Fisheries Committee on April 18th, 2008

[Roland Landry, Administration portuaire de Anse Bleue]

Good morning. My name is Roland Landry and I am the President of the Anse Bleue Harbour Authority. There 19 of us who are lobster, herring and mackerel fishers. In addition to that, in the summer, there are about 30 recreational boaters.

I don't quite know how to start. To begin with, we are facing serious problems: water issues, and wharf paving problems. I don't know if this is what I am supposed to be talking about, but we would like to get money to try to address the wharf excavation issues once and for all, because it is ridiculous to have to dig with shovels every year. It's never-ending. That is the purpose of my visit here today: I'm trying to have this problem fixed once and for all.

All of us do volunteer work. Every year, we have about $12,000 with which to pave the wharf. I'm not afraid to say that we're all rolling up our sleeves and getting our hands dirty for nothing. And people are starting to get tired of it. That's why we'd like to start getting some money so that we can continue with our harbour activities.

That's all I have to say.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Landry.

Mr. Mallet.

[Paul-Aimé Mallet, Chair, Administration portuaire de Le Goulet]

Good morning, gentlemen.

My name is Paul-Aimé Mallet and I'm the President of the Le Goulet Harbour Authority.

The Le Goulet Harbour Authority was created in March, 1996. The wharves were a little outdated, but we still continue to work with Small Craft Harbours in order to improve them. One part of the wharf which has been the responsibility of the Le Goulet Harbour Authority since 1996 was built in the early 1960s. One part of the wharf is also used as a breakwater for the Shippagan channel.

For years we have worked hard with Small Craft Harbours in order to improve our wharf. We have 60 lobster fishing craft which dock at the wharf and about 15 to 20 vessels that come from other wharves to deliver their lobster in our wharf. We have about 10 to 15 craft which fish for other species, such as spring herring, mackerel and some groundfish, when quotas are small.

We also have between 10 and 20 native fishers fishing for snow crab. Since 1995, we've had about 12 to 15 snow crab fishers coming from other wharves to offload. In December 2006, we signed a long-term agreement with Small Craft Harbours for major repairs to the wharf costing approximately $8 million. In early January 2008 approximately $200,000 worth of work was almost complete.

It has become apparent that fewer and fewer fishers are attending the harbour authority's annual meetings because, according to them, the wharf is increasingly outdated. If major improvements aren't carried out in the near future, part of the wharf will have to be closed. Where are we going to dock our boats? Will we have to go back to the old capstan system so that fishers can continue to make a living?

In light of this, I believe that the current government needs to shoulder its responsibilities and start to invest more money in wharves.

And on that note, I'd like to thank you very much, gentlemen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Mallet.

Mr. Larocque.

[Samuel Larocque, Secretary-Treasurer, Comité portuaire de Pigeon-Hill]

Good morning. My name is Samuel Larocque and I am the Secretary Treasurer of the Pigeon-Hill Harbour Authority.

There are 68 coastal fishers at the Pigeon-Hill wharf. In the fall, during the herring harvest, there are an additional 15 boats. Currently, I have seven problems with the wharves. First the problem is with dredging at Le Goulet. We dredge every year, and every year our funding applications are approved. The problem is that we always have to call Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Public Works and Government Services Canada 48 hours in advance to file an application to dredge. And they give us 40 hours of dredging time, and sometimes 30 or even 20 hours. We're asking for a maintenance contract with allocated funding.

We have the Amphibec in the Pigeon-Hill region. And we're lucky from that point of view. The Amphibec can dig a wide enough channel so that if there's a storm or big winds, even if it fills up to a width of 50 feet, it's at least 200 feet wider. So that's the extent of the dredging problem.

Then we have wharf 401 which has been closed for five years. I have a lot of trouble getting money for that wharf. We've got it closed at the moment, but fishers open it and trucks drive through. Whose responsible? The port authority is. And we don't have enough money to repair this wharf.

The third problem is the slip, where vessels enter into the water. I lodged an application three years ago and I'm still waiting for the plans and designs from PWGSC. There are 70 boats which enter the water on the slipway with what we call a float. It's really dangerous. I've also submitted an application in relation to this. We're still waiting for the plans and specifications.

Another problem is that last year, we got $25,000 to carry out a study on future plans. I called Fisheries and Oceans Canada about this, but I didn't hear back. I called PWGSC. I got the same response, they are not aware of the issue. This is what we need to make the wharf bigger. We are still waiting.

The fifth problem is with the iron wharf. My grandfather built the iron wharf 32 years ago. It was inspected and we're going to get money to rebuild it. Fisheries and Oceans has done a lot of work on this, and I'm very pleased with this.

As you can see, there are a lot of problems at Pigeon-Hill.

The sixth problem involves floating docks. Four floating docks have degenerated. They're over 25 years old. We've continued to make requests in this regard, but there's not enough money.

The seventh problem is that Fisheries and Oceans Canada never has any money. We'd like to have a lot more money for small craft harbours. Small wharves must be treated differently to big sea ports. This problem really must be addressed.

When the government handed the sea ports over to the harbour authorities, they were in bad shape. You cannot hand something over to someone else when it's in bad shape. Had the government repaired the wharves immediately, we wouldn't be sitting at this table.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Larocque.

Mr. Paulin.

[Marc Paulin, Chair, Administration portuaire de Ste-Marie-St-Raphaël]

My name is Marc Paulin and I am president of the Ste-Marie-St-Raphaël Harbour Authority.

There are approximately 30 lobster fishermen working from the wharf. We fish herring and mackerel. Sometimes, depending on the year, some boats from outside come to fish for herring in the fall. In the past, we have landed crab, but we can no longer do this because there isn't enough water at the wharf entrance. Those boats don't want to run the risk of coming in, so they are forced to go to other wharves further away.

Our biggest problem is the silting of sand. Every spring, we have to dig ourselves out in order to go fishing. We also have to dredge whenever there are winds from the northeast. The annual priority projects that we submit to Fisheries and Oceans concern dredging. I don't see why we need to ask every year for funding for dredging. Since the department is aware that Ste-Marie-St-Raphaël needs and will always need to dredge, it should set aside funding for this.

The problem is getting worse. The condition of the coast and the sand has greatly deteriorated over the past 10 years. I have made Fisheries and Oceans and Public Works and Government Services aware of this. Those departments told me that there was no funding for a study or anything else. The sand is currently moving toward the front of the wharf, in such a way that it will be even more costly to dredge that area.

The wharf has been repaired. Some parts have been paved. A slip was built, a new boat slip, but it hasn't been finished. The slip is nice, but it can only be accessed by boat. We asked for a floating dock to be installed along the slip, and we got it. It is in the field, but we don't have a ramp to install along the floating dock, along the slip. The project is not yet complete. The government is telling us that it doesn't have any money for this.

Another problem has come up. Part of the wharf itself is starting to weather and soften. The crane, the excavators and the trucks loaded with herring have to drive on a soft and dangerous wharf. However, the wharf can't be blocked off because it's the only accessible area from which to dredge right to the bottom. I have advised Fisheries and Oceans, and Public Works and Government Services undertook some studies. They know that the wharf is in bad shape. We can't wait until an accident occurs. When a transport vehicle goes through the wharf, dredging will no longer be an option. We might as well say goodbye to the wharf.

Once again, I want to come back to the issue of dredging, because it is one of our major problems. Only a small path is dredged because that's all that we have allocated. If a wider path could be dredged, it would be much more beneficial for us. Instead of taking a single storm, it would take two or three perhaps before the boats are held up by too much sand. Boats have run aground and lives have almost been lost. You can't put a price on someone's life. Despite everything, the government is refusing to give us the money.

When the port authorities were created and forced on us, we had the choice of either creating a port authority committee or closing the wharf. So the government pushed the wharves onto us.

As my colleague Samuel said, the wharves were in very bad condition, and they still are. We are only volunteers and we are doing our best to manage these wharves. The fisherman are putting pressure on us to get us to do one thing or another. We're doing our best, but without any funding, our hands are tied. That, in a nutshell, is the problem.

That is all.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Paulin.

Mr. Chiasson.

[Aurèle Chiasson, Comité portuaire de Lamèque]

Good morning. My name is Aurèle Chiasson. I am the Manager of the Lamèque Harbour Authority Committee. In 1968, we were the first of all the wharves to create a port authority committee.

Back then, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans had said that it would hand over the wharves in operating condition, meaning safe on all fronts. However, this was not the case. Every year, we had to fight that department to get repairs made to all the wharves.

Every year since 2002 we have made our demands known to each minister of Fisheries and Oceans. Since I began this job there have been four minister of Fisheries and Oceans. With each change, we have had to reapply, since the new minister wasn't up to speed on the matter. So things never moved forward.

At one point, Minister Dhaliwal had given his approval to me for a wharf repair project. Then, the new minister, Mr. Thibault, who wasn't up to speed on the matter, talked to me about a really highly positioned project given the Department of Fisheries and Oceans' budgets. It was called a “rust proof” project. He gave me approximately $900,000 to do repairs on the worst part of the wharf, meaning the plant side. I had the choice: agree to the project or get nothing at all. We agreed to it. The side in question and the side for which I made my application concerned that part of wharves 407 and 408 according to l'Association coopérative des pêcheurs de l'Île.

This fall, an engineering firm inspected the wharf. After the inspection, the engineer in question told me that that part of the wharves—wharves 407 and 408—were in bad shape and were not safe. I asked him up to what point it wasn't safe. He suggested that we close a portion of the wharf and to only let three-quarter tonne trucks through. We mustn't forget that all of the fishers who work on the Lamèque wharf all have one tonne or more trucks. These are all crab and shrimp fishermen.

Fifty commercial fishing boats tie up to my wharf. They aren't small boats some 40 to 45 feet long; these boats are 65 feet or longer. On the part in question, meaning wharves 407 ad 408, there isn't even any room to tie up a boat safely. Although the Department of Fisheries and Oceans said from the start that it would maintain the wharves in an acceptable condition in accordance with construction safety standards, this has never been the case.

Furthermore, every year, fishing products worth $15 million are unloaded. That's a lot of money! Some 500 jobs are generated by these fishing activities too.

I still have not received confirmation that that part of the wharf will be closed, but everything leads me to believe that it will be closed this spring. The past month people have been working on that wharf, including two aquaculturists. There is a company that buys crab; they have a freezer that needs to be moved; there are two spots for offloading, and a dozen boats have to tie up there to unload. So I have to relocate all the people on the other wharves, meaning wharves 401, 402 and 403, which are already busy.

For all those reasons, I wonder what Fisheries and Oceans is going to do this spring. Is it going to give us money for the wharf?

I am not asking today for repairs — it would take approximately a million dollars — and even under those conditions, the wharf would not be acceptable in my opinion. What we're asking for today is a new wharf, a wharf that complies with construction and safety standards.

I have drafted a document and I have made copies for everyone here. This document, with supporting photographs, shows exactly the condition of the Lamèque wharf. I am talking here about wharves 407 and 408. Just from seeing the pictures, some people will be afraid to walk on the wharves. I have letters of support from the chambers of commerce, mayors, the Coalition pour la viabilité de l'environnement de Shippagan et des Îles Lamèque et Miscou. These people all support a new wharf being built in Lamèque.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Chiasson.

Mr. Savoie.

[Roger Savoie, Treasurer, Autorité portuaire de Grande-Anse]

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, members of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. I represent the Grande-Anse Harbour Authority Committee. We want to take this opportunity to thank you for allowing us to present our dredging project for the Grande-Anse wharf. Be it in terms of economics or tourism, the port is in many cases the heart of rural communities. We mustn't forget this.

Over the past few years, a lot of work on the port infrastructure in our community has been done, and we are very grateful for this. The previous facilities were no longer safe and no longer met the needs of inshore fishermen. These fishermen depend on these facilities to earn their living, thereby generating a lot of economic activity. The Honourable Claudette Bradshaw had announced that all the work would be done over several years. We are talking about a $1.5 million project.

In my opinion the most important phase of the port facility modernization project is dredging the port entrance and basin. At low tide, no boats can access the wharf, since silting has not left enough water depth for boats to get through. Currently there is only one and a half feet of water approximately, which represents a quarter of the normal depth, which is six feet. The cost of the dredging project is estimated at $417,000.

If this silting problem is not resolved, the current situation will represent a danger for fishermen as well as for pleasure boaters, because at low tide, they have to wait before they can come into the wharf. If there is a storm at low tide and someone is injured or has a heart attack, it would be impossible to access the wharf. The lives of fishermen, pleasure boaters and others will be endangered if the entrance to the wharf is not dredged. Last year, a similar situation occurred. The weather was bad and one of the boats tried to come in, the tide was not completely out. The boat got hit by the waves and almost broke up. Lives could have been lost. They weren't, but do we have to wait for that kind of accident to happen before we react?

If you look at the following pages, you will see the inside of the wharf and a beached boat. It's obvious that even inside the bay, there isn't enough water at low tide for the boats to float. I think that the photos speak for themselves. Our needs are urgent. Dredging is a necessity for us.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Savoie.

Thank you all for your presentations.

We'll now begin our round of questions, with ten minutes to the Liberal Party.

Mr. Simms.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

I'm going to be sharing my time, Mr. Chair.

Over the past few days we have been through Newfoundland and Labrador, and we've been in P.E.I., Nova Scotia, and here. One of the commonalities in all of this is that the changing face of the industry is now seeing much larger boats, bigger investments in the industry itself. It comes down to a point where a lot of your wharves are not built for these boats that are much larger. We've seen congestion problems to the point where people can't get out. And of course, as you mentioned, Mr. Savoie, there are the dredging issues. So depending upon where you are, it's either dredging or it's the actual size of the wharf, but the commonality is that our industry is seeing a much larger boat and much larger customers and more expenses when it comes to investment. Therefore, in my opinion, frustrations get that much bigger, because you don't have just a fishing enterprise; this is big business.

I would like you to comment on what problems you will face down the road, given the changing face of the industry, how it is changing. Comment on that and on how you think it's going to be a problem, given how your clients are changing the way they fish and what they fish with.

Also, there is competition. I'm starting to see some areas where it seems like harbours are pitted against each other. It's not just here; it's everywhere. But I want you to comment on why that is so. Is it more so now than it was in the past, or is it just something that was always there?

I guess I can start with who opened and go from there.

[Paul-Aimé Mallet]

On the issue of inshore fishing in the gulf, there is a policy stating that we can replace our boats only with a boat of the same length or the same tonnage. For 46 years, I have been fishing on a 40 to 45-foot boat that draws 4.5 to 5 feet of water. I don't understand why you say that boats will get bigger and bigger. That may happen in other regions, like Nova Scotia and Scotia-Fundy.

In the past 30 years, fishers have been keeping their boats at about the same length. When harbours are dug, the effects of nature must be taken into account, be it storms, erosion or sand movement. On the gulf side, from the Miramichi to Miscou point, for instance, there is sand all along the shores. In Newfoundland, it's rocks and pebbles. It's not the same thing.

We have to put ourselves in the shoes of the people asking for help. We have to know where they are, and on what kind of territory, what kind of terrain they operate.

I hope that answers your question.

[Rénald Haché, Mayor, Ville de Lamèque]

Good morning, Mr. Simms.

My name is Rénald Haché, and I'm the mayor of the City of Lamèque.

You said that boats are getting bigger and bigger. The Lamèque dock is a commercial fishing dock. It services inshore fishers, as well as midshore and offshore fishers. Thus, there are indeed some large vessels in which the fishers have invested significant amounts. These are vessels worth 2 to 3 million dollars.

With regard to the shrimp fishery, those really are big boats. What worries us is the safety of the wharf when it comes to a large fleet representing massive financial investment by fishers.

You also talked about competition between wharves. I would say there is no competition right now, because every region has a fleet that takes up each wharf's activities. Even if there was competition, each wharf is totally filled by the vessels it serves. Moreover, most fishers like to use the wharves that are close to where they live. So there is an established clientele for every wharf. I would say that wharves in the region work together, in fact.

Thank you.

[Samuel Larocque]

In our community, there is a small sea harbour and a small village with 700 to 800 people. You said that boats are too big. On our wharf, we set aside only three metres a boat for 68 boats. I remember that, 35 years ago—when I was only seven—my father fished near the coast using capstans. The boat was only 21 feet long. I remember that. Now, we have to move with the times. The federal government provided wharves that were in good condition when they were new, but now they are old and quite damaged. That's why I am saying the world has changed a lot, and now we need large boats to get the fish.

In our small community, the economic benefits amount to 7 to 8 million dollars. In a small village with 700 or so people, 7 to 8 million dollars is a lot of money for the general store, convenience store, and so on.

And when it comes to sand build up in the channel, let's see what the figures are. The main fishery is the lobster fishery. If 68 lobster boats lose one day's fishing, let's see what happens. Take 400 pounds at $5 a pound, you get $2,000. So if each of those 68 fishers loses $2,000 each, the total loss is about $200,000. In fact, it's $140,000, but sometimes people bring in 500 pounds of lobster. So one day's lost fishing amounts to $150,000 less for the community. That's why we have evolved. We need very efficient ports to serve us.

There was also mention of disputes among harbour authorities. There is so little money at Fisheries and Oceans that no one whose project is approved will tell anyone else how the money was obtained. That's the problem. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans often finds us very annoying—they often find me extremely annoying, because they know me quite well—but I care a great deal about the issue and I volunteer my time. I have been on the committee for eight years and I love my work, but I volunteer my time. I have other plans for the future. I'm young, and I have three sons who are 4, 7 and 11 years old. One of them will become a fisher, there is no doubt about that. We have to care, because this is our field, our livelihood. We have been raised in the fishery. That's why we want well-constructed and well-run harbours. That is my view.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bill Matthews]

Thank you very much, gentlemen.

We'll now go to Mr. Blais, please.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Thank you very much.

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Larocque, I find everything you have said touches me very deeply. In fact, I would say that this is at the heart of the issue, because it is a question of priorities, a question of choices. The question is not the amount of money, but how the money will be divided and shared. Canada's budget is about $240 billion. The budget of Fisheries and Oceans is $1.7 billion, while the department's budget for small craft harbours is $100 million. At the beginning of this millennium, the budget was $50 million.

These are large figures, but they show how things are now. In 2004, repairing and restoring the wharves cost $400 million. Today, it would take over $600 million. Things are in decline, and the facilities are deteriorating. Unfortunately, Mr. Chiasson, we are not talking about development projects, but projects to repair and restore, projects to patch up what's already there. That is the sad truth.

Mr. Larocque, the message that you have to keep repeating is that this is your way of life, this is how you earn your living, and this is how you were raised. This affects you very deeply because you feel you have been somehow betrayed, that a promise has been broken. That is exactly what has happened. You were sold the wonderful idea of the port authority system. I have nothing against the idea, but it has to work for both sides, yet obviously it does not.

The other thing I have to day—and I think we have to keep saying it—is that it's always a question of priorities. Eventually, priorities have to be the right ones. It's not a money issue. I believe the wharves are essential, and I keep saying it—they are the heart of the community. Some would even say the docks are the soul of the community. They are much more than a place where boats are loaded and unloaded. They are the place where people come together, they are a forum. No more wharves, no more unloading. No more wharves, no more life. That is also a sad truth.

I very much appreciate what you are saying, Mr. Larocque, but we have reached a point where the size of vessels is causing a number of problems. Some of them are not just longer, but also wider. There is climate change to be considered as well. Storms are much stronger than they used to be, and that has an impact too. Depending on where it is located, a wharf will become more degraded because the storms buffeting it are more powerful.

At some point, we have to find a balance, and stability. I was saying that to our first witnesses, and I would like to hear your views on it as well.

Mr. Roussel.

[Denis Roussel, Mayor, Administration portuaire de Le Goulet]

My name is Denis Roussel, and I am the mayor of the town of Le Goulet. I am on the Le Goulet Harbour Authority.

In 1996, you did not give us a wharf, you imposed it on us. That is pretty much what happened to every port authority. Generally speaking, Le Goulet and other harbour authorities received wharves that were already under repair, or that needed repair. You asked us to take ourselves in hand, and that is what we did. We established committees and did our work until very recently. In fact, it seems that the number of members is beginning to drop. That's not because we're not working, but because we are not getting government support. Existing wharves need major repairs. I am not just talking about Le Goulet, but all wharves. Lamèque needs a new wharf. There is not even any money to repair those wharves. Wharves like ours and the one in Ste-Marie-St-Raphaël, in fact all wharves represented here are on the verge of shutting down. Where will the boats go once the wharves are gone?

So I tell myself that if the government doesn't invest in them... and I'm not just talking about the current government, but also about preceding governments. Governments have not invested sufficiently in wharf infrastructure. If you are here today—and I do thank you for coming—it's to see what the situation is. I am not going to congratulate anyone today. I have some strong comments to make. If you don't immediately invest in the wharves—take that as an ultimatum, if you like—I will communicate with all port authorities, and we will gather up our books and bring them to you. We are at the end of our rope. All port authorities are at the end of their ropes.

I can promise you that, if nothing is done and if there is no investment in our wharves, I will take it upon myself to communicate with all port authorities to institute a boycott and get things moving.

Thank you.

[Marc Paulin]

You said that the wharf was the soul of the community. That is absolutely true, because in our community, we all live off fishing. I am in my 30s, and I expect to spend the rest of my working life fishing. That takes a lot of investment. I have been chairman of the harbour authority from the very start.

Now, we are beginning to notice that it's tough to find people to sit on the committee. They are behind us, and they see that whenever we go to DFO, DFO says it has no money, even before we open our mouths.

Our wharves are in ruins. The department imposed harbour authorities on us. I think we do some very good administrative work. We started from scratch and got where we are today. We never received the funding we were promised when these harbour authorities were imposed on us. We were told to set up committees and ask for money to implement our projects. The funding side of it was forgotten. It's funding that we lack.

That is all I have to say.

[Paul-Aimé Mallet]

You are absolutely right in saying that a wharf is the heart of a village or a community. I have been working for the Le Goulet port authority for so many years I've lost track. Each year, towards the end of March, retired fishers call to find out when the wharf and the road leading to it will be cleared. It is a meeting place.

There is no money to repair the infrastructure, but even less to clear the wharves come springtime. Fishers have to pay to clear the wharves. Now, I understand that we've had an exceptional winter in terms of snow. However, something is not quite right when fishers have to pay to clear the snow and remove the ice on the wharves.

We will have to rattle the cage quite a bit before things really change and so we can continue to operate. Fishers are very courageous people. And yet, they are getting discouraged and abandoning the trade. They no longer participate on the board of directors because things are at a standstill. Some even do not want to move forward.

As was said earlier, there has been a breach of contract. We signed a contract and yet more and more conditions are being imposed on us. We have to submit audited financial statements, which amounts to $1,500 to $2,000 over and above our other costs. Agreements were signed with Fisheries and Oceans 10 years ago. They point to a small clause in the contract and tell us we have to comply with it. We do not have the means to do so. Some fishers can no longer pay. Wharf users can no longer pay $400, $500 or $600 a year. Don't expect to draw blood from a stone.

Fishers are starting to get fed up. If nothing is done, we will make do with what we have.

Thank you.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Savoie.

[Roger Savoie]

I understand that the role of standing committees, including the fisheries and oceans committee, is to influence the budget process. Given all that you have heard here, I would hope that you will convey the right message in order to obtain more money for small craft harbours. You see that there are crying needs, but it is also a matter of safety for users.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Fabian Manning]

Thank you, Mr. Savoie.

Mr. Stoffer.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Gentlemen, thank you very much for your presentation.

Let me just play the devil's advocate here. Obviously if a wharf is not safe, if it's shut down or closed because of safety reasons, that fisherman and his catch will go somewhere else. We have heard, very clearly, that every wharf we go to needs an investment. No one hasn't asked for money--for extensions, for dredging, for wharf repair, for new wharves, etc. That's an awful lot of money in requests.

If the future of the fishery, as we've heard from one individual, is that the industry may itself be consolidated with fewer boats--bigger boats, but fewer fishermen accessing the fish--and if that indeed is the case fifteen or twenty years from now, then why do you have to have all these wharves in these communities?

Remember, I'm just playing the devil's advocate.

If DFO comes to the point where they say, “No, we don't have the money, this wharf will end up closing because of safety reasons, those people will go somewhere else”, and so on, then do you think--I just throw this out for your thought process--that every community should have a harbour and a wharf facility? If not, should there be consolidation in the industry in order to better manage and better use the dollars? Or should every community continue having its wharf and harbour as the lifeblood--you had indicated this before--of the community?

I say that because I remember when grain elevators--the lifeblood of small rural prairie communities--started coming down in the Prairies. When the grain elevators went down, the farmers had to take their grain further distances down the road. I see that happening in the industry of fishing as well.

Please tell me I'm wrong.