American Fishing in Canadian Waters

[August1991]

It's not much of an exaggeration to say the boarding of American fisherman Roy Andersen's boat by Canadian border agents has become an international incident. Not with all the other American fishermen now avoiding Canadian waters. And not with the involvement of high-level politicians and diplomats on both sides of the border.

It was on May 30 that 22-year-old Roy M. Andersen, of Baldwinsville, New York, was fishing with a friend in the Ganonoque Narrows. According to an account he gave the Watertown Daily Times, he was fishing less than 400 metres inside of Canadian waters when Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officers approached.

They asked whether he had phoned in to say he was crossing over into Canadian waters. He hadn't.

At that point, Andersen was told he'd have to pay $1,000 on the spot to keep his boat. If not, he and his friend would have to lie handcuffed in the bottom of the boat while it was towed to shore. He paid the fine with his credit card.

Ottawa Citizen

If American border guards can prevent Canadian firetrucks from crossing the border to stop fires in the US, I think our border guards can arrest Americans from taking "Canadian" fish.

Even as the yields reached an historic high on the east coast in 1986, the World Commission on Environment and Development, the Brundtland Commission, warned that the world's oceans were in trouble as overfishing threatened most of the familiar fish stocks.

...

Foreign fishing fleets surely played an important role in the devastation of the cod stocks, but Canada must also share a portion of the blame.

Link

It's true that our federal government deserves much blame for badly managing this renewable resource. It did not enforce fishing quotas on foreign fishermen (including Americans) and it encouraged too many domestic fishermen with loan guarantees and various direct subsidies.

While this case concerns inland fishing, the federal government must defend more strongly our economic border against foreign exploitation of our natural resources.

Edited July 25, 2011 by August1991

[Guest American Woman]

From what I'm reading, the 'arrest' was totally uncalled for. The fisherman in question had an Ontario fishing license and was not anchored.

...Andersen had a valid Ontario fishing licence and one other thing: an understanding that, as long as he didn't drop anchor on the Canadian side of the line, border officers wouldn't enforce the technical requirement to "phone inwards" and announce his presence.

That's been the understanding, on both sides of the border, according to Canadian Conservative Sen. Bob Runciman, "for generations."

link

[Shwa]

From what I'm reading, the 'arrest' was totally uncalled for. The fisherman in question had an Ontario fishing license and was not anchored.

...Andersen had a valid Ontario fishing licence and one other thing: an understanding that, as long as he didn't drop anchor on the Canadian side of the line, border officers wouldn't enforce the technical requirement to "phone inwards" and announce his presence.

That's been the understanding, on both sides of the border, according to Canadian Conservative Sen. Bob Runciman, "for generations."

link

I was waiting for you to answer this one for some reason. I held out hope that you would and, voila! (er, eureka!) you did!

Thank you!

And your reply is bang one!

[dre]

From what I'm reading, the 'arrest' was totally uncalled for. The fisherman in question had an Ontario fishing license and was not anchored.

...Andersen had a valid Ontario fishing licence and one other thing: an understanding that, as long as he didn't drop anchor on the Canadian side of the line, border officers wouldn't enforce the technical requirement to "phone inwards" and announce his presence.

That's been the understanding, on both sides of the border, according to Canadian Conservative Sen. Bob Runciman, "for generations."

link

Well just because a law has been traditionally ignored doesnt mean its wrong to enforce it. If its not a law anymore they should take it off the books... if it IS a law they SHOULD enforce it.

In any case this seems stupid and heavy handed. They should get rid of the law, and as long as foreign fishermen have valid licences and follow the rules they should be welcome to fish here. Hopefully they can resolve this and fix the stupid law, or at least make it CLEAR that it IS the law and will be enforced.

[Oleg Bach]

From what I'm reading, the 'arrest' was totally uncalled for. The fisherman in question had an Ontario fishing license and was not anchored.

...Andersen had a valid Ontario fishing licence and one other thing: an understanding that, as long as he didn't drop anchor on the Canadian side of the line, border officers wouldn't enforce the technical requirement to "phone inwards" and announce his presence.

That's been the understanding, on both sides of the border, according to Canadian Conservative Sen. Bob Runciman, "for generations."

link

This side of the line - my fish! your side of the line - Your fish! How hard of a rule is that to adhere two..Maybe you would like to go up to the boarder of Alberta and drill a ten mile long parallel shaft over to the Canadian side and suck up some of OUR oil - pay for the oil and pay me for the damned fish _ Americans are getting the attitude that our immigrants have -that Canada is a non-nation and up for grabs...Canada does have owners who reside on the property...don't be picking apples off our tree even if it is hanging over the fence.

[charter.rights]

This side of the line - my fish! your side of the line - Your fish! How hard of a rule is that to adhere two..Maybe you would like to go up to the boarder of Alberta and drill a ten mile long parallel shaft over to the Canadian side and suck up some of OUR oil - pay for the oil and pay me for the damned fish _ Americans are getting the attitude that our immigrants have -that Canada is a non-nation and up for grabs...Canada does have owners who reside on the property...don't be picking apples off our tree even if it is hanging over the fence.

Here is the really perverse thing.

The fish belongs to First Nations who have no "this line" or "that line" down the St. Lawrence. Somehow the governments decided that the line should go down the middle of Akwesasne Territory, when in fact it doesn't.

So the fishers should be calling the Mohawks before entering the St.Lawrence to fish since it is their resource and no one consulted them about the use of the fishery.

[Oleg Bach]

Here is the really perverse thing.

The fish belongs to First Nations who have no "this line" or "that line" down the St. Lawrence. Somehow the governments decided that the line should go down the middle of Akwesasne Territory, when in fact it doesn't.

So the fishers should be calling the Mohawks before entering the St.Lawrence to fish since it is their resource and no one consulted them about the use of the fishery.

Who really takes that pandering Indian act seriously? I mean seriously...It is ironic and a bit hypocritical that it is not mentioned...probably because those that inforce Native rights don't really believe in them - they just appease the tribes with documents...thinks like treaties - that never were taken serously to begin with.

[charter.rights]

Who really takes that pandering Indian act seriously? I mean seriously...It is ironic and a bit hypocritical that it is not mentioned...probably because those that inforce Native rights don't really believe in them - they just appease the tribes with documents...thinks like treaties - that never were taken serously to begin with.

The Court takes native rights very seriously. And so does the US.

[Oleg Bach]

The Court takes native rights very seriously. And so does the US.

If they took them seriously - then why did those fishing in native controled waters not approach the tribe for permission..but approached the white authorities? Maybe the courts do take native rights serously - but they have done nothing in the realm of educating anyone else in the art of this seriousness. Law means nothing without law enforcement.

[charter.rights]

If they took them seriously - then why did those fishing in native controled waters not approach the tribe for permission..but approached the white authorities? Maybe the courts do take native rights serously - but they have done nothing in the realm of educating anyone else in the art of this seriousness. Law means nothing without law enforcement.

Try again.

Why is it that Bruce Power Generation cancelled their plans to transport radioactive generators through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence? Clue. The Mohawks told them it wasn't going to happen.

The Mohawk corridor is a lane that includes rail, the 401 and shipping lanes from Montreal to Windsor that passes across Mohawk Territory at various locations. The Government recognizes this corridor since it is land (all of southern Ontario) that has never been surrendered by the Mohawks as required by law if we want to use it. The government knows better than to make a challenge out if, since they are in clear violation of Canadian law, and the Mohawk's rights. They respect that the Mohawks might have a water tight claim, and without consulting them there is no moving ahead. Of course that is the law and the government must respect the law.

I was at a meeting with a couple of Mohawk leaders and their lawyers the other day and they are next going to start suing (of all people) the bureaucrats that fail to comply with the laws and interpretations set out by the Supreme Court of Canada. Apparently, government employees are no longer immune from civil action and the Mohawks believe this will stop the internal meddling that goes on within government departments.

[Wild Bill]

Try again.

Why is it that Bruce Power Generation cancelled their plans to transport radioactive generators through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence? Clue. The Mohawks told them it wasn't going to happen.

They blocked the shipment for no good technical reason at all! They are obviously totally ignorant of even elementary physics!

They simply wanted to make a political point. It had diddley squat to do with science. The generators will have to be recycled somehow. All the Mohawks did was ensure that some far more expensive and likely truly damaging to the environment method will have to be employed. In effect, the Mohawks have used the environment for a political tool, either ignorant or not caring about any collateral damage.

[charter.rights]

They blocked the shipment for no good technical reason at all! They are obviously totally ignorant of even elementary physics!

They simply wanted to make a political point. It had diddley squat to do with science. The generators will have to be recycled somehow. All the Mohawks did was ensure that some far more expensive and likely truly damaging to the environment method will have to be employed. In effect, the Mohawks have used the environment for a political tool, either ignorant or not caring about any collateral damage.

Funny.

I do know about nuclear generation since I inspected all of Darlington Nuclear Generating Station while it was being constructed and qualified under a Orange Badge in nuclear safety in order to enter many restricted areas.

I CAN tell you that Bruce Hydro is only telling part of the story in an attempt to downplay the actual risk of shipping the material through waterways.

Most of the equipment is contaminated with tritium which becomes embedded in the metals as part of the process. The issue with tritium as a radioisotope of hydrogen is that when it mixes with water it is indistinguishable from the water itself and when ingested it bonds with cells in the body as water. The contamination does not leave the body for weeks and while there gives off beta particles in concentrations that can disrupt the cells at the molecular levels. These changes can cause cancers to accelerate when they are connected to prolonged exposures.

15 generators near a water intake would have the potential of contaminating the entire Toronto or Montreal (or anywhere in between) water supply. It cannot be removed from water once it is present and would present a permanent contamination of the water supply.

Bruce Power is not interested in reclaiming the 15 generators or recycling the metals, since nuclear contamination of these kinds of materials by law must be contained on site. Rather, they are interested in obtaining the tritium which on the open market would worth $billions. In case you don't know, tritium is used as a trigger for nuclear bombs. Out of Canada, Bruce Power and the Canadian government would lose control of it since by law it is required to be locked up in the nuclear stations under high security and constant inventory.

In any case the Mohawk's issues were issues of territory and of the risk of contamination of their waterways. Good thing there was someone who would stop the blatant disregard for safety the government and Bruce Power would have subjected us all to.

GOD SAVE THE FISHERY! (and if he fails just call on the Mohawks to do His job for Him)

Edited July 26, 2011 by charter.rights

[Oleg Bach]

Fish will be our last sourse of protein - They are as valuable or more so than oil or gold...Look what happened to the cod stocks off the Grand Banks. We must protect our food supplies....You can't just let the neighbour come over and go in the fridge when he needs a snack.