Back to back issues

Questions And Answers About Employment Insurance. On July 1st the Federal Government introduced major revisions to Canada's old system of unemployment insurance. The first noticeable change is to the name. Unemployment Insurance (U.I.) will now be called Employment Insurance (E.I.). A whole host of other changes have also been introduced and many will hit the pocketbooks of unemployed Canadians. Some of those changes are already in effect, others will become effective on January 1, 1997. This month Coastal Communities News sorts through the confusion over E.I. and searches for answers to some of the most asked questions about the new system. Q: Is it true that unemployment benefits will no longer be calculated based on the number of weeks worked but rather on the number of hours worked? A: Yes, on January 1st, 1997, the new system will replace weeks worked to determine if a person qualifies for benefits. Workers already in the workforce will require a minimum of 420 hours of work to qualify. For new entrants coming into the workforce they will require 910 hours. Q: Has the maximum benefit been reduced under this new system? A: Yes, the maximum benefit rate has been reduced from $448. per week to $413. per week. In addition, starting on January 1, 1997, the maximum insurable yearly earnings will drop to $39,000. per year Q: How will the hours based system affect how much money a person can collect in benefits? A: One of the goals of the new E.I. system is to save government about 10% annually on its unemployment benefit costs. This means many people can expect a smaller payout in benefits in the future. There are some groups who will not be as well off under this new hours based system and will have to work many more weeks to qualify for benefits. This group includes casual part-time workers. In the past they could file a claim if they had 15 hours of work per week for the required number of weeks (ie: 14-20 weeks). Starting in 1997 those same workers, who typically work in seasonal businesses(ie: tourism), will have to accumulate a minimum 420 hours of work. This means for someone working 15 hours a week they will need to work 28 weeks to qualify. Human Resource Development estimates that about 16% of the labour force file claims with between 12-19 weeks of benefits. There are some workers who may have to put in fewer weeks to qualify. For example, construction workers may put in 50-60 hours per week and may only need 7-9 weeks of work to qualify. Q: There has been a lot of talk about benefits being reduced for those who make claims on a regular basis. Is this true? A: Yes, this is true. The benefit rate a person receives will drop by one percentage point for every 20 weeks of benefits collected, within a five year period. This means an individual who collects 100 weeks or more of benefits within a 5 year period will see their maximum benefit rate drop from 55% to 50%. The only exception to this policy, which is being called the intensity rule, is for families who earn $26,000. or less within a year. They will be exempt. Q: How will this new system affect fishermen's U.I.? A: Rules for fishermen are expected to be approved by Ottawa sometime in October, but the details are already known. While there will be no separate system of E.I. for fishermen there is still a different method of determining benefits. Most of the other rules that apply to the regular workforce will be equally applied to fishermen. After January 1, 1997 benefits for fishermen will be determined based upon earnings over the season. The minimum amount of insurable earnings required by fishermen will be $2500. The maximum benefit will drop from the current $448 per week to $413 per week. The intensity rule will see the maximum fishermen can collect drop to $375. per week after collecting 100 weeks or more of benefits over a five year period. All fishermen will be subject to a 26 week maximum benefit period on a claim. It has been pointed out that 80% of past fishing claimants used only 26 weeks or less of benefits. Intensity Rule Weeks % Top U.I. Drawn Benefit up to 20 wks 55% $413. 20-39 wks 54% $405 40-59 wks 53% $398 60-79wks 52% $383 80-99 wks 51% $380 over 100wks 50% $375 For more information on the new E.I. contact your localHuman Resource Development Centre. Analysis Who Wins And Who Loses Under The Government's New Employment Insurance System? There are going to be winners and losers as the result of Canada's new Employment Insurance system. Supporters of the recently announced changes to the old unemployment insurance program say that government has to change the way Canadians view their unemployment safety net. That is one reason why the name of the program has been changed from unemployment to employment. Those opposed to the revamping of the old system say government's motives have nothing to do with creating employment rather they are simply trying to cut costs and force more people off the program. An analysis of the situation surrounding these changes finds some accuracy with both arguments with the real truth falling somewhere in the middle. The cuts announced won't affect everyone in the same way and the impact on individual benefit rates will vary. Most people who apply for employment insurance benefits in the future will be receiving less than they used to be able to receive. The maximum benefit rate will drop from $448. per week to $413. per week. This is in keeping with the government's stated objective of reducing employment pay-outs by 10% nationally. The reductions in benefits don't stop there. For frequent users the maximum benefit rate will drop from 55% to 50%, if they draw benefits for more than 100 weeks over a five year period. Some workers will also find it more difficult to qualify for E.I. in the future. The rules relating to qualifying periods have changed. No longer will benefits be calculated on the number of weeks worked but rather on the number of hours worked. If a person is already in the workforce they will need 420 hours to qualify. New workforce entrants will require 910 hours. This means that some classes of workers, particularly seasonal part-time workers, will have to work more weeks than before to qualify. For example, a part-time tourism employee who in the past could qualify with 15 hours of work per week for 16 weeks now must work 420 hours, which could be up to 28 weeks (28 X 15 = 420). But the change to an hour based system will help those part time workers who previously worked less than 15 hours per week. In the past they could not qualify for benefits at all, regardless of the number of weeks they worked. In the future every hour of employment will be insurable. This means people who previously couldn't qualify for U.I. will now be able to draw benefits. In particular about 270,000 women could benefit from this new provision. Another potential class of winners in the new system will be low income families with children. A new family income supplement will increase the employment insurance benefits based upon the number of children in a family. About 350,000 claimants will get about a 12% increase in benefits. High income earners will see their benefits reduced in two ways. As previously mentioned the maximum weekly benefit will be reduced. This affects high income earners most because they qualify for maximum benefits. A new claw back system will also reduce benefits and tax back all employment insurance received. The threshold used to be $63,000. It is now reduced to $48,750. This means those with incomes above this level will see no financial benefit from drawing E.I. The new E.I. system also means the end to current special rules for fishermen. They will now be subject to most of the same rules as the rest of the workforce, things like reductions in maximum insurable earnings, the intensity rule, and claw back requirements. One exception is how a fishermen's benefit rate will be determined. The maximum benefit period for fishermen will be fixed at 26 weeks. Benefits will be based on earnings after January 1, 1997. Due to the difficulty of calculating hours worked fishermen will base their E.I. claim on earnings. As of January 1997 the minimum amount of insurable earnings required for fishermen to qualify for employment benefits will be $2500. That would translate to a weekly benefit of $98. (the maximum benefit is $413.). A boat owners insurable earnings will be calculated by deducting costs for boat shares (25%) and crew shares from the total gross sales. Human Resource Development Canada (HRDC) confirms that in Nova Scotia the objective is to cut at least 7% from the cost of employment insurance. The continued decline in benefit levels is nothing new for Canada's unemployment insurance system. The Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) point out in a recent report on U.I. that for the past two decades basic benefit levels have been steadily decreasing while the number of weeks required to qualify have been increasing. In 1971 the benefit rate was based upon 75% of income and an individual only required 8 weeks of work to qualify. Critics of the recently announced changes believe the money saved from this round of cuts will be re-directed towards deficit reduction. Not so says HRDC. They insist that the savings will be utilized to pay for an $800 million transitional jobs fund that will be directed towards high unemployment areas in an effort to create job opportunities. Five re-employment measures or benefits will be utilized by HRDC to encourage individuals and communities to create new opportunities for training and job development. These include, Self Employment Assistance, Earnings Supplement, Wage Subsidy, Skills Development Loans and Grants, and Job Creation Partnerships. Training funds will also be handled differently in the future HRDC's new policy is to support only those community and business training initiatives that are relevant to the job market and will lead to a real job. Participants in training programs will also be expected to contribute to the costs if possible. Negotiations will take place between HRDC and clients to determine their family income and circumstances. Financial support will only be provided to the level to which it is required. This differs from past policy and will mean that the government will no longer pay, either directly or indirectly, for employers to send their employees on training courses. Over a three year period HRDC will withdraw completely from training. Critics of this withdrawal from training support, like the CAW, call the five re-employment benefits nothing more than a set of low cost hand outs to the private sector. Another set of new rules will toughen the consequences for people who try to cheat the employment system. Those caught cheating will now face stiffer penalties and will find it harder to re-qualify for employment insurance in the future. The new rules will also provide penalties for individuals within businesses who are part of a scheme to abuse the system. In the past only claimants or corporations could be punished for cheating but now individuals within corporations, like bookkeepers and accountants, who are part of the abuse will also face penalties. It is clear that the recently announced changes for Canada's unemployment insurance system will mean less money and tougher qualifying rules for most people. For some, like low income families, women and part-time workers with less than 15 hours per week, there are some benefits to the new system. One thing is clear though, there has been a real change in how government views the role of unemployment insurance in the economy and they are hoping that with time Canadians will develop a new perspective on the system. Critics say that government has turned the clock back and that the long term impact of weakening the support levels available from E.I. will do little to create jobs and leaves Canadians with little to fall back on if they lose their job. Who Wins And Who Loses? Winners Low Income Claimants With Children. Part-Time Workers Working Less Than 15 Hours Per Week. Losers Casual Part-Time Workers With More Than 15 Hours Per Week. Frequent Users Fishermen/Seasonal Workers High Income Earners For more information on the new E.I. system contact your local Human Resource Development Centre. back to top Eastern Passage Reaches Back To The Past To Create Opportunities For The Future. Communities In Action Situated just twenty minutes from downtown Halifax and with a population of 10,000, Eastern Passage is not your typical coastal community. In comparison to many isolated, small fishing communities, Eastern Passage would be considered a major metropolitan centre. Over the years this once quaint fishing community has been surrounded by suburban and industrial development as the cities of Halifax and Dartmouth have expanded outward. Traditionally though many of the local families earned their primary source of income from the fishery. At the heart of this traditional community was Fishermen's Cove, a collection of wharves, fish sheds and processing facilities built on a slim peninsula of land extending from the waterfront. With the growth of the metropolitan area and the ensuing change in residential growth patterns the face of the village shifted. Populations increased with fewer and fewer people earning a living from fishing. The downturn in the Atlantic groundfish fishery also meant declining incomes for area fishermen and a reliance on the lobster fishery. As fishermen left to find other jobs the Cove declined and its colourful character started to fade. The Cove was no longer a centre for community life. There were also other shocks to the local economy when Canadian Forces Base Shearwater was downsized and the Ultramar oil refinery was shut down. With bad news swirling all around them local residents started asking, 'What can we do ourselves to make a better future?' The answer, according to Jim Wies, a local resident, was to capitalize on the areas natural advantages. Namely its beautiful location, the nearby wilderness islands of Lawlors and McNabs, and of course the historic Fishermen's Cove. In 1994 a small dedicated group of about 15 residents recognized that while the sea was no longer able to provide the same resources as before they were confident that new opportunities were presenting themselves. One of the opportunities they identified was the redevelopment and revitalization of Fishermen's Cove. On July 1, of this year, their dream became a reality when the new Fishermen's Cove was officially opened. During the past two years the committee worked diligently to bring the community together and develop a concept for the complete revival of the Cove and hopefully the community at large. The concept they developed was the re-creation of a working 19th-century fishing village. By combining the existing wharves, fish sheds, processing facilities and repair yards with a new waterfront complex designed to look like an old fashioned fishing village the community hoped to create a major regional attraction that would offer tourists the flavour and character of a working fishing village. With the assistance of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Human Resources Development Canada, Shearwater Development Corporation and the Halifax Regional Development Agency the grass roots community group put together a strategic plan and a funding package that allowed the development to become a reality. Today Jim Wies is Manager of the Fishermen's Cove project and he is convinced that the long term benefits of the development will mean new jobs and a renewed sense of optimism in the area. Wies says, "This was the only way to go. It is a community based project that builds on our natural strengths. It not only benefits Eastern Passage but all of the Eastern Shore." The project is about 75 percent complete and features restaurants, gift shops and craft shops. Visitors can watch local fishermen and artisans demonstrate their crafts, visit an interpretive centre, walk along the board walk or take a boat tour. Jim Wies is obviously proud of what the community has accomplished but he knows there are still a few people who are sceptical about the project. Wies says, " There were some who wondered if this was just another government project that is going to fail, and once it is built who is going to come?" Now that the project is open and close to final completion the scepticism is being erased. Wies says many of those who were critical are now speaking positively. Wies also points out that although government helped to get the project off the ground it has to be self sustaining in the future. And it appears that the private sector tenants who are leasing space for small business operations in the complex are more than pleased with the results so far. Doug Scott and nine other local artists have leased space to set up an art cooperative and speak highly of Fishermen's Cove. Another newly opened small business, 'Tea By The Sea Cafe', is owned and operated by the husband and wife team of Margaret and Mike Arnold. Mike explains that the project gave them the opportunity to get into business for themselves for the first time. Jim Wies believes that encouraging new business and creating jobs is the most important role of the new development. "Already we have seen former fishermen open businesses such as whale watching, shark fishing and island tours," says Wies. About 35 jobs have been created at the site so far. A community advisory committee of 12 local citizens, representing a broad cross section of the area, oversees the operations of Fishermen's Cove. A Total Quality Community Initiative Local citizens are taking the lead in other ways in Eastern Passage as well. Leslie Dunn is a resident of the area and serves as a member of the Eastern Passage Total Quality Community Committee. Dunn reports that during the winter of 1991 about 40 representatives from a variety of community service agencies from the Eastern Passage, Cow Bay and Shearwater area got together to discuss ways to promote a healthy and safe community. From those early meetings has grown a network that promotes community groups and individuals working together with all of the institutions, agencies and support groups in the area. The network had as its goal nothing less than making Eastern Passage, Cow Bay and Shearwater the safest, healthiest and most caring community in Canada. And when you look at the long list of accomplishments made in the past five years you will come to believe that they are well on their way to achieving that goal. Projects such as a Family Wellness Network which was designed to promote the emotional health of the community and a community policing initiative are but two of dozens of community undertakings. They included: establishment of an RCMP office in the community; creation of a homework hotline; development of a human rights awareness campaign; continued promotion of efforts sponsored by the Community Education Council which was established in 1975; CPR training for all junior high students; establishing a community garden and setting up a drug awareness project to name but a few. In January 1996, the Shearwater Development Corporation established a learning centre which works in harmony with all initiatives undertaken by the community. As Leslie Dunn, co-ordinator of the learning centre explains, the total quality initiative is based on connecting people and groups to form effective partnerships, empowering the community to make its own decisions and using the gifts of community members, service clubs, local businesses and groups to enhance the overall quality of life for residents. Sixteen residents make up the core total quality committee while dozens of volunteers serve on satellite committees. Leslie Dunn explains that the concept is gaining wide community acceptance. "We are now having people come to us. It is very encouraging." back to top Sharing The Wealth Through Community Based Co-management. A group of about 135 fixed gear, longline and gillnet fishermen have joined forces along Nova Scotia's Bay of Fundy to share a community quota and give birth to a community based co-management system. The group known as the Fundy Fixed Gear Council was formed in April of this year when the Digby County Inshore Fishermen's Association, Island's Inshore Fishermen's Association and the Maritime Fishermen's Union (Local 9) joined forces. The group represents fishermen from all along the Bay of Fundy from Digby County to Cumberland County. Arthur Bull, one of the group's organizers, explains that the lengthy protests undertaken by Nova Scotia fishermen this past winter was the spark that brought the group together and cemented the realization that as a community they could do a better job of managing their fishery than could DFO. One of the most important things they recognized was that there was only a limited pocket of wealth available within the fishery and they had to find a way to spread it around to as many people as possible. Community based co-management was their solution. The group prepared a plan and presented it to DFO. It called for DFO to grant the group a set amount of quota. Once granted it would become the group's responsibility to manage and police that quota. One of the guiding principles of the group was to get rid of the whole idea that future catches should be linked to individual historical catches. Bull says, "This is a community based approach. We don't recognize individual catch history. We don't support ITQs." Bull explains that every fisherman who wants to be a part of the group must sign a civil contract with the Council agreeing to abide by the rules of the group. Already Arthur Bull is seeing the positive benefits of the co-management system established. He says, "There is real participation of the membership. It has worked well and the small group is growing steadily." Bull goes on to explain that to be truly effective it is necessary for the Council to develop strong committees where members can directly impact the management of their fishery. To this end they have established a series of committees that rely on fishermen to meet on a regular basis to discuss and set policy. Committees include one each for handliners, longliners and gillnetters. It is their responsibility to meet and look at methods of effort control (ie: limiting the amount of fish caught and the strain on the fish stock). In the case of handliners the committee meets every week to adjust, up or down, the amount of fish available to be caught. In order to ensure fair and effective representation there are representatives from all of the ports along the shore. This ensures that different fishing patterns are taken into account when making decisions. There is also an infractions committee that is charged with handing out penalties to fishermen who break the rules. If some one catches more than his or her limit then the committee meets, on an anonymous basis, to review the case. Under this management system DFO will not enforce trip limits. This means it is up to the community to police itself. The method in which the Council's infractions committee operates is another unique feature of this co-management system. Bull explains that in a spirit of fairness the committee never knows a suspected cheaters name. For example, if someone is accused of catching more than their limit the sanctions committee steps in and without ever knowing who the suspect is, they review the facts of the case and depending on the seriousness of the offence a sanction is handed down. Sanctions might restrict a fishermen's right to fish or other punishment. Another aspect of fairness built into the system ensures that a different group of fishermen serve on the committee each time an offence is reviewed. In order to plan for the long term, an advisory and research committee has been set up. Bull points out that if coastal communities are going to conserve and manage resources they will have to build up a knowledge base on the ecosystem, stocks, fishing patterns and more. Bull explains, "If we are serious about co-management we have to have a handle on this type of knowledge." Bull goes on to explain that they are already conducting research into conservation and gear types and are conducting a spawning ground survey. The Fundy Fixed Gear Council serves as a model of what can be accomplished through community based co-management of a resource. The goal of the group is ensuring that as many people, families and communities as possible can share in the wealth of the fish resource. This in turn will hopefully lead to more stable communities and a sustainable future. It hasn't been easy. Bull points out that the biggest problem the group faces is the small amount of fish able to be caught. He is confident though that co-management is the best way to make the most of the fish available. Although Bull believes that the Council still has a lot to learn about making this community quota sharing concept work he sees it as a real step to establishing an effective community based co-management system. They are already preparing next year's plan. For more information on the Fundy Fixed Gear Council call 902-834-2958 Mandatory Dues Getting Ready To Take The Vote By Cher Roadhouse In 1995 the Nova Scotia Department of Fisheries started consultations with fishers in regard to enabling legislation for organizations and mandatory dues. The hope was, and is, that if fishers are being serviced by accredited organizations they would be better informed about the many issues involved in their livelihoods and be better enabled to communicate their concerns, needs and ideas to both the provincial and federal government. After many months of consultations and rewrites of the regulation drafts, the completed product is now going to cabinet for approval from the executive council. This process will take a couple of weeks and should be completed in early September. Once approved, a copy of the act, the regulations and a letter (including the details of the voting procedure) will be sent to every core fisherman in an attempt to properly inform all involved. The degree to which fishers understand the legislation and its repercussions is a concern for some, including Norma Richardson, of the Eastern Fishermen's Federation. She feels that it depends on how individuals interpret the information that reaches them (official or not) whether the legislation will be positively received and accepted. A core fishermen is a person who holds two or more key fishing licenses or one vessel based license and has earned $25,000. or more from their fishing enterprise for two of the years 1992,1993,1994 or 1995; or has a bona fide status in the Gulf region of Nova Scotia with at least one key license. After being approved by the executive council every core fishermen in each of the six regions of Nova Scotia (Gulf, Cape Breton Atlantic, Eastern Shore, South Shore, South Western, Fundy) will have a chance to vote for or against the new policy. To be a valid vote, 60 percent participation is required in each of the above regions,with the majority vote winning. This will mean that one region may vote for mandatory dues while their neighbouring region may vote "no". Clarrie MacKinnon, Marine Advisor of Ground Fish and Sea Plants for the Nova Scotia Department of Fisheries, is recommending that voting be conducted by mail, using a two envelope system. The outer envelope would have the voter's name on it, so it could be recorded. The inner envelope would contain the completed ballot. The two envelopes would be separated before the inner seal was broken to main tain voter confidentiality. It is hoped that voting will be completed by the end of 1996. Following a positive vote in a region, organizations wishing to become accredited must apply within 30 days of the vote to be eligible. The $1000. fee is meant to encourage consolidation among the approximately 50 Nova Scotian fishermen's organizations. An organization will be able to represent individuals in more than one region, and only pay the one fee of $1000. If a yes vote is acquired in a region then a fishermen can pay dues to any accredited organization. If a region votes "no" fishers residing in that area can still pay dues to an accredited organization if they wish. Norma Richardson believes that stronger fishermen's organizations would, in an indirect way, protect the fishery, by keeping fishers in formed and allowing their concerns, needs, and ideas to be heard. To become accredited an organization must: have the representation of its members as its primary objective; have a duly elected executive composed of a president, vice-president, secretary and a treasurer (or a secretary treasurer), and a board of directors; demonstrate in its application to the minister, for accreditation, that there is a regular reporting mechanism to its members; be registered under the societies act or as a limited company; require that its members pay a minimum of $100. in annual dues; have a membership of at least 100 eligible license holders, or 15 percent of the eligible license holders in a region, or be otherwise recognized on special sectoral or geographical basis as determined by the minister; pay an annual accreditation fee of $1000 to the province. For more information on mandatory dues contact the Nova Scotia Department of Fisheries (902) 424-4560. back to top Graeme Gawn, of the Maritime Fishermen's Union, Already Has Enough Evidence To Convince Him That ITQ's Will Spell Disaster For The Fishery. By Graeme Gawn Destroying Communities And Sabotaging Organizations By now most fixed gear fishermen in Western Nova Scotia are fully familiar with the divisive fiasco, engineered by DFO and a few greedy individuals, with an eye to grabbing as much quota as possible for themselves. They showed no concern whatsoever for their community at large, or for their fellow "core" fishermen. The Maritime Fishermen's Union (MFU), along with the other "Alliance" groups, adhered to the principles contained in the "Alliance" demands, that community based management be carried out democratically, by community based management boards, made up of all organizations in the community. In the Fundy region, this has been done by our forming the "Fundy Fixed Gear Council", in cooperation with other organizations like the Digby County Inshore Fishermen's Association and the Islands Inshore Fishermen's Association. Likewise in Southwest New Brunswick, and some other cases, a common management board was established under terms of reference which put the interests of the community ahead of the interests of the individual. So far, except of course for the shortage of quota, this localized management is working. And we believe that it should be a model for all communities. Of course, there must be a clear delineation of what a community is, and such is not the case. What we have instead, thanks to DFO and the greedy "big history" groups, is a can of worms which amounts to association quotas based solely on catch history. The situation in Shelburne County is the best example of how to destroy a community and sabotage organizations. There are around 700 active fixed gear fishermen there. 570 are in one group, fishing under management plans produced in cooperation by three of the organizations there, including ours. The other 130 are in three other associations, each of which espouses ITQs, each of which is considered by DFO as a community and who claim half of the catch history in Shelburne County. It is clear that the majority of the core fixed gear fishermen favour a true community based management which should include all 700.Yet the 130 have basically had their way, since it is in line with the DFO agenda to eliminate fishermen. Obviously all of these fishermen are in the same community, yet there are six associations and no single management board for the community. If individual catch history alone is the only criteria for allocation, then this is simply a pooled ITQ system, which is clearly against the will of the majority of the community. It should also be noted that fixed gear issues have taken up an extraordinary amount of time, and continue to be a major preoccupation. While at the same time there are dozens of other vitally important issues to address. In 1995, the fishery landed a record value,and yet there are tens of thousands of people who have been evicted from the fishery under the false pretence that there is not enough fish and too many boats. I would like to give my perspective of what privatization has meant to my community of Digby County, where I have lived and fished for over 20 years, and where these privatization measures have had dramatic and obvious effects. Twenty years ago, we had in Digby County, a large fleet of independently owned and operated fishing vessels, including offshore and inshore scallopers, purse seiners, fish draggers, along with a fully viable inshore fleet of multi-species lobster, fixed gear groundfish and herring vessels. One fleet sector after another, the larger vessels fell under privatization schemes. Whether you call them ITQs or EAs. These policies were devised by economists at DFO, encouraged by fish buyers, justified by the lack of any effective controls and the resulting rapid growth in fish killing capability due to application of new technologies. We had a vibrant herring net fishery for hundreds of boats in the inshore, up until the time in 1983, when the DFO instituted the ITQ system for seiners. It left out any form of monitoring and catch enforcement of the total allowable catch (TAC). This resulted in seiners being able to flood the shore market with cheap herring, and it was perfectly normal for a seiner to actually land double his quota, and get paid for half. The result of course was that the netters, who need to be paid for every pound that they catch, were squeezed out of the market, and herring stocks were decimated. At the same time, under this rationalization program, which was to address overcapacity, the purse seine vessels were replaced with vessels two to three times the capitalization and capacity, (which was allowed,since they argued, that with their own individual quotas, it didn't matter what size boats they used). The result today is a seiner fleet of 40 boats with three times the capacity as the 52 they replaced. To this day the "home" of the herring, Trinity Ledge, is virtually barren. Were it not for the ITQ system for the seiners, and the lack of any real enforcement of it for a decade, many of those seiners would have gone out of business, and natural forces would have protected the fish as they have done for centuries. If there is not a healthy stock of herring, the netters don't catch any fish, instead they turn to one of the other options they should have, as true multi-species fishermen. The end result of the rationalization of the herring fleet, is a loss of 1000 seasonal jobs on the boats, decimation of the spawning stocks of Trinity, and elsewhere, a tripling of the capacity of the supposedly rationalized seiner fleet, and the subsequent constant pressure on any school of herring anywhere else in the Atlantic. All to desperately try to maintain a fleet which under normal circumstances would not even exist. At one time many lobster fishermen would spend the summer scalloping in Meteghan. There were several fishermen who did so using 36 foot open lobster boats, which obviously limited the amount of impact they could have on the stocks or the grounds. There was also the "Digby" scallop fleet, of mainly 45-65 foot vessels. Many of which were dual purpose, spending the winter fish dragging, and switching to scallops in the summer. Well, when the fish stocks started to go down, for the exact same reason as the herring stocks did; a total lack of any effort control or enforcement of the TAC, Les Burke and the gang stepped forward with the "solution"...ITQs. Once the scallopers were able to concentrate their fish quota on dedicated groundfish vessels, they were then free to fish year round for scallops. As a result the Digby fleet is now a hundred 65 foot boats dragging scallops year round. A quantum increase in effort. They are now often under orders from the owners to spend a hundred hours a week with the drag on the bottom, regardless of what is in the drag. Both these fleets were mainly owner-operated in their former life. Now most are company owned, and operated with hired skippers, often from distant communities. Often they have shown a lack of regard for unwritten community rules. They have destroyed set gear, lobster traps, gillnets, longlines etc., and have invaded grounds which have traditionally been left alone by the original owner-operators, who as members of the community, knew and cared for example, that a certain area was being used by fixed gear fishermen, or that a certain area was thick with soft shelled lobsters. They respected that and left it alone. That mentality seems to be gone, and the fleet is driven, under orders from the owners at home, to simply put in the hours and turn over every rock. Meanwhile the fish draggers too were rationalized with their ITQ system. In the seventies Digby County had a large fleet of small fish draggers, 35 to 65 footers and a large number of small and medium sized processing plants. Thousands of jobs were involved, and each worker was in some way, a stakeholder. When the gang in Halifax decided that something must be done, they excluded the vast majority of stakeholders from the discussion. They charged ahead with their own agenda and what resulted was exactly what they planned themselves, in private, long before any so called "consultations". Before 1989, the mobile groundfishery was characterized by a lack of any monitoring of the quota, laughable attempts at enforcing management measures, such as trip limits and log books, and no attempt to limit effort through measures such as seasons or gear restrictions. With ITQs the first effect was to concentrate the quota in the hands of the highest bidder, rarely the fishermen themselves. Most often a large processing company would acquire the quota and hire the fishermen to catch it for them. In short order the company also owned the boats. A second effect has been documented, testified to, and acknowledged by DFO themselves. Dumping and discarding has increased under the shopping list ITQ system. The incentive for high grading is obvious and continues to this day. The fewer fish draggers now fishing, are now fishing more, since with transferable quotas they are allowed to lease quotas from the offshore companies and continue fishing long after their own quotas are exhausted. These transferable quotas enabled a massive and insidious redirection of effort and capital into other fisheries including the inshore lobster fishery. As a case in point, six years ago there were 15 fish draggers in one port. Today their quotas have been acquired by processing companies in other communities and there are 17 more, highly capitalized lobster boats in their place. They are financed by the artificial capital from the selling and leasing of the quota. Most of the small fish plants are closed, due to the double whammy of losing their supply of herring and groundfish, throwing hundreds out of work,and sending them to look for a living from the lobster fishery. Of course if you ask any quota owner they instantly sing the praises of ITQs and denounce any alternative as simplistic or unenforceable. But for each one of them t here are four or five displaced former stakeholders who can tell you the other side. The government experts warn of overcapitalization, yet they have established a system which creates artificial capital from the sale of leasing quotas. It is then reinvested in the other fisheries. They warn against redirection of effort, yet their system has encouraged and driven it. They talk about a multi-species core fishery prosecuted by professional owner- operators, yet their system is built around a specialized company owned fleet, crewed by wage labourers with no equity at all. They brag about extensive consultations with the stakeholders, yet they specifically deny a voice to plant workers and crew members, and indeed the community at large. And as we all know, they simply use consultations as a forum to deliver their own policies to us and then say we were extensively consulted. Another aspect of this attack on the resource and on the independent inshore fisherman, is the current obsession with user fees and cost recovery. Aside from the draconian increases in license fees, we are being expected to cough up thousands more in berthage, inspection and monitoring fees. This money all comes from the resource, and is all extracted from our coastal economies, since it must come from previously disposable profit. On top of this the government is also attacking transportation subsidies which are crucial to the viability of any industry in our region. When you add it all up it is clear we cannot bear the combined effect of all of these changes. It is my opinion that changes are inevitable, needed and wanted. The question is, who gets listened to? Whose vision do we follow? We have a colossal task ahead. Not only do we have to stop the immediate threats, we have to position the inshore in such a way to ensure they don't keep coming back and hitting our weak spots. Believe me, we have many. Sincerely, Graeme Gawn This issue's commentary was from Graeme Gawn and represents the first in our Opinion Series. In each issue Coastal Communities News will provide space to reprint the opinions of our readers. We want to hear your opinions on any topic you believe is of interest to our coastal communities. Make Your Views Known In The Opinion Section. Coastal Communities News Welcomes Your Opinions. Write to: PO Box 578, Trade Mart Building, Halifax , NS, B3J 2S9 or FAX: 902-424-0666 The views expressed in the opinion section do not necessarily represent the views of the Coastal Communities Network, its members, or the editorial committee of Coastal Communities News. back to top Our Changing World Who Will Save Nova Scotia's Lighthouses? Lighthouses are perhaps one of the most poignant and romantic reminders of Nova Scotia's rich nautical heritage. Apart from their important role in marine navigation they are regularly featured in works of art, in photos and in tourism promotions. But the picturesque image of the grand red and white beacon steadfastly standing guard over our coasts may soon fall victim to advancing technology and budget cuts. Already all but one of the 87 lighthouses in the Maritimes have been destaffed. With automation the age of the lighthouse keeper came to an end. And over the next four years, the Coast Guard, operator of Canada's lighthouses, will be looking for a way to hand responsibility for maintaining these historic landmarks over to community groups and others. Larry Wilson, Director Marine Programs for the Coast Guard, explains that with the modernization of navigational aids and the use of advanced satellite positioning technology, by most mariners, lighthouses have become less important. This fact combined with a 40 percent reduction in their operating budget means the Coast Guard no longer needs or can afford to service lighthouses. Larry Wilson says they will have little choice but to stop maintaining the buildings and sites accompanying Nova Scotia's lighthouses. "In the future we will see most navigation lights downgraded to minor lights. For example, a 20 mile landfall light may only be required to provide a 10 mile range," explains Wilson. Wilson goes on to explain that in the coming months a complete review will be undertaken to determine what is needed in terms of navigational aids. Things like, buoys, range lights and lighthouses will all be examined for their continued usefulness. "Once we analyse the overall system we may find that certain light stations are surplus. Other stations may be found to be required but at a reduced level. The fact is lighthouses are going the way of the dinosaur," says Wilson. He is quick to acknowledge though that some fishermen will dispute the fact that lighthouses are no longer as important as they once were. He goes on to say that he does expect most lighthouses to still be required but he is concerned for their future none the less. "My concern is that with limited dollars how do we maintain these sites? There is a lot of expensive upkeep. Windows, doors, shingles, vandalism all cost money and we don't have the money to do it." Wilson says, a simple pole with a light bulb attached on top would be more than sufficient to do the job of most lighthouses, and would be a lot more cost effective. One obvious solution is to tear down the lighthouses and support buildings that surround them but Wilson and the Coast Guard don't want to do that. Instead they are counting on volunteers and community groups to take over the structures and maintain them. The Coast Guard will be calling for proposals from groups, such as municipalities, historical societies, non-profit organizations and others. "We will negotiate an agreement with these groups that will allow access to the site by the Coast Guard but overall care and maintenance will be the responsibility of the community group." In terms of history, heritage and tourism lighthouses have become important landmarks and symbols, not only in Nova Scotia but throughout the world. Here in Nova Scotia for instance, it is hard to imagine a tourism promotion that doesn't feature the lighthouse at Peggy's Cove. The entire are a on the South Shore, from Yarmouth to Halifax, is called the Lighthouse Route and is a major tourist attraction. This fact is not lost on the Coast Guard and they are working closely with groups like the South Shore Tourism Association and others to find solutions to the pending downgrading and potential closing of lighthouses. Lynne Perry, executive director of the South Shore Tourism Association, reports that her group is already anticipating the future and has recently completed a study of all of the lighthouses on the South Shore. "We have classified all of the lights according to accessibility. Our next step will be to determine who will assume responsibility for certain lighthouses. We are doing the groundwork right now," explains Perry. Larry Wilson is encouraged by groups such as this and their concern for the future. Already about a dozen groups have come forward in Nova Scotia to express their interest in assuming responsibility for lighthouses. One of those groups is the Coastwatch Foundation, a newly formed group that supports and encourages the development of local community based lighthouse preservation initiatives. Cliff Fanning is the interim co-ordinator and he explains that the foundation hopes to duplicate the success of the Maine Lights Program in the U.S. which helped the United States Coast Guard dispose of its lighthouses by getting businesses and community groups to take them over. That program created an overall co-ordinating agency to administer development and conservation plans for all lighthouses. To assist communities the Canadian Coast Guard is tentatively scheduling a strategic planning session for December 3-5 in Dartmouth. The session will be used to outline the Coast Guard's position in regards to its future plans for the navigational aids program , budget reductions and alternative uses. All interested groups are encouraged to attend. For more information contact Larry Wilson, Director Marine Programs Canadian Coast Guard 902-426-9022. Joe Purcell Has No Doubt That His Community Can Reclaim And Restore The Chezzetcook Harbour Clam Flats. Planning For Success Ten years ago the once rich clam beds in Chezzetcook Harbour were closed to harvesting by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Department of the Environment. The beds were contaminated due to excessive levels of fecal coliform bacteria (human waste) pollution. To this day the beds remain closed and the industry, that for centuries had depended on the resource, has withered. No one understands the importance of the Chezzetcook clam flats more than Joseph Purcell, of Grand Desert on Nova Scotia's Eastern Shore. His family has been harvesting clams in the area for almost 200 years. Today Purcell is rallying his community, of about 1200 families, to do something about the state of the harbour. Purcell believes that collective community action will be the key to bringing the beds and the industry back. Finding solutions is not going to be an easy job though. The clam flats are contaminated with fecal coliform bacteria, they are being deteriorated by the encroachment of salt marsh grass and silt is accumulating to unhealthy levels. The community has responded to the call for help and Joseph Purcell has taken on the position of chairman of the Chezzetcook Harbour Revitalization Association. With the help of 35 volunteers and small amounts of funding from the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Human Resource Development Canada, and the Halifax Regional Development Agency the group has set out to implement a plan that will reclaim the once vibrant harbour. During the Spring of 1996 tests were conducted on the area. Next they will track down the sources of pollution (most of which are sewage systems), find funding to help people install upgraded sewage systems and then reseed the clam flats and monitor them. Based upon the success of similar projects in the U.S. it is estimated that the entire process will probably take 3 to 5 years. Clam harvesting and processing is a big business on the Eastern Shore creating work for 60-100 people. With the restoration of the Chezzetcook clam flats Purcell believes everyone will benefit with the environment protected and job opportunities created. Will DFO Say "Yes" To Community Based Co-Management? The last issue of Coastal Communities News featured a cover story on community based co-management. In our continuing focus on this topic we turn our attention this month to what the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has to say about co-management and what, if anything , it will do to encourage the process. Coastal Communities News sat down with two representatives of DFO and explored their ideas about co-management. The following report is based upon that interview. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans is looking to the fishing industry to tell them what type of co-management they want and need. In an interview with Coastal Communities News, Greg Peacock, DFO Director of the Resource Management Branch, and Gus Van Helvoort, DFO Chief of Program Management, said that DFO definitely wants to see community based co-management of the fishery. "It is a viable option and we want to see the industry design something that is in their best interests," says Greg Peacock. Community based co-management is a system where both the government and community organizations have specific management responsibilities and authorities, but control of the overall process does not rest with one group. By working cooperatively all of the tasks related to resource management are addressed. Along with DFO's endorsement of co-management it also now appears that a process will be initiated to encourage the industry and communities to discuss how to best implement co-management by looking at different models. Gus Van Helvoort explains that DFO will be setting up meetings around the province, beginning with a workshop of fishermen's associations in October. "The community based vision is needed," says Van Helvoort. Greg Peacock has no illusions though that it will be easy to get immediate consensus among the various communities involved in the fishery. "We don't know what the industry wants. Do they want to move towards a model that emphasizes the economics of the fishery or the social impacts?", asks Peacock. He goes on to explain that there are a lot of other questions to be answered as well. Questions such as, how do you define community and what is the role of DFO? He points out that there is a real debate about whether you define community by geography or by like-mindedness. "There are real differences between different fisheries and geographic locations. The community has to be able to define what makes it different," says Peacock. "We think we know what we would like to see." Peacock explains that DFO would like to get a co-management approach in place that will allow the fishing industry and other interest groups to deal with all of the conservation and non-conservation issues with respect to any individual fishery. But does DFO have other, less noble, motives for supporting co-management? That is a concern expressed by some who feel that the department wants to use this issue of co-management to split the industry even further and open the door to the introduction of ITQs. There are fears that if no consensus can be reached among industry organizations the resulting disarray may mean that co-management will be viewed as totally unworkable. Greg Peacock is aware of the mistrust and dislike of DFO by many in the industry but he strongly denies that DFO has any hidden agenda when it comes to co-management. "We would like to go out and talk to the fishing industry about this topic. I know we will be accused of having a hidden agenda but we don't. Our agenda is conservation and sustainable use of the resource. We are very interested in learning what the industry feels about co-management." Peacock also envisions a much smaller role for DFO in the future fishery. The conclusions of a complete program review point to DFO focusing on conservation as its main priority. "We have to ask the question, can we (DFO) do everything we have been doing. Especially in light of budget cuts and downsizing. The answer is no," reports Peacock. It appears that realization is one of the reasons why DFO now has a real interest in co-management. They see it as a way to download some of their previous responsibilities to the industry. But what does a community do if it is ready to accept the responsibilities of co-management? Gus Van Helvoort advises, "If you are a community that is truly representative then we are prepared to sit down, look at your proposal and framework and put a plan into effect." As was pointed out in the July issue of Coastal Communities News there are some examples of community groups who have done just that. But there are some obstacles to overcome for any group attempting such a project. One of them is the state of federal legislation which limits what DFO can and cannot do. This is one area where Greg Peacock feels his department can be of real help. "We can promote information sessions, assist the thinking process, explain what can and cannot be done with the legislation. But we have to balance that helping process, always with the thought in the back of our minds that people are going to think we have a hidden agenda." DFO has made the commitment to encourage community based co-management and the first step is the workshop with representatives of fishermen's organizations. They are also asking for the assistance of groups like the Scotia Fundy Communications Council and the Coastal Communities Network. It is at this workshop that the hard questions will be asked; What should co-management look at? What is the role of industry? A lot of these questions have been addressed previously by the CCN through its province wide consultations. They are also being answered through the work of individuals involved in existing community based management efforts. Greg Peacock acknowledges that one of the first things he and his colleagues have to do is read and utilize the research already completed by groups like the CCN. Even though DFO is now acknowledging that co-management is a viable option and is offering to assist the process along they are also throwing a challenge out to the industry to get its act together and decide what is in its best interests. Community based groups like the CCN await DFO's next move on co-management. Based upon history most harvester and community organizations are cautious and somewhat sceptical about DFO's real understanding of, and commitment to, a true community based approach to co-management. back to top Dear Cod, Q: There was a lot of talk about government's changes to TAGS. What were the changes and what do they mean? Sincerely, Just Wondering A: Dear Wondering, In July the Government of Canada announced some fairly major changes to The Atlantic Groundfish Strategy (TAGS). TAGS was first implemented May 15, 1994, as a five year, $1.9 billion strategy to assist East coast and Quebec fishermen and fish plant workers who lost their jobs as a result of the downturn in the groundfish industry. TAGS is administered by Human Resources Development Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. The objective of the announced changes was to keep the government within its original budget for TAGS. In order to do this a number of changes were announced. Firstly, about $190 million originally budgeted for such things as training and administration were redirected to the income support (TAGS benefits) side of TAGS. This meant that as of August 1st, activities such as training were no longer available under TAGS. Second, an income cap of $26,000. was placed on all TAGS recipients. Third, TAGS payouts during the two week waiting period for employment insurance were eliminated. Fourth, about $105 million originally earmarked for license retirements was also redirected to income support. This left about $30 million for the second round of license retirement bids. Fifth, and perhaps the most dramatic change was the announcement that the whole TAGS program would have to end earlier than expected. The government explained that in order to maintain income benefits to individuals at current levels and stay within the original $1.9 billion budget, TAGS would have to end when the funds were exhausted. This could be as early as May, 1998. To date in Atlantic Canada about 40,000 workers have applied and qualified for income support under this program. Originally it was estimated that 26,500 people would take part in the program. It is estimated that approximately 25,000 individuals are receiving income support at any given time. The others are either working or are on Employment Insurance. The government believes that to date about 14,600 TAGS clients have successfully left the groundfish industry. It is pointed out that if this number should increase more quickly than projected then the program could be extended beyond May of 1998. About 1600 TAGS clients have taken advantage of the early retirement packages offered to fishermen and plant workers. About 500 fishermen are expected to retire their licenses under the license retirement program offered by DFO. Except for license retirement and economic development, all remaining available funds have been relocated to income support. Do you have letters for Dear Cod? Send your letters to: Coastal Communities News PO Box 578, Trade Mart Building Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 2S9 back to top Coastal Communities News Acknowledgements Coastal Communities News is published bi-monthly by the Coastal Communities Network, a non-profit society registered in the province of Nova Scotia. Coastal Communities News is made possible by the generous efforts of many volunteers, and by financial contributions from Human Resources Development Canada, and by donations and in-kind contributions from the Nova Scotia Department of Education and Culture, as well as from member groups and organizations. We welcome all articles and submissions, from individuals and groups, with content in keeping with the role and nature of this magazine. We reserve the right to edit all submissions. Except where additional credit has been given, all articles are prepared by the Editor and Editorial Board. Join the Coastal Communities Network Our Mission Statement The Coastal Communities Network is a volunteer association of organizations whose mission is to provide a forum to encourage dialogue, share information, and create strategies and actions that promote the survival and development of Nova Scotia's coastal and rural communities. "A Large Voice for Small Communities" CCN is made up of organizations rooted in Nova Scotia's coastal and rural communities, and it is the diversity of its membership that gives it strength. Your organization, and your community, can help CCN determine its direction and strengthen its voice still further. Join the Coastal Communities Network today. How to Become Involved in the Coastal Communities Network CCN's strength lies in its membership, which is made up of organizations rooted in Nova Scotia's coastal communities. The range of member organizations is very broad, including churches, fish harvester groups, municipalities, community and regional economic development agencies, unions, universities, and local community groups. CCN welcomes the participation of any organization that represents the interests of a coastal community or issue and is interested in working together with similar groups across the province. Your organization can become involved in a number of ways: — by participating in regular monthly meetings of the CCN membership. These are held in Truro (usually on the first Tuesday of each month), and allow representatives from member organizations to review what is happening in coastal communities across the province, plan actions on issues of common concern, and review progress on CCN-sponsored projects; — by getting on our mailing list to receive regular copies of Coastal Communities News. Send us your name and address by mail or fax, or call us directly; — by contributing written articles to Coastal Communities News, and so letting everyone know what's happening in your community; — by taking part in CCN workshops and information sessions. Special events like this are held on topics of importance to coastal communities (for example, community economic development, co- management in the fishery, etc); — by inquiring about CCN's resource library, which includes information, reports, and studies on topics that affect the future and sustainability of coastal communities. You may contact us at: CCN Coordinator: PO Box 1613 Pictou, N.S. B0K 1H0 Phone:(902)485-4754 Fax:(902)445-7134 e-mail:coastalnet@ns.sympatico.ca CCN Communications Office: Phone: (902) 445-7168 Fax: (902) 445-7134 e-mail:ccnews@ns.sympatico.ca back to top

CCN Publications  | Co-Management  | Make It Happen  | Up-Dates Glossary  | CCN Magazine  | Main Port  | Fish Facts  | Information Kit  | SUBSCRIBE!!!  | E-Mail

Created by Virtual Media Productions Ltd. All rights reserved by The Coastal Communities Network © 1997-2002. PO Box 1613 Pictou, N.S. B0K 1H0 Phone:(902)485-4754 Fax:(902)445-7134 E-Mail coastalnet@ns.sympatico.ca