This is a study of the human conflict over fish in late nineteenth and early twentieth century British Columbia, and of how that conflict was shaped by law. Law, understood broadly to include both the legal forms of the Canadian state and those of Native peoples, defined and in part created both Native and state fisheries. When those fisheries clashed, one finds conflict between legal systems. When one fishery sought to replace the other, its laws had to replace the other. Thus, this is a study of law and colonialism, seen through a close analysis of the conflict over fish. Native fisheries and the web of regulation surrounding them preceded non-Native interest in British Columbia's fish. The fishery was not an open-access resource, but rather a commons, defined by entitlements, prohibitions and sanctions that allowed certain activity, proscribed others, permitted one group to catch fish at certain times in particular locations with particular technology, and prohibited others. The Canadian state denied the legitimacy and even the existence of Native fisheries law in imposing its law on the fishery. This study, based largely on government records and a secondary anthropological literature, describes the legal apparatus constructed by the Canadian state to reduce Native control of the fisheries in British Columbia through the creation, in law, of the "Indian food fishery". Law became a means of constructing a particular economic and social order that marginalized Native participation in the fishery and eliminated Native control. It was a "rhetoric of legitimation" that supported state domination, but also local resistance. Native peoples and their supporters used law, both Native and state law, to defend their fisheries. The history of the conflict over fish is the history of competing legal cultures, and the struggle on the Cowichan River and the Babine River over fish weirs reveals those cultures, constructed in opposition to each other. The study concludes by integrating the local conflicts over fish into a wider literature on law and colonialism, reflecting on the role of law in particular colonial settings.

This thesis evaluates the impact of the Canadian 200-mile fisheries zone from biological, economic and social perspectives. The factors and events leading to the 200-mile zone are examined. The Canadian management regime post-extension is described. Canada derived significant benefits from the 200-mile zone including increased management authority over a vast area with major fish resources, the displacement of foreign fisheries, the development of Canadian fisheries in areas and for species not previously utilized by Canada, and the opportunity to rebuild overfished fish stocks. However, various problems and constraints have led to continued fisheries instability. These include: (1) Natural resource variability, (2) The common property nature of the resource and resultant overcapacity, (3) Fluctuations in market conditions, (4) Heavy dependence on the fisheries in isolated coastal communities, and (5) Recurrent conflict among competing users and conflicting objectives for fisheries management. / Despite Canada's abundant marine fishery resources, various combinations of these factors have contributed to a recurrent boom-and-bust pattern in many marine fisheries. Extended jurisdiction did not provide a panacea for the problems of the fisheries sector. Continued periodic fluctuations in Canada's marine fisheries and demands for government assistance can be expected unless viable alternative economic opportunities can be developed in the coastal regions.

This is a study of the human conflict over fish in late nineteenth and early twentieth century British Columbia, and of how that conflict was shaped by law. Law, understood broadly to include both the legal forms of the Canadian state and those of Native peoples, defined and in part created both Native and state fisheries. When those fisheries clashed, one finds conflict between legal systems. When one fishery sought to replace the other, its laws had to replace the other. Thus, this is a study of law and colonialism, seen through a close analysis of the conflict over fish. Native fisheries and the web of regulation surrounding them preceded non-Native interest in British Columbia's fish. The fishery was not an open-access resource, but rather a commons, defined by entitlements, prohibitions and sanctions that allowed certain activity, proscribed others, permitted one group to catch fish at certain times in particular locations with particular technology, and prohibited others. The Canadian state denied the legitimacy and even the existence of Native fisheries law in imposing its law on the fishery. This study, based largely on government records and a secondary anthropological literature, describes the legal apparatus constructed by the Canadian state to reduce Native control of the fisheries in British Columbia through the creation, in law, of the "Indian food fishery". Law became a means of constructing a particular economic and social order that marginalized Native participation in the fishery and eliminated Native control. It was a "rhetoric of legitimation" that supported state domination, but also local resistance. Native peoples and their supporters used law, both Native and state law, to defend their fisheries. The history of the conflict over fish is the history of competing legal cultures, and the struggle on the Cowichan River and the Babine River over fish weirs reveals those cultures, constructed in opposition to each other. The study concludes by integrating the local conflicts over fish into a wider literature on law and colonialism, reflecting on the role of law in particular colonial settings. / Law, Peter A. Allard School of / Graduate

No description available.