The Canadian government is looking at both long-term and short-term solutions to the problem overfishing by foreign vessels on the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap.
The long-term solution is in the hands of Jacob Verhoef, Director of the Atlantic Division of the Geological Survey of Canada. He and his team are in the process of preparing maps and documentation to justify the extension of Atlantic Canada’s offshore boundary – possibly as far as 300 to 350 miles offshore.
“That will certainly cover the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap,” Verhoef says. His work, begun 10 years ago and also covering the Arctic and Pacific coasts, will constitute Canada’s claim before the United Nations Law of the Sea – and it will take years to complete. He believes that geologic studies of Canada’s coast will support the extension claim.
Verhoef notes that Ottawa has yet to ratify the Law of the Sea convention, “largely because of conservation concerns,” but that will change when the European Union ratifies the United Nations Fish Agreement, reportedly expected in August. When Ottawa ratifies the Law of the Sea, Canada will be eligible to apply for a change in boundaries, Verhoef says. Once ratification occurs, Canada will have 10 years to apply.
As for a short-term solution: whether EU ratification of Fish Agree-ment will effectively stop overfishing on the Grand Banks depends on who’s doing the talking.
Federal Fisheries and Oceans Minister Robert Thibault fully supports the agreement, and expects that EU ratification will strengthen efforts to regulate fishing on the Grand Banks.
“From Canada’s perspective, the United Nations Fish Agreement, or UNFA, provides important tools to help us strengthen the conservation and management of fish stocks in the North Atlantic,” Thibault says. “From its inception, we clearly recognized the value of such an agreement in managing and conserving our fish stocks, in protecting them over the long term, and in settling disputes between states.”
Earle McCurdy, president of the Fish, Food and Allied Workers, is more cautious in his approach.
“It’s a useful stepping stone,” McCurdy says. “It has some useful elements in it, but it leaves the management and regulation of the stocks to NAFO (Northwest Atlan-tic Fisheries Organization). UNFA is more of a framework; it’s definitely not a replacement for NAFO.”
McCurdy has been highly critical of NAFO’S enforcement practices and the failure of its member countries to follow organizational regulations.
Nadia Bouffard, Director, DFO’s Atlantic Division of the Inter-national Directorate, says, “When the agreement is ratified and therefore legally binds the key countries that fish in the North Atlantic, Canada believes that it will offer additional tools to manage and conserve stocks of the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap. The agreement imposes a higher standard of conservation and sustainable management of high seas fisheries resources.”
She adds, “It obligates countries that are party to it to adopt measures to manage the stocks based on the best science available, to apply the precautionary approach as well as an ecosystems approach when managing these stocks, to minimize pollution, waste, discards and by-catches, especially of endangered species, to take measures to prevent and eliminate overfishing and over-capacity, and to have effective monitoring, control and surveillance to ensure compliance with the conservation and management measures adopted for the stocks.”
As for NAFO’s role Bouffard says, “To support this comprehensive framework, the agreement provides a detailed boarding and inspection procedure allowing third countries to board vessels of other UNFA countries to ensure compliance with the rules established by regional fisheries organizations, such as those adopted by NAFO. In certain circumstances, the third country could bring such vessels to port if a serious offence is found and the flag State does not respond appropriately and in accordance with its obligations under the agreement.”
She adds, “This possibility does not currently exist in NAFO or anywhere else in the world. It can be an effective tool and deterrent to non-compliance. Taking a vessel away from the fishing grounds for a few days to conduct further inspections in port can be an effective deterrent to non-compliance. The Agreement also provides mandatory and binding procedures to settle disputes. Such procedures do not currently exist in NAFO. UNFA would provide these added tools for those NAFO countries that are party to UNFA to ensure compliance with NAFO measures and address disputes concerning the conservation and management of stocks regulated by NAFO.”