Fisheries Committee on Dec. 2nd, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 16 of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee is meeting to continue its study on the review of the Fisheries Act.

Today's meeting is taking place in hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. The members may attend in person or through Zoom.

Before we continue, I would like to ask all in-person participants to consult the guidelines written on the cards on the table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio and feedback incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including the interpreters. Pursuant to our routine motions, I would like to advise the committee members that all witnesses appearing virtually today have conducted the required technical testing.

I'd also like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic. Please mute yourself when you're not speaking.

For the interpretation, the participants using the Zoom platform can choose floor, English or French at the bottom of their screen. The participants in the room can use the earpiece to select the desired channel.

This is a reminder that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

If the members in the room wish to speak, they must raise their hands.

The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can. We appreciate your patience.

With that, I'd like to welcome our witnesses today.

We're joined by Jean‑Sébastien Vacher, a commercial fisher and a former fishery officer. He's taking part in the meeting by video conference.

By video conference, we have Nigel Buote, fisherman.

Lastly, we're joined by Réjean Noël, president, and Marcel Hébert, director general, from the Association des crabiers acadiens.

We'll start with the witnesses' opening remarks. Each witness will have no more than five minutes.

Mr. Vacher, you have the floor.

[Jean-Sébastien Vacher, Commercial Fisherman, As an Individual]

Good afternoon. My name is Jean‑Sébastien Vacher. I was a fishery officer from 2001 to 2008. I've been a commercial fisher since then.

You asked me to speak today about barriers preventing fishery officers from enforcing the Fisheries Act. Before getting to the heart of the matter, I would like to remind you of the purpose of the Fisheries Act. The act provides a framework for the proper—and I emphasize proper—management and control of fisheries and the conservation and protection of fish and fish habitat.

I see two major barriers preventing fishery officers from enforcing the Fisheries Act.

The first barrier is the increasing number of rules. The Fisheries Act has so many associated rules and regulations. One regulation sets out, for example, licence conditions for licenced fishers. These licence conditions are written and drawn up by public servants, who aren't legislators. For instance, as a zone 16 crab fisher, I must follow about 200 rules on 16 pages to carry out my commercial fishing operations. I think that this increase in the number of rules is a serious issue for the enforcement of the act. Fishery officers can't apply all these rules. They must start by making a choice that isn't always the most appropriate option. They often make an easy choice. They apply the easiest rules for the licence conditions, at the expense of rules that may be harder to apply but that make more sense for fishery monitoring management, especially in the fight against poaching networks. The fishery guardians will often focus on analyzing the compliance of commercial fishers by checking whether they actually followed the multiple rules set out in their licence conditions. However, the fishery guardians will let many poachers in particular slip through the cracks.

The second barrier concerns a form of discrimination in how the act is applied to non‑indigenous fishers compared to indigenous fishers. Of course, I don't mean to speak against the indigenous nations. The government rightly recognized their ancestral rights. Fisheries and Oceans Canada also rightly helped integrate them into the commercial fisheries. This is a great improvement for their communities and for the other communities around them.

However, in the enforcement of the act, I faced a situation as a fishery officer. We were told to let indigenous people go unchallenged. They were new to the fisheries and challenging them could lead to legal disputes. The authorities didn't want to deal with these types of situations. We overlooked offences and never reported offences committed by indigenous fishers. In contrast, we were mandated to report offences committed by other non‑indigenous fishers, particularly commercial fishers.

The issue lies in the fact that most poaching networks are operated by indigenous fishers who don't necessarily have the authorization of their band council. Sometimes, they aren't even associated with a band council, but they have the title of indigenous fisher. They often run networks that engage in poaching and the illegal sale of seafood products. This undermines both the enforcement of the Fisheries Act and proper fishery management, because we don't have all the catch data. Moreover, other non‑indigenous fishers, who aren't treated the same way, feel a sense of injustice. Yet they too have a public right to fish in tidal waters. They have traditions and a culture.

In short, these are the two main obstacles that I can identify when it comes to fishery officers enforcing the Fisheries Act. The first is the excessive increase in the number of rules, particularly licence conditions. These rules could benefit from a review to ensure that they're applied properly, since this doesn't always happen. The second concerns discrimination in how the act is applied to non‑indigenous people compared to indigenous people.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Mr. Vacher.

Next we're going to go to Mr. Buote for five minutes or less.

Go ahead, Mr. Buote.

[Nigel Buote, Fisherman, As an Individual]

Hi. I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans for the opportunity to present today.

I'm a commercial fisher, and I make my living off the sea in LFA 25 on Prince Edward Island. For more than a decade, commercial fishermen in LFA 25 have worked tirelessly to rebuild, protect and stabilize the lobster fishery. Our industry has taken responsibility financially and operationally to ensure the long-term health of the resource.

The success of the fishery today is not accidental. It is a direct result of disciplined conservation measures, industry-funded buybacks and strict compliance with regulations. However, these hard-won gains are now being undermined by ongoing and increasingly widespread abuse by some fishers within the FSC fishery and unauthorized fishing for a moderate livelihood. This situation threatens conservation objectives, weakens proper management and erodes trust in the regulatory system.

Commercial fishermen in LFA 25 have invested heavily in buybacks over the past 15 years, reducing the number of active licences and traps in the water. These buybacks were not refunded by government; they were paid for by the fishers themselves because we understand the long-term value of protecting the stock. Fewer traps and fewer licences created real, measurable conservation gains.

Our fleet has embraced strict science-based conservation practices that include trap reductions, escape mechanisms, returning all 115-millimetre or larger lobsters to the water, mandatory seasonal closures, detailed logbook catch reporting and compliance requirements. We fish only in regulated seasons. We are monitored through e-logs. We are inspected at sea, and we operate under enforceable reporting requirements.

These measures have improved stock health and contribute to long-term sustainability, even during years of environmental stress. The commercial sector has done everything asked of us to protect the fishery. Lobsters caught in the FSC fishery, which is intended for food, social and ceremonial purposes, have increasingly been used for unregulated commercial sale. This has been documented and reported by harvesters and community members for many years.

Some catch levels far exceed traditional or food-related requirements, and substantial volumes of lobsters taken under FSC are entering the commercial market illegally. Commercial fishermen have been raising these concerns through advisory committees, letters, emails, calls and meetings with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and members of Parliament, and we feel that repeated requests for action have been ignored.

We are asking for monitoring, transparency, conservation-based limits and eco-enforcement. We seek the same rules for everyone. The single most important principle in fisheries management is fairness. Conservation cannot succeed when different groups operate under different sets of rules. The lobster stock does not distinguish between sectors and neither should the enforcement of conservation measures. FSC fishing either occurs during the commercial fishing season, or it must have 100% third-party independent dockside monitoring. This ensures legitimately harvested FSC lobster is respected while preventing illegal commercial sale and protecting lobster stock health.

Communal commercial licences issued to indigenous communities are intended to benefit the community directly. Leasing these licences to third parties undermines transparency, fair access and conservation-based management. DFO must enforce the prohibition on licence leasing consistently across all sectors.

In closing, the commercial fishing industry is not asking for special treatment. We are asking for equal treatment and equal enforcement. Commercial fishermen have spent over a decade sacrificing income, reducing effort and funding the conservation measures that built the fishery into what it is today. We are proud of that work, but we are deeply concerned that current mismanagement and unequal enforcement threaten everything we have built.

If the Government of Canada and DFO want a sustainable, stable and fair fishery for all harvesters, indigenous and non-indigenous, then we must return to the core principles that have always protected the resource: one fishery, one resource and one set of rules; and equal treatment and responsibility for everyone.

The future of the fishery depends on balanced, conservation-first fisheries management. This is something we should all agree on.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much.

I'll now give the floor to Mr. Hébert for five minutes or less.

[Marcel Hébert, Director general, Association des crabiers acadiens]

Good afternoon. Thank you for the invitation to appear before this committee to discuss a sensitive subject of great concern to our snow crab fishers in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence.

As you know, the snow crab fishery is certainly one of the best managed fisheries in the world. A few of the current management measures include the weighing of all landings at the wharf, 20% at‑sea‑observer coverage for fishing trips, the closure of quadrants in cases of significant soft‑shell crab presence and area closures when right whales are observed. Only adult snow crabs with a carapace size of 95 millimetres or more are harvested. An annual survey allows us to estimate commercial biomass and monitor population trends. The quotas for the snow crab fishery in the southern gulf are based on a decision‑making framework incorporating the reference points from a precautionary approach to ensure that stocks remain in the healthy zone at all times.

As you know, illegal landings of snow crab aren't included in the official landing data of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Illegal landings lead to overexploitation of the stock. This undermines its reproductive capacity, particularly during the declining phase of the population when the residual biomass is decreasing. It should be noted that the snow crab fishery in the southern gulf is a recruitment fishery. It depends on annual recruitment of 75% or more. The snow crab fishery is very dependent on annual recruitment. As a result, additional pressures on recruitment could have a negative impact on the profitability of our fleets and the economy of our coastal regions. Remember the impact of the collapse of landings in 1989, when yields were only 6,950 tonnes in zone 12.

Following Radio‑Canada's Enquête broadcast on lobster poaching, we're concerned about the extent of illegal lobster landings and the sophisticated means employed by poachers to carry them out. In fact, the same players have access to the snow crab fishery following the decision to share the resource in 2003.

Illegal landings are underestimated in the snow crab fishery in the southern gulf. Normally, in a healthy population, the natural mortality rate for commercial‑sized adult crab is between 20% and 25%. In the southern gulf, the natural mortality rate is 35% to 45%. One of the reasons mentioned in the annual review by the science sector is illegal landings. These illegal landings increase the exploitation rate and reduce the residual biomass year after year. This affects the reproductive capacity of the stock by skewing the ratio of large spawners. This will lead to long‑term genetic changes in the population and will significantly reduce future recruitment.

What concerns us most is the incentive for these inshore fishers to land illegal catches of snow crab. The quota is allocated to non‑profit associations. These associations then distribute the quota annually through a lottery to some of its members. The inshore fishers selected to fish part of the association's allocation receive a very small portion of the market price. The association keeps most of it. As a result, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans is funding non‑profit inshore associations to the tune of millions of dollars annually, while the mid‑shore associations receive no revenue at all.

For example, in 2025, the price paid to fishers ranged from $7 to $8 per pound for snow crab. The inshore fisher made $1.50, and the association received $5.50 to $6.50 for each pound. Doesn't this create an incentive to sell snow crab under the table in order to receive the full market price?

At any rate, the lobster fishery has become highly lucrative. They no longer need this allocation, which was meant to support a fleet reorganization in 2003. This objective was achieved only minimally, if at all.

We're working very closely with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Discussions are currently under way on how to limit illegal landings of snow crabs. We request that the number of wharves designated as landing sites be limited to improve the dockside monitoring, given the limited number of fishery officers. We're asking for an increase in the number of fishery officers and for the installation of cameras on all designated wharves so that fishery officers can observe them at all times. We're also calling for the use of drones and the installation of cameras on inshore vessels or for 100% at‑sea‑observer coverage for inshore fishers' fishing trips.

In the Acadian peninsula, as in other regions of the maritime provinces and Quebec, lobster and snow crab are the only major commercial species remaining that generate millions of dollars for the economy of our coastal regions. Harsher fines are necessary for fishers who break the rules in order to significantly reduce this illegal activity, which affects the resource for future generations. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Mr. Hébert.

That concludes our opening remarks.

We're going to get into the first round of questioning of six minutes.

We'll start with Mr. Small.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I'm going to start off with some pictures.

Mr. Buote, I don't know if you're familiar with these pictures taken somewhere not far from your fishing area 25, perhaps in late June or maybe early July.

Do you know if that is when these pictures were taken?

[Nigel Buote]

Yes, I'm quite sure that's when they were taken.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Mr. Buote, who could legally fish during that time? Was the area 25 commercial lobster fishery open then?

[Nigel Buote]

No, it was not.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Have you heard of any pursuit by DFO to get to the bottom of these dumped lobsters? By the looks of it, many of them were female, in fact.

[Nigel Buote]

Yes, by the look of the pictures they were. However, I haven't heard any feedback on DFO and what they have done.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Okay. It's shocking to see that waste of lobster.

We had the Public Prosecution Service of Canada here on Thursday, and they denied that maintaining prosecution ratios based on ethnicity could possibly have the effect of watering down the number one objective of the Fisheries Act, which is conservation.

Do you agree with that?

[Nigel Buote]

No, I do not.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

To Mr. Vacher, in terms of the objective of maintaining prosecution ratios, what kind of effect do you think that could have on the number one objective of the Fisheries Act, which is conservation?

[Jean-Sébastien Vacher]

Please repeat the question. I didn't quite understand it.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Pardon. I had my earpiece off.

Could you repeat that, Mr. Vacher?

[Jean-Sébastien Vacher]

I didn't quite understand the question. Please repeat it.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

We had the head of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada here witnessing on Thursday past. They were asked if the intention not to over-ratio certain ethnicities could have a negative effect with the Fisheries Act, in terms of the Fisheries Act not being able to do what it's supposed to do in terms of conservation.

What do you think of that?

[Jean-Sébastien Vacher]

This can indeed create a serious issue. If the Department of Fisheries and Oceans fails to take action against people because of their race and if poaching allegations remain uninvestigated, the conservation of the resource is at risk. Moreover, the managers lack a great deal of the data needed to set quotas properly. Clearly, this negatively affects resource management.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

Monsieur Vacher, in your opening statement you mentioned discrimination in law enforcement and poaching networks. It sounds to me like it could be possible that large volumes of fish could be caught and sold.

What's the impact of that on the productivity of the fishery in Atlantic Canada?

[Jean-Sébastien Vacher]

I can't give you a specific answer. You would need someone with more expertise to respond. However, if the Department of Fisheries and Oceans' data fails to include a significant portion of the resource fished, scientists and managers will find it quite difficult to determine the catch amounts required to ensure the sustainability of the resource.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

To Mr. Buote, do you have any theories on how those lobsters got into the woods there in the pictures that I put up at the opening of the meeting?

[Nigel Buote]

From stories I've heard, they come from the FSC fishery, which couldn't sell them. They could not move the lobsters. Nobody wanted to buy them because they were FSC lobsters, so they were dumped in the woods.