Fisheries Committee on Dec. 6th, 2011

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Okay, thanks.

But you mentioned you still carry some open-net products. Is there a reason you are offering closed containment—I think you just outlined that—but why you still continue with open pen salmon products?

[Guy Dean]

It's important to note that Albion carries over 2,000 different items, and at this point in time, 500 of those items are actually certified as sustainable by the various NGO groups. It's our goal to consistently improve on that number and continue to offer more and more sustainable options to our customers, but it's really our customers who are driving that initiative.

In the case of farmed salmon, it's really the retail marketplace that is still requesting that product at their counters and on their shelves. Some of the retailers have certainly changed from that.

With regard to closed containment systems, at this point in time I certainly believe that the industry is in its infancy, and we haven't found any viable options that have been able to offer product consistently to the marketplace.

Our goal would be to support those initiatives that are focused on improvement and change, and we'll put our strong support behind them. But until that takes place, we'll continue to offer open-net pen product.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Okay.

My final question is a two-parter. In terms of consumer habits, could you comment about whether different regions in western Canada are different, or are there different demands for green products versus other regions in western Canada?

In terms of Ocean Wise versus SeaChoice, for instance, why did you choose Ocean Wise? Why that certification program?

[Guy Dean]

Those are good questions. With regard to the first question, there is a noticeable difference in the marketplace for sustainable products. We're finding people on the west coast, particularly in British Columbia and on the coast, are far more focused on sustainable options.

We personally, from a company perspective, believe in that. We think for our long-term livelihood that makes the most sense and we want to make a difference. But as I mentioned before, we also offer throughout western Canada...and at this point in time there is nowhere near the focus in Alberta and Saskatchewan that we're seeing in British Columbia. We see that it's a growing trend, and there is becoming more and more interest nationally. Basically, as we move off the coast there becomes less and less of an interest, but it is growing.

With regard to Ocean Wise versus SeaChoice, we actually haven't chosen one over the other. Ocean Wise has recently signed on with SeaChoice. There is a group of NGO groups—about 20 in total and many of them in the United States—that have all signed on for a common vision. The goal was that they would all be able to use the same assessment criteria to assess whether a fishery is sustainable or not.

Ocean Wise and SeaChoice have committed to using the same assessment criteria. So it's not that we've really chosen one over the other. There is a value in dealing with both. We are partners with SeaChoice. They hold us accountable for many of the nationwide programs that we offer.

OceanWise has gained tremendous momentum here on the food service level, but have gained very little ground on retail, whereas SeaChoice has a very strong presence nationwide, mostly within retail.

Again, we also are partners with the Marine Stewardship Council. We've had chain of custody for over nine years now, offering certified fish from the Marine Stewardship Council. So again, we're not just focused on OceanWise. They're not our preferred NGO group. They're just one of many NGO groups that we work with.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you very much, Mr. Donnelly.

Go ahead, Mr. Leef.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Thank you very much.

We continue to hear that word “sustainable” today. From your perspective, do you think the average consumers fully understand what sustainable means when they're purchasing things off the shelf?

[Guy Dean]

At this point in time, I don't think they do. There's a lot of confusion there. As I pointed out earlier about that common vision, I think the goal is that they will come to some common agreement, so that when I see something that's rated good or green, it means the same thing.

At the same time, current research from a number of universities has shown that sustainability is still not a primary focus for the average consumer. Cost, quality, and food safety have ranked above sustainability. If you ask me from a marketing perspective what is the strongest growing trend over the last 10 years, I would say it has been about offering sustainable seafood items within the marketplace.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Then if that's the case—our seeing that growing trend—would that be because of a better educated base, or would that have more to do with branding and labelling, which can obviously be highly influential in consumer choice, or is it a blend of both?

[Guy Dean]

I think the recognition of brands with regard to sustainable seafood is still at its infancy stage, so I don't believe it's a big factor in consumer decision-making. It's more an education base, and there's been a stronger commitment by the average consumers to understand where their food in general comes from and what impact the food they consume has on the environment.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Just so I understand, when you have Ocean Wise or SeaChoice, is there actually a label on a package that says it's an Ocean Wise product or a SeaChoice product? How does it get labelled to show a consumer this product is different from, let's say, an open-net product?

[Guy Dean]

It's important to note, though, that open-net products are not necessarily deemed non-sustainable, as long as they follow the criteria. It would be the difference between what is deemed sustainable and non-sustainable.

Ocean Wise is a program that was focused on educating the consumer at the food service level, at the restaurant level. What happened was that the restaurants would make a commitment to Ocean Wise—to the Vancouver aquarium—that they would delist many of their non-sustainable items or switch the non-sustainable items on their menu over to sustainable items. In return for doing that and making that commitment, they got to use the Ocean Wise logo beside that particular product on their menu. In many cases, particularly in Vancouver where it's a strong focus, the entire menu of many of the restaurants now is Ocean Wise. From that perspective, the consumer can go in, look at the menu, and know that all those products are Ocean Wise.

SeaChoice, on the other hand, really hasn't labelled particular products as much as developed partnerships with people like Overwaitea Food Group and Safeway. Its branding has been at the store level, primarily offering education-based handouts, pullouts, flyers, and posters outlining what particular seafoods in the counter are deemed sustainable. So there's really no brand or logo, so to speak, from the retail perspective.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Okay. We see nowadays the zero trans fat logo or a low-carb logo, and trends shift based on that branding and marketing. I suppose if I were to walk into a store and look at something that said it's Ocean Wise or SeaChoice, with a sticker on it, I would probably naturally be drawn to that sort of label. It's just a foregone conclusion that it's a better choice. I was wondering if that was playing a role.

Right now—

[Guy Dean]

Sorry. I don't mean to interrupt, but there are those programs out there; they're just strictly not particularly well developed in Canada at this point in time. The Marine Stewardship Council, based on the World Wildlife Fund and Unilever, started in the U.K. and is very strong internationally. It has a very strong following in Europe and now has a growing interest within North America. It has that MSC brand logoing. It's a fish with a check mark on it, outlining that this is a sustainable option, and that actual brand or logo appears on the seafood item at the store.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

When I was listening to you speak about the viability of closed containment, you said it's probably economical, and it might be more viable. We've all heard about some of the closed containment projects under way with the N'amgis. We're interested in seeing the results.

If they turn out not to be economically viable, are you preparing for that? Industry is shying away because they can't fit into that niche market, or because it just doesn't translate into the success story they're looking for. You'd have to have a shift in thinking if they turned out not to be viable on open net. I know that's a bit hypothetical, but have you contemplated that possibility?

[Guy Dean]

I don't think we ever believed that closed containment would take over from open-net pen aquaculture 100%. I believe that closed contained aquaculture will have a niche, will have a marketplace. A market will demand a premium for that product. As production develops and more research allows us to reduce our costs even further, that might become more of a viable option. It could compete with open-net pen aquaculture and become more of a commodity, the way open-net pen has. Albion's perspective—not mine—is that it will completely replace it.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Mr. Leef.

Mr. MacAulay.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Welcome, Mr. Dean.

Do you deal with SeaChoice?

[Guy Dean]

Yes, we do.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

They put “best choice” and “avoid” on their products. They put “avoid”, if I understood correctly, on all open-net fish. I guess they do not have open-net products to sell. Is that correct?

[Guy Dean]

They haven't certified any open-net pen aquaculture. The five organizations that they're part of are vehemently opposed to open-net pen aquaculture. Various scientists within their organization, the David Suzuki Foundation, are well-respected and have helped to establish criteria for what are deemed sustainable farm salmon. They may be opposed to open-net pen, but they have contributed to developing criteria on what would be deemed sustainable.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I would also suspect they're a bit opposed to open-net production with ocean-wide certification. And we talk about eco-certification. It's just a different brand, I expect.

You also talk about the sustainability of some open-net fish. Some would be certified as sustainable and some would not. How could any of it not be classified as sustainable? They would be restocking. I'd just like you to explain that to me. It's hard for me to understand that the open-net concept would not be sustainable. They have the fish to put in, and they farm them.

[Guy Dean]

That's sustainable business versus environmentally sustainable. Again, I'm not a scientist in any way, so I'm probably the wrong person to ask. There are certain criteria that have been established that deem what is environmentally sustainable.

A lot of it is management of resources. We have to remember that, like any farm initiative, the product we feed our fish has to come from sustainable sources as well. When we're taking non-sustainable fish, grinding it down, and feeding that at a higher ratio than the actual weight of product that we're getting out of the product, that certainly is not sustainable.

Those are some of the criteria that have been established to deem whether that is sustainable.

There are going to be open-net pens that are going to be able to produce one pound of fish by using less fish protein than the one pound they're gaining. Those would be sustainable alternatives to the other groups that are going to use a lot more fish protein in their feed.

Those are just some of the criteria that would establish whether it's sustainable or not.

Again, it's also management of resources and your ability to manage well, whether it's escapement, predation, or your impact on benthic environment. There are going to be groups out there that are highly focused on producing a product that has very little impact on the environment; that's really going to be the difference between whether it's well managed and focused on environmental impact and a group that's not necessarily focused on that at all.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Basically what you're saying, then, is that if you wish to sell the product, there need to be more rules for the open-net concept, or regulations. We're hearing everything here at this committee, but the truth is that I can see eco-certification making decisions in the fishery around the world, and that's not going to involve governments. They can get involved if they like, but if it's not certified, then it will not be sold.

Down the road, it looks like that's where we're heading. It looks like this certification is going to rule the day, not what governments decide. You're going to decide on sustainability of the stock, whether it's in fish farming, the lobster industry, where I come from, or anything else. It looks to me anyhow that certification and eco-certification are going to make the decisions even on where people can and cannot fish and that type of thing, which I'm not overly big on, but it looks like that's where we're heading.

I would like to ask you if you think there should be more.... I know that obviously there will have to be more regulations if you're going to have the product certified, but do you think there's a need for more rules, more laws, or more regulations within fish farming? There are some presentations—and people—that give the open-net concept a pretty big black eye. It's obvious that you know it's valuable and will continue.

But in order to have a better face on it, do you think there need to be more rules in place as to what they do with the waste and what happens to the property underneath the net? They talk about the land being dead underneath the net and all that. Do you think there should be more rules put in place in order to have a better public view, if I could say that, of the open-net concept?