Fisheries Committee on Dec. 12th, 2006

[Rebecca Aldworth]

I would not say that the commercial fur trade is part of the traditional native lifestyle in this country, but there are aboriginal and native people involved in commercial trapping and hunting of animals for fur. Does it decimate their communities when global markets for fur products shut? I don't believe so. I don't believe the evidence is there.

There have been a lot of statements made by the federal government, some self-serving statements. When you speak to the people in those communities, I don't believe they will agree that the thing they do best is kill animals for fur. I don't think they will agree that the closure of any market around the world for fur products is going to mean the end of their communities. Their communities have lived on subsistence hunting for generations, for thousands of years. I don't believe that the global market for fur products, which is fickle and cyclical and depends on the whims of the fashion industry, promises a sustainable future for any native person in this country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

Thank you, Mr. Stoffer.

Mr. Lunney.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Thank you very much.

Just for starters, Ms. Aldworth, I'd like to say for the record that, boy, you come in here with guns blazing, attacking the integrity of the members of this committee, referring to myths that have been perpetrated, you say, by this committee, and bias in this committee. You come in with an adversarial approach from the beginning.

On behalf of my colleagues around the table here, I have to say I find that very offensive. I'm glad that Mr. Matthews addressed that, because you actually impugn the integrity of all the members around the table, and that is somewhat reprehensible and unhelpful.

I don't come from Newfoundland. I come from Vancouver Island. I also have an interest in matters related to biology. My undergraduate degree is also in zoology. I listened very carefully to the presentation by the veterinarians who appeared here about the kill, about the hakapik in particular, and the evidence produced from their studies, dissections, and analyses of the brains of seals that had been killed. Their conclusion was in fact that the hakapik is a very effective tool and very humane in use.

Maybe you'd be happier if somehow you could round these animals up.... Perhaps you wouldn't, but you were saying that if they were slaughtered in an abattoir, in a closed building somewhere like cattle, sheep, and lambs for human consumption, somehow that would be more palatable. I suspect your group wouldn't support that either.

For the record, I find your attack on the integrity of members around this table is certainly unhelpful and somewhat reprehensible.

[Rebecca Aldworth]

Is that a question? May I respond to it?

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

I'd like to pose a question.

Going over to Dr. Lavigne, you mentioned your PhD is in physiology and zoology and that you taught at the University of Guelph. Are you still teaching at the University of Guelph?

[Dr. David Lavigne]

I am not on the faculty. I did participate in the teaching of a course this past semester, but I'm not on the faculty.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

So is your work with the IFAW full-time for you?

[Dr. David Lavigne]

Yes, it is.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

You said you found the harvest TAC of 335,000 is unsustainable.

[Dr. David Lavigne]

I said it's higher than the sustainable yield and in that sense it is unsustainable.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

You state on the website that as many seals are killed today as during the 1950s and 1960s, when significant overhunting pushed seals down the road to extinction. And yet the harp seal population has grown significantly, from under two million in the early seventies to over 5.8 million in 2004.

Moreover, DFO says the multi-annual total allowable catch is established based on scientific surveys designed to ensure that the harp seal population does not fall below 70% of the maximum observed population.

It would seem, therefore, that increases in annual harvests have led to a stabilization in population and not a reduction. So do you agree or disagree with the population estimates released by the Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat at DFO?

[Dr. David Lavigne]

Which website are you reading from?

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

I believe that would be the IFAW website.

[Dr. David Lavigne]

I'm not aware of that.

But the reason the seal population increased was that there was a drastic reduction in the hunt beginning about 1982 or 1983 that stayed in place until about 1995. These seals live for 30 years or so, so during that period of reduced hunting when catches probably averaged somewhere between 50,000 and 60,000—and in one year you may remember it got down as low as about 20,000—the population was given time to recover. And that's where the real growth of the population occurred.

Then, beginning in 1995, there was an increase in the total allowable catch, an increase in the landed catch that has continued every year since, with perhaps one exception. That increased catch has stabilized the growth of the population and is now causing it to decline.

So it is totally consistent with what you are saying, except that there is a time lag in there.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

If over 5.8 million, that was--

[Dr. David Lavigne]

Plus or minus two million.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Plus or minus two million. If you don't have better numbers--

[Dr. David Lavigne]

No, I'm not arguing with your numbers. I'm just saying that—

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

And if the numbers back in 1970 were two million, then obviously there's been an increase in that herd and not a decrease. So in terms of being sustainable, your comments about it being unsustainable are somewhat suspect.

[Dr. David Lavigne]

No, no. I tried to clarify that in answer to Mr. Stoffer's question.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Let me come back to the comment about the World Wildlife Fund, because I don't think that was clearly stated. I think most of us around the table respect the World Wildlife Fund, and I think you indicated you agree with a lot of their assessments, and you know they recently appeared here.

They are a body with certainly as much concern for animal welfare and certainly for conservation and are well respected around the world, and for them the hunt is not a conservation issue. Having looked at the same figures you're concerned about and having examined the hunt and being aware of it year after year, they don't see it as a concern for the future of the seals themselves.

So you disagree with their position, obviously.

[Dr. David Lavigne]

I would point out that the World Wildlife Fund does no science on harp seals. They do not do scientific assessments of harp seals, or at least I'm not aware of any.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Does IFAW do science?

[Dr. David Lavigne]

Yes.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

And what studies have you—