Fisheries Committee on Nov. 6th, 2006

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

It has to be on value, like the other fisheries, right?

[Rene Genge]

Yes. If percentage-wise it's the same as your fishery and you take it as a part of income, although it was only involving one week's earnings, how can you put down hours?

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

And the value, like other fisheries, that's the only way you could. You could go out and spend three days on the water and not catch one animal, and therefore you have three days of work counting to no value.

A lot of these issues, if we had the time to get into more details, for us to.... I think the fact that you've highlighted them here today certainly opened my eyes and I'm sure members of the committee's eyes to a couple of issues that could be straightened out. You'd think they would be able to straighten it out.

If I could, I want to get back to the protesters. Protesters should not be interfering with your work, period, either in the air or on the ice. That's my personal opinion. That's one issue the government should be able to take care of. I don't know of any other industry in which people will interfere with people's work and not be charged for doing so.

[Rene Genge]

But you have the government giving them a permit to go out and do it.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Exactly. That's what I'm saying. These kinds of things need to be addressed. It's a safety issue also, along with interfering with your work.

On the competition factor that Mr. Aylward talked about, I realize that in some instances it falls under the province. And I'm a strong believer in making sure there's strong competition, especially when the person is in the boat. If these rules come in in 2008, how would you suggest that be addressed to make sure the fishermen have competition at the end of the wharf when they arrive with their load of seals, or whatever the case may be? If we're only going to be down in this case to maybe two buyers, how do you determine it?

The processor needs to make money, the fisherman needs to make money, and from the standpoint of the province, you're trying to get as much work in the communities in the provinces as we can. Everybody would like to do that too, but there's always this gap between the fisherman on the water trying to make a living and the expenses incurred and so on. I'd like you to address that. How do you suggest we deal with it before it becomes the issue it's going to become in 2008? Because if we eliminate the competition to a point where there's going to be a problem, then everything else falls from that.

[John Kearley]

I fully understand what Wilf said, but I'm not sure that competition will be eliminated.

It's my understanding that certainly this stuff.... It has been suggested; it's a suggested policy. I don't think it's in their policy manual yet. But in April of 2008, it's my understanding that, as someone said, a significant number of the sealskins must be processed to the finished stage before they are exported out of the province. Certainly to smaller processors that then becomes a problem to start up a tannery for processing sealskins. If you're not taking in large numbers, it certainly is very problematic for a small processor.

However, there are ways out, in that they can have one of the larger processors process their seal pelts to that stage for them. That small processor can still purchase, but if he's not willing to build a finishing facility, he would then be required to go to another processor or the bigger processors and have his seal pelts finished by them. I'm not sure that it will make a difference in the marketplace. Everything is market driven; the price that is paid is reflective of what the market will bear.

I'm not really sure the competition will be any less as a result of that regulation. As Wilf said, it may be.

[Wilf Aylward]

It would be interesting to know what the value of a seal would be. That's what I'm getting at. How will we ever know what a seal will be worth any more? I can see a problem with competition.

You say you're getting feeder plants, so you set up feeder plants that go to the bigger plants. That's an extra cost to the sealer.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

How many processors are there? How many buyers are buying seals right now?

[John Kearley]

Right now in Newfoundland, the major buyers are Carino Company, ourselves, the Barry Group with Atlantic Marine Products in Catalina, the Panian Group in Carbonear, and that's about it. Northeast Coast Sealers Cooperative and Fleur de Lys purchase sealskins; however, they have been on a contract with our company to do so in the past few years.

Then on Îles-de-la-Madeleine, the Tamasu company would buy sealskins there. I think that's about it.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

I'd asked you a question already, and maybe you got it mixed up with some of the other ones I asked. With regard to the quota, the 2006 TAC on the 325,000, there were some left in the water due to the inconsistencies in the hailing system more than anything. Maybe more than one can answer. Can we sustain a larger hunt? I believe we can, but I don't know enough about the industry. This is based on the fact that our seal population seems to be climbing steadily. It's like everything else, supply and demand works in the marketplace. From both ends of the spectrum, what do you believe we can do with regard to the TAC?

[John Kearley]

Last November, in meetings in St. John's, when the request came from DFO as to what we thought the TAC should be for 2006, as a company, we suggested 400,000 animals. We felt the marketplace could stand 400,000 animals--not for a long period of time, but at least for a year or two. We would then reassess at the end of a year or two as to whether to continue with 400,000 animals.

I think the majority of sealers recommended a smaller number, again, because of supply and demand. If we keep everybody hungry, then certainly the expectation is that the prices will be higher. As a company, we thought that markets could stand 400,000 animals for a year or two.

If you listen to scientists, I think even the 300,000 is above what they would consider a sustainable yield, in that we would, over time, start to deplete the seal herd. I'm not a scientist; I have my own opinions on that. It hasn't been obvious for the last few years, anyhow. We've been taking numbers that are above what scientists say we can take, yet the population still seems to be increasing. You have to depend on the scientists to come up with a number that's appropriate. It's not to our advantage to deplete the seal herd down to a level where we can't harvest.

We're in business, and we want to stay in business for many, many years. I started back in the late 1970s, when the population was estimated to be two million. Boats would spend days and days trying to get their TAC. Now it happens in a few hours. That's a good thing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Thank you very much to our witnesses and to members of the panel. It was a very interesting and informative discussion.

I do have two points that I'd like to make, and maybe just one quick question.

There has been a lot of discussion on the hakapik. I just attended the meetings in Europe, as well. I think we have learned that this is one more domino in the line of dominoes. If you take away the hakapik, they're going to want to take away something else, and then they'll want to take away something else. It is interesting, though. We have some sealers who simply use the club or the hakapik, where the majority of our sealers use the rifle. Quite frankly, the rifle doesn't come under as much scrutiny by the Europeans. In Norway, where they have a mainly recreational hunt, they shoot all the seals. They use the hakapik on the seal that has been shot, and then they bleed it. Norway hasn't come under the same type of criticism that we have, although they have a much smaller hunt.

One of the challenges, obviously, is how the TAC is divided up. The comment was made earlier that there are about 600 sealing licences. I'm assuming that's in this area. And there are 200 core fishermen. Is that this area here? It would seem to me that there is probably some reason for DFO to look at that and maybe divide the licences up into sealing licences for industry participants who are core fishermen. I have no difficulty--and I come from a fishery riding--in giving the fishermen the first shot at it. We also have to consider that recreational aspect of it. There's a food fishery as well. Maybe they could be limited to a fewer number.

I'd like some quick feedback on that. The pelts would still be utilized, but if there is a food fishery and we limit that to five or six animals or something like that, would that reduce some of the pressure on the rest of the fishery?

[John Kearley]

It shouldn't be confused. There is a recreational food fishery. Personal use licences are referred to with DFO. I think there are 6,000 animals or 8,000 animals that are taken for personal use. That's six animals per licence. I think the limit is 8,000 or 6,000 animals. However, with these animals, the pelts are not allowed to be sold. Processors are not allowed to buy them. They can only utilize the meat for their personal use.

I think when people refer to recreational, they are mainly referring to people who are not fishermen, who do other trades, and over the years, when licences were more readily available, they would have had a professional sealer licence. Personally, I had a sealing licence probably 25 years ago. I didn't keep it, but I could have. I would be considered a professional sealer. However, I would not participate in any other fisheries other than the sealing industry.

There's a separation between recreation or personal use, I suppose, and fishermen or sealers who do other things for their main source of livelihood.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Thank you very much for that clarification.

Thank you again, gentlemen, for appearing. It was very helpful to our study on the seal industry. I'm not going to prejudge the outcome of our study, but you can certainly rest assured that you have a very friendly audience here with this group of members of Parliament.

The meeting is adjourned.