Remember when Canada used to take morally courageous stands on issues and was well-respected for it? Remember when it was America on the wrong side of so many issues, rather than Canada? And remember when the lust for profits didn't necessarily trump all else in every decision this country made?
Well, I've got something new for you to all remember and it's something, when the time comes, I sure hope no one forgets: When you read about the complete collapse of the Atlantic bluefin tuna population and its eventual extinction in a few short years from now, remember that it was Canada, as much as any other nation (aside from Japan), that was responsible.
Who gives a *$%# about bluefin tuna, you ask?
See also
Can commercial fisheries ever be sustainable? (March 30, 2009)
Well, short answer, certainly not Canada. And if you did ask such a question then you're most likely a strong supporter of this country's current Conservative government and you probably should just stop reading here.
However, for those of you who do care but don't necessarily follow all the goings on at meetings of groups like the U.N. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), let me fill you in.
CITES is currently in the middle of an important meeting and just today (March 18) voted on a proposal to ban the export of bluefin tuna. The proposal failed.
Some would argue that in order to let the stock replenish itself what is actually needed is a complete ban on catching these huge fish, but sadly even with both the European Union and America backing it, not even today's proposed limited ban was able to pass.
And what about Canada? Well, the Canadian government's position is quite clear and can be summed up rather succinctly (and I paraphrase): "Screw the tuna, let's make some more money while we still can!"
Bluefin stocks may be down 85 percent from their peak and on an unbridled path to almost certain extinction, but why let that spoil a few more good years of fishing, right?
Seriously, it was really terrific to see the world once again step up to the plate and forcefully say "Let's do nothing". Just like at the U.N. climate change conference in Copenhagen a few months back.
Consistent to a Fault
The one thing you can say about this Stephen Harper-led government is that it is quite consistent. That is, when it comes to the environment our government is consistently opposed to doing anything concrete to make things better. Not if it'll cost us a thing economically.
Four years ago it was a ban on bottom trawling that our country took a bold, strong stand against. And it was an especially brave stand when you consider that the world's fish stocks are forecast to disappear by the year 2050 and that bottom trawling is considered one of the main contributing causes.
Why would Canada not care about such a thing, you ask? Well, simply put, because Canada's fishing fleet still makes big profits off of bottom trawling, of course.
Even George W. Bush, of all people, supported that ban. And it really takes a lot to have George W. Bush make you look like a heartless environmental degrader. But that's exactly what happened.
In fact, in recent years many things about Canada's environmental record have been making America's record look quite good in comparison.
For instance, at this very same CITES conference this week Canada voted against a U.S. proposal to ban the international sale of polar bears skins, another animal on the decline that it seems Canada cares little about.
Then there's the collapsing Fraser River sockeye salmon population, a collapse linked by many scientists to the fish farms dotting the B.C. coast. Fish farms, it should be noted, that the government seems to consider untouchable.
I'm starting to wonder whether there's any ban this country would support, at least if there was a buck to be made in opposing it.
Of course, the most glaring of all this country's environmental crimes is the lack of government control, or even concern, when it comes to that infamous, globally-despised wasteland known as the oil sands (the single largest contributor to our title as "The World's Worst Per Capita Climate Change Polluters"—and what a magnificent title that is!).
Canada's overall environmental record may rank as the worst among the G-8 nations, and the WWF (World Wildlife Fund) may have recently ranked Canada as the "worst climate performer amongst [the] top 10 greenhouse gas emitters" and "56th out of 57 countries evaluated, ahead of only Saudi Arabia", but who really cares since, as Dave Chappelle playing Rick James on Chappelle's Show would say, "We're rich, bitch!"
Jaded Japan
Sure, you can say Japan, which imports 80 percent of the Atlantic bluefin catch and has led the opposition to the ban, is the main villain in this whole tuna story, but, let's face it, Japan has long been a joke when it comes to anything involving conservation and the sea.
After all, Japan's government is, at this very minute, allowing its school kids to be fed toxic mercury-laced dolphin meat labeled as "whale" (as was discussed in last year's great documentary The Cove).
We're also talking about the same government that is ferocious in its commitment to slaughtering a thousand or more whales every year in the name of "research", research that has absolutely no scientific value.
I mean, really, what do you expect from such a country?
At least they're opposing the ban on the grounds that they can't do without their beloved "hon-maguro" sushi and sashimi (that is, at least until it becomes extinct in a few years), while countries like Canada are simply opposed to the ban due to nothing more than good ol' fashioned notions of greed and lust for profit.
Morally Bankrupt
You can scoff at me all you like, but some of us can actually still remember a time when Canada wasn't completely morally bankrupt. A time, say, in the 1990s, when we weren't on the wrong side of history on just about every single environmental issue.
At this point it almost wouldn't surprise me if our government came out in support of tiger hunting. Or lead-based paint. Or the export of asbestos (oh, I forgot, as I reported in my Top Ten Things To Love and Hate About Canada piece, we already do that).
Certainly, Stephen Harper and his Conservatives are chiefly to blame for many of these reprehensible stands, but some of this predates their rise to power. The fact is Canada has been on a slow road to environmental pariah status for years now.
The State Religion
Think back to the complete inaction on the Atlantic cod fishery 20 years ago that led to the catastrophic collapse of that once-thriving fish population.
In fact, it feels like we're experiencing an almost identical case of negligent inaction with the bluefin. It really feels like déjí vu.
Clearly there's really only one state religion in Canada and it's called greed. The planet be damned. Future generations be damned. And the bluefin tuna? Well, once again, it can go %&$* itself for all the Canadian government cares.
Just like the Atlantic cod.
And we all know how well that case of short-term thinking worked out.
What's that saying again, the one about not learning from history?
Mike Cowie is a freelance writer who writes about politics, music, film, travel, and much more. You can read more of Mike’s views on his Web site.




Comment (44)
Comments
You'll have to get a ticket to Tokyo.
seth
Great stuff.
On many occasions, you've demonstrated how easy it is for Canadians to remain sheltered from the realities of our underperforming government policies/positions. It's easy to see how this can happen. Regardless of whether or not we support the ban on Bluefin Tuna, halt our export of asbestos, revisit the tar sands, etc, the fact will remain that every single Canadian won the lottery when we were lucky enough to be born here. Whether or not we adopt a right moral stance today will not change the fact that tomorrow we will wake up in one of the most beautiful countries in the world. However, the truth of the matter is that we could be better, much better, and tomorrow our country will be a little less beautiful because of our failure to do the right thing today.
Thanks for bringing this and everything else to our attention.
Brent
Chretien was doing it before Harper. They blamed the fisheries collapse on the seals--now they are playing the Inuit card(eco activists have to let go of this weird racist myth that Inuit and other tribal cultures are any less human than all other groups- they can be selfish, corrupt, greedy-hypocritical--like the Makah tribe wanting to resume whaling but not human slavery, or the Inuit talking about traditional lifestyles but not giving up tvs, textiles, and guns. Its just human supremacist bs. Shows that they are human like the rest of us. And its used to try to persuade people that unnecessary exploitation is ok if its done by these "noble savage" humans. Its racist. I'll believe the Inuit are natives of the North like the polar bear(which they helped Canada keep off an advanced Endangered status by saying it would harm their lifestyle-they did the same thing with fur in the 80s) when they can survive without artificial means and catch fish in the frozen sea like seals can. Until then they are just humans causing problems for the native inhabitants. Humans arent true predators like wolves--they need tools to do the killing. Without them they are feeble. And the tools can be used for agriculture, hunting non humans or hunting humans. Its flexible and nature doesnt penalize us for homicide so we are not true predators(dont see wolves killing each other much).
Anyway Canada isnt anything noble when it comes to wildlife. We didnt even update our animal welfare laws until a few years ago-and it took over a century. And where are the Canadians in protesting the seal hunt? Only Pamela Anderson says anything. Just like last time-we need outsiders to show us how its done. Oh Canada what a joke. No wonder we produce so many comedians.
Questions answered by a marine biologist who is an expert in bluefin population and not some asshole with an agenda.
Q. Who did most of that over-fishing?
A. The Americans mostly. The smaller bluefins keep in the south a bit because they can’t stand the cold temperatures. So the ones that make it to Canadian waters are really the big ones. During the Seventies and Eighties the Americans had these purse seine fisheries, where they’d surround a whole school and take them. They fished the juveniles really hard. At the same time, the Japanese used to long-line in the Gulf of Mexico, which is the breeding ground. So you had the adults being hit by the Japanese, the small ones being hit by the Americans.
Q. The Canadian government claims their bluefin practices are exemplary. Are they?
A. It really is true. In Canada the bluefin industry is really well regulated. The fishermen obey all the rules. It’s really well done.
Q. So it’s a sensible policy for Ottawa to present itself as a model?
A. Canada’s quota has traditionally been LESS THAN ONE PERCENT of the Atlantic and Mediterranean quota. So we’re a really small player. And these other countries either don’t have the will or don’t have the ability to manage their fisheries in the way that we do.
http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/03/19/saving-the-bluefin-tuna-an-expert-exp...
So to sum things up. America and Eastern Europe have been a bunch of super greedy assholes as usual, over fishing like crazy, single handedly causing this whole crisis in the first place and now you want to blame Canada who has been an exemplary model of how to do it right and fish responsibly for the past 30 years? You guys are fucking nuts. Also the whole reason that Canada opposes the ban is because they don't want this being handled by CITES who have a track record of being useless and approaching problems the wrong way, not because they oppose conservation of bluefin tuna like you love to suggest. Your entire article is misinformed and sensationalist.
The proposal in question was submitted by Monacco to CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). Out of the seventy-five nations involved ONLY THREE SUPPORTED IT - the U.S., Norway, and Kenya.
All the nations want to use ICCAT (International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas) to regulate fishing, not CITES.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100318/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_un_saving_species
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp
Gore agrees,
it -does- take a lot.
Canada's conservation of bluefin tuna is admirable but you also claim it is Canada's "Natural Resource." Which, frankly, is crazy, as the sea is international commons. And your fish stock integrates with others in the region.
Also, the article being "misinformed" is an interesting statement. The article states:
"Then there's the collapsing Fraser River sockeye salmon population, a collapse linked by many scientists to the fish farms dotting the B.C. coast. Fish farms, it should be noted, that the government seems to consider untouchable."
"Canada's overall environmental record may rank as the worst among the G-8 nations, and the WWF (World Wildlife Fund) may have recently ranked Canada as the "worst climate performer amongst [the] top 10 greenhouse gas emitters" and "56th out of 57 countries evaluated, ahead of only Saudi Arabia""
Those quotes (and many others) come with one or more linked citations...This article is about how poorly Canada has reacted to almost all major environmental concerns over the last decade. Not just Tuna.
The actions of a single nation, or even a large regional group of nations, are not enough to stop bluefin degradation. Hence the CITES proposal. Don't even suggest we fall back on ICCAT, that has failed time and time again, and has become completely captured by political and fishing interests, notably Japan but also Canada. They don't even listen to their own scientists.The fact that Canada is following ICCAT "under the premise that ICCAT's recommendations are sustainable" demonstrates how Canada wants to do nothing, and appear to have no culpability, in the matter.
This is simply playing with the facts, since (as the cited BBC article clearly states) the truth is the real vote was on a slightly amended EU proposal, one that "weakened the original Monaco proposal but still endorsed the ban", and this was defeated by 72 votes to 43.
But "ONLY THREE SUPPORTED IT" sure works if you want people to actually think that no one but the U.S., Norway, and Kenya supported any sort of ban whatsoever.
It's quite interesting that such a person would be throwing around assertions of "sensationalism" and "misinformation".
Don't blame Canada, blame the Liberal voting public from Vancouver who consume so much Tuna it would make a seals head spin! Like the Liberals who signed up to Kyoto and polluted 4 times more in the following years with no comment from David Suzuki, the card carrying Liberal!!
Something needs to be done. Unfortunately the people in power don't represent our generation, and they don't have a vested interest in our future or our childrens future. Greed has blinded them, and the pillars our country used to stand on continue to erode. It's time for us, the youth, to step up and take back our country. We are the present and future of Canada, and it is our duty to ensure that our values are represented in our country. We are not powerless. We just need to raise our voices a bit more, get in politicians' faces a bit more, hold corporations accountable a bit more... just do more. Speak out, act out. Do something.
Thanks.
Check out Sushi Otaku for more information, and continued updates about the destruction of the Atlantic bluefin tuna.
http://sushifaq.com/sushiotaku/?s=bluefin
I'm truly aghast at how irresponsible these countries are acting in the face of such a great issue. When the fish are gone you can't just slap your forehead and say 'whoops!'