Latest news with #elverfishery
CBC
21-05-2025
- Politics
- CBC
Sipekne'katik First Nation fishers say treaty elver fishery is 'a peaceful thing'
While the 2025 commercial elver season is underway in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, Mi'kmaw fishers from Sipekne'katik First Nation in Nova Scotia are exercising their treaty rights through a protest fishery. In 2025, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) re-allocated 50 per cent of the harvesting quota for baby eels, or elvers, from commercial harvesters to First Nations in the two provinces but some First Nations communities are not participating under that regulatory framework. Sipekne'katik, Millbrook First Nation and Membertou First Nation are three Mi'kmaw communities in Nova Scotia operating under their own management plans instead of accepting DFO's plan. The protest fishery is a form of resistance, where Mi'kmaw fishers are harvesting under their own management plans rather than those imposed by the federal government, in an effort to affirm treaty rights. The elver fishery on the East Coast is booming due to its low-barrier entry and surging market prices in recent years. The "truckhouse clause" in the Peace and Friendship treaties of 1760 and 1761 affirmed the right of Mi'kmaq, Wolastoqiyik, and Peskotomuhkati to trade goods — including fish, furs and wildlife — at designated truckhouses. In 1999 the Supreme Court affirmed this right, and interpreted it in modern-day terms to say beneficiaries of these treaties have the right to sell these goods to earn a "moderate livelihood." Tabitha Morrison, a Mi'kmaw treaty fisher from Sipekne'katik First Nation, says when fishers from her community attempt to make a moderate livelihood fishing elvers, they are being harassed by DFO. "Threatening, intimidation, arriving in unmarked vehicles, not having business cards, not saying their badge number," said Morrison. "It's another form of institutionalizing our people and it is triggering as a nation." She said when DFO confiscates equipment it isn't being returned, which can make it difficult for fishers who see the fishery as a path to financial independence. "There are socio-economic gaps on reserve, so these are people on social assistance trying to do better and then they're being held back," she said. Harvesting in groups for safety There's been tensions between First Nations and non-Indigenous fishers over the perceived impact of a treaty rights-based fishery on commercial fishing, with notable conflicts arising in Esgenoopetitj in New Brunswick in 2000 and more recently in Sipekne'katik in 2020 over lobster. Amy Maloney, a Mi'kmaw treaty fisher who harvests alongside Morrison, said she sees stories in the media and hears other fishermen talk about her community and feels it is being painted as violent and disorderly. "It's a peaceful thing, it's not violent," said Maloney of the treaty fishery. "We want to do things without violence. We want to teach our kids that you don't have to be violent to exercise your rights. You can do this peacefully." She said the community is taking extra steps to stay safe this year by harvesting in groups and remaining vigilant. "We have to protect each other cause we don't have guns out there and stuff to protect us... and we shouldn't have that because fishing is a peaceful thing," she said. Morrison said fishers from her community head out beyond her community to harvest elvers because the Mi'kmaq traditionally moved based on the seasonal availability of food source. "We're gonna travel to fish, we're gonna travel to hunt," Morrison said. "That's what we have done for years." Morrison said her community's fishing plan is not unlimited, and their data is being tracked and managed by their community's fisheries management. They said they don't feel divided from other Mi'kmaw communities based on their choices to fish or not fish elvers, or to fish them under DFO's quotas. "The people that are here to treaty fish, let them treaty fish," Morrison added. Morrison said her community will continue to fight for their rights protected under the Constitution. "We're not all wrong and we're not all right. We're doing the best of what we know and I don't think the answer is pointing the finger and blaming," said Morrison. Fishery officers patrolling DFO regulates the commercial elver fishery with a maximum allowable catch of 9,960 kilograms. New regulations in March require anyone in possession of elvers — not only fishing them but storing, transporting, or exporting them, to be licensed. In a statement, DFO said "Fishery officers are patrolling rivers, inspecting holding facilities and export points, and working with our law enforcement partners, to enforce the Fisheries Act." "Fishery officers have a range of compliance measures that they can use depending on the particular situation. Any compliance measures taken will be based on numerous factors, including the severity of the offence, and the context in which it was committed." DFO added that if anyone believes "their interaction with a fishery officer was improper or if they believe that a fishery officer behaved in a less than professional manner, this should be reported to their local Conservation and Protection detachment."
CBC
20-05-2025
- Politics
- CBC
How Mi'kmaw communities are moving toward self-regulation in commercial elver fishery
As eight Mi'kmaw communities co-ordinate a federally recognized elver fishing plan, and others fish independently, tensions have grown over regulatory confusion and enforcement by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). Here's what you need to now about the complex regulatory landscape surrounding the Mi'kmaw elver fishery. First, a brief look back to the Marshall decision. In 1993, Donald Marshall Jr., a Mi'kmaw man from Membertou First Nation in Nova Scotia, was arrested and charged for fishing and selling eels in Pomquet Harbour, near Antigonish, N.S. Marshall was supported by Mi'kmaw leaders, and believed he was exercising a right guaranteed by the 1760/61 Peace and Friendship treaties, affirming Mi'kmaw rights to trade and commerce. His case went to the Supreme Court and resulted in a landmark decision in 1999 that affirmed the Mi'kmaw right to hunt, fish and gather in the pursuit of a "moderate livelihood." The decision also implicated the Wolastoqiyik and the Peskotomuhkati. A second decision, Marshall II, clarified that the treaty right could only be infringed upon when justified for conservation reasons or other grounds, and Indigenous people must be consulted about any limitation of their treaty rights. Mi'kmaw communities began to assert their treaty right, while the federal government launched new initiatives aimed at managing what courts now recognized as a constitutionally protected right for First Nations in Atlantic Canada. The Marshall decisions have resulted in tensions between First Nations and non-Indigenous fishers over the perceived impact of a treaty rights-based fishery on commercial fishing, with notable conflicts arising in Esgenoopetitj in New Brunswick in 2000 and more recently in Sipekne'katik in Nova Scotia. Elver fishery The Maritime elver fishery began as a small experimental fishery in 1989 with just a handful of licence holders. Over the past two decades, the baby eel fishery's growth in Canada has been explosive. The demand, particularly in Asia, combined with declining eel populations worldwide has driven prices as high as $5,000 per kilogram, making elvers one of Canada's most valuable fish. Harvested primarily in rivers and estuaries in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, the tiny eels are caught, shipped live to Asia and raised to adulthood in captivity. In 2019, a number of Mi'kmaw fishers in Nova Scotia entered the elver fishery independently, citing their treaty right to earn a moderate livelihood. That same year, three Nova Scotia Mi'kmaw communities — Annapolis Valley First Nation, Bear River First Nation and Wasoqopa'q First Nation — drafted their own joint elver fishing plans, outside of the regulations of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. In late 2024, eight Mi'kmaw communities develop a unified elver management strategy grounded in Mi'kmaw principles of self-determination, united through the Kwilmu'kw Maw-klusuaqn Negotiations Office (KMK), a group that negotiates on behalf of the Nova Scotia Mi'kmaw chiefs. Half of 2025 quota goes to First Nations fishers KMK was able to negotiate with Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) for 50 per cent of the overall elver quota for First Nations fishers in the 2025 season — of which the group received almost 20 per cent. The KMK communities fish under their Netukulimk Treaty Right Protected (TRP) elver fishery management plan, which the group says prioritizes conservation and Mi'kmaw self-determination over federal regulation. Justin Martin, KMK's fisheries manager and a member of Millbrook First Nation, said their plan isn't about putting restrictions on moderate livelihood fishing rights, but co-ordinating the implementation of rights in a justifiable conservation-based way. "This TRP fishery is authorized by those eight First Nations and [we're] just a delegate to support that and manage that," said Martin. "We did extensive community engagement, including a survey of over 600 Mi'kmaw individuals, to not only understand their aspirations around livelihood-specific fishing activity, but also their aspirations and and thoughts on the elver fishery." Martin said creating a low-barrier, night-time fishery conducted on multiple rivers can present challenges, but he's hopeful to see the First Nations fishery continue to develop in the coming years. At the same time, three Nova Scotia Mi'kmaw communities — Sipekne'katik First Nation, Millbrook First Nation and Membertou First Nation — have chosen to assert their treaty rights independently. These communities developed their own fishing plans prior to DFO's quota offers and continue to harvest elvers without the federal authorization, backed only by their moderate livelihood fishing rights. Alden Paul, a TRP plan harvester from Eskasoni First Nation, said he sees much in common with the independent fishers despite their different approaches in 2025. "I'm an elver fisherman who's part of an actual plan approved by DFO; I don't feel threatened by a treaty fisher who doesn't have the same plan fishing next to me," said Paul. "Yeah, it might be governed in different ways, but we all have a right to it and we're all there to provide for our families, whether you're part of the TRP or you're a treaty fisher." Paul said he feels fishing through the quotas and regulations is better in terms of safety and minimizing harassment from DFO but worries that working with the federal fisheries department is setting up fishers for failure. Differences between plans cause confusion At the beginning of April, KMK raised concerns in a letter to DFO, about misinformation allegedly being shared by Conservation and Protection Officers (C&P). Issues cited included confusion on fishing area designations and proper net usage, two main distinctions between the DFO and TRP management plans. "We were under the assumption that DFO would respect our constitutionally protected rights throughout this process," said the letter. "C&P's misinformation undermines our conservation efforts and contradicts our plans." The organization also worried misinformation from enforcement officers would be used to justify punitive actions against individual harvesters asserting their treaty rights. DFO said any licence holder or authorized group, like KMK, can set additional parameters for harvesting. "It is the responsibility of the licence holder or authorized group to ensure that their designated harvesters are following their plan," a statement from the department said.
