210 F.NFORCIMIHr 



qiuilc compliance can be achieved becaase of 

 enlightened selt'-intcresi growing out ot a prtv 

 gram i>l public inlormalion. A tt>lciahlc level 

 of compliance can only be achieved when the 

 ci>ninuinit\ is fully aware that the prime goal 

 of the local wildlife law eiiforccniciit otficer is 

 law enforcement. And they respect him and 

 his mission, convinced that violators will be 

 apprehended, that laws apply equally to all 

 and that the system is creating a deterrent by 

 removing the benefits from misuse of 

 resources.... Certainly the otlicer's obligation 

 to resources remains the first consideration 

 and number one priority, but his training, his 

 equipment and his attitude must reflect a law 

 enforcement strategy.... People management 

 and biological management of resources are 

 not totally in harmony as each has its own 

 peculiar need for competence and profession- 

 alism. That need can only be accomplished if 

 neither is diluted to the point of inefficiency. 

 A Departmental separation of both functions 

 is the only means to secure a maximum 

 benefit to resources.* 



A study commissioned by the B.C. Ministry of Recre- 

 ation and Conservation in 1977 also recommended that 

 the management and enforcement functions of the 

 departmental conservation officers be separated. I under- 

 stand that these recommendations have been carried out 

 with considerable success. 



From time to time the Department itself has recog- 

 nized the need for a specialized enforcement unit. In 

 1979. a study prepared for the Pacific region on a licens- 

 ing and resource royalty program recognized the different 

 specialties required of an investigating officer as opposed 

 to a landings verification officer.'* More recently, in 1982, 

 a regional review of inshore patrol vessels in the Pacific 

 region expressed the need for a special enforcement 

 squadron to be established in each division for the pur- 

 pose of providing a "high profile enforcement presence 

 that has been lacking."'" And at the Commission's hear- 

 ings on enforcement. Departmental personnel indicated 

 that, since 1979, the Department has recognized the need 

 to separate management and enforcement functions to a 

 limited extent in the roe-herring fishery. 



However, despite this apparent support for a special- 

 ized enforcement unit, the recent disbandment of the 

 General Investigation Unit suggests that enforcement is 

 still relegated to a position of low priority by the Depart- 

 ment. Given the aim of conserving the resource and the 

 increasing threats made to the resource by illegal fishing 

 activity, the Department must reassess its view that such 

 specialized enforcement activity is a luxury. 



What is needed is a well-equipped, highly trained, 

 mobile team of fishery enforcement officers to supple- 

 ment ficlil staff. The mere presence of an aggressive, 

 highly visible enforcement team on the fishing grounds 

 would increase the [X-rceived risk associated with illegal 

 activity and would thus have a significant deterrent 

 effect. 



My recommendations are geared to this need. In 

 designing them I have considered the specialized needs of 

 the fisheries resource, training and equipment require- 

 ments, the vast area to be policed, the inevitable budget 

 and manpower constraints faced by the Department and 

 implications for administration. The range of alternatives 

 put forward and discussed at the Commission's hearings 

 covered a number of possible combinations of these fac- 

 tors. The following recommendations are an attempt to 

 incorporate the best aspects of each. 



4. In the Pacific region a special enforcement unit should 

 be created whose exclusive responsibilities will be 

 enforcement. Their duties should not include resource 

 management. 



The unit should be primarily responsible for enforcing 

 the Fisheries Act and all regulations except those relating 

 to fish quality, processing plants and vessel sanitary 

 standards, which should continue to be enforced by the 

 Inspection Division. 



Members of the unit should receive rigorous training in 

 all relevant enforcement techniques in the context of the 

 special needs of the fisheries resource. The current train- 

 ing arrangements with the R.C.M.P. should be expanded 

 or else arrangements made with the B.C. Justice Institute 

 in Vancouver, which now trains provincial conservation 

 officers. Enforcement skills of members should be 

 updated regularly through refresher courses. With special 

 training and supervision, a revamped enforcement capa- 

 bility should be able to handle most, if not all, offences. 



Members of the special enforcement unit should wear 

 uniforms to engender a professional image. Side arms 

 should be available to them, to be worn when their safety 

 or that of others is threatened. And they should be prop- 

 erly equipped with vehicles and have access to well- 

 equipped vessels for patrols at sea and in the estuaries 

 and rivers. They should be linked to headquarters and 

 field offices 24 hours a day by short-wave radio services. 



Fishery enforcement officers should be stationed in 

 each of 10 districts in the Pacific region. The number to 

 be assigned to each district will vary by district, depend- 

 ing on local needs. To the extent that they are qualified 

 and have a keen interest in enforcement, fishery officers 

 now employed in the region should be posted to the 

 enforcement unit. If necessary, these personnel should be 

 supplemented by others hired from outside the Depart- 



