I think I can wrap up with no problem. This is the most complicated part of it.
So the minister then had a chance to look at the proposal and he approved the proposal with conditions. He said: First of all, I won't approve it on a permanent basis, but I will approve it on a pilot basis, a three-year pilot; further, I want the pilot to be evaluated each year; and further, I want the pilot to be evaluated within the year, and if unintended effects occur--for example, we see distortions or problems we hadn't anticipated when the pilot was set up--we would take measures to try to correct that within the season; and regardless, we would evaluate it at the end of the year to make any changes required for the next year, and at the end of the three years we'd do a final evaluation.
That's what the minister said. The minister also made it clear this pilot would not affect first nations obligations, nor was it designed to deal with intersectoral allocations, issues between sport and commercial and so forth.
The pilot has been in place since May of this year. What are the results to date? We know one thing: the fishing season has been extended beyond what would have happened if we had not made the changes. We're still fishing today, and based on information we had going into the season, if we had not made the changes and we had continued with the status quo, we believe we would have closed in August or September.
All fisheries have been able to secure catch to allow their fisheries to continue, so they've been able to find bycatch to allow them to continue to their target fishing. Catch accounting has improved substantially. Bycatch levels have been reduced and the conservation targets for the stock of concern have been respected.
Further, fishermen can now sell their bycatch, because they account for it. They're getting money for fish they previously had to throw away; now they can keep and sell it, so that's boosted their profit or their revenue. Finally, the value for some species has actually increased. Ling cod has doubled with the integrated groundfish pilot.
There are some important issues. One is the cost of monitoring. There are new costs to the industry. For example, you either have an observer on board or you have a camera that observes your fishing and looks at the fish you bring over your ship. That's a new cost. And we have issues around how we can minimize those costs.
It's complex. This is a comprehensive, complex arrangement, and the reality is that even for the fishermen themselves, this requires adjustments. This raises the issue of resistance to change. It is new, it is different, it does require a learning period, and therefore transition issues and flexibility are important during this time.
There is a recreational concern by the recreational interests that the groundfish pilot may make it difficult for them to increase their share of groundfish species. That's a concern they've raised. And first nations are concerned that their interests not be compromised by the groundfish pilot.
In terms of next steps, as I've noted, we will be doing a review of the season. The season will be wrapping up in the next couple of weeks for some of the fisheries. We intend to construct a process and identify participants for a review of the first year to get ready for the second year of the pilot. Based on that review, we expect to make appropriate adjustments as we take into consideration other points people may raise about how the pilot has unfolded so far.
Thank you.