NWMB responds to May 13 editorial

With respect to your May 13 editorial regarding an alleged conflict of interest on the part of the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, the NWMB would appreciate the opportunity to publicly respond to your allegation, and to inform you and the readers of the facts.

Your argument leading to the conclusion of conflict of interest is the following:

1. The Nunavut fisheries working group (NFWG) is a de facto economic development body composed of the Government of Nunavut, Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. and the NWMB.
2. The BFC is a political creation fostered by the Nunavut fisheries working group. The public interest demands that environmental boards, such as the NWMB, not participate in the creation of commercial enterprises, especially enterprises they will be involved in regulating.
3. By participating as a member of the Nunavut fisheries working group, the NWMB has signaled that in any quota allocation issue involving the BFC’s interests, it is highly unlikely that it will be impartial.

With respect to point number one: The Nunavut fisheries working group came together in 1999 as an informal group composed of representatives of the GN, NTI and the NWMB to address areas of common interest in the development of Nunavut’s fisheries. This was nothing new.

Since the establishment of the NWMB in 1993, the board has always worked closely with its co-management partners on a variety of wildlife issues relevant to the NWMB’s jurisdiction. This is one of the strengths of the co-management system, and very much in line with the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit principle of Piliriqatigiingniq (working together in harmony to achieve a common purpose).

As the main instrument of fisheries management and the main regulator of access to fish resources under the Nunavut land claims agreement, the NWMB has taken the position that it is entirely appropriate to discuss development issues with its co-management partners, and to co-operate with them on initiatives designed to improve Nunavut’s share of its adjacent fish resources. That co-operation has led to the spectacular results of recent years, including an increase in Nunavut’s share of its adjacent turbot resources from 27 per cent to 58 per cent.

All that having been said, while its busy members do keep in touch, the Nunavut fisheries working group itself is not particularly active. It did, however, produce the important 2003 submission to the Senate’s standing committee on fisheries on quota allocations and benefits to northern fishers. That submission accurately reflects the focus of the working group’s efforts: access and allocations with respect to adjacent fish resources.

Concerning point number two: In 2001 – based primarily upon the impressive results of a comprehensive turbot research survey jointly organized and funded by the NWMB and Department of Fisheries and Oceans – the DFO minister provided a new and exclusive allocation to Nunavut fishers of 3,500 tonnes in the northern part of Davis Strait. Prior to that allocation, Nunavut’s overall turbot quota was too small to form the critical mass necessary for true fisheries development. All that could be done was enter into endless royalty charters with southern interests, who fished the quota with their vessels and their crews. At the end of each season, those southern interests sailed away with the majority of the profits.

When it came time to allocate the new 3,500 tonne quota, the NWMB members responsibly decided to call a meeting of all the Inuit organizations that had submitted applications to fish the new allocation, to determine how they wanted to proceed. Those organizations included all six of the HTOs along Baffin Island’s east coast. The meeting was organized with the assistance of the GN, DFO and NTI, who were also in attendance. It produced no decisions – only discussions among all participants.

It was not until approximately a month later that the fishers, having considered their options, decided on their own to forego fragmented quotas, embrace the principle of Piliriqatigiingniq and work together. Shortly thereafter, they developed and signed a memorandum of understanding and a three-year work plan. They eventually incorporated themselves as the BFC.

Besides organizing that single consultation meeting at which it offered the observation – based upon experience and already shared by most, of not all, the particpants – that small, divided quotas favour southern interests, the NWMB did nothing further. It certainly did not participate in the creation of the BFC. The eventual members of the BFC were entirely capable of deciding their future for themselves, and did so.

With respect to point number three: by participating as a member of the fisheries working group, the NWMB has signaled only that it continues to proudly and successfully work in collaboration with its co-management partners on fisheries development issues. As to the issue of impartiality, while cheating within any organization is always possible, to be effective in the case of the NWMB and fish allocations, it would have to involve conspiracies and the breaking of solemn oaths by a majority of NWMB members.

Every quota allocation decision that the NWMB makes requires a majority vote, and is available to the public subject to privacy considerations. All NWMB meeting minutes are also publicly available. Furthermore, in making commercial marine allocations, the NWMB applies a set of objective criteria that includes the following: employment benefits, training benefits, ownership/sponsorship by an HTO or RWO, ownership by Nunavut residents, economic dependency and history, adjacency and harvesting methods.

Nevertheless, the NWMB is scheduled to carry out a thorough review of that policy later this year, to make improvements if necessary, and to undertake consultations with Nunavummiut prior to finalizing the revised policy in time to evaluate applications for the 2006 fishing season. The NWMB urges widespread public participation in those consultations, in order to help ensure continued public confidence in the board’s allocation of Nunavut’s fish resources.

Harry Flaherty
Acting Chairperson
Nunavut Wildlife Management Board