. When cod size went down the numbers of crab went up. This is
a good illustration of the repercussions of disruptions in the food chain. This ecological
relationship was figured out by Troy Coombs, a student from Notre Dame Bay.
Socioeconomic and political environment
Fisheries evolve as
Fishery 1
Community
1
Fishery 2
Community
2
Fishery 3
Community
3
the fish community
is changed
Biological and physical environment
-14-
The number of Northern wolfish – a noncommercial species – has been in decline
since the 1980’s. By 1992 there were
almost none left. As a result of the work of
former Memorial University student Niall
O’Dea, in 2001 the Northern wolfish was
one of the first marine fish to be added to
Canada’s endangered species list. What led
to the decline of this species if it was not
being commercially fished? The problem
was at the level of the ecosystem. As
recently as last May, the Northern Cod was
also listed as endangered on Canada’s
Species at Risk Act.
Cod landings vs snow crab CPUE
300
1000 t
250
?
(lbs/trap/day)
?
?
?
40
?
30
?
200
?
150
20
? landings
CPUE
100
10
50
?
0
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
?
93
0
Year
The Species at Risk Act categories
include: endangered, threatened, special
concern, data deficient, and not at risk.
The table above shows the number of
species potentially at risk from among the
266 Atlantic marine fishes in the
Northwest Atlantic and the Northern
Gulf.
Number of Species
Some of the wording of the Species at Risk
Act raises concerns. Section 6 of the
“Species at Risk Act” reads as follows: “The
purposes of this Act are to prevent wildlife
species from being extirpated or becoming
extinct, to provide for the recovery of
wildlife species that are extirpated,
endangered or threatened as a result of
human activity and to manage species of
special concern to prevent them from
becoming endangered or threatened.”
Further wording of this act is questionable.
For example, section 32(1) states: “No
person shall kill, harm, harass, capture or take an individual of a wildlife species that is listed as
(…) an endangered species or a threatened species.” Yet, section 83(4) states that “subsection 32
(…) does not apply to a person who is engaging in activities that are permitted by a recovery
strategy, an action plan or a management plan.” This raises the question of who makes the
recovery plan. In section 37(1), we discover that a “competent minister” is in charge of preparing
the recovery plan. What about the ideas
of other people? Section 39(1) states that
the minister can prepare the plan in
How many potential Species at Risk?
consultation with “any other person or
organization that the (…) minister
considers appropriate.” What does all
160
140
this mean? It seems to imply that co120
management is built into this act.
100
NW Atlantic
N Gulf
80
60
40
20
0
EN
TH
SC
COSEWIC Status
-15-
DD
NAR
Provincial/Local Perspective (Voices from the inside)
Elizabeth Davis, Commissioner, Royal Commission on Renewing and Strengthening Our Place in
Canada
“Dear Natash,
We have a lot of work to do in our community our community is
dying…Let us work together – we wil be able to help our children and
our grandchildren. We will be the ones to show them something
beautiful about our lifestyle, our traditions – something beautiful that we
can leave for them when we are gone.”
Elizabeth Penashue
Sheshatshiu, Labrador
The Royal Commission on Renewing and Strengthening Our Place in Canada was established by
Premier Roger Grimes in June 2002 and given 13 months to gather opinions, information and
recommendations based on a comprehensive mandate. This mandate included the following:
• To undertake a critical analysis of the province’s strengths and weaknesses;
• To make recommendations as to how the province might achieve prosperity and selfreliance;
• To review and assess expectations since Confederation in 1949;
• To examine how the province is viewed in Canada;
• To research the effects of the Terms of Union;
• To review the contributions of the province to Canada;
• To determine the arrangements with Canada that might hamper the province’s progress;
• To analyze the demographic changes in the province and their impacts;
• To assess how the province can take full advantage of its strategic location.
The commission made a strong effort to be independent, inclusive, and seed setting. During the
deliberations, the commission met with 1,400 people in 25 public meetings, held school visits,
women’s meetings, and business meetings. Eight round tables were held, one with people who
were adults at the time of confederation. The Commission received 25 written submissions,
produced 28 research papers and conducted 2 polls (one national and one provincial).
“Without a doubt, I believe the next five to ten years will be a watershed
for the province in all aspects of society. Analyzing our role within
Confederation will serve as the genesis of a greater plan towards greater
prosperity.”
Excerpt from the Public Consltations
Six key principles emerged from these public consultations:
• There is a great passion for the province;
• There is a need for new ways of thinking;
• There is a need for a new kind of relating;
• It is time for action;
• People have a determined hope for the future.
-16-
The commission noted that, among other things, the province contributes the following to
Canada:
• A diversity Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal cultures;
• The openness and warmth of the people;
• The skilled and talented workforce;
• A strategic geographic location;
• A world renowned fishery;
• Important hydroelectric and petroleum resources.
“Let’s not fall into the trap that some misguided souls may have by
asking what have we done for Canada – the evidence is under our feet
and in the Atlantic blue sky and on the broad ocean, and in the war
graves of Europe and our proven generosity toward all, and in the
skyscrapers of Ontario and Alberta and in the B.C. industries, and in the
mainland univesities and our music and stories.”
Excerpt from the Public Consultations
They also noted that Canada has made significant contributions to the province, including:
• Newfoundland and Labrador is an equal province with 9 others;
• There has been an improvement in the overall health and education of the population
since confederation;
• Personal incomes have risen;
• Infrastructure has improved (roads, schools, hospitals etc.)
• New programs – such as Medicare, Canada Pension, and Equalization - have benefited
the people of the province;
The commission felt that the mutual benefits were apparent, and that a balance sheet exercise
would be extremely complex and ultimately unproductive (for example, how do we account for
lost benefits from Churchill Falls or the locational benefits that the province brings to Canada?).
Overall, the commission determined that expectations of people in the province had not been met.
This is attributable to a powerful set of circumstances, such as:
-17-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The collapse of the fishery
under federal control;
Benefits of hydroelectric
development in Labrador that
accrues to Quebec;
Double digit unemployment for
the last 35 years (much higher
than the rest of Canada);
12% of population lost to outmigration (only 4 years of
positive migration since 1951);
Canada as principle beneficiary
of oil revenues;
Lowest per capita income;
Highest per capita debt.
The commission heard a message loud and clear from the people of the province: it is time to
pursue a new two-way partnership with Canada, as the current relationship is in disarray. The
people of the province rejected the idea of separation, but they also rejected the status quo. The
federation must be capable of change, and the time is ripe to go ahead with that change.
In the past, the relationship between the province and Canada has been characterized by a lack of
understanding leading to blame, acrimony and confrontation. A new relationship must be based
-18-
not on a competitive and dismissive federalism, but on collaboration, co-operation based on new
ways of thinking and relating. A premium must be placed on respect, fairness and understanding.
The relationship must be strong enough to withstand crises, flexible enough to accommodate
circumstances and creative enough to find solutions. We must attain social inclusion, listen to
women’s values and experiences, clarify the rights of Aboriginal people, and close the
Newfoundland-Labrador divide. The government must commit to fiscal prudence, and the
arrangements of federal transfer programs must be sorted out. It is critical to recognize the key
role that youth have to play in securing the future of the province. The fishery also requires
significant attention. This is the last chance for a collaborative approach to building a viable
future for the fishery. An Action Team to be jointly appointed by the Premier and the Prime
Minister should be formed with a threefold mandate: To rebuild the groundfish stocks, to sustain
the shellfish stocks, and to restore science to the process. The question of the future of rural
Newfoundland and Labrador is a critical item on the agenda. There needs to be a public dialogue
to address this question, and this is where creativity will be an important factor in the equation.
The quest for the best possible
returns from natural resources is
another important issue that must
be seriously considered. The
inequities of the Churchill Falls
arrangement, which have seen
Quebec benefit from the hydroelectric resources of Labrador,
have shaped perceptions of the
province’s place in the federation.
Newfoundland and Labrador has
not been the principal beneficiary
of revenues from offshore oil and
gas developments, and therefore
the spirit and intent of the
Atlantic Accord have not been
met. Furthermore, there has been
a failure to develop the hydro potential of the Churchill River at Gull Island for the past 30 years.
The federal government needs to be partner in the development of this project, which should not
be linked to an alteration in the terms of the Churchill Falls development.
Other important observations made by the Commission include the fact that the province is
poorly represented in terms of housing federal institutions. There are no departmental Atlantic
regional headquarters located in Newfoundland and Labrador. Also, the federal focus on the
“Atlantic region” often means that the specific interests of the province become invisible when it
is integrated with the Maritime provinces. The locational challenge facing the province is another
issue that requires attention. Improved transportation and communication infrastructure will
require joint funding from the provincial and federal governments. The Gulf ferry link is crucial
and in need of improvements.
The pathway to renewal will require the relentless pursuit of a comprehensive and cohesive
strategy and the forging of new alliances. It is critical that all the people of the province pull
together to meet the challenges. The way forward is based on a new collaborative partnership
built on the core values of fairness, equity and respect.
-19-
Discussion and Questions arising from Ocean Management – Vulnerable Coastal and
Ocean Resources, Provincial/Local Perspective
Herb Bret (Federation of Municipalities; Mayor of Arnold’s Cove): How does the population of
seals affect the balance of the ecosystem?
Richard Haedrich (Memorial University): The cod population has gone down - it is about 1% of
what it used to be, but the seal population is not doing what we would expect it to do if they were
completely dependent on the cod. They are showing some signs of stress but there are large
numbers of seals now. If you look at the whole ecosystem, there are periods of time over which
things will come back into balance, and it is possible that this is what is happening now. Crab
and shrimp are probably also out of balance, there are more of them than there would be if there
were more cod. Seals are probably also out of balance, and there is the risk that they will slow
the recovery. A lesson from other places is that once you have a system that is out of balance like
ours, the more you interfere with the system, the worse it gets. We need to pay attention to the
seal issue, but not rush in and have a seal cull. If you remove the seals because they might be
eating the cod, then the smaller, more rapidly producing cod become dominant. Often the biggest
predator on cod are other cod. We must tread carefully when trying to engineer parts of a system
that we don’t understand completely.
Gert Van Santen (World Bank): With regards to an integrated management system, the future of
this process is uncertain. We must have faith, however, that someone will put it into action as
there are people working on it right now. What is happening with the scientific community
regardinga total allowable catch that can be set that is in keeping with the capacity of the
ecosystem?
Richard Haedrich (Memorial University): Some people are in the process of working on
ecosystem models. Although this is imperfect for now, the time will come when it will be
possible to develop an ecosystem model. For the time being, it is important to keep the
precautionary principle in mind – when in doubt, we must be cautious and err on the side of the
fish. One interesting model is a food web model, not based on species but on sizes.
Question: What is being said about the state of capelin and in terms of a rebuilding strategy for
cod? What is the scientific community saying about capelin in terms of it being a species that
needs to be monitored compared to other species that cod would consume?
-20-
Richard Haedrich (Memorial University): Capelin represent a keystone species in the
ecosystem. The roe fishery with lots of waste is terrible. At this stage, we should not be wasting
anything. It is a bad idea to have a capelin fishery.
Question: What is the relationship between the Species at Risk Act (SARA) and the desire for
federal and provincial joint management (for the new Action Team)?
Richard Haedrich (Memorial University): The SARA represents a great opportunity for the
province. This is brand new legislation and parts of it are untried. Parts of this Act require that
the federal and provincial Ministers work with each other and also with other interested groups,
which may also include municipalities, etc. In this way, it can allow for communities to work
with government. Furthermore, in the legislation there are provisions about an action plan. It is a
wonderful opportunity for Newfoundland, it is not confrontational, and it has these important
elements in it. There are questions about the wording – what is a “competent minister,” what
does it mean to “consult” – but we can use it and make something of it. The Act represents a tool
and an opportunity.
Bill Broderick (FFAW Union): People in rural communities are themselves an endangered
species. We need to build awareness and to establish a balance. Often, there is a double standard
in the fishery. A prime example of this is the fact that, today, there is less evidence of capelin than
ever before and yet people still fish them. Meanwhile, there are more seals than ever before and
the world is saying not to touch them. There is something wrong with this. We need a balance
between all these things.
Richard Haedrich (Memorial University): There is a need to establish milestones and indicators
for recovery. Planning steps with clear goals and milestones is the key to resolving the issue.
VULNERABLE OCEANS, VULNERABLE COASTAL COMMUNITIES:
COMMUNITY APPLICATIONS
Provincial Perspective
Mike Warren, Executive Director, Policy and Planning, Department of Fisheries and
Aquaculture, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
A Snapshot of the Fishery
19
20
Harvesters
16,000
12,700
Volume of Landings
510,000t
270,000t
Value of Landings
$240 million
$520 million
Value of Production
$650 million
$1 billion
Processing Plants
214
125
Plant Workers (Pk)
21,000
14,500
Plant Workers (PY’s)
13,000
8,000
-21-
The following provides us with a current context for the fishery in the province:
• Cod fishery closed
• Transition to shellfish
• Lack of science and a rebuilding plan
• Diversification inside and outside the fishery
• Continuing requests for access by non-Newfoundland interests. No surplus
• Continued requests for processing licenses
• Continued foreign over-fishing (greater than is reported)
• Improved professionalization
• Highly competitive marketplace
• Government fiscal constraints
• Continued dependence on the fishery
Fish Landings by Species
Group
'000 T
$ million
600
600
Shellfish
Pelagic
Groundfish
Total Value
500
500
400
400
300
300
200
200
100
100
0
0
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
'00 '01 '02
Source: DFA &
DFO
Top Five Species
Landed Value (Millions)
1989
Plaice
2002
Lobster
$18
Cod
$14
$29
Capelin
Seals
$20
$19
Crab
$144
$235
Shrimp
$18
$27
Shrimp
Lobster
$120
Cod
$190M
$460M
-22-
Aquaculture Growth in
Newfoundland & Labrador
Production
tonnes
Value
(millions)
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
14000
12000
10000
Tonnes
Value
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
'95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05
The following are the challenges and issues facing the industry:
• Resource rebuilding and conservation is required
• Need good scientific basis for the decisions
• Need full utilization - less waste
• Clear access and allocation policy
• Move past conflict into co-operation
• Conflicting objectives
• Lack of a provincial role in fisheries management
• Need awareness and capacity building
• Insufficient resources - fiscal restraints
• Need more integrated oceans/fisheries/coastal management
An Action Team has been identified, with an initial meeting held last week. Two main strategies
were stated at this meeting: First, it is critical to take an ecosystem approach and second, the
process must be inclusive and holistic.
Some ideas and actions for the future include:
• Identify common vision objectives
• Prepare a rebuilding plan for cod stocks (Action Plan)
• Continue to diversify and maximize the value of fisheries, coastal and ocean resources
• Increase our role in fisheries management (greater than just at the provincial level)
• Optimize science through partnerships
• Conduct integrated and inclusive planning and management
• Build partnerships (Canada’s Ocean Strategy and Marine Protected Areas)
• Measure state of the ocean
• Participation and advocacy
• Encourage private sector investment
• Build on success (Eg.: Lobster management- Eastport peninsula)
-23-
Federal Perspective
Dawn Mercer, Integrated Management Coordinator, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
The Department of Fisheries and Oceans is currently focused on the following: Canada’s Ocean
Act, Canada’s Ocean Strategy, Integrated Management, Marine Protected Areas, and Marine
Environmental Quality.
Canada’s Oceans Act was proclaimed in January of 1997 and is comprised of three parts. Part
one “recognizes Canada’s jurisdiction over its ocean areas”; part two “contains provisions for the
Minister to lead the development and implementation of a national strategy for ocean
management”; and part three “consolidates most federal responsibilities for the oceans under one
agency, making DFO the lead in ocean matters.”
Canada’s Ocean Strategy (COS) is a policy statement that “defines a vision, principles and policy
objectives for the future management of estuarine, coastal and marine ecosystems.” It represents
an attempt to provide an overall strategic approach and framework for management of these
ecosystems, particularly through the Integrated Management Program, Marine Protected Areas
and Marine Environmental Quality. As part of a regional engagement process, copies of COS
and the policy and framework for integrated management were distributed to regional
stakeholders with an interest in oceans management issues. Bilateral meetings were held with 48
key stakeholders, including Aboriginal peoples, Regional Economic Development Boards, nongovernmental organizations, industries and communities. Overall, stakeholders’ response was
positive. The ultimate factor that would determine support would be the implementation details.
The provincial government was supportive of the initiative and participated as a partner in 30 of
these meetings. The fishing industry gave qualified support, with caution voiced on the level of
commitment and resources. Community organizations felt that they were already participating in
integrated management on land and saw a natural extension to the ocean. A common theme was
that given limited resources, people saw themselves as active participants, not necessarily as
leaders.
The Integrated Management
(IM) initiative is an attempt
to bring stakeholders together
and enhance collaboration
when it comes to oceans
management. Stakeholders
include: municipal
governments, provincial
government, federal
departments, nongovernmental organizations,
coastal communities,
Aboriginal groups, the
fishing industry, and other
ocean industries. The goal is
to introduce flexible and
transparent planning to the
management process. The
three main focuses include: to
“effectively plan and manage
human activities occurring in
and/or affecting portions of
Integrated Management Process
Define and
Assess Area
Monitor, Evaluate
and Revise IM Plan
Engage Affected
Interests
Implement IM Plan
Develop IM Plan
Endorsement of
Plan by Decision
Making Bodies
-24-
the marine environment; to provide opportunities for wealth generation (i.e. sustainable use and
development of resources), to consider conservation and protection of the ecosystem.”
The Integrated Management Process is developed in consultation with the area in question. The
IM process is illustrated above.
The Marine Protected Area (MPA) program has made the most progress of all the initiatives thus
far. These are special areas designated to enhance the conservation and protection of commercial
and non-commercial resources (marine mammals and their habitats), of endangered or threatened
marine species and their habitats, and of other unique habitats including those exhibiting high
biodiversity or biological productivity. In Newfoundland and Labrador, DFO currently has three
main areas of interest which are not designated yet but are up for consideration by the Minister.
These are Gilbert Bay, Eastport, and Leading Tickles.
Finally, the Marine Environmental Quality initiative is used as a tool in the IM and MPA
processes and it holds the most legislative teeth in that it formulates certain regulations. The
objective is to ensure the “long-term preservation of the marine ecosystem.”
All of the above programs are community-driven, the request coming from the grassroots. They
represent “opportunities for communities to become involved and work side by side with
government towards sustainability of our ocean resources and coastal communities.”
Community Perspective
Eddie Oake, Fogo Island Co-operative
Kyle LeDrew, Kittiwake Youth Council
Agnes Pike, Mayor, West Ste. Modeste, NL
Eddie Oake, Fogo Island Co-operative
Fogo Island has a population of 3,000-3,500 people living in eight communities and an economy
based solely on the fisheries. The Fogo Island Co-op was founded in 1967 to respond to the need
for a salt cod processing industry. The people wanted to build a fishing fleet able to go further,
and to catch a bigger diversity. Out of that, a business grew. There are now about 80 enterprises
(fishing boats) on the island, and three processing plants - two of them multi-species and one
shrimp. About 400 people are employed as active fishers and another 400 work in the plants.
Annual sales in the fishery amount to $25 million. There is a buying station, a marine service
station, and a product development and research facility. The fishermen are expected to land the
product, and the processors place a premium on quality.
Five percent of all earnings generated by the co-op are re-invested into the co-op. Up to date
during this year alone, $4 million has been re-invested. A brief history of the co-op includes
important developments in 1979 when they expanded to include frozen products, and 1983, when
they expanded to include crab. 1993 saw the co-op expand by selling raw fish into the Japanese
market. A new state-of-the-art processing facility was opened in 1999, and now they can process
about a quarter of a million pounds of crab per day. In 2000, they entered into the shrimp
processing industry with an Icelandic partner, and in 2002 they bought out this partner. In 2001
they expanded into value-added secondary processing including products such as seafood sauce.
The co-op won the Newfoundland export award in 1988 and again in 2000 for exports to both
traditional and niche markets. Brand extension will be important as they move into the future.
The Co-op participates with educational programs in the province, with the fisherman’s union and
with the Marine Institute for training, and with DFO in terms of science and habitat (for example,
-25-
marine resource inventories). For 36 years, the co-op has sustained the community – without it,
the people of Fogo Island would not have survived.
“We sometimes hesitate to believe…we do depend on the fishery.”
Kyle LeDrew, Kittiwake Youth Council
“With change comes opportunity.”
The Kittiwake Youth Council is a youth driven organization comprised of thirteen members that
works to engage youth in community development and to improve social, educational, and
economic options for young people in the region. The council “works to give wings to youth
ideas and power to youth voices.”
Rural communities in the province are undergoing great transformations. The population in this
area is in decline - in Change Islands between 1996 and 2001 the population has decreased by
–21.7%. In the province as a whole, the median age in 2001 was 46.4, now the median age is
38.4. The unemployment rate in 2001 for the province was 21.8%, while in Change Islands it
was as high as 37.9%. This is a significant increase for the small, rural community from 1996, at
which time the unemployment rate in the community was 21.3% (25.1% for the province).
Rural out-migration has a significant effect on the young people. For the A.R. Scammell
Academy Island Warriors basketball team, the 2003-2004 season may be the last as the number of
team-mates is in decline. The graduating class of that year will have only eight students.
“Getting a grad date involves a ferry ride and a whole lot of scouting – it’s kind
of upsetting.”
The out-migration that plagues rural communities has its roots in unemployment. The jobs that
are available – for instance, in the fishery and in tourism, are seasonal. The youth do not want
seasonal employment. They need careers that are interesting, new, and exciting. Rural
Newfoundland is not producing these kinds of jobs. The communities are waiting around for a
“big saviour” – but meanwhile, nothing is happening. The jobs are located in regional centres or
in St. John’s. Also, the youth want an education, and they are forced to leave Change Islands to
get it. From these places, it is hard to get home to visit the rural communities that they call home.
The following points are critical if these communities are to adapt for the future:
• There is a need for new and diverse industries that can grow and change
• Sustainability must be a guiding factor
• There is a need to “think outside the box”
• There is a need to take more risks, but to do better research
• There is a need to come to terms with the fact that the people of rural Newfoundland
cannot wait for the wild fishery to save them. The wild fishery may never recover.
Meanwhile, people continue to exhaust the resources with too many fish plants, too big a
demand for work and not enough product. This is unsustainable.
• The province is blessed with resources. The ocean itself may be the greatest resource.
There are many innovative ways in which this resource can be put to use - such as for
new technology, like hydrogen-powered cars. There is a need to focus on our strengths
using innovative ideas.
• In terms of small communities like Change Islands, location is a great hurdle. There
needs to be improved transportation infrastructure, such as a fixed link between Change
-26-
•
•
Islands and Fogo Island. This would have positive repercussions on the tourism industry
as well.
Youth involvement at all levels is critical. Young people represent a new generation of
thinkers with innovative ideas and important opinions. They need to have ways in which
they can get their voices and ideas heard. Many people are still focused on ideas that are
centuries old. Now there is a need to meld the old ideas with the new.
The economy is evolving, and the rural communities of Newfoundland and Labrador
cannot be left behind.
Agnes Pike, Mayor, West Ste. Modeste, Newfoundland and Labrador
Agnes Pike grew up as a member of a family of fishers in a coastal community in Labrador. She
was a fish buyer for 25 years. In the early 1950s, the community created a co-op to get away
from the merchants.
“If we have to depend on our government, we won’t get anywhere.”
She insists that the future of our communities lies in leadership from the communities. We should
never look negatively upon the community, we should remain positive and build on opportunities.
It is up to communities to create a future. Communities can not rely on the Province for
leadership nor on the Federal government.
Communities mush however, co-operate. If not, communities become vulnerable.
An example of communities taking leadership is found in response to the moratorium. When
the moratorium was announced, its impact did not sink in until you could see that there were no
boats on the water. For Agnes this meant she would have to close down her fish plant that
employed 65 people. Her little community was dying. This hit home when her own son told her
that he was moving to Ontario. She did not give up. She dug her feet in and decided to turn
things around. New businesses have developed in the Labrador Straits. There is the contract with
Voisey’s Bay, there is a growing tourism industry. There are also opportunities in woodworking
and work on boats (fibre glassing boats). People have endured difficult times, but Labrador
Straits has diversified.
Across the straits the Northern Peninsula is dying. If we think negatively it will be negative. If
we think positive, it will be positive. Our problem is our mentality. Why do we only work 16
weeks a year in the fish plant? We grew up on seasonal work. We need to change our mentality.
There is a large influx of people in the Straits of Labrador now. We have to be up for the
challenge. The people of the province will survive – there will be downturns, and young people
will move away, but they will come back. It is critical that we work together.
Discussion and Questions
Reade Davis (Memorial University): What is the role of industry versus the government in terms
of funding the move towards privatization?
Dawn Mercer (Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada): DFO works with a limited budget.
The programs they run are for the long-term, and there are many stakeholders involved. There is
a lack of funds and a need for new funding arrangements. There is the need for a new direction
when it comes to accessing financial resources for ocean environment.
-27-
Mike Warren (NL Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture): From the provincial perspective,
there is concern about downloading. There is room for cost-sharing. The province has a role to
play in terms of supporting the University and supporting training, and we have invested directly
into the sciences. We need a co-operative approach. We share costs and responsibilities with the
industry and with the government of Canada. It is important to pool resources and enter into costsharing arrangements.
Frances Reid (Observer): Is your reach beyond coastal regions? How far do these initiatives
reach and what influence will they have on the Law of the Sea?
Dawn Mercer (Fisheries and Oceans Canada): DFO does work beyond the coastal regions in the
offshore area. The work that they are doing is working on the premise that UNCLOS will be
ratified.
Mike Warren (NL Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture): The ratification of the UNCLOS
is a big issue in Canada. If you are going to be a player in terms of international fisheries
management, then you have to sign and get a place at the table. John Lien heads up the
Minister’s Advisory Council on Oceans and they are looking at all methods to improve
management of fisheries, particularly straddling stocks. At this point, we do not see the benefit or
effectiveness of that agreement. When there has been the chance to monitor it and see how it
works, then we will look at the broader issue of ratification.
Eddie Oake (Fogo Island Co-op): In the province, the crab stock is up, and as a result, the quotas
and licenses are also up. However, this year, the Fogo Island Co-op was 4 million pounds short
of the crab they processed last year. The situation sounds a lot like what happened to the cod
fishery. If this province has to face another Moratorium, coastal communities will not survive.
Mike Warren (NL Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture): There is a need to work together.
Local knowledge needs to be linked with the research of scientists. The Collaborative Fisheries
Science Program is an example of how these groups can be brought together. With regards to
aquaculture, we have not seen many problems in this province, although we are aware of the
problems internationally and we are monitoring the situation. Not every community will benefit
from aquaculture.
Dawn Mercer (Fisheries and Oceans Canada): There are measures being taken in BC to ensure
that farmed fish will not be able to reproduce in the wild. There is a need for more science, in
terms of what are the ecosystem interactions and the human role in the ecosystem.
Question: The increase in crab stocks has been coupled with an increase in quotas and licenses.
Will crab be the next endangered species?
“If we have to face another Moratorium, we can say good-bye to our fisheries and good-bye to
our island homes.”
Maureen Woodrow (Carelton University):
“What we’ve just witnessed is an example of leadership in small communities –
leadership that is indigenous to the communities. I think it is really important that we
celebrate it and celebrate our communities and really support the leaders that we have –
Kyle and Agnus and Eddie Oake from Fogo Island – we have to remember that it is
important.”
-28-
Euclid Chiasson (Maritime Fisherman’s Union): How does the Fogo Island Co-op manage to
maintain people’s interest in the co-op?
Eddie Oake (Fogo Island Co-op): In the Fogo Island case, the fish plant workers and the
fishermen own the business. Our grandfathers and our fathers took it upon themselves to create
this business and it has become part of our history. We also understood the need to diversify and
make it unique so that it would survive. We could not depend on just one thing. It started as a
fishermen’s co-op, but as it grew and evolved, everyone became involved, including the fish plant
workers. The co-op has hired a general manager with a background in business, which was an
important step. The co-op was unique and diverse and it has been kept alive by the people
themselves.
“We had nothing to lose and everything to gain. We dug in our heels and said
nothing we can’t do’.”
‘there’s
Kelly Vodden (Simon Fraser University): You hear a lot about youth involvement, about youth
being a partner in various processes, but often it does not work very well. Is the Youth Council a
good way to get youth involved in the region?
Kyle Ledrew (Kittiwake Youth Council): Part of the problem is that when youth messages do get
across and things are changed, the credit is not always given so we are not aware that they were
involved. The provincial Youth Council does work, it is a great vehicle for addressing issues.
This council has been around for approximately 3 years.
BREAK-OUT GROUP DISCUSSIONS:
IDENTIFYING AND MANAGING VULNERABLE COASTAL AND OCEAN RESOURCES
Group One:
Question One: What are the vulnerabilities and successful adaptations?
Vulnerabilities include:
• Loss of resources, especially fish
• Out-migration – loss of a generation of people and skills
• Lack of control over change
• Lack of economic diversity
• Lack of financial resources and access to extend money/resources
• Decline of social capital
• Lack of leadership or under unidentified leadership
• Inward looking mentality, not looking at the big picture
• Government policies
• Negativity, lack of creativity
• Lack of co-operation
Adaptations include:
• Become more aware of programs available
• Diversify
• Getting inventory of capacities/asset mapping
• Full value processing
• Distribution of services
-29-
•
•
•
•
•
•
Long-term strategy
Attract people who work in migrational work
Decentralization of services
Cohesive strategic plan, focused community planning
Incentives
Partnerships/co-operatives
Question Two: What are the major conflicts in ocean management within coastal
communities?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Conflict between resource users
Sharing resources
Politics
Double standards
Value conflicts between outsiders/locals, suburban values, locals/tourists
Mistrust between locals and government
Coastal versus island communities
Competing communities may have competition for resources
Needs of regions versus community
Present versus future generation
Group Two
Question One: What are the vulnerabilities and successful adaptations?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Problem of the retention of youth in coastal communities.
Problem of mobilization of the people to get things done.
Problem of inclusion and participation.
Problem of misconceptions and negative attitude and image. To the rest of Canada, the
image that is portrayed is that we are like a youngster that wants more – they neglect the
resources that we export. Not everyone thinks this way, but it is a common
misconception. It is important to develop a more positive attitude and image while
recognizing structural limitations; i.e., the economic and political forces that play upon
these communities.
Problem of the mainstream market-driven aspect or private investment property model
that dominates resource policy. (Globalization, capitalization, conglomeration).
How to attract financial investment? It is important to find out where the money might
be – how to leverage the funds. For example, on Change Islands, they are getting money
to develop the trails, but we need people to come out here – we need people to come out
to the site, not us go out to them.
Government commitment is needed outside of the nine to five time-frame.
Problem of volunteer burnout. Few people actually do things, others just sit on the
sidelines. There is only so much that a few people can do.
The people of the province represent an invaluable resource.
We know we have to diversify, but we have to determine are the costs of diversification.
Ask the question: do people want to stay? If they are passionate enough about the place,
they will stay. Staying in small, rural communities may be a lifestyle choice. There may
be a slump, but people will come back if this lifestyle is what they are looking for.
Currently, there are no reasons for the youth to stay.
A new industry will not come to a place that has no workforce.
-30-
•
•
•
•
•
There is a shift in attitude about the inevitability of globalization. Usually, the move to
the centre is just accepted.
Is it economically viable to keep these communities alive?
Influxes of government money go to expanding the airport in Toronto, or the subway
system there. There has been a lot of money put into the construction of the outer-ring
road in St. John’s. The cost of the Change Islands ferry may pale in comparison.
Population concentrated in the Avalon.
The first thing we talk about when we move beyond the fishery is tourism. We should be
cautious about tourism.
Question Two: What are the major conflicts in ocean management within coastal
communities?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Various commercial fisheries.
What amount of resource development do we want? What is the total allowable catch?
What about seal and capelin issues?
There is a notion among some people that privatizing the commons is the way to go.
How is the next generation going to get enough money to participate in a new fishery?
The only people that can afford to buy are the rich capitalists.
Are the most profitable fishing enterprises the best for small coastal communities?
Why would industries seeking profitability care about small coastal communities?
Trying to get things off the ground in rural Newfoundland and Labrador is a struggle.
There is no community model yet.
How to draw the financial resources? How to attract the bankers?
Private investment approach versus the community approach.
Risk is being downloaded on fisheries workers in these situations. Fishermen are paying
for fisheries science.
It is all about political priorities.
Conflicts surround other industries in the province including petroleum and mining,
tourism, and heritage sites.
Aquaculture versus commercial fishery.
Conflicting government policy – is this an issue? Government policy is usually
implemented under the pressure of industry.
Group Three:
Question One: What are the vulnerabilities and successful adaptations?
•
•
Out-migration is a significant vulnerability.
The federal government has taken its cue from theoretical doctrines of economists and
have changed the fisheries management system in a way that is very difficult to reverse –
they have gone for individual quotas and they want the market to work. “The market
gives one vote for every dollar, and if you have more dollars, that’s more votes. What
happens then is that, in a fully operational quota system, those that have access to large
funds will buy up the quotas and put them where it suits them best not where it suits
people best. It is a plutocratic process - dollars rule, and the people who have the dollars
rule. And that has resulted in a geographical concentration of fisheries access rights and
that has destroyed communities unnecessarily.” The adaptation is for “communities to
persuade the governments, through their political votes, that they want to have
community access guaranteed.” The social and environmental consequences of the new
management system can be disastrous, as we have seen.
-31-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
There are examples of places where communities have spoken up – in New Brunswick
and Nova Scotia.
If the quota is in the hands of the processor instead of the community, for example, and if
that processor decides to leave an area, the quota is also gone. If it is in the hands of the
community, then it stays and another processor will come in. Non-transferable quotas
may be more desirable in this sense, determined by geographical factors.
In Arnold’s Cove there is a National Sea plant, which has been very successful, and they
had an offshore clam quota and wanted to sell it. But it had been given to the community
of Arnold’s Cove, and so they could not sell it without permission. They had to make
commitments to upgrade the plant, and assign a trawler from Lunenberg to Arnold’s
Cove. This was of great benefit to the community. That was key, because there was no
way that the federal minister would have given the permission to sell that clam business.
The community still has the employment and the business. Local ownership of the quota
is key.
There are some community management systems in Greenland as well, also Australia and
New Zealand.
The town of Fogo got a grant from ACOA to bring in an economic development officer.
The officer got some money to do some tourism trails, and there are four to five other
business ideas being worked with now.
A smaller amount of product can be turned into a higher value product. Value-added is
an important adaptation – use a more limited resource and further process it, creating
more and longer employment as opposed to seasonal employment. Profit development is
a big opportunity.
We sometimes underestimate ourselves. At first we couldn’t see past cod. Now we are
into crab and shrimp, and high-grade products.
Look at economic diversification that does not fit with traditional Newfoundland
resources. On the Canada-Vermont border, there was a person interested in archival
paper conservation. He has started a strong business in this, even though it was not a
traditional practice. He was thinking outside the box. We have to educate our young
people to stay, not educate them to leave. This means educating them on how they can
link technology with other things they are interested in and showing them that they do not
have to leave.
IT development is an important area of opportunity for the province. The issues
surrounding transportation are eliminated. We need to have good strategic planning
sessions to develop these ideas.
In this province, we often sell ourselves short. We need to overcome this.
DITRD has a program called “Getting the Message Out” that involves talks in school
about new sectors and businesses. This is a good way to raise awareness of the
possibilities and what we can accomplish in this province.
It would be beneficial to have some of the regional hesdquarters of DFO moved to
coastal communities. To make fundamental change in DFO they need to adopt
ecosystem-based, integrated policies and procedures. Now is the time for fundamental
change. A gesture that could be made would be to move some divisions. There is a
marine conservation office in Halifax. We should be working hard to do something like
this. This would be an adaptation for DFO.
We need to work hard at the community level to see if a marine conservation model
would be appropriate to Newfoundland and Labrador. There was one tried in Bonavista
Bay that did not work, but the times have changed.
Attention should also be paid to the terrestrial part of the province. There are
opportunities here that may have been overlooked (E.g.: berries, hiking trails). We need
to be able to think outside the fishery tunnel.
-32-
•
People are the biggest resource – the minds of the province.
Question Two: What are the major conflicts in ocean management within coastal
communities?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
People who have had accumulated quotas are about to lease them for 80% the value of
the catch. A new person who wants to enter the fishery has to pay this off of the top, and
then his boat and his crew on top of it. What does he have left? This is the system that
the government is moving towards now. In Iceland, the only way people who enter into
the fishery can afford it is to high grade – they choose the best fish that gets the top price
and the rest gets dumped. This is a scandal in Iceland.
Conflict between the department in power and the industry. It seems like there had not
been downsizing. The government wants to downsize the fishery, but the numbers do not
seem to have gone down.
People are using crab and shrimp for political gain, they are not considering the stress and
strain on these fisheries. That is what happened to the cod, and it culminated in the
Moratorium. How much longer are we going to allow increased quotas and licenses in
these fisheries?
There is a conflict between crab fishers and shrimp fishers. Crab are coming in with
broken legs because of the draggers. There is also damage caused to shrimp gear.
Maybe there needs to be new technology.
Different groups can be after the same resources for different reasons. For example, tour
boats and iceberg harvesters were in conflict. There needs to be a mediator in place.
The community is a huge stakeholder, but there is a disconnection between the community
and the decisions being made by the federal government. There needs to be a mechanism
through which the broader community interests can come into play.
It is time to get back to the grassroots to find out what the people need.
We have a fishing season open for 8 weeks for crab, and yet in order to qualify for EI you
need 14 weeks. The qualification period should be cut back to 10 weeks. EI regulations
for fishers versus plant workers are different.
The way the unemployment system is set up, it is not relevant to the transition of rural
communities from one job to another. It is not linked to the needs of people in rural
communities.
The provincial federal divide is a barrier.
Communities that directors come from get the most resources.
There is a need to educate adults as well as youth.
There is a conflict in the industry between the harvesters, the processors and the buyers.
There is a conflict with the labour force itself that works in the fish plants.
There is a conflict with government.
MONDAY, AUGUST 25TH
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
Ottar Brox, Professor, Anthropology, University of Bergen, Norway
Sigfus Jonsson, Fisheries Consultant, Reykjavik, Iceland
Ottar Brox, Professor, Anthropology, University of Bergen, Norway
As far as Europe is concerned, Northern Norway is one of the richest resource areas if you look at
population in relation to value of the resources. After World War II, there were two different
types of fisheries undertaken in Norway. First, there was the year-round offshore modern fishery
-33-
which took place in the Barents Sea with large trawlers. Second, there was the seasonal in-shore
fishery which involved smaller boats fishing along the coast with selected gear such as gill nets or
long-liners. The history of the Norwegian fishery after WWII is one of conflict between the two
types of fisheries and the two ways of life. On the one hand, there was the 24-hour a day, yearround fishery involving the trawlers, and on the other hand, there was the in-shore fishery based
on people living in coastal communities and fishing from small boats.
In the early 1960s, fishers were exhibiting the perverse tendency of investing in smaller boats
rather than bigger boats. Meanwhile, the authorities assumed that everyone engaged in the
economic activity of the fishery wanted larger boats and the ability to fish all year-round. They
pressured the fishers to acquire larger boats with more modern and efficient technologies. The
reality was the contrary: the fishermen were interested in harvesting the fish during the season
with the equipment and technology available to them. They were not interested in expansion.
Fishermen felt that they would be compelled to fish all year-round and all season with the bigger
boats.
To understand this we must try to understand the character and the richness of the resources
available to the fishermen. Take the example of a fisherman who went out on a fishing voyage in
a small boat with a little motor and landed 700 kilos in 10 hours. For this, he would have
received about 10 cents a kilo and made a total of about $70. His expenses would have been as
follows:
1) For 10 hours fishing his labour expenses would amount to about
$10. (Work ashore would be about $12 per hour.)
2) Depreciation of pre-war boat would have been about $10,
plus gas which cost about $5.
In this example, the fisherman was harvesting a resource rent of about $55 as compared to what
he could have made onshore that day. This was not the situation every day, and if it was a good
season he would have made more. Norwegian fishermen were living not from their personal
investments in terms of gear or labour, they were simply harvesting their resource rent in the
same way a farmer who inherits a big productive farm would. They were living off the ocean’s
bounty. The conflict in the Norwegian fishery has revolved around the question of who has the
right to harvest this resource rent? Everyone wants to claim the resource rent.
The Fresh Fish Act - which was passed in 1938 due in large part to the political influence of
fishers in Norway - benefited fishermen such as the one described above. It transformed the
question of the price of fish from a matter of bargaining between local fish buyers and immobile
fishermen into a national bargaining concern. By this Act, the local buyer had to pay at least as
much as the national fixed price, which had a reasonable relation to export prices. Now imagine
what would happen if fish prices were fixed to the free local bargaining prices. In that scenario,
the buyer would have to pay just a little more than what he could have earned ashore. This would
mean that for the 700 kilos of fish, the fisherman would get what he could have earned ashore - a
little more than 2 cents a kilo rather than 10 cents. The accumulation of all the alternatives that
he would forego - the “opportunity costs” - would determine how much he would receive.
The Fresh Fish Act secured the resource rent for the primary producer; i.e., the one who has the
right to harvest the resource. We can see from this calculation that the buyer would have to pay if
the fishery was somewhat poorer. If the fisherman described above had fished 300 kilos instead
of 700 kilos, by the same logic he would have had to have made a little more than $15 for his
-34-
voyage as opposed to considering what the fish buyers could earn on the international market for
fish ($50/300 kilos implies that the price would be 5 cents rather than 2 cents).
Securing the resource rent for the fisher meant that the small boat seasonal fishery became a
relatively attractive occupation compared to relocating to industrial towns or to towns with a fish
plant. The fishery became subject to a national wage level. This put a half end to poverty along
the Norwegian coast.
One result of this was a great interest in the small boat fishery and an increase in the number of
small boats. People who had acquired big boats before the war began experiencing problems
getting a crew. They also had to resort to small boat fishing. This was a very egalitarian
influence.
On the national level, the increase in small boats was considered a great problem as it was
thought to hinder economic growth. It was difficult, for example, to introduce new forms of
production such as fresh fish filleting since plants had to have so many tons on hand every week.
The government tried to stop public loans to fishermen who were not interested in buying larger
boats and they began to subsidize the trawler fleet. Some coastal skippers were tempted to take
advantage of these favourable loans given to purchase bigger boats. This resulted in overinvestment and too many people fishing for a limited resource.
Up until around the late 1960s and 1970s, nobody had been concerned with the limits of the
resource because the landings had been increasing every year. It was commonly accepted that the
fishery was an expansive industry. Over-fishing finally came onto the agenda. The effects of
neglecting the limits of the resource became visible in the 1970s and methods of reducing or
monitoring fishing were attempted but had little effect. In 1989, the cod catch was extremely low
and the situation became desperate. The government acted on the premise that the common
property theory of the tragedy of the commons held - that fishermen would be greedy, catching as
much as they can and increasing their capacity until all the common-held resource was gone. A
regime of boat quotas was enforced. The total catch allocated to the inshore fleet was divided
between the boats that had been actively fishing during the very bad years of 1987-1989. As a
result, the small boats that had gone ashore because they could not afford to fish during these
years were penalized. Meanwhile, those that were contributing most to the destruction were
rewarded with quotas.
The system was an intermediate version of the Individual Tradable Quota (ITQ) system which is
the standard solution offered by economists for the tragedy of greedy fishermen and limited
resources. For example, one boat might receive a quota of 30 tons of cod and another might
receive 12 tons. In order to fish, one had to buy a boat with a quota rather than buy the right to
fish a certain volume of cod. Thus, a boat worth 1 million Kroners could be sold for 2 million
Kroners because of the quotas attached to it. The cumbersome nature of the system has many
practical shortcomings when compared to a truly developed ITQ regimen, which would imply
outright privatization of the stocks. This must be considered an intermediate system which can
only be developed into a tradable commodity or the right to buy and sell a certain amount of cod.
The interesting point is that the fishery had essentially been closed because of the price that the
market dictated for the right to fish. Those who lost their right to fish might never get it back
again. The government had decided to exclude most of the coastal population from utilizing the
resource that had been their “raison d’être.” People had lived in these northern coastal
communities for one reason: to fish. By taking away their access to the fishery, the government
had relegated the population to dependency on transfer payments or having to relocate. The
-35-
people had homes with all the amenities where they were and would never be able to obtain the
same standard of living in the southern industrial towns. In the northern coastal villages, there
would have been around 60 fishermen in the 1960s. Today, there are only two boats and five
fishermen that are allowed to fish for a living.
What is most striking about these villages is the new attitude to fishing. Prior to 1989,
fishermen’s careers were usually initiated by fishing with relatives or more experienced
shipmates, utilizing all types of small boats, during the summer vacations. Such activity does not
necessarily evoke career planning, but some of these youths simply continued full time after their
schooling was complete. They divided their time between crewing on larger boats and
participating in the small-scale coastal fishery. Crewing on the trawlers provided an opportunity
to acquire funds to buy a smaller boat. Today, very few young people from the fishing villages
ever have a chance to become boat owners. In the past, the goal of all young fishermen in these
villages throughout the decades after the war was to become the owner of a 25 foot to 35 foot
boat. Today, the prospect of being a crewman for a lifetime does not appeal to anyone. The
result is almost zero interest in fishing as a career. This has many implications. For instance,
there used to be little difference between crew and owners. Now, there is a big difference. Cheap
labour from other countries (e.g. the Philippines) presents operators with opportunities to reduce
costs. Also, without the Fresh Fish Act, coastal fishermen would be powerless against the fish
buyer who would dictate the prices. The Fresh Fish Act is justifiable under an open-access
fishery but impossible to maintain in a restricted access fishery.
At the same time that people are kept out of the fishery, the government - very contrary to the
theory upon which they base their policies - continues to increase the incentive for capital to enter
the fishing industry. For example, the current fisheries Minister claims that he wants to take
unprofitable boats out of the industry in order to make room for new and modern equipment. By
the government definition, the operation of a fisherman whose boat has been paid off many years
ago but who continues to fish year after year is unprofitable, otherwise he would have stopped
fishing. These are the types of operations that the Minister wants to remove from the fishery. In
the process, the Minister gives quotas and state subsidies to very expensive new boats that can
never be profitable. New boats that have to fish every day all year round in order to pay their
debts even if they are subsidized by the government.
The graph to the right demonstrates
what this means. Economists know
this graph very well. If you increase
the effort and increase the catch,
you eventually reach the resource
limit. Any new capital invested in
the fishery means increased effort
and smaller profits or less money for
the individual fisherman.
Profitability will drop the more you
invest without any chance to
increase the yield. A point will be
reached where the level of effort is
sufficient. In economics, we say
that the fishing industry experiences
decreasing returns to scale.
Decreasing Returns to Scale
$
Cost
Cost
Limit
Limit
Profit
Profit{
Effort
Sufficient
Sufficient
-36-
Effort
Today, utilizing a very rich resource, the economy of the fishery on a national scale is no longer
profitable. The authorities continue to make little money available to invest in the fishery, which
runs contrary to most theories on deficient and aging economies.
What do we see in the future for Norwegian coastal communities? Without the Fresh Fish Act,
there is no benefit at all from living in one of the most resource-rich areas of the country and the
world. Fishing as a career and way of life for people living in these communities is no longer a
viable alternative due to government policies that deliberately removed the right to fish from
small scale fishermen.
Sigfus Jonsson, Fisheries Consultant, Reykjavik, Iceland
There are many features of the Icelandic experience which make it an interesting case to compare
with Newfoundland and Labrador. General comparisons between Iceland and Newfoundland and
Labrador are given in the table below.
General Comparisons:
Iceland
Newfoundland and Labrador
Nation
Province
Island
Island and Labrador
Population: 280,000
Population 520,000
Coastal towns and villages
Many small out ports, single industry resource
towns
75% of population in Southwest region
50% of population in St. John’s region
Population growth
Stagnant/declining population
Very low unemployment
High unemployment
Strong local government (national level and
Weak local government (3 levels)
local level)
Large farming areas
Small farming areas
Lutheran state group
Many religious groups
Export-based
Export based
Fish, hydro-power and geothermal energy
Fish, hydro-power, minerals, timber, offshore
oil and gas
Less urbanized
More urbanized
In terms of the fisheries in both these places, there are major differences in the size, type and
governance of the industry in Iceland versus in Newfoundland and Labrador. For example, the
value of the landed catch is approximately three times larger in Iceland than in Newfoundland
and Labrador, and the value of landed catch per fisherman is approximately 4-5 times larger.
Historically, throughout most of the 20th century, the groundfish catches were of comparable
sizes, whereas pelagic catches have always been larger in Iceland. In recent years, the industry in
Newfoundland and Labrador has become much more focussed on shellfish. The fishery in
Iceland has been much more capital-intensive and less labour-intensive than Newfoundland and
Labrador since circa 1900. The Icelandic fishery was spatially concentrated into about 60 strong
fishing communities between 1900 and 1940; whereas in Newfoundland and Labrador, 600-800
fishing bases remained throughout the 20th century. The following table presents comparisons of
the fisheries in both jurisdictions.
-37-
Comparing the Fisheries:
Iceland
Newfoundland and Labrador
More pelagic and groundfish
More shellfish
2,133,327 tonnes of low value species
267, 470 tonnes of high value species
5,300 person years fishing;
8,400 person years fishing;
6,400 fish processing
7,900 fish processing
Domestic control of fish resources since 1977
External control of fish resources (federal)
(within 200 mile limit)
One Ministry
Two Ministries
No fishing zones
Fishing zones
Individual quotas are transferable (controversial
Restrictions on transfer of quota/licenses
issue–market fores are displayed as big companines
buy out small ones)
Unrestricted utilization or sale of ctaches (aside
Restrictions on sale of catches
from regulations for quality and health and safety)
No licensing of fish plants
Licensing of fish plants
Law on auction markets for fresh fish (Health,
No auction markets for fresh fish
safety and quality regulations). Most small-scale
fishers sell on auction markets
Market price for fish
Collective bargaining
Special community quota (special allocation to
No community quota
communities who have lost out)
Both Iceland and Newfoundland and Labrador exhibit strategic weaknesses in their fishing
industries. The main ones are as follows:
• In terms of the business environment, the two jurisdictions are in the same boat. They
are supplying fish to the same market - a market in which there is a high demand for
fresh fish and therefore no overwhelming need for freezing plants. The auction system
in Iceland has helped to cater to the market demand for fresh product. Fresh fish fetches
a higher value-added, which presents a threat to the future of finishing plants.
• Workers coming from different parts of the world (such as East Asia) charge much less
for their labour. Chinese fish plant workers, for example, cost 36 times less than their
Icelandic counterparts.
• Aquaculture has experienced a 10% annual growth since 1990. Currently, there are over
40 million tonnes of fish farmed globally. In North America, about half of all the
available fresh and frozen seafood is farmed. Aquaculture has brought a consistency of
supplies and lower prices in comparison with the wild fisheries.
• It is important to be cautious and keep in mind that once a fish stock is depleted, it does
not necessarily come back. In Iceland, for example, the lost stock of herring never did
recover.
• A heavy reliance on export markets implies that a jurisdiction must adapt to the rules of
the world. This applies to the Icelandic case.
What are the lessons to be learned from the Icelandic experience?
• With regards to the individual tradable quotas, while it may be good for the national
economy, it is not favourable from the community perspective.
• One critical lesson is that a reduced fishing effort yields greater returns, as shown in the
graph above.
• Fewer fishermen mean higher salaries.
• Increased efficiency in the utilization of catches is important.
-38-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
In Iceland there is a concentration of fishing corporations in a few groups. These
corporations trade on the Icelandic Stock Exchange. There are very few family-owned
firms left. Big firms participate in various international operations.
There has been some growth of small inshore fishing boats. These are very efficient 1-2
man operations.
The economic reliance on the fisheries is declining in Iceland (40% of GDP versus 7580%), but there is strong economic growth.
There is an unstable and bleak future for many fishing communities.
There is no unemployment in Iceland as out-migration is high. There are many
opportunities in Reykjavic.
In Iceland, small peripheral communities receive a community quota. Extra privileges
for long-liners have been promised by the government as a way of helping communities.
Iceland has seen a steady growth in tourism, hydro-power schemes and aluminium
smelters. Since 1995, new economy industries such as pharmaceuticals, information
technology, biotechnology, financial services and professional services have also
experienced growth.
How can the province use the Icelandic experience?
• Management of the fish resources needs to be addressed.
• Unrestricted utilization of catches.
• Too much government involvement - for example, why is there the need to license fish
plants?
• Overly generous employment insurance.
• Take aquaculture seriously - both as a threat and as an opportunity.
• Bring tourists from Europe - more direct flights would be needed.
• Strengthen local government - fewer and stronger municipalities.
• Fight for independent development of Churchill Falls.
Discussion and Questions Following International Perspectives
Sigfus Jonsson (Iceland): Discards from the groundfishery are a serious problem.
Kelly Vodden (Simon Fraser University): There are many ecological issues associated with
aquaculture. It is important to study and use best practices.
Sigfus Jonsson (Iceland): Aquaculture is capital intensive. It should only be done in certain
areas. The South Coast seems to have tremendous opportunities.
Question: What is the impact of the ITQ system on the attitudes towards care of the resource?
Comment: Some say that there is better utilization.
Question: Where do you expect to get your fishermen from in the future?
Comment: There are no opportunities, and therefore no interest. There is an argument for
recruiting globally.
Question: What about the labour shortages in processing in Iceland?
-39-
Comment: Workers often come from Poland. It is hard to get locals to work in the plants. In
Alaska, they come from Mexico and Vietnam. This has been a problem for over 20 years. It
provides low income, it is a remote location, and it is insecure.
Sigfus Jonsson (Iceland): At one point, they looked at the possibility of bringing Newfoundland
workers to Iceland. They said no because they would lose their unemployment benefits.
Question: Is the concentration of wealth in the Icelandic fishery acceptable?
Comment: This is a problem but the industry is much more effective and healthier. This is an
economic and social trade-off.
Ottar Brox (Norway): Geography makes for two very different starting points.
Question: How widely held is the stock of the fishing companies?
Comment: They are leading investors, but they do not have control. A portion of the pension
program is invested in the stock exchange.
Bill Broderick (FFAW): There seems to be a similar situation here in the province as in Norway.
Cod stocks are being fished offshore, and then seasonally inshore. Here we have gone into a
limited and then a closed fishery. Individual quotas will lead to small operations in coastal
communities being shut out. We will start to see imported labour. The Norwegian situation that
was described is where this province is headed - but there is still time to turn it around.
Ottar Brox (Norway): The situation in Norway is similar to that of Newfoundland in terms of
the inshore versus offshore conflict. There are unexplored alternatives to the individual traded
quotas.
RURAL DIVERSIFICATION/BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Paul Stride, Executive Director, Kittiwake Economic Development Corporation, NL
Herb Bown, President, Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation, Change Islands, NL
Paul Stride, Executive Director, Kittiwake Economic Development Corporation, NL
For a profile of statistics from the Kittiwake Zone, see www.communityaccounts.ca
There are the 102 communities in the Kittiwake
Zone, 92 of them are coastal, and 40% of the total
population of the zone is concentrated in six
communities which each have a population greater
than 2,000 people. 39 of the communities are
incorporated municipalities. The primary
industries in the zone include the fishery, forestry,
manufacturing, retail, government services, and
tourism.
The zone has been greatly affected by outmigration. The proximity of a community to
regional service centres, the level of economic activity, and job creation all dictate a community’s
ability to retain population. In the zone, there is an excess of lower educated, less mobile
workers. Many young workers with the skills and education required of emerging sectors have
-40-
already moved away. Areas most heavily dependent
on the fishery have been the most impacted by
demographic changes. Technology and an aging
workforce will continue to reduce employment in
the fishery and thus also the population of rural
Newfoundland and Labrador. By 2016, it is
projected that the zone will lose another 10.3% of
their population, against a provincial average of
about 4%. These demographic trends are long-term
and are not easily changed. In order to manage this
change, there is a need for long-term strategic
planning regarding the management of this
demographic shift. The challenge facing rural
communities is to stabilize the population base by
providing employment and business opportunities
that can thrive in a rural setting.
Population Dynamics for the Kittiwake Zone
1986-2001 SOURCE: CANADIAN CENSUS
60000
58,276
57,020
55000
52,03
50000
48,164
45000
40000
35000
30000
1986
1991
1996
1998
2001
Challenges facing the province include:
• Urban areas in the province (i.e.: St. John’s) will have to enlarge to compete with
businesses between the Halifax/Moncton corridor;
• Difficulties associated with lower-skilled workforce;
• Attracting and retaining skilled employees is problematic;
• Employment Insurance is proving to be a deterrent to economic development (labour
market saturation);
• Jobs are not being generated fast enough to employ young graduates;
• The fishery is in a period of severe transition;
• Economic growth is concentrated on the Avalon Peninsula and in the regional services
centres.
Opportunities for the province include:
• Business development drives our economy. Only the private sector can create long-term,
sustainable jobs. There is tremendous unrealized potential here. KEDC is working on
creating the right climate for business growth (tools and resources, skills development,
technology integration and marketing assistance).
• The tourism industry has the capacity to grow.
• Strategic sectors include light manufacturing, aviation/aerospace, innovative fisheries,
agrifoods, and mining.
• There is a high level of education among college, trade school and university graduates.
Can we generate opportunities so that they will stick around?
• Can we ignite the entrepreneurial spark among the aging population?
• Global competitiveness is critical to the growth and survival of many manufacturing
firms.
• Biotechnology is a burgeoning industry. Opportunities here revolve around the use of
natural resources (berries, marine proteins, by-catch).
• Small fruit development also has great potential in this province. An example of a
business venture of this nature in the Kittiwake zone is the Blueberry Cooperative.
• Customer contact centres have great potential in the province.
• New growth sectors include:
o Agrifoods;
o Nutraceuticals;
o Light manufacturing;
-41-
o
o
o
o
o
Commercialized fisheries and aquaculture;
Peat, dimension stone, etc.;
Environmental industries;
Cultural industries, ecotourism;
Information management.
How we can grow the economy?
• Focus on the private sector.
• Import substitution.
• Develop a balanced
economy.
• Get more from natural
resources.
• Develop human and physical
infrastructure.
• Export market development.
• Create globally competitive
businesses.
Old Economy
New Economy
Exploiting traditional
resources
Find new
uses/processes for
traditional resources
Selling unprocessed raw
material
Value-added
processing
Competitive locally
Competitive globally
Based on availability of
Based on availability of
Issues facing the growth of business
resources
skills
in the province include:
• Newfoundland and Labrador has the lowest number of patent applications per capita in
Canada;
• Newfoundlanders tend to be innovative, but not so much in terms of commercial
applications;
• Access to venture capital is poor;
• More work needs to be done to foster a culture of entrepreneurs, particularly at a young
age;
• Transportation/communications infrastructure needs improvement;
• Technical, human and physical resources are clustered in urban centres (i.e.; business
best located adjacent to R&D facilities, university-fuelled labour pool).
“The sustainability of rural Newfoundland is very much dependent on the ability
innovative private sector to create long-term employment and wealth.”
-42-
for an
Herb Bown, President, Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation, Change Islands, NL
“What’s really important about this island is the people. What really concerns me is that
we really have to address the future. Our biggest problem is the leadership at the
provincial and federal level. Basically, it is the squeaky wheel gets the oil approach.
Those communities, groups, or individuals who are tenacious, approach government
agencies, and can, after a while, succeed. It should be done a lot more efficiently. The
preparation of proposals takes a lot of time. We need to get a report back to these
government agencies to say: “get a plan, get with it!” We should be more like a business
at the level of how we spend money and we are not doing that. It is being done in all
kinds of funny ways, and that is very hard. Also, when there is a change in government,
there is usually a change in the way things work.”
“The Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation is only one initiative, and we need more.
We have to come together, have a common objective, bring together all of our talents and
resources and focus on what we want to do over a long period of time. I want
participation at that level, and it has started. It will bring some relief to some of the
problems we have, but that is not the only answer. The answer lies in a lot of the other
suggestions we have seen here. This focusing together and having a common objective is
a very important thing. I think that if we do that we can make a difference, and what we
can do can be magnified by having proper, better controls, better planning and better
management of the resources spent by the provincial and federal governments.”
According to Vogel (1998), vulnerability is “the capacity of communities to anticipate, cope with,
resist and recover from the impacts of environmental change.” This definition applies well to the
situation facing the coastal communities of Newfoundland and Labrador. In the past decade or
so, coastal communities in the province have faced the challenges of the collapse of the cod
fishery and subsequent Moratorium, the decline of the employment base, out-migration, and a
peak in economic and social vulnerability.
The keys to developing solutions in the local context to the challenges we face include:
• Building trust;
• Understanding the mindset;
• Reinforcing sense of place.
-43-
The people and the community of
Decreasing coping capacity
Change Islands have strengths to
build on includi ng:
• A strong tradition of hard
work and overcoming
Coping
Environmental
difficulties;
Capacity
Stress
• A long/strong history of
traditional skills (knitting,
•
Social
•
Hazards
woodworking, rug
•
Economic
•
Resource
making, etc…);
Depletion
•
Political
• The traditional
independent work ethic
and entrepreneurship of
local fishermen;
• Change Islands fishing
Increasing Environmental Stress
heritage well preserved
(over 200 stages and
stores);
• The community has a tremendous opportunity in tourism, in adventure tours and learning
vacations.
Challenges and risks facing the community include:
• On-going youth out-migration and an aging population;
• Employment reduction in the fisheries;
• Declining enrolment in the public schools;
• Difficulties in maintaining and increasing local public infrastructure;
• Population decreasing (1901- 1,067 to 2001 - 360);
• Government rules, regulation and policies favour urban areas;
• General lack of confidence by the residents in the future of the town.
POPULATION HISTORIC DATA
CHANGE ISLANDS
1000
900
800
Population
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Year
Opportunities for the future include:
• New fish species introduced to the local plant;
• Designation of the town as a Registered Heritage District;
• The Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation - master plan for restoration of the 200 stages
and stores;
-44-
•
•
•
Build on the extensive historic fishing heritage to increase tourism (specialized inns,
adventure tours, learning vacations, special events, etc…);
Opportunities in craft manufacturing coupling local heritage skills with modern
technology and global marketing techniques;
Design future business ventures to build on the traditional independent work ethic and
entrepreneurship of local fishermen.
Lessons learned include:
• Locally-made solutions;
• Link the local to the outside;
• Long-term re-investment;
• Multi-pronged strategy.
The Stages and Stores mission statement is to “establish and maintain itself as the premier source
of artisan products from the Change Islands – Fogo-Twillingate area and one of the leading
wholesale suppliers of Newfoundland and Labrador arts and crafts.” The foundation seeks to
“provide a first-class e-commerce and North American wholesale/merchandizing capability,
serving the needs of Newfoundland and Labrador artisans and their communities.” Products
include canvas mats, fused-glass designs, woollen apparel, and fine art. The marketing strategy
pursued in one of extending the market reach by wholesaling the world, and utilizing internet and
e-commerce.
The Stages and Stores Heritage Foundation believes in the “tradition and values of the
Newfoundland and Labrador rural and outport way of life, the creativeness and resourcefulness of
the people, and the maintenance and restoration of both the cultural and physical expressions of
the community.” The main objective of the Foundation is to “preserve and promote the unique
fishing heritage buildings of one of the last picturesque Newfoundland fishing outport
communities.” This is achieved by “the restoration of selected stages and stores located
throughout the community and by the arrangement of lectures and discussions, publications of
papers, pamphlets or books, the preservation of records, and any other means that may be deemed
appropriate.”
Discussion and Questions Following Rural Diversification/Business and Entrepreneurship
Question: Does the zonal board have any kind of strategic planning in place?
Paul Stride (Kittiwake Economic Development Corporation): Last year the board did an update
of their strategic economic plan, which is a five-year model. Consultations with the people took
place. This SEP is available for anyone who is interested.
Question: Where do you seek your business in terms of the future and your activity either as a
region or as a business?
Herb Bown (Stages and Stores): There are many opportunities in ecotourism and taking
advantage of some of the beautiful marine shoreline that we have. One of the greatest problems
we have is that to set up businesses and to create new things it takes capital. Getting things
started in rural areas is harder that it is in urban centres. To start anything you need about $2030,000 just to get going. In rural areas you often have to build up your infrastructure which can
be very costly. Electricity costs are very high in the province - the cost of electrical connections
being at least double what it is in Ontario. This hurts the rural and remote areas more than it does
the urban areas because the people here will do it themselves in most cases. There are also the
-45-
various levels of restrictions and regulations that you have to meet and get approvals for when
starting up. Then there are all of the health regulations, water and sewer regulations, and in rural
areas there are none of these kinds of services. When you try to do something you have to put
that all in yourself and that is very expensive. For these reasons there needs to be a separate
program to cater to rural areas and the special needs of people starting up in these locations.
Comment: It seems that there is a gap in services – the zonal boards are doing strategic planning
at the regional level, but we have communities that are trying to develop and write proposals.
There needs to be strategic planning at the community level. Who is delivering those kinds of
services? It is too much to dump on one small group.
Comment: Support is needed in many forms, not just financial.
Paul Stride (Kittiwake Economic Development Corporation): The community needs to be the
driver, the community has to take ownership of the program and strategic planning can be sought
through resources available if progress is made. People have to take control of their future.
RURAL DIVERSIFICATION/HERITAGE AND CULTURE
Claude Dubé, Doyen de la Faculté d’Aménagement, d’Architecture et des Arts Visuals,
Université Laval, Québec, QC
Candace Cochrane, Quebec-Labrador Foundation, Ipswich, MA, U.S.A
Gordon Slade, Executive Director, One Ocean, St. John’s, NL
Lillian Dwyer, Mayor, Tilting, NL
Claude Dubé, Doyen de la Faculté d’Aménagement, d’Architecture et des Arts Visuals,
Université Laval, Québec, QC
Culture can be a vector for development in rural settings. There are three networks in Canada
that are putting this idea into action. They include the network of “Economusées” or
“Economuseums”, “La Fondation Rues Principales” or “The Main Street Foundation”, and the
“Villes et Villages d’Art et de Patrimoine” or “Cities and Villages of Art and Heritage”.
The Economuseum network is a micro-enterprise concept whereby artists open up their workshop
to the public along with a small interpretation centre and store. The mission is to preserve,
conserve and develop traditional crafts which are in danger of disappearing; while at the same
time, boosting the local economy. The promotion of educational and cultural heritage tourism is
a major objective of the network. The method is to build a partnership based on feelings of pride
in local cultural heritage, and local ownership and control of the development of the project. The
project started in 1992 and since then 36 Economuseums have opened up across Quebec and the
Atlantic provinces. There are currently two Economuseums in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Both of these are located on the Northern Peninsula. Borealis Crafts, which is located in Shoal
Cove East, specializes in traditional bark-tanned and handmade sealskin boots, mitts, and other
clothing. The Dark Tickle Company, located in Griquet, manufactures jams, sauces, vinegars,
and drinks from hand-picked Newfoundland wild berries.
In order for an enterprise to be considered for the Economuseum network, it must have been
functioning for a minimum of 3 years. The Economuseum organization assists with technical
aspects of project development, such as the addition of the interpretation centre to the site.
Afterwards, the business must be self-sufficient; “l’économuséologie, c’est le patrimoine qui
gagne sa vie.”
-46-
Each economuseum has six functions:
1. To receive people and give them the history of the enterprise.
2. To place old collections on display.
3. To display a new collection.
4. To demonstrate the technique in a production workshop.
5. To offer information in a documentation centre.
6. To offer a product for sale in a store.
The “Rues Principales” Foundation was started first in the United States, then in Canada by the
Heritage Foundation. The mission of the Foundation is as follows:
• To promote the conservation of heritage by offering a process, a method and the expertise
needed;
• To boost the local economy;
• To revitalize and inject value into traditional districts;
• To develop a viable future for rural towns and regions.
The objectives of the program include:
• To establish a coherent democratic process involving dialogue between groups so that the
range of interests can be represented and heard;
• Demonstrate the pertinence and the profitability of local development based on the
dialogue of locals and a dedication to true partnership building;
• Raise awareness in each community of the importance of protecting and placing value in
heritage and cultural assets in order to promote social and economic development;
• Establish in each municipality a project office whereby the financing and the strategic
planning will take place in order to ensure the continuation of the process of revitalization
and socio-economic development.
The goal of the “Rues Principales” Foundation is to revitalize the main streets in various towns.
The foundation looks for a locality that has a main street with some distinguishing feature that
would attract people. They also assess what kinds of businesses should be located there, or what
kinds of activities should take place. This job is like David versus Goliath, you find yourself up
against companies like WalMart. Usually, the foundation enters into a three year contract with the
community. Recently they have started a continuing education process, which caters mostly to
planners and architects. They do the majority of work in Quebec, but they operate elsewhere if
there is a request.
The project “Villes et Villages d’Art et de Patrimoine” was initiated in 1998 by the Ministry of
Culture and Communications in partnership with other agencies such as the Quebec Employment
Bureau, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, and the University of Laval. The program is aimed at
developing and promoting the cultural resources of an area by sponsoring the acquisition of
knowledge and leadership in the area of cultural heritage. The program targets young people who
are just completing their studies and offers them their first work experience. They develop
various forms of art and heritage such as buildings, archaeological sites and artefacts, artistic
objects, and cultural landscapes.
The program started with the development of a diploma in cultural tourism. What began as a
small project has now become a government program. The first project was a summer school in
Percé (on the Gaspé Peninsula in Quebec) in art and architecture. Now, this is a specific graduate
program, which includes a two-week stay in Percé.
-47-
Candace Cochrane, Quebec-Labrador Foundation, Ipswich, MA, U.S.A
The Quebec Labrador Foundation (QLF) is a joint Canada-U.S. non-profit organization that
focuses on developing programs that promote stewardship of the natural environment and cultural
heritage. The approach to community development being used by the QLF inn the communities
of Conche, Coake, St. Julian’s and Main Brook on Northern Peninsula is a common-sense
approach that sociologist Doug House calls the Integrated Strategy for Social and Economic
Development. This approach is made up of different categories, some of which will be described
below.
The first category is diversification. The communities mentioned above had experienced a
decline in their primary industry, the fishery. At first, there was a resident fishery, but then that
was also taken away. Faced with the collapse of the fishery, four communities in this part of the
province got together and asked themselves: What assets do we have? All around them, there
were several fancy heritage tourism projects under development. Each community had to go
through the process of determining what unique assets they had that they could use to attract
visitors. Certain assets, like the beautiful scenery, the icebergs, the moose, and the outport fishing
industry were not unique. They decided to go back to a map of the Northern Peninsula and look
at other major heritage tourism developments happening in the area. There were developments
surrounding the Maritime Archaic Indians, the Vikings, and Dr. Grenfell. There were large-scale
initiatives taking place in Port-au-Choix, Battle Harbour. The communities of Conch and Coake
discovered that their French heritage was unique. Both were important communities for about
200 years in the history of the French migratory fishery where the French came from Normandy
and Brittany, fished during the season and went back home. So they decided to focus on the
French heritage as their asset, and build on this unique aspect of their cultural heritage. Because
the French did things differently from the Newfoundlanders, the project would be interesting for
both locals as well as for visitors. There were the different ways the French fished, as well as
what the communities looked like when the French occupied the coves and bays. Fortunately, the
French had left things behind. There were French cemeteries; such as the one in Coake that was
kept up by the French Navy up until the late 1970s because the community had been the
administrative headquarters for the French Navy during the French Shore fishery. The French
had also left artefacts on the beaches such as cannons and bark pots.
The communities recognized that their biggest assets of all were the people. There were
motivated people, with knowledge and drive. The youth were a great asset - they had skills that
were needed (e.g.; computer skills). They were also full of energy. All these people, including
the youth in particular, had to be involved in the project in order for it to be a success. They took
advantage of pre-existing programs such as the Green Team program offered by the Conservation
Corps of Newfoundland and Labrador. The Green Team is a wonderful strategy for getting
things done at the local level by involving youth in community development while providing
them with gainful employment. There was also the HRDC which was greatly helpful at
providing students with salaries to work in the summer time.
The second category found in the Integrated Approach to Social and Economic Development
outlined by Doug House involves defining the long-term goals. These goals included finding
jobs for youths and creating a community in which young people would like to raise their
children. It also included saving some of those things that made life in the outports special,
including the traditions that mean a lot to the people who live there.
The next category emphasizes starting where you are and building on your strengths. The most
challenging thing to do was to get the locals to value the things around them which were no
longer of any practical use to them. It was hard to get people to see value in, for example, old
-48-
“tools” such as an old dory. While it was attractive to look at and hinted at a rich and vibrant
history, if the old boat did not float it was better put to use as firewood.
“I keep this image on my desk because it makes me cry every time I see it. I walked by
this boat and thought ‘this will be great in the exhibit’, this man is retired and he’s not
using the trap boat, I put it down on my list of things to do and a week later he had taken
his chainsaw to the trap boat and cut it up for fire wood. It was very hard to get people
to see that what had been a tool that was no longer needed actually had value.”
Another very important question they had to ask themselves was what kind of tourism did they
actually want in the area? Cape Cod was not a good model as this destination was becoming
flooded with people. The best model for them was Fleur-de-Lys where tourism had been built up
around a Dorset site as well as some other local history.
The fourth category is maintaining a positive attitude and image. The naming of the project - the
“French Shore Historical Society” - was important in this regard. The society announced that
they would focus on researching the history of the community, and in particular, trying to learn
more about the people who came, fished, died, and left evidence of their lives behind. Early
success and getting the message out is critical. The way things work in the province is that you
cannot always work in a linear manner, you have to go where the money is to get something
done. At that time, the money was in economic development and not research, so they had to go
there to seek their funding. They also received funding from the Heritage Foundation and from
the municipality of West Ste Modeste. Sometimes, these were matching grants which provided
50% of the funds required. It was a challenge to come up with the other half of the money
needed.
It was decided that an old Grenfell Nursing station that was not being used anymore would be
turned into a community museum. Young people participated by setting up the exhibits, making
brochures, putting out press releases and making signs for the community. Before the permanent
exhibit could be set up, a temporary one featuring hooked rugs was created. Every year, the
exhibit changed. The youth group joined the Traditional Skills Network and set up a place where
people demonstrated traditional crafts. The three communities were trying to build on the French
heritage, so in Coake they identified some carvings on nearby rocks that had been done by French
fishermen as unique assets. A trail was then constructed down to these rocks.
Throughout the process, it was important in this case to seek help from experts. They sought
advice and knowledge from professors at Memorial University in the archaeology and history
departments, however, local citizens and citizens of the wider area were also involved linking
scientific knowledge with local knowledge.
The project has made great progress, and they are now looking at how they can link to other
communities and other strategies. The project has given people hope. In the communities, other
people are starting projects. Young people are buying up the stores and revitalizing them. A
woman from the area who makes quilts found a market in the “gone-aways” and is doing great
business. There are some hurdles - such as business conflicts between the iceberg harvesters and
the boat tour operators. The community has become very environmentally conscious and are
investigating waste management options. Challenges do remain, including the old dirt road, the
run down waterfront and old houses which need renovating because it is so hard to find money to
renovate private homes. The harsh winters of the Northern Peninsula also present a challenge.
-49-
“When people become stewards of their community they also become stewards of
their environment and they are getting more and more involved and wanting to
know
how they can preserve what they have.”
Gordon Slade, Executive Director, One Ocean, St. John’s, NL
The project of the Battle Harbour Historic Trust in Battle Harbour (which is located on Battle
Island in the Labrador Sea) was based on the notion of building a future based on the past.
Today, Battle Harbour looks a lot like it did back in 1900. In the early 1770s, West-Country
England merchant John Slade established a mercantile saltfish premises there as an outpost of
operations located on Fogo Island and in Twillingate. It soon became an important centre for the
cod, salmon and seal fisheries of the region, and a permanent settlement was established. People
settled on the headlands because they could start fishing earlier in the season at this location. If
they had settled in the bay, it would have been June or later before they could start fishing.
People moved to Battle Harbour from Poole, Devon and Dorset to start fishing in the spring.
The economy of Battle Harbour peaked around 1850. In 1848, Bishop Field visited the
settlement and documented 92 schooners tied up in the tickle. At this time, there were over 1000
people in Battle Harbour and the surrounding area working in the fishery. This was tremendous
activity given the size of the place. The fishers employed primitive technology in the fishery at
that time. The fish were taken by three groups of people - the floaters, the stationers and the
lifters. The floaters were the ones who lived on the schooners and brought their fish back to the
northeast coast of Newfoundland. The stationers went up with their families and had their own
spot where they stayed for the summer and brought their fish back when the fishing season was
over. The lifters lived on the coast of Labrador permanently. There was a permanent settlement
in Battle Harbour up until the resettlement program of 1968. In 1992, after the Moratorium, the
community was entirely abandoned.
The Island of Battle Harbour is about half a mile long by about half a mile wide, and it retains the
original institutions: the church, the only remaining Newfoundland ranger station, an RCMP
detachment, the only remaining complex of salt fish mercantile fish premises in the country, a
hospital set up by Sir Wilfred Grenfell (the first in Labrador), and about 500 artefacts of the salt
fish era. Today, the community is a tremendous resource. In other places, this heritage all
disappeared. Perhaps the preservation of the heritage can be attributed to the remote location, or
to the presence of nothing but the salt fish industry right up until 1992 when the fishery closed.
In contrast to Change Islands where heritage and culture are being harnessed as a means to
diversify the local economy; in the case of Battle Harbour, they were starting with a community
that had been abandoned after the Moratorium. All that was left were the heritage resources
which were neglected. What could be done with these heritage resources to help build a future
for people who had moved to the mainland communities of Mary’s Harbour, Lodge Bay and St.
Lewis?
“First when I broached this idea with a provincial cabinet minister he said: “you
must be nuts! There are people like you who periodically experience the right
side of their brain going haywire - but this is a ridiculous idea - who would want
to go to the coast of Labrador off on an island in the Labrador Sea to see old
buildings, things that are finished in the fishery?” Anyway, there were a number
of us who weren’t deterred by that. We developed a plan.”
One of the most important things that the Battle Harbour Historic Trust did was to seek
professional expertise. It is important to have a cultural resources management expert who will
-50-
help with the development of the site in the right way. The best investment that the Trust ever
made was to engage a coastal resource management expert. That expert stayed for 10 years until
all the major properties had been restored. Now, the old buildings and historic premises have all
been restored so that visitors can stay in them. The entire community has been transformed into a
historic district, similar to the town of Lunenburg in Nova Scotia.
There are a whole lot of things happening related to the development of the heritage and tourism
industry in southern Labrador. Battle Harbour is only one example. There is also a 3-year
project to document all of the abandoned communities between Red Bay and Cartright. A book
will be produced about those communities. There is a film under production with CBC which
examines the end of the Labrador fishery – which is really the end of the inshore, family-owned,
2-3 member trap-sciff type of operation where people would leave Mary’s Harbour in the summer
and go out to Carol’s Cove or go out the Cap Islands and spend the summer as a family unit
fishing with gillnets and with lines, hooks and so on.
The district currently employs 10 local people in the summer, pays out $80,000 in salaries and
another $80,000 in goods and services all of which is procured locally. From the start, everyone
involved in the operation came from the area. When the project started, it was very important to
get heritage carpentry expertise. They took 15-20 fishermen and trained them in heritage
carpentry at Algonquin College in Ottawa (which has the best heritage carpentry program in
Canada), and with the community college in the province in a program taught by restoration
experts. The side benefit to the restoration of Battle Harbour is that these 20 people - fishermen
who were out of work due to the fishery closures - can now find lucrative work outside of the
project. They have also trained interpreters, administrators, cooks, etc.
“I can see in the future that Battle Harbour and all the things that Battle
Harbour wants to do will surpass what is going on in the fishery in that little
area of St. Lewis Inlet. I am absolutely convinced. It might take ten years to
happen, but there are enough heritage cultural resources that this will be the
kind of anchor required. It will be important for the future of the people who live
in southeastern Labrador.”
Dale Jarvis, Heritage Preservation Officer, Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and
Labrador, St. John’s, NL
“I don’t think we are here to preserve the things that are here - I don’t think our
job is to pickle history and keep it in a museum, but really to encourage people to
develop heritage as a living part of their community.”
The Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and Labador was established in 1984 by the
Department of Culture, Tourism and Recreation through the Historic Resources Act. Their
mandate is to “stimulate an understanding of and an appreciation for the built heritage, the
architectural heritage of the province.” There are a number of ways in which the Foundation
fulfills its mandate. They run several programs, and they have the power under legislation to
designate buildings and other structures as registered heritage structures. They also provide
grants for the preservation and restoration of heritage structures.
“The province’s cultural landscape is unmistakenly different of that of our North
American neighbours and there are distinct ties that link the fishing rooms and
the mercantile premises of the outports with the homes, lodges and churches of
these communities. Taken together these form recognizable cultural landscapes
-51-
clustered at the water’s edge centred on and connected to Newfoundland and
Labrador’s fisheries heritage. The need for a place to land, process and dry fish,
and to shelter the fishers during the season produces characteristic building
types and fisheries related structures which were once common around the
Atlantic rim and while structural remnants of traditional fishing premises can be
found in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and the Québec shore, today they are most
numerous in Newfoundland.”
The Heritage Foundation is extremely concerned about the loss of the built heritage and material
culture associated with the 500-year old fishing industry in the province. There is a long list of
cultural resources that have been lost since confederation due to neglect or intentional
demolishing. A few examples in this area include the Earle Premises, a large fishing premises on
Fogo Island; the Carter Premises in Herring Neck; and the Ashbourn Premises in Twillingate.
While many larger structures have been lost, even more dramatic has been the loss of the smaller
fisheries buildings; for example, the vernacular fishing stages and flakes which were once the
defining architectural character of our communities and that are vanishing rapidly. Other aspects
of our cultural landscape - such as traditional fencing - has also largely disappeared.
“Folklore, and culture and built heritage are completely interwoven. The loss of
these buildings, vessels, structures and material and intangible culture is not
only a loss of our landscape, but it is also a loss of our sense of who we are as a
people. ”
Much of the remaining fisheries heritage in the province can be preserved and saved. The
Heritage Foundation has started to make inroads in the preservation of fishing heritage and
designating examples of commercial premises, stages, fishermen’s houses, houses of sealing
Captains, twine lofts, and other buildings associated with the fisheries. There are many examples
of successful projects out there. There is the Custard Head fishing premises in Hants Harbour,
which was designated in 1999 and represents a wonderful example of what a community with
absolutely no funds can do to preserve their fishing heritage. In Carbonear there is the Rorke
Stores, built by John Rorke, a successful merchant of the fleet of ships for trading goods from
fishing and sealing. The restoration of the Rorke Stores is a success story on many levels.
Designation and granting through the Heritage Foundation allowed the community to lever
money out of other government agencies and they have created a museum dedicated to the rural
fishing industry in Carbonear. The museum has proven to be a tourism generator for the town
and for the region, an example of a good adaptive re-use of a former fisheries building. They
have also started to use the building for other activities such as theatrical pageants and that sort of
thing.
A very different example of an adaptive re-use of a building is from Jeffrey’s on the west coast.
The Hulan House was built in 1865-1866 by Leonard Hulan senior, who did all the work himself
including using his own pit saw, wooden pegs, and some cut nails to hold the house together. It
is one of the last structures of its type in the area. Originally built to store salmon nets, there is
another net loft in the back of the structure. The current property owner has taken the buildings
and converted them into a private residence. The structure was awarded the Southcott Award for
heritage restoration by the Newfoundland Historic Trust and it is a good example of what a homeowner can do on a individual level to help preserve fisheries heritage.
The old program of the Heritage Foundation had some limitations. It focussed mainly on larger,
architecturally significant buildings, and ignored certain types of cultural features that are really
important on the landscape such as fences, outbuildings, and sheds. The program is set up as a
-52-
cost-sharing arrangement - the Foundation funds 50% up to a certain amount - and community
groups often have to struggle to pull together the matching funds. There is a high level of
bureaucracy, and it has been accused by many in the community to be a classist type of granting
programbecause it tends to celebrate the merchants’ houses, the big churches, the buildings built
by people with lots of money. Those are not necessarily the buildings that are most reflective of
the culture here in the province.
Starting with five pilot projects in 2002 (Change Islands, Salvage, Tilting, Grand Bank and
Woody Point), the Heritage Foundation created a new program called the Fisheries Heritage
Preservation Program. The pilot project was funded through the Provincial-Federal
Comprehensive Economic Development Agreement, with some money from the province and
some money from ACOA. The project has continued and is now wholly funded by the province.
The program was designed to allow the Heritage Foundation to expand upon the work of
promoting restoration of everyday Heritage structures in the fisheries. A great example is the
Torraville Stage on Change Islands. This was the first structure to be restored on Change Islands,
and the first structure to be completed under the new program, was John Whitt’s stage, originally
built in the 1880s. Currently, around the community of Change Islands, there are about four
properties being worked on. In Tilting, a Green Team partnership was formed through funding
from the program.
Not everybody can do the same thing; it is important that each community identify its own unique
stories. This uniqueness is what should be commemorated. There are measurable social and
economic spin-offs associated with these projects, such as employment, enhanced tourism, and
increased community pride.
Other programs being promoted this year at the Heritage Foundation include the Registered
Heritage District Program which enables the Foundation to designate an entire district. This
allows a movement away form looking at one building to looking at the bigger picture. Tilting
was the first district to be designated under this program. The Tidy Towns competition provides
motivation and rewards hard work.
“We realize that heritage preservation is not going to be the saviour of coastal
Newfoundland and Labrador, but it is one piece of the puzzle, and we want to try
to work with communities to figure out how heritage fits into an overall plan.”
-53-
Lillian Dwyer, Mayor, Tilting, NL
Tilting is a small community on Fogo Island with a significant Irish population and a long and
proud history in the inshore fishery. When the community first became aware of the importance
of their cultural landscape - their stages, stores, traditions and culture - they were at a low point.
A poem by a local poet Pearce Dwyer tells us from where we start to build.
This year, Lillian Dwyer was very proud to be able to respond to Pearce’s poem.
-54-
“Tilting is being presented as having ‘come of age’ but it many ways we have the
cart before the horse. We have a wonderful little community, and we have
managed to do a lot of preservation work, but now we are faced with the
situation that ‘here we are, we’re wonderful, we’ve done all this work’ but at
what point is this going to make us survive, how can we capitalize on all of this?
That is the reality. We need to keep it going. The reality here on Change Islands
is that while there are beautiful stages and stores here, we can’t maintain and
restore them all.”
-55-
“We have to recognize the strength and the special things we have. We can compliment
each other. We have so much heritage wealth, on Change Islands and Fogo. We have to
present ourselves as a package. We have so much to offer. How can we present this to the
world as the wonderful place that it is? We have to develop stronger and larger municipal
governments to represent an area as opposed to a tiny area. On the small Island of Fogo,
we have 4 incorporated towns and then the regional government as well - 5 municipal
governments? There is no way we can continue to survive following that track.”
How did Tilting achieve what it has achieved? Tilting has a long history of losing its young
people. Tilting expatriates have done and continue to do a lot for the town. In 1984, they formed
a group called The Tilting Expatriate’s Association that operates out of St. John’s. These people
have worked closely with the town of Tilting. There is also the Tilting Recreation and Culture
Society – a group formed in the 1980’s. At first they worked towards developing a trail. They
then started to work on the restoration of properties within the town – our stages and stores, the
Dwyer Premises, etc. In 1993, The Tilting Expatriates Association started an annual magazine.
This magazine is an invaluable resource for people looking to do restoration work because it has
the history from the older people who built the town and who experienced life there.
“Locals have begun to recognize their own strengths and the special things they have to
offer. One unique feature is that the Irish heritage preserved through isolation. Also, on
Fogo Island there is one of the four corners of the world - Brimstone Head. Recently,
there has been a book written by Robert Mellin about the community of Tilting entitled
Tilting: House Launching, Slide Hauling. Potato Trenching And Other Tales From a
Newfoundland Village. Sometimes it takes people from away to come here and to show
us what we do have. It is very important to have the community behind it and to have the
community take a really good look at themselves. Identifying, promoting and developing
our differences is also important because we compliment each other and I think there is a
bigger package then and we have more potential for development then.”
Glen Blackwood, Director, Centre for Sustainable Aquatic Resources, Marine Institute, St.
John’s, NL
(Note: This presentation was originally planned for the session on “Ocean Management Vulnerable Coastal and Ocean Resources” on the first day of the workshop.)
The global fisheries are the “last wild round up on the planet,” the “last free-for-all”. The sea
exists as “the final frontier” for humans, and our lack of understanding of the ocean is a major
problem. When you find a concentration of something, one boat goes there, 3 days later there
are 10 boats, then 15, then 20. The Flemish Cap is a perfect example. A couple of boats went
there in 1994 and discovered shrimp and it has been pillaged ever since. There are rising
expectations now from the market and the public when it comes to managing the fisheries.
Historically the markets have wanted a consistent quantity and quality. More recently, the
markets have been demanding greater responsibility and sustainability in the coduct of the
fisheries. Thomas Huxley once stated that “all great sea fisheries are inexhaustible.” There was
no concept of the fishery as a finite industry. In the 1960s and 1970s, fisheries had been
declining worldwide. The late 1970s saw the establishement of the 200-mile limits and national
management systems. However, 25 years later the rising expectations of the markets are not met
and the fisheries management process is changing again. The market has become a major force
in the management of the fisheries. It is dictating where and when people fish. Also, there is the
demand for stewardship councils, eco-labelling, and dolphin friendly tuna. Newfoundland has
-56-
had problems marketing fish.
Industry has become aware of
these problems and is working
with governments and
researchers on trying to find
solutions. The allocation of
coastal resources - which is just
as important as stock rebuilding
- is beyond the control of
communities. George Feltham
in Eastport is doing some
interesting work.
We must ask ourselves how the
resource changes bring about
changes in communities that
have historically depended on
those resources? Communities
may be vulnerable in the face
of these changes, but that is
only part of the problem.
“Will sustainable resources mean sustainable communities? ... NO”
Some resources are still
abundant, and yet
Fish Landings by Species Group
communities are
and , 1989-2000, (tonnes)
declining. The
groundfish have not
tonnes
increased, and the
600,000
spawning
concentrations that are
Shellfish
500,000
out there form a 20
Pelagics
mile long school of fish
Groundfish
400,000
that are very vulnerable
to exploitation.
300,000
Shellfish have
increased, and this is a
200,000
very high-value
fishery. The irony is
100,000
that the landed value of
the fishery is the
0
highest it has been now
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99 00(P)
that we are not fishing
cod. We have been
Not Including Lumpfish Roe or Sea Mammals / P = Preliminary
lucky that crab and
Source: DFA & DFO
shrimp increased in the
absence of cod. It is
imperative that we practice better conservation of the crab and shrimp stocks. For example, 50%
of the crab that are dropped are not surviving, they usually die within a week. If the cod do come
-57-
back, the crab and shrimp will likely go back to historic levels and the value of the fishery will go
down. Currently, there are by-catch problems in the shrimp fishery. Also, people are travelling
further out to fish for shrimp. In Alaska, when the shrimp stock declined, it never re-established
itself. The situation there was the reverse of what has happened here - the flatfish catch
increased. Foreign fishers continue to be a major problem beyond the 200 mile limit on the high
seas over the Grand Banks. Also, the total amount fished has not changed, we have only replaced
foreign capacity with our own capacity. In 1978, the top 15 landing sites in Atlantic Canada were
all in Newfoundland and Labrador. In 1988, there was not one site north of Cape Freel.
Landed Value by Species Group
and , 1989-2000
millions
$700
Shellfish
$600
Pelagics
$500
Groundfish
$400
$300
$200
$100
$0
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
Not Including Lumpfish Roe or Sea Mammals / P = Preliminary
Source: DFA & DFO
T o p Fi v e S p e ci e s
L an d e d Va l u e
2002 (preliminary)
1989
Plaice
$14
Lobster
$18
Lobster
$27
Capelin
$19
Surf Clam
$11
Shrimp
$144
$18
Shrimp
$236
$120
Cod
Crab
-58-
$29
Cod
00(P)
The current scale of management does not encourage stewardship. In terms of allocation of
coastal resources, this is beyond the control of communities, and there are winners and losers.
The future of these communities depends on fisheries management. NAFO has not worked very
well. If stocks are rebuilt, how people will gain depends on the efforts of people in the coastal
communities around the province. There needs to be a change – we must be proactive instead of
reactive.
POLICY FOR SUSTAINABLE RURAL LIVELIHOODS
Mildred Brown, Policy Analyst, Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, St. John’s, NL
Heather MacLellan, Assistant Deputy Minister, Culture and Heritage, Department of Tourism,
Culture and Recreation, Newfoundland and Labrador
Herb Bret, Vice President, Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Municipalities, St. John’s,
NL
John Wickham, Director, Regional Economic Development, Department of Industry, Trade and
Rural Development, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John’s, NL
Mildred Brown, Policy Analyst, Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA),
St. John’s, NL
“Sometimes policy is remote and it can seem like only words. Policy development is like
plucking something out of the air and trying to turn it into something tangible.”
“I hope that you will appreciate that when you dump on organizations like ACOA for not
helping you out, it is not because there are not a lot of people in the organization who
have their hearts in the right place and would do everything they could to help you. It is
that it is the nature of these bureaucratic beasts that things do not always work smoothly,
try as we might. But what I will go through with you today I hope shows you that we are
trying our very best to do the right thing, and be inclusive…”
A lot of what is done in policy is foundational to programs. It is to get the projects funded on the
ground, to help promote economic development in remote, rural communities. Policy is a basis
for support programs. Lately, ACOA has been doing a lot of foundational work – such as
determining the rational for action, and addressing key questions such as “what is sustainable
livelihood?” This is part of what is needed for a larger government plan of what to do.
The shift over time has been from individual income support to private sector support to
governmental sectoral priorities and, finally, community empowerment. These shifts have been
evident in the various federal responses to the fisheries closures over the years. In terms of
economic development, since 1992 ACOA has had a number of different focuses. Prior to 1992
there was the Fisheries Adjustment Program - a federal economic development program focussed
on the private sector. Following the 1992 Moratorium there was the Northern Cod Adjustment
and Recovery Program and The Atlantic Groundfish Strategy. These focussed on individuals and
had a community development component. After that, we moved into the Economic Renewal
Agreement, a federal-provincial agreement targeted by and large at government-identified
sectoral opportunities particularly in tourism, agriculture and the knowledge-based economy.
Then there was the Strategic Regional Diversification Agreement (SRDA) which provided the
funding for the start-up of the Regional Economic Development Boards. The Fisheries
Restructuring Adjustment and Measures - Economic Development (FRAM-ED) came out around
the same time. Both represented federal responses to more recent fisheries closures and were
targeted at community-identified opportunities. What is most relevant right now is the latest
closure and the latest response in-progress. When the latest fisheries closure was announced in
-59-
April, the government of Canada made a few commitments through ACOA. One of them was
called Cod-SCIF (Strategic Community Investment Fund) which is a short-term, make-work
response to these cod closures. ACOA is generally focussed on the long-term, and this is only the
first step towards a longer-term solution.
The approach to developing a long-term response was to involve stakeholders in the designing of
the program. The hope is that this will ensure a sustainable solution focussed on economic
development. The stakeholder engagement process is a contribution to developing the long-term
response. A multi-stakeholder perspective is being sought. This is more than only a consultation
process in that ACOA would like to get together and actually do things with stakeholders.
Perhaps there will be a marriage after the engagement. All summer ACOA has been gathering
suggestions from communities, REDBs, the Newfoundland and Labrador federation of
municipalities, industry, unions (FFAW), other federal departments, provincial government and
education and research institutions. 70 communities have been involved in the consultation
process. The engagement with the provincial government has taken a while, as intergovernmental business can get more complicated. In August, three federal Ministers met with the
Premier and three provincial Ministers and they all agreed that they would look at a long-term
adjustment response in terms of managing the fisheries.
So far, they have heard many good ideas during the consultation process. Some are part and
parcel of a bigger idea (packaging ideas together), some are far-fetched, others very feasible and
innovative. There will be an interim report on the results of the consulation process which will
express the kinds of ideas they have been receiving.
There have been three main clusters of ideas. First, regional or zonal clusters of opportunities
focussing on affected areas. Second, there are sectoral clusters of opportunities, for example,
focussing on tourism, aquaculture, forestry, and manufacturing. There are also others related to
mining, IT, and KBE. Third, there are thematic clusters of ideas such as diversification away
from the fishery, needing capital investment, capacity-building, and innovation.
It is important to stay goal-oriented, in this case the goal being sustainable rural livelihood. The
plan is to develop a framework for further analysis and to identify strategic opportunities based
on the following:
• Priorities: What are the priorities for this particular region? REDBs are doing a lot of
work here. What are the priorities for developing the industry? For example, there has
been a lot of work determining what is and is not feasible in terms of aquaculture. What
are the priorities for the levels of government involved?
• Pillars: Things will be useful for long-term strategic adjustment if they:
Capitalize on existing assets and previous investments - that is, if they build on
existing strengths;
Cultivate innovation and economic diversity;
Create long-term social capital;
Catalyze community, industry and government partnerships.
• Programs: We already have tools - there are also programs available. For example, at
ACOA alone we have the Business Development Program, the Atlantic Innovations
Fund, and the Strategic Community Investment Fund.
• Partners: We hope to gather together partners that can bring other assets to the table Communities, REDBs, industry associations, provincial and federal governments.
-60-
Heather MacLellan, Assistant Deputy Minister, Culture and Heritage, Department of
Tourism, Culture and Recreation, Newfoundland and Labrador
The Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation is a big department with a budget of
approximately $35 million annually. They are in charge of a variety of programs including
recreation (for example, the Winter Games), tourism and culture. In terms of tourism, a big focus
of the department is the marketing of Newfoundland and Labrador outside the island. They are
not involved with private sector or community-based tourism facilities; this is the responsibility
of ACOA. Culture is the biggest division in the department. Other programs include wildlife
management – looking after the health of wildlife in the province and licensing for big game.
They also deal with land claims agreements with Aboriginal people in the province.
“I have seen such tremendous growth in the last 10 years in the tourism sector, in the
cultural sector, and it is due to the accomplishments of hard work and the ability of
people to adapt to a new and complex environment. The biggest change I have seen is
that we have gone from a province that has had one industry and we have moved into a
multi-industry jurisdiction. Even within tourism and culture, if you take all the markets
we have, each one of them is its own industry - you have to target differently, you market
to it differently, you need a different product. And in culture, we just don’t just have
culture, we have culture and cultural industry - the music industry is very different from
the film industry which is very different from the literary and publishing industry. We are
having to adapt as a province and in regions to whole new industries. We are in the
early stages.”
“There is no such thing as an accidental tourist in Newfoundland and Labrador. So the
growth that has been created since 1993 was well-planned, and required strategic
investment, and we have accomplished every goal that was set 10 years ago. We are now
at the stage of setting new and different goals.”
Tourism is critical for this province. In 1992, when the cod fishery closed, tourism was targeted
as a major industry for growth. In 1993, we were creating the industry - most of the activity was
provincial and federal. At the community, regional and business level, there were very few
people participating in this industry. So the strategy was to develop those products that could get
us the best international appeal. There were key decisions made about where those investments
were to go. We looked at generators, and now it is important to look at satisfiers - which are
those regions that may not draw internationally but are part of the experience while people are
here in the province or as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians drive around their own province.
The industry has grown to $600 million dollars worth of activity annually - half of this coming
from non-residents. The industry creates 25,000 jobs annually. It is the third largest industry in
the province, having doubled since 1993. There has been a serious cooperative investment by
both levels of government. It has been a tremendous accomplishment. It is a seasonal industry
and very dependent on sustaining significant marine, natural, cultural and human resources.
Integrated and sustainable management programs are necessary as we move forward.
Since 1996, there has been a 35% increase in visitation. The province is leading the country in
growth in tourism. This year has been the first year in ten years that there has not been growth.
This is attributable to external factors, such as SARS, the war in Iraq, and the economy. Air
Canada and access is an issue we are constantly monitoring. We may need to work more with the
private sector, for example, more of our own airlines and our own business to places outside of
Newfoundland and Europe directly.
-61-
Tourism highlights include the development of significant national and international markets.
We have developed relationships at the tradeshows with a variety of people. The province was
successful in launching a world-class, award-winning marketing campaign. The province has
also been successful in developing tourism resources here in the province. Special celebrations,
such as Cabot 500 and the Vikings, were marketing campaigns to raise awareness in international
markets and they have generated much of this success.
The key markets in Canada include Ontario and the Maritimes, and the New England States in the
U.S. Outdoor and cultural adventure tourism comes mostly from North America and Europe. In
Europe, Germany, Holland and England are being targeted. Educational travel is growing and
there are many different initiatives underway particularly with the national parks and national
historic sites as well as with The Rooms, the new provincial cultural facility. Hunting and fishing
continues to be very important, with $30 million a year spent by people who come in to hunt
wildlife, particularly from the U.S. The bus tour and convention tourism caters to the North
American market. The cruise ship industry is growing and we are dealing with issues of
infrastructure. The winter tourism options are being developed - the winter ski and snowmobile
expeditions in the Western regions are very important.
Lately, the province has been successful in raising our profile through the arts - for example, by
hosting the Juno Awards and through the films Random Passage and The Shipping News. We
have worked in collaboration with the music industry to profile Newfoundland and Labrador
artists. Forming Partnerships has been the key to this success. A variety of partnership initiatives
are available at the regional and community level.
Investment products include:
• People
• Icebergs
• Whales
• Seabirds
• Caribou and other wildlife
• Adventure
• Arts (traditional and contemporary)/culture
• Architecture and landscape
• History, sites, archaeology and museums
• World Heritage Sites (these are important generators.
• National/provincial/community parks and historic sites
Future considerations at the national and provincial level:
• We are in the early stages.
• Maximizing our world – nationally, provincially and regionally. Significant human,
culture, marine and natural heritage.
• Two new national parks (Torngats and Mealey Mountains).
• Feasibility for national marine parks.
• World Heritage designation submissions (3 new submissions).
• Generators and satisfiers – partner with generators.
• Operational support and grants for municipalities, associations.
• Managing quality for complex integrated experience.
• Focus on air and ferry access.
• Policies and legislation.
• Support integrated professional planning, partnerships and packaging.
Future considerations at the community level:
-62-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Establishment of community goals and plans: vision and 10-year goals.
Seasonality and new structures/organizations to develop tourism.
Strong leadership and working together – the Viking Accord.
Municipalities and communities to engage in greater resources protection and
management to sustain the resources upon which their tourism depends (scenic coastlines
and vistas, important habitat, geological and fossil features, wooden boats, vernacular
architecture, flakes, cellars, fences, horses, stores, archival, artefacts, all themes).
Sustainable development of resource attractions.
Municipal planning act delegation of authority.
Tourism services – food and accommodation – Canada Select.
Water and sewer.
Access for coastal communities to professionals and to regional tourism association
activities and committees.
Visitor centres at entrance point.
Research and guidebooks.
Education for residents and youth.
Access.
Promotional packaging and partnerships.
Cultural development is also in its early stages, and it is growing. We have lots to offer including
a diversity of ancient and contemporary peoples (nine distinct ancient Aboriginal cultures, three
remaining contemporary Aboriginal cultures, six early primary European cultures). The province
is renowned for archaeological treasures, a rich history, and a significant arts community.
Cultural policy should focus on the following:
• Artists
• Arts professionals
• Heritage professionals
• Volunteers
• Aboriginal and European-based tradition bearers.
• Industries, provincially-owned arts and heritage crown corporations, programs,
organizations and enterprises.
• Strengthening provincial programs (Strategic Plan – sustainable tourism, The Rooms,
CEDP - fisheries heritage, research, presentation and conservation, professional
development).
Best practices include:
• Viking Accord
• Bonavista Townscape Project
• Cuslett
• Dr. Gunn Project
• Fisheries Heritage Project
• Elderhostel and educational learning
• Norway’s fishing stores
• Eco-museums
Some ideas for Change Islands:
• There is a need to define one’s position in the region - one’s uniqueness. Change Islands
could build on its unique character as the “Squid-jiggin’ Grounds.” The community
could build on the history of the squid fishery.
• Emphasis could be placed on the geological uniqueness of the area.
-63-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Emphasis could also be placed on the “Islands Experience” and the ocean frontage.
Many people are coming in and buying ocean frontage. The value of this property will
be very important in the future.
Hiking and other outdoor adventure activities (bird-watching, boating, kayaking) need to
be expanded.
There is a critical need to work with adjacent communities - like Twillingate and Fogo and to find linkages with these communities. For example, many tourists visit
Twillingate to view the icebergs, and Change Islands is also part of this “Iceberg Alley”.
These connections could be maximized, while at the same time, emphasizing the
uniqueness of Change Islands.
Decide what element of the market to go after. For example, do you want to attract the
resident market or the international market?
Mentorship is important. The work that is being done by Stages and Stores is wonderful,
and it is an example of how regions have grown in our past. Other mentors will be
important.
More workshops like this would be desirable - to bring back cultural resource specialists,
tourism specialists and heritage specialists to help with planning.
Heritage co-ordinator/facilitator. People can be brought in from the Strategic Social Plan,
from the zonal board, from HRDC, to put the focus on some of the things that need to be
done.
The first thing to do is to take advantage of opportunities including the ACOA programs.
Write up a proposal for a project stating what you want done.
There is a need to articulate short and long-term goals - these should be high-level goals.
It is important to place the right value on your product.
Projects:
o Inventory of natural, cultural, marine, historic, geological, etc, resources.
o Guide-book to give visitors when they come so they can orient themselves.
o Conservation and protection.
o Strategies around expanding trails, services, etc.
Herb Bret, Vice President, Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Municipalities, St.
John’s, NL
“I believe that attitude is 80% of what life is all about. The best 10 two-letter words I
ever heard in my life are: ‘If it is to be, it is up to me.’ Some people in Newfoundland
say, ‘If it is to be, it is up to we.’ There is no saviour that is going to save us. Our
challenge is to find a way to do what we want to. It all goes back to attitude. It’s our
attitude and not our aptitude that will determine our altitude. We can do anything we
want to do, we just have to figure out our attitude and how we are going to do it.”
The Federation of Municipalities represents 289 incorporated municipalities across the province.
Members of the Federation can benefit from several programs including free legal referral
services. One particular challenge facing the Federation of Municipalities is to try to get people
to work more with each other. We have a certain attitude towards the different levels of
government and the bureaucrats, and vice versa. This is a hindrance.
During the year, the Federation tries to represent all their members in discussions with both levels
of government. Municipal governments can play a critical role, but our municipalities are weak
because we have 600 municipalities in total, with several unincorporated areas. If we can start
working to get all these areas organized, we can be a lot more successful. We have had a meeting
with the federal minister and have some funding in place now, and a project in place called
-64-
LADR (Local Action for Developing Regions). We recognize the need to bring people together,
and with this funding, we will bring people together at round-table discussions (zone boards,
municipal reps, etc) and sit down and do some strategic planning. It is important to start
developing some actions to to address the problems.
With the co-operation of the provincial government, we have set up the CCRC (Co-operative
Community Resource Centre). We are going to hire a person there and start to work on getting
interested regions of the province together. We have some good examples of that – Melrose, Port
Union and Catalina are coming together as a group when three years ago they would not even talk
to each other. They have realised that, by working together, they can have a few dollars to do
something and limit duplications.
John Wickham, Director, Regional Economic Development, Department of Industry, Trade
and Rural Development, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John’s, NL
“The strongest resource that we have is our people and we should never forget
that. The attitudes and the people themselves is the resource we have got to
develop and work on the most.”
The Department of Industry Trade and Rural Development (DITRD) offers several community
development initiatives. One example is the Community Capacity-Building Program, which is a
tool for small communities to get together to do some planning. Another example is the Business
Retention and Expansion Program which is offered in conjunction with the Regional Economic
Development Boards (REDBs) to help small businesses identify any problems before they get out
of hand.
Community economic development, from the point of view of the DITRD is citizen-led
development dedicated to improving lifestyles though wealth distribution, poverty reduction and
job creation. Community economic development also provides infrastructure in support of
business development.
Early Development Associations were established for a number of reasons, and we are seeing
organizations being created for some of those same reasons now. Some of the reasons for the
formation of the early Regional Development Associations included the resettlement program, the
need to provide access to employment, the need to address the problem of out-migration, and a
lack of attention to fishery development which together were making rural communities in the
province vulnerable. These early organizations were intended to promote a commitment to
traditional lifestyle.
In the early 1990s, the collapse of the groundfishery created a community crisis. There was a
need to refocus regional development efforts. Government was downsizing, there was less
money and a need for greater accountability. As a consequence of these changes, we have a new
approach that began with the creation of regional economic development boards. There are
currently 20 REDBs in the province. The history of the process included:
• The release in 1992 of a government report entitled Change and Challenge - a strategic
planning document.
• In 1993, the Newfoundland and Labrador Rural Development Council requested a study
of regional economic development.
• In 1994, the Task Force on Community Economic Development travelled across the
province. The objective of this Task Force was to review and make recommendations
-65-
•
regarding the organizational structures of economic development and related programs
and services and how they are used.
In 1995 the government approved the creation of regional economic development boards
based on the report of the Task Force entitled Community Matters. First, provisional
boards would be formed. These would be made up of major stakeholders in the zones
responsible for:
o Identifying stakeholders for the REDBs.
o Developing formulae for their representation.
o Developing bylaws and ensuring Incorporation.
o Finalizing boundaries and providing a name.
The five core functions of the REDBs include the following:
1. Provide leadership in the development and implementation of a strategic plan for the
zone which involves:
o Initiating partnerships. Partnerships are key to the whole planning process. They
are better than they were, but they need to get even better.
o Marketing and promoting the zone and the strategic economic plan (SEP).
o Ensure the SEP is current and up-to-date.
o Ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the impact of the SEP implementation
relative to the larger zonal economy.
2. Coordinate business development support which involves:
o Assisting businesses, development groups and entrepreneurs to identify funding
sources, investment opportunities and local and global investment potential. The
REDBs have taken a lead role in investment prospecting in this province. We
have several examples of REDBs going down and taking businesses back with
them, which has been very helpful to the provincial economy.
3. Support organizations and communities within the zone which involves:
o Accessing resources and expertise in support of stakeholders.
o Promoting community organizational capacity building.
o Promoting leadership and skills development.
o Empowering sub-zonal agencies. Boards must work in conjunction with local
agencies - municipal governments for example. They must not be set apart as a
different group. So far they are doing a good job in this regard.
4. Coordinate social and economic initiatives related to economic development which
means ensuring the following:
o That the SEP is successfully implemented.
o That development is consistent with the goals and objectives of the SEP.
o That social and economic objectives are integrated.
5. Promote public participation and community education means ensuring the following:
o The participation of all sectors of the community including youth, women and
other minorities and groups that are feeling disenfranchised.
o Access to information and skills for community decision-making.
o Citizens’ responsibility for becoming functional in decision-making, the
development process and government operations. This is a complicated process
when dealing with government - we have seen examples above in which people
had to go to government several times before receiving approval for a project, but
the other side of the story is illustrated by the words of an economic development
officer in government who said that “the approval process starts when I say no.”
This illustrates the fact that community is not the only one confused about the
decision-making process.
-66-
o
Board empowerment through community support. They cannot do it on their
own, and they must be accountable to the communities.
The REDBs have been working closely with the Strategic Social Plan (SSP) in each area, which
play an important role in the process. This collaboration further illustrates the need to integrate
social and economic development.
One of the key functions of the REDB process is performance contracts. These are renewed
annually, although they are multi-year contracts. The performance contacts are:
• Agreements to undertake mutually agreeable objectives.
• Mechanisms for providing core finding.
• A means to define the relationship between government and REDBs.
• Developmental versus regulatory.
• A means to identify an accountability framework.
The process of establishing the REDBs took place in 2 phases. Phase One included the hiring of
expertise to assist with the development of the SEP and policy manuals, as well as to monitor and
provide input on economic development proposals which for the most part were going to costshared arrangements at the time. Phase Two involved a five-year framework agreement based on
the five core functions of the REDB. Phase Two also provided for an annual renewal of the
budget, work plan and monitoring and evaluation scheme as well as procedures for dispute
resolution, reporting and other administrative details. The Boards are very accountable for the
money they get, and they do a very good job with very limited resources.
The issues facing the REDBs include the following:
• Planning
• Mechanisms for governance of the board.
• Resources
• Capacity-building
• Pan-provincial issues.
• Communication - they need to take credit for the work that they do.
• Government partnerships - is government committed to this process?
Actions that are being jointly undertaken to address these issues include:
• Integrated workplans. The boards cannot do a plan without consulting with the
communities. The plans have to be integrated with the community and with various
levels of governance. The community and the boards have to be pro-active in this
respect.
• Monitoring and evaluation programs are underway.
• Partnerships with ACOA, LMDA
• Business retention and expansion
• Capacity-building program
• Newfoundland and Labrador Regional Economic Development Association (NLREDA)
formed to tackle pan-provincial issues
• Communications strategy being developed.
• Protocol committee – between REDB, provincial government and ACOA is a response to
the partnership requirements.
-67-
Discussion and Questions Following Policy for Sustainable Rural Livelihoods
Ray Andrews (Fisheries Products International [FPI]): The following two issues are very
important:
1. It is very important to get a full view of the industry. For example, while there is little
cod here, FPI is buying product from Russia and Alaska, shipping it to China for
processing, and then bringing it back to Massachusetts and the Burin Peninsula where we
value-add and ship to the retail sector in North America. In the context of Change
Islands, and the province, and the country, it is nice sometimes to remember the global
picture.
2. In 2002, FPI was squashed because they wanted to modernize the groundfish industry and there is not even supposed to be any! There is one stock in Newfoundland and
Labrador that has almost 30 million pounds of groundfish - yellow-tailed flounder coming to the company each year. When they tried to modernize, they tried to do it in
isolation. This was a mistake. When they turned it around and did what people here at
the conference are talking about, the opposite was the result. They modernized at a cost
of $50 million in private investment, this year alone. At the beginning, they didn’t work
in conjunction with other interest groups. Once they did begin to work together as a
group - which included visits to China, Iceland, Norway and Denmark with the union and
employees who came back and together helped to develop a plan - believe it or not;
Mary’s Town, Harbour Breton and Fortune are now the most modern groundfish
processing plants probably in the world. Now, at least three or more rural communities
in Newfoundland and Labrador have a future because of modernization. We had two
choices: We could go the Chinese route, which was not an option because you get 36
days of work there for the price of one here, and we could not compete with that. The
other option was to follow the European modern model which is the high-tech route. We
chose the latter. Maybe this is only the start for Change Islands and some other regional
and local areas, but working together will at least give us a better base to proceed from
instead of trying to do things in isolation.
Jerry Dick (Association of Heritage Industries): There will be a conference in St. John’s
October 3-5th entitled “Sustaining Heritage and Communities.” Find out more at ahi@nfld.net.
Comment: In the consultation process (in ACOA, or DITRD, etc.) it is important not to forget
the people who have been successful and those organizations that ACOA has helped in the past
that have the capacity to do things and continue to do things; organizations like the REDBs, the
Federation of Municipalities, and so on. It is important to also consult with those who have
succeeded in accomplishing things in rural Newfoundland and continue to accomplish things.
You might think that if you go to the REDB you will automatically have access to successful
people and will have their input, but that is not necessarily always the case.
Comment: There is a problem with by-catch on the boats dragging for shrimp - they also catch
small turbot and redfish and throw them back in the oceans. There are also lots of crabs coming
up with legs missing due to shrimping vessels dragging over crab fishing grounds. Is the same
thing happening with crab that happened with cod?
Glen Blackwood (Marine Institute): There are red flags being raised in the crab fishery right
now. The shrimp by-catch issue is being addressed. We are working on fisheries technology and
fisheries development, in particular on the problem of by-catch. One of the other problems we
have identified in the shrimp fishery is the question of clearing of the bottom and the damage to
crabs. In central Baie Verte, there has been more shrimp traffic and 60% of the crabs caught have
-68-
had missing legs. The mortality rate of soft-shelled crab is probably as high as 90%. In terms of
the crab fishery being in trouble like the cod fishery, one safeguard would be to not harvest
female crabs. Also under development are crab pots that will target 4-inch crab.
LESSONS FROM CHANGE ISLANDS WORKSHOP
The knowledge acquired at this workshop will be invaluable. Several main themes were
constantly revisited throughout the workshop. These can be identified as lessons to assist us in
the creation of a more feasible plan of action for Newfoundland and Labrador’s vulnerable
coastal communities. Some of the recurring themes and lessons were as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
We must admit that the northern cod fishery might be gone and begin to focus on the
future, not dwell on the past.
The starting point must be the communities themselves. They must be proactive and not
merely wait for government to reach out to them. The communities must initiate an
action plan and they must receive assistance from both levels of government.
We need strong community leadership. Our people are our best resource and we must
develop and utilize this resource
We must coordinate our efforts with adjacent and similar communities as well as with
regions experiencing similar problems. There must be a coordination of efforts on a
larger scale. This needs to be a team effort.
We must forge partnerships with all levels of organization. We need cooperation between
community groups, university organizations and different levels of government
We must change our self-defeatist attitude. We must stimulate positive thinking in order
to have positive results.
We must identify our strengths and weaknesses. We must perform a strength assessment.
We need to identify our niche and work to protect it and use it to help the province’s rural
communities. We must learn to appreciate those things around us which we may have
taken for granted in the past.
Communities must assert their independence while working with government to gain
back some level of control over natural resources. We require a new governance structure
in which these communities have a stronger voice in the management process.
We must work together to preserve the culture of outport Newfoundland or it will be lost
forever. Our vibrant history and culture is very important and we must protect it and
celebrate it.
We must identify what options are available to us (e.g.; government programs).
We need to work together to develop a strategic action pan for the future that is
appropriate for these communities
We must foster innovation and creativity. Our people have always had a great inspired
resourcefulness. Now is the time to use it.
We need to harness the spirit of our people to persevere and use this enthusiastic
community spirit constructively to make real change.
We cannot be afraid of change.
We must take an internationally comparative approach in order to learn from areas of the
world that are experiencing similar problems.
We must identify our mistakes and learn from them to work towards the future.
The time for decisive action is now.
We need to work towards enhanced social inclusion. It is important to involve youth in
social and economic development. We also need to listen to the voices of women and
Aboriginal people in the province.
-69-
•
•
•
•
•
We need to emphasize sustainability in our use of natural resources. We cannot let what
happened to the cod fishery happen to the crab fishery. We must understand the role we
play in the ecosystem.
We must be aware and understand global economic trends.
Government policies need to be more sensitive to rural areas.
Unemployment is a critical issue that needs to be addressed.
We need to understand the role of politics. Politically-motivated decisions are critical.
CONCLUSION
Newfoundland and Labrador is currently in a precarious position. We live in one of the most
resource rich areas of the world, yet we lack control over those resources. The cod fishery is
closed, but this does not have to be the end of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. We must see
this as an opportunity. This is our chance to diversify and explore other avenues to sustain the
rural communities in our province. These areas have much to offer. This coastal planning
workshop was a major step towards a plan of action that may lead to a more viable future for
these vulnerable communities.
The Change Islands workshop was an unqualified success. The workshop featured a great variety
of presentations and allowed for intensive dialogue between various stakeholders and interested
parties. It provided an opportunity for individuals representing a range of interests communities, unions, industry, government, academia - to share information and collectively
devise possible solutions. The venue gave participants an opportunity to speak with local people
and to get a taste of life in rural communities. This experience offers invaluable insight into the
challenges that are faced on a daily basis by people living in these communities. It also presented
an opportunity for participants to discover the great potential that exists in these small
communities.
We must use the lessons learned at this workshop to move forward and create a strategic plan of
action. The most important lesson is that the time for action is now. The most common concern
expressed at the workshop is that all of these lessons were discussed but will not result in
concrete action. A legitimate fear is that all of these great ideas will be forgotten once the
workshop is over. This seems to be a common complaint of many people involved in coastal
communities and ocean management. The main message we must take away from this workshop
is that we must employ all of these lessons in working towards action, and it is up to the
community to take the initiative and take charge. We cannot afford to merely be satisfied with an
identification of the weaknesses and strengths of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Now we
must strive for the implementation of the action plan that is based on all of these lessons. Only
with such a strong commitment to action and change can these vulnerable communities of the
province emerge with a more productive and self-sustaining economy that can contribute to their
revitalization and renewal.
-70-