Cod ban effect could be dire 

By ROB ANTLE (rantle@thetelegram.com)

Newfoundland and Labrador, November 8, 2005.

Declaring cod an endangered species would deprive thousands of fisheries workers of income in Newfoundland and Labrador, speed up the out-migration process and potentially suck $75 million out of the provincial economy in just one year.

The long-term impacts could also be dire, according to confidential briefing papers prepared for the fed-

eral cabinet and obtained by The Telegram.

Any decision to declare northern cod an endangered species under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) could essentially shutter the cod fishery in all regions of the province, even the south coast, where a limited commercial fishery remains viable.

The decision would hit Newfoundland where it hurts most, in already decimated rural areas.

“Management scenarios that involve further restrictions on harvesting cod may increase out-migration from rural communities,” the document warns.

That would have a cascading effect on everything from reduced funding for schools and hospitals in rural areas to smaller transfer payments from Ottawa to more people heading to the social assistance rolls.

“While estimating these costs is beyond the scope of this analysis, they should be considered in a listing decision,” the papers advise.

Complicating the matter is a clause in the act that could prohibit the sale of cod, even from commercially viable zones like 3Ps on the south coast of Newfoundland, where there is a 15,000-tonne quota.

Millions lost

Federal officials estimate the decision’s direct annual impact on Newfoundland’s harvesting and processing sectors would approach $34.5 million, if cod sales were still allowed.

More than 1,500 licence holders and 3,300 crew — defined as those who derived any revenue from a potentially restricted fishery — would be affected.

About 20 per cent of those workers would be considered “dependent,” those who could lose 25 per cent or more of their fishing revenue as a result of Ottawa’s decision.

The equivalent of another 750 processing jobs would be lost.

“A very high percentage (90 per cent) of the total impacts would be felt in Newfoundland and Labrador,” the documents advise.

“However, the impacts in Quebec and Nova Scotia would nevertheless be significant — all of these impacts are concentrated upon an economically vulnerable group of individuals.”

And under the legislation being considered, things could get worse.

“In addition to the harvest restrictions contained in the scenarios under consideration throughout this document, a listing under SARA could result in additional impacts from an automatic prohibition on the sale of cod, whether that cod originates from a directed fishery or is by-caught in another fishery,” the documents state.

Translation: another $40 million in annual losses to the Newfoundland economy.

More than 2,600 licence holders would be affected. More than 6,300 crew members would be affected. About 1,250 processing jobs — the equivalent of 500 full-time employees — would be affected.

The south coast and Burin Peninsula would be hardest hit, the documents predict.

And federal officials could not determine whether any long-term gain would outweigh the short-term pain.

“Long-term benefits may not accrue until a number of years into the future, if at all. In light of the aging demographic of the industry and rural communities, those who would bear the immediate costs may not be those who would realize the future benefits of a management scenario. This analysis does not examine the distributions of costs and benefits across generations.”

In zone 3NO, which includes international waters regulated by the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO), Canada’s plans could be scuttled altogether if other countries don’t get on board.

“Results from the 20-years projections for 3NO show clearly that the success of Canadian conservation efforts depend critically upon the harvest in the NAFO Regulatory Area,” the documents state.

“Without compliance … no Canadian conservation measures would be sufficient.”

And even if NAFO countries comply? “Foregone revenue would be approximately $346 million, mostly from Newfoundland.”

The document was prepared by Department of Fisheries and Oceans officials in October.

Its purpose is “to present estimates of the potential socio-economic impacts of fisheries management scenarios which could occur under a listing of two populations of Atlantic cod on Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA).”

The document obtained by The Telegram contains estimates based on the “most plausible alternative” if the Paul Martin government opts to classify northern cod as endangered.

Alternatives

That would include:

• a “prioritized rebuilding scenario” in zone 2J3KL — a continued moratorium, and a reduction in bycatch of cod by 50 per cent through reductions in the winter flounder fishery of 53 per cent.

• a “maximum rebuilding scenario” in zone 3NO, with a continued moratorium on the directed fishery, and a reduction in the bycatch of cod through the closure of skate, yellowtail, redfish, and Atlantic halibut fisheries. The monkfish fishery could also be shut down.

The calculations used 2004 as a base year. Since then, the document notes, the Canadian dollar has risen sharply, as have fuel costs.

Those factors would hurt harvesters even more.

In May 2003, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada officially declared most Newfoundland cod to be endangered.

The independent scientific panel slotted south-coast cod into the “threatened” category.

In April 2004, Ottawa decided not to act on the listing advice.

The feds instead opted to embark on a tour of Newfoundland for public consultations on the issue.

“It does not mean that these species may not be listed eventually,” Fisheries Minister Geoff Regan said at the time.

“The fact of the matter is, this allows for consultation with people who are involved in this issue from all points of view.”

The idea was largely panned by people throughout the province later that year.

The Martin government could make a decision on the issue as early as the end of the month.