BFC responds to the Nattivak HTO

I wish to comment and clarify some of the misleading comments made by Mr. Koalie Kooneeliusie, chair of the Nattivak Hunters and Trappers Association, in his letter to the Nunatsiaq News dated Feb. 4, 2005.

“There is a world of difference between the two fishing types” — We are glad that Mr. Koalie Kooneeliusie mentioned this and it is important that we clarify the difference for everyone as follows:

BFC believes in a balanced approach to the fishery, one that use trawlers and hook and line vessels. By using both gear types you are taking a combination of both smaller and larger fish: Trawlers on average take smaller fish; however hook and line vessels take on average larger fish.

There are always pros and cons to every type of fishing, but what Mr. Kooneeliusie did not tell you is that the majority of the larger fish being harvested by hook and line are the mature, female, egg-bearing fish that are essential to the growth of the biomass.

Is this any different than catching polar bears, where we make sure that we do not harvest the mature females, so that the population can increase? The key to a sustainable fishery is to have a balanced fishery. If you harvest the majority of the larger females what will this do to your stock?

“Vessels were allowed by DFO to take two times the legal amount of small fish.” — All the vessels that fish in 0A are monitored by DFO, with an onboard observer, and we meet all rules and regulations as provide by DFO.

“Fishermen do not like fishing on BFC boats.” — This is both misleading and false. Throughout 2004 we have worked very hard to increase Inuit crews on the vessels. On the Inuksuk I we now have Inuit workers on a rotation basis, on shrimp, two trips on and two trips off. In some cases, we have had workers stay on for three trips before getting off. The reality here is that, as in any business there will be some workers who are not prepared to work in that industry and in this case make it difficult for the other workers who do want to succeed.

“Have not been paid on time, and they are not going to work on them in the future.” — This is again misleading and false. It is important to point out that BFC does not pay the workers, but rather they are paid directly by the vessel owners. Other than the Inuksuk I, BFC has no input or direction on the payment schedules for any of the crew whether they be Inuit or others. With regards to the Inuksuk I, the workers are paid as per their contracts, and overall they are paid faster that the industry norms for the offshore shrimp and turbot fishery. Workers sign contracts when they go on the Inuksuk 1, and yes, in some cases the crew have not lived up to their contract, and as in any industry, if you do not live up to your contract then you may not be entitled to your full pay.

“Their goal was to get us to rejoin the BFC and allow them to fish 0B quota.” — Of course, BFC would like to see Nattivak HTO rejoin BFC. It is important to point out that BFC has never fished any of Nattivak’s 0B turbot quota with the Inuksuk I or any other vessel. Yes, BFC did say that it would like to harvest the 0B quota on their behalf. However, we made it very clear that this was their quota and it was theirs to do with as they wished. Considering that BFC is owned by Inuit-owned organizations, does it not make more sense for the Inuksuk I to fish this quota for them on their behalf?

“When BFC was formed, they promised they would be fishing 60 per cent of their quota with trawlers and 40% with hook and line.” — This is correct and we still believe in that objective, however, despite us informing Mr. Kooneeliusie and his board as to why our 2004 hook and line percentages were down, he again elected not to tell you why BFC’s percentage of hook and line caught fish in 2004 was low in comparsion to 2002 and 2003.

In 2001, all of the 0A turbot allocation was harvested by trawlers and not hook and line vessels because there simply were not any hook and line vessels in Canada with the capacity to harvest in 0A. In 2002 and 2003, after calling for proposals, and again not finding Canadian hook and line vessels with the capacity to harvest 0A turbot, we received permission from DFO to use several foreign hook and line vessels, and as a result the percentage of hook and line harvested 0A turbot increased from 0 per cent in 2001 to 32 per cent in 2002 and 2003, real progress to a balanced fishery.

Again in 2004, BFC requested of DFO to allow the use of several foreign vessels in 2004, under the condition that the vessels would be Canadianized for 2005. Because of all the issues regarding the Canadianization of the Inuksuk 1, DFO rejected our request, knowing very well that the percentage of 0A turbot to be harvested with hook and line vessels would be down compared to 2002 and 2003. We now feel confident that our percentage of hook and line caught fish will increase in 2005 and beyond, since several hook and line vessel were Canadianized in late 2004 and are ready for the fishery in 2005.

BFC is certainly not favouring factory freezer vessels versus hook and line vessels, but rather a balanced approach to the fishery. BFC made the decision to charter a factory freezer trawler as its first venture into the fishery because it offered it more flexibility as follows:

• The vessel has a much larger carrying capacity, and considering the distance from offloading ports it felt it was more important to have the vessel fishing longer than to have it steaming back and forth to port.

• Because of the harsh environment the larger trawlers can fish longer during the season than hook and line vessels. These large trawlers can fish in ice conditions while the hook and line vessels cannot.

• BFC wanted a vessel that could fish both shrimp and turbot. A trawler can do this and a hook and line vessel cannot. By having a multi-purpose vessel BFC was simply reducing the risk factors and increasing its chances of success.

• Any vessel, whether factory or hook and line, has to maximize its fishing days, and with the abundance of shrimp in the south, the Inuksuk 1 could be kept busy year-round and not for just half of the year.

• By having success with its first vessel, it could reinvest some of the proceeds back into the development of the inshore fishery.

In conclusion, these misleading statements being made by the Nattivak HTO are inappropriate, and being fueled by southern self-generating interests who will be really financing and managing the fishing operation for Nattivak HTO. It should be pointed out that the individual that Nattivak is working with is a middle man who brokers vessels and services.

In 2001, this individual was acting as agent for a foreign vessel owner that was fishing for BFC. In 2002, both BFC and the vessel owner decided that they did not need a middle-man and the cost associated with that individual, so they decided to deal directly with each other.

We are prepared to work with Nattivak HTO, and as a member of BFC, we would support their effort to gain a portion of any future 0A turbot increase, and work towards maximizing Inuit employment.

Ben Kovic, President
Baffin Fisheries Coalition