Efforts to overhaul the Fisheries Act have “stalled” according to Ruth Salmon, executive director of the aquaculture lobby group, the Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance.

The group has been pressuring the federal government to “modernize” fishing legislature to redefine fish farming as an extension of the federal Ministry of Agriculture. This proposal was brought to the British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture – which appears to be on board, according to documents obtained under the B.C. freedom-of-information law.

The Ministry recognizes the Fisheries Act as expired legislature, a “poor fit” that “lacks the capacity” to allow proper development of the aquaculture industry.

(*) What is the information? 

Briefing notes for Norm Letnick, the B.C. Minster of Agriculture. The document suggests provincial recognition that the Fisheries Act is a “poor fit” and the regulatory framework doesn’t allow growth of the aquaculture industry.

(*) From which department did these pages come?

British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture

(*) Why was this information helpful?

The document helped to provide a focus for the story and directed the questioning for Salmon and the Ministry.

Though the Ministry appears favourable towards Salmon’s CAIA proposal, and they slighted a question regarding their support for Salmon’s proposal, the government remains reluctant to be vocal in their support of rehauling federal regulations.

In an email response the Ministry said they’re aware of the CAIA’s proposal, though there are drafts being drawn up by the Strategic Management Committee – a group of provincial and federal officials from across the country –  to bring the aged legislation up to meet the with modern aquaculture industry.

Salmon argues the Fisheries Act was brought into existence “before aquaculture was even a concept” and that it shouldn’t surprise that aquaculture not a good fit for a dated Act.

There is “a lot of overlap,” Salmon says, and that they comply with 74 current pieces of legislation that are “conflicting” and “confusing” when considering aquaculture as a farming industry rather than a fishery.

According to Salmon, Canada has been “stalled for 13 years” while other nations benefit from federal policy on aquaculture that is cultivating a growing global industry that Salmon estimates is growing at a rate of “79 per cent per year.”

(*) What is the information? 

This document is from the same briefing note. It highlights the discussion of what a Aquaculture Act may provide.

(*) From which department did these pages come?

British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture

(*) Why was this information helpful?

The document helped to understand the depth of the issue and allow experts and Ministry to refer to what has been said about a proposed Aquaculture Act.

Most of Canada’s top competitors – the United States, Chile, Norway, Scotland, Ireland, New Zealand and Australia – have already enacted aquaculture legislation and Salmon believes it’s time Canada modernizes their fishing industry to change policy regarding aquaculture and increase provincial and federal oversight to encourage growth.

Easier said than done.

The complexity surrounding aquaculture policy and the Fishing Act isn’t new; many experts wouldn’t comment (better to say they couldn’t comment) because they are still grappling with the unclarity surrounding an industry in a grey area.

It’s an industry caught between two Ministries; existing as a fishery under the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, but persisting as farming.

Peter Tyedmers, professor of environmental science at Dalhousie, says a federal act will in no way “disentangle” the web of complexity involving the constitution.

He says the division of power and responsibility between federal and provincial governments add to the complex framework. Current government oversight under the Fisheries Act, he says, is a “crazy patchwork quilt” of competing jurisdictions. And that is the leading cause for confusion.

As an example, Tyedmers says provinces like P.E.I. have the authority to provide licenses and decide the size of the farm – a degree of governance with some sovereignty. Though, a federal Aquaculture Act would allow for further federal oversight and mingling into provincial jurisdictions.

“The people drafting this have enough sense to know that they cannot change the constitutional powers of the government with one act,” Tyedmers said. He defines the proposed Act as a “constitutional interpretation challenge,” one that higher courts may strike down based on the federal-provincial conflict.

What remains consistent throughout expert opinion, lobbyists and government officials is the unclear, confusing mess of legislation that overlaps the aquaculture industry and fisheries.

“The complexity as a failure of government,” Tyedmers said.

____________________

Federal: Department of Fisheries and Oceans

**Received a call March 24 to add some to the request. She only added the word ‘proposed’ before ‘federal Aquaculture Act’ so that it may generate more hits, or be less specific as to get a better response.

**Received another call asking if I wanted private emails, because there may not be a lot of records and the emails will add much more.

Provincial: B.C. Ministry of Agriculture

**Acknowledged my request.

Municipal: City of Vancouver

**Acknowledged my request.