Fisheries committee  I think local communities and different sectors have information they can contribute, and in order to have social support they need to be part of the process. It has to be transparent and they have to be clear on what the available options are and be able to provide their prefere

Fisheries committee  Monitoring and enforcement are components that need to be used with MPAs, and that social support for the system would rapidly erode if the rules weren't being followed. As with any other rule, monitoring and enforcement are critical to maintaining social support.

Fisheries committee  Yes, and certainly the IUCN has different levels of classification with different levels of protection. The fundamental point is that the levels of protection should be appropriate to the outcome you are trying to achieve, both from a biological perspective and, as Mr. Richard sa

Fisheries committee  Yes, certainly there would be with the BC Seafood Alliance, and Christina Burridge was part of the announcement. First nations were part of the announcement. It was not done collaboratively as part of the PNCIMA process. It was done unilaterally as a DFO initiative.

Fisheries committee  I'm part of a number of processes with DFO, including the Sport Fishing Advisory Board, and certainly I'm part of the planning process that DFO is involved in with PNCIMA. I think the issue with DFO is the capacity to provide support for consultation, along with the timely shari

Fisheries committee  Yes, we have been commenting on the design criteria and process, and we certainly are engaged in the federal process as well. Our intent is to be constructive, and that these marine protected areas should be focused on achieving conservation outcomes, not arbitrary percentages ov

Fisheries committee  I think MPAs can be used to protect species, particularly those that are highly territorial or resident in particular areas. For those species that are far-ranging, such as tuna and salmon, MPAs probably will not be effective, because there is a high degree of variation in terms

Fisheries committee  Thank you.

Fisheries committee  Are you talking about the glass sponge reefs?

Fisheries committee  They are in the PNCIMA area. The day before that, they announced the adherence to the PNCIMA process and marine protected areas. On the following day, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans announced the sponge reef marine protected areas. Given that it was in the northern shelf

Fisheries committee  No, I didn't.

Fisheries committee  PNCIMA is a good concept because it involves first nations. It involves the federal government and the province, and it is comprehensive. What I don't agree with is that if individual entities go off and do their own thing, in the absence of that larger planning process, that tak

Fisheries committee  Yes, it undermines it. PNCIMA is for the northern shelf. There are larger issues in terms of fishery sustainability on the west coast, some of which can be dealt with through a marine protected area process. Others need to be done by a fundamental restructuring of fisheries. It'

Fisheries committee  The consultation around PNCIMA has been focused a lot more on process than substance. It has had good representation from first nations, but in terms of the angling community and the fishing industry, not so much. The PNCIMA process certainly is one that's driven collaboratively

Fisheries committee  I think the outcome that we're trying to achieve is good fisheries management, not to have a prescribed level of MPAs. If MPAs contribute to good fisheries management and are appropriate, clearly you can apply them. If they're not useful for maintaining the habitat or the stocks,