:S6 ItHIlN l\iri 1 \ll \l \IUiN WDKIVIIU 



ii) S<>t iMit IIh' IV'|);irtiiK'iit's iiuinautMiH'nt ri-sp^tusi- 

 iHlilii-s aiul iilaiiniii^ proiitliiri's, IIk' m(>(K' of 

 these sImhiUI Ih' hniiul, k'a>iii^ im> (kHihl alMiiit llu- 

 IX'p;irtiiKiit's iiuiiulali- to tiri\ii\ol\ iiuiiiaL;!- 

 tishi-rk-N aiul llivl ik'vi'lii|inK'iit. 



iii) C'oiiiiiiit tJR' IV'partim-nt to iiite^^ralcHl riNource 

 iiuiiia;;t'iiM'iit ami plaiiiiiti^, aixl set <Hit arraii(;c- 

 iiitiits tor (kaliii^ w'uU |iroj<.vts aiul (k'vel<»piiK'nts 

 tlut atkvt lisli liahital. 



iv) Devote a separate part to Paeifit fisheries, e<ni- 

 sisteiit v>ith IIk- national |)olic> franiemtrk. 



v) Set out tlw k*gal aiithoritv and proeedures to be 

 folkmixl in alkxatin^ the sport, conuiKTcial and 

 Indian fishing rights reconuiiended in Parts III 

 and l\ of this report. 



vi) Provide for the appointment of the Pacific Fish- 

 eries Council reconuiK'nded in Chapter 17. and 

 create t\w Pacific Fisheries Licensing Board pro- 

 posed in Chapter 8. 



vii) Fomiali) delegate decision-niaking authority to 

 the licensing board and. where appropriate, to 

 regional officials of the Department. 



viii) Include a clear and consistent structure of penal- 

 ties, recx)nmiended in Chapter 16. 



The anachronisms in the current Act should be elimi- 

 nated: some provisions now in regulations should be ele- 

 vated to the new statute, and vice versa. With a separate 

 part devoted to Pacific fisheries policy, it should be much 

 easier to stnke an appropriate balance between the need 

 for a national policy and the need to recognize regional 

 diversity, and between the amount of policy detail to be 

 incorporated into the new Act and the amount to go into 

 regulations. Many other considerations will go into draft- 

 ing the new legislation concerning its structure, organiza- 

 tion, and detailed provisions, which cannot be dealt with 

 in this report. 



Although I recommend that the Fisheries Act be 

 replaced, this process undoubtedly will be time consum- 

 ing. Some recommendations in this report (particularly 

 those concerning licensing in Part III) should be imple- 

 mented before the end of this year and thus should not 

 wait for a new Fisheries Act. Accordingly, I recommend 

 that— 



2. Pending passage of a new Fisheries Act, new commer- 

 cial fisheries licensing regulations should be passed 

 immediately to implement the proposals in Part III of 

 this report. 



Regulations Regulations are passed by the federal 

 Governor General in Council (effectively, the cabinet) 

 and have the force of law. In all, the Department admin- 



isters 21 sets of regulations in the Pacific region, jiasscil 

 under several statutes and covermg a diverse range ol 

 subjects including fisheries management loi the various 

 species, (.omnicrcial and sporlfishing licensing, fish 

 inspcclioii and Wikon fisheries. Most deal with detailctl 

 aspects of policy, such as specifying mesh sizes for nets 

 and other gear restrictions, and describing management 

 areas. But they now also include laws that have major 

 implications for fisheries management and private inter- 

 ests, such as the Department's licensing program. 



Inconsistencies and duplication among some of the 

 regulations have arisen as a result of their having been 

 enacted and amended piecemeal over the years. In con- 

 junction with preparing the new Act, the government 

 should streamline and consolidate the Pacific fisheries 

 regulations. TTierefore, I recommend that — 



3. New Pacific fisheries regulations should be passed 

 under the new Fisheries Act. They sh(»uld contain 

 administrative detail ancillary to the Act and policies 

 that must be adjusted quickly in response to changing 

 conservation and manageiiK'nt needs. 



1 will not comment on the many detailed aspects of the 

 current regulations, but two disturbing problems deserve 

 mention. 



One concerns the time it takes for regulations to be 

 passed. At the Commission's hearings, the Department 

 described the tortuous and complicated government pro- 

 cedures that are followed in obtaining needed amend- 

 ments to fisheries regulations. Before becoming law, they 

 pass through 17 hands within the Department and the 

 Privy Council organization and this can take up to 6 

 months. Delays of this nature are understandable for 

 amendments to statutes that must be passed by Parlia- 

 ment, but they are inexcuseable for changes to regula- 

 tions that should be far more expeditious. They have cre- 

 ated serious management and enforcement difficulties 

 and have been an acute embarassment for the Depart- 

 ment in dealing with the public and provincial govern- 

 ment. For example, this year's freshwater sportfishing 

 regulations were not passed until the fishing season was 

 half over. While they are in limbo, their enforcement 

 must depend on voluntary public compliance or, in some 

 cases, bluff. 



By their nature, most Pacific fisheries must be con- 

 served and managed seasonally, and the Department 

 must be able to adjust its policies quickly in response to 

 changing needs. Current procedures are a serious hin- 

 drance to the Department in effectively discharging its 

 responsibilities. So I recommend that — 



4. The federal government's procedures for passing 

 fishing regulations should be streamlined so that they 

 can be changed quickly in response to changing needs. 



