| dc.contributor.author |
Winbourne, Janet |
en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned |
2009-07-31T14:30:05Z |
|
| dc.date.available |
2009-07-31T14:30:05Z |
|
| dc.date.issued |
1998 |
en_US |
| dc.date.submitted |
2001-07-02 |
en_US |
| dc.date.submitted |
2001-07-02 |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri |
https://hdl.handle.net/10535/454 |
|
| dc.description.abstract |
"The salmon fisheries of the Pacific coast of Canada have been heralded as some of the most abundant in the world. During the last two decades, stock declines have been accompanied by intensifying conflicts between resource users and resource managers. Since the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in R. v Sparrow (1990) federal strategies for the management of the Aboriginal food fisheries have been modified to accomodate emerging legal definitions of Aboriginal rights. In 1992, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans introduced the Aboriginal Fisheries Strategy (AFS) in response to the suggestions of the Court. The underlying policy objective was to provide a clear and simple regulatory framework for the management of the fisheries in a manner consistent with the Sparrow decision and with the communal nature of Aboriginal fishing rights.
"I will argue that the AFS has met with limited success because it continues to impose principles and practices of a state management system that are culturally inappropriate for many First Nation communities and resource use systems. By ignoring the importance of the social, spiritual, and cultural purposes underlying the harvest and use of salmon in Aboriginal communities, promoters of the state model of fisheries management will remain in conflict with those who most value and rely on the resource. In practice, a quota severely limits the ability of Aboriginal fishers to provide for their needs through tradition resource distribution systems. Philosophically, it represents state perceptions of the salmon resource and its management that are opposed to those found in Aboriginal models. In this paper I will examine some of the reasons underlying opposition to the AFS within the cultural context of one coastal First Nation." |
en_US |
| dc.language |
English |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
IASC |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
common pool resources |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
fisheries |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
Native Americans |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
conflict |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
indigenous institutions |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
coastal resources |
en_US |
| dc.title |
Meeting Needs: A Consideration of the Aboriginal Fisheries Strategy and the Future of Food Fisheries Management |
en_US |
| dc.type |
Conference Paper |
en_US |
| dc.type.published |
unpublished |
en_US |
| dc.coverage.region |
North America |
en_US |
| dc.coverage.country |
Canada |
|
| dc.subject.sector |
Fisheries |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.citationconference |
Crossing Boundaries, the Seventh Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Property |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.citationconfdates |
June 10-14 |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.citationconfloc |
Vancouver, BC, Canada |
en_US |
| dc.submitter.email |
hess@indiana.edu |
en_US |