'U VnMIMSIRMION 



I able l*>-2 IX'p;irtmcnt i)t Fisheries and Oceans 

 national alliKation ot biulgcl and nian- 

 rK)wcr. 1981-82 



IIUIipOWtT 



Fisheries 

 HeaUifuarters 

 Resions 



Newfoundland 



Gulf 



Scotia- Fundy 



Ontario 



Western 



Patil'ic 



(Xean Science and Surveys 

 Pacific region 

 Other regions and 

 headquarters 1036 18 



Total Fishenes and Oceans 5866 100 



Source: I>epartment of Fisheries and Oceans. 



pt-rsoii- 

 _^fiirs 



565 



860 

 200 



1247 

 123 

 306 



1231 



298 



1036 

 5866 



|nrixiil I 



10 



15 



4 

 21 



2 



5 

 21 



iHtd^'l 



millions 

 if (liillars 



98.5 



60.8 

 29.7 

 77.4 

 9.0 

 15.0 

 84.1 



17.2 



54.4 

 44^vl 



percent 



22 



14 

 7 



17 

 2 

 3 



19 



_I2 

 100 



The pattern of budget and manpower allocations in the 

 Pacific region is depicted in Figure 19-1. Of the region's 

 $84 million budget for the 1981-82 fiscal year, wages and 

 salaries account for $34 million, goods and services $30 

 million, and capital expenditures $20 million. About $50 

 million, or 60 percent of the region's budget, was allo- 

 cated to Fisheries Management and Research. The 

 remaining 40 percent of the budget ($34 million) was 

 allocated to the Salmonid Enhancement Program. The 

 Government of British Columbia contributed an addi- 

 tional $1.5 million to this program in that year. 



Recent Turmoil 



A striking feature of the Department has been its 

 repeated attempts to reorganize, particularly during the 

 past decade. In conjunction with frequent changes in sen- 

 ior personnel, this has produced an unstable administra- 

 tive environment in the Pacific region. 



Responsibilities for the fisheries of Canada rest primar- 

 ily with the federal govermnent. Traditionally, this 

 national responsibility has been supported by a full- 

 fledged Minister and Department. But in 1971 fisheries 

 was brought under the awkward umbrella of a newly cre- 

 ated Department of Environment, along with forestry, 

 meteorology, wildlife, water and environmental protec- 

 tion. 



Within the Department of the Environment, the Fish- 

 eries Service was headed by one of seven Assistant Dep- 

 uty Ministers, but because of the wide variety of 

 disparate agencies in this conglomerate department, 

 fisheries suffered from a lack of focus and attention at 

 senior levels. This shortcoming was recognized, and in 

 1975 a Minister of State for Fisheries was appointed to 

 share responsibilities for the Department of the Environ- 



ment. In adililion, the position of Senior A.s.sistant Dep- 

 uty Minister was created to heaii ilic fisheries and 

 Marine Service. 



Three years later, in 1978, a .separate Department of 

 Fisheries and Oceans was created, in effect reversing the 

 decision made seven years earlier to consolidate fisheries 

 with other areas of federal responsibility in the Depart- 

 ment of the Environment. With this structure came the 

 appointment of a Minister, a Deputy Minister and four 

 Assistant Deputies, which we have today. 



While these developments were taking place, the 

 Ottawa headquarters of the Department was expanding 

 and becoming more heavily involved in Pacific region 

 decisions, with a corresponding dilution of influence by 

 regional officials. Successive waves of structural change 

 have led to an apparent preoccupation with internal 

 administrative matters both in Ottawa and in the region. 

 During this period three different individuals held the 

 position of Director General (formerly called Director) 

 for the Pacific region, each of whom made significant 

 organizational changes during his tenure. 



These changes did little to improve the effectiveness of 

 the Department. As one participant noted — 



Re-organizations of management agencies 

 have occurred with some regularity in 

 response to changing circumstances. How- 

 ever, the organizational changes have done 

 little to improve stock management and habi- 

 tat protection. Furthermore, the institutional 

 instability has resulted in the departure of 

 significant numbers of Fisheries and Oceans 

 stafl!" including several well qualified fisheries 

 biologists.'' 



The 1970s also saw the retirement of many fishery 

 ofl^cers and professional staff who had been recruited 

 from the armed forces after World War II. The influx of 

 less-experienced replacement persormel added to admin- 

 istrative stress in the region. 



These administrative disruptions came at a time when 

 the Department's ability to manage the fisheries 

 resources of the Pacific coast was being challenged by a 

 number of important events. These included the exten- 

 sion of fisheries' jurisdiction from 12 to 200 miles, the 

 development of the Salmonid Enhancement Program, the 

 explosive emergence of the roe-herring fishery, a sharp 

 increase in the catching power of fishing fleets, accelera- 

 ting participation in sportfishing, new difficulties relating 

 to the Indian fishery, and increasing public concern 

 about environmental quality and protection of fish habi- 

 tat. The resources of the region were tested as never 

 before during a period of almost continual administrative 

 upheaval and retrenchment. These events took their toll 



