Fisheries Committee on June 3rd, 2008

[David Bevan]

The science isn't perfect. There's always uncertainty. That's why we have a range in the advice that we get, and there are probabilities and so on and so forth.

I would say, however, simply put, that we don't see a fundamental problem with the science. I think in the northern gulf as well as the southern gulf--let's put it in context--those fisheries were 60,000 tonnes throughout the whole first half of the 20th century. They supported a 20,000- to 40,000-tonne fishery and then peaked out at 100,000 tonnes, with 60,000 tonnes for a long period in the second half of the century.

That's the context in which we're looking at these stocks. They're well below their historic range. The northern gulf was low, and the risk of continuing to fish on that at the time was such that it would pre-empt a rapid rebuilding of the stock. Even where we are now with better productivity, the fishery that we have, in order to respond to the demands of the fishermen, is one that will impede the rate of recovery but not stop the recovery. In the southern gulf, we haven't seen that.

I know we heard from some fishermen today. There are many others in the southern gulf who don't share the view that you heard earlier, who do understand that the southern gulf cod stock is in serious trouble, that the trajectory in that stock is down, and that the productivity there is not comparable to that of a totally separate population that exists in the north.

It's not perfect. We don't have something that can give us the degree of precision that sometimes is being sought. It will happen. We will have growth at 4,000 tonnes, and—

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

That's going to lead me to my next question. The proposed new act, Bill C-32, which is very explicit, basically says that the minister must employ scientific evidence from a conservation principle in his management plans. You presented evidence to this committee stating that in your opinion, if the minister does not.... Well, every decision of the minister is challengeable in a federal court.

Do you think if the minister were to maintain this fishery on a status quo basis, given the scientific evidence out there--right or wrong--that is being presented to you and to him, and the new act were employed, that the decision of the minister to maintain the status quo could be challengeable in a federal court? Would the scientific evidence support his decision to maintain the status quo?

[David Bevan]

Clearly, on the latter point, the scientific evidence in the southern gulf does not support maintenance of the status quo.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

So the court could shut the fishery down whether the minister wanted to or not, under the new act.

[David Bevan]

Well, that's not quite true either. The act doesn't say that the minister must follow scientific advice; it says he must consider scientific advice. He must consider the precautionary approach. It doesn't say that he has to consider and follow it. I think that's a clear distinction. He could be challenged in a court of law if he had not demonstrated that he actually did consider the scientific advice. But it does not oblige him to follow it. There's a whole series of other events.

And from your own area, the northern gulf, we've seen a high catch per unit of effort through the northern gulf, and we've seen some signs of fish. He can consider that as well as the scientific advice. The scientific advice does not take issue with that. In other words, it does indicate that there were fish there and that there is a high catchability of that fish, but he doesn't need to follow it.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

I'll pass my time to my colleague Mr. Simms, but I'll just make one final comment, which is that usually a Federal Court judge, in Toronto or somewhere where a case might be brought, would think that “considering” means following it. That's a point of debate.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bill Matthews]

Mr. Bevan, you don't have to speak or respond to that.

Mr. Simms.

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

I have just a couple of points here about the research.

In your opinion, would the predation by seals be considered a significant component of natural mortality?

[David Bevan]

Some scientists--not all--are saying that that is in fact the case, and it's a major component of natural mortality in the southern gulf. I think we also have to put it in a broader context. We had a population that was depleted by significant fishing. It was subject to low productivity while that fishing was going on, and we knocked the population down well below a reasonable limit. The limit in the southern gulf, as I recall, is 80,000 tonnes. That's thought to be a place you don't want to go below.

In addition, we have other environmental changes, such as lower oxygen and higher temperatures. Those are things that don't help cod either.

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

I agree, because I certainly feel that the sea temperature change is one of the issues that get glossed over.

Going back to the seals issue again--and let me get this right--some scientists say that the predation of seals is a major factor, but it almost seems to me you're not really buying into that.

[David Bevan]

No, I'm not taking issue with that. What I am saying is there is ongoing debate in the scientific community. Those scientists who study the seals and their place in the ecosystem are not coming to that conclusion. Those scientists who look after fish are more inclined to see the correlation between the population of seals and the productivity and increased mortality in cod.

We also have a tack for grey seals that's not being taken. We have a working group that's being formed to try to look at how to deal with that whole issue. So we are recognizing the need to take some action on seals.

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

Obviously, when you reduced the seal quota from 320,000 to 270,000, you did not take predation into account, did you?

[David Bevan]

That was on harp seals, and we were looking at maintenance of a product of harp seal population. They are not resident in the gulf, and they don't cause the problems that we've heard about in terms of southern gulf cod.

[Sylvain Paradis, Director General, Ecosystem Science, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

With regard to the scientific advice on seals, we had an earlier meeting with industry a couple of months ago to actually look at what the questions were. There is going to be another meeting in the fall to look at stomach-content studies, improved consumption patterns of seals, some new design for how we can actually measure.... For example, we're planning to put cameras on the heads of some seals to be able to follow them better and see what their nutrition patterns are, because when we do stomach content you don't find that large a number. That doesn't mean they don't eat that, but you don't really see it.

We also look at other issues, like belly biting, eating the underneath of the cod. You don't really find traces in their stomachs. There is also the issue of worms, parasites being transmitted to species. We actually have a science plan to work with all of the partners.

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

My colleague has one very quick question.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bill Matthews]

Mr. Regan.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

A few years ago I had occasion to be on Sable Island and to hear from DFO scientists. They have previously only had to look at the insides of the seal to see what was in the gut, so to speak, in terms of trying to figure out what kind of fish they'd been eating for the past few weeks. But these days they can use the fatty acids in the seal to determine what it's been eating for five months, which is much more accurate. They were saying, to my surprise, that the amount of cod in the grey seals around Sable Island was 3% to 5%.

What similar work has been done in the gulf, in the southern gulf particularly?

[Sylvain Paradis]

That's one of the issues that is going to be addressed in the fall meeting, because we're looking at the genetic makeup of the food consumption, exactly to discuss what you are talking about, the fatty acid content and so on. I don't think we had a clear picture for the southern gulf, and that's what is going to be addressed at the meeting in the fall.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bill Matthews]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Blais.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, gentlemen.

First of all, when will the decision on cod in the southern gulf be announced?

[David Bevan]

It will probably be announced this week, within the next few days.

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

Just how accurate is the scientific assessment that you have presented?

[Sylvain Paradis]

It is difficult to specifically assess the accuracy. Bear in mind that this opinion does not come strictly from DFO scientists. Here's how the process works. DFO scientists present scientific information to a joint panel with representation from industry, universities and the research community. Using peer review, we reach a scientific consensus which is subsequently sent to the minister, after having been posted on the Web for all Canadians.

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

You realize that it is surely not in the interest of fishermen to exaggerate the abundance of cod in order to obtain a 2,000, 3,000 or 4,000 tonne quota for an additional three or four years. These are responsible people who fully realize that doing so would be to their own detriment. The people fishing cod are cod fishermen.

In this case, why not have confidence in them?

[Sylvain Paradis]

The issue is not about not having confidence in them. I will use the words you used during the break. We have no intention of being confrontational with the fishermen. The idea is to move closer together and to have a stronger consensus. The challenge is bigger than that. We want to work with the fishermen, but we are also facing pressure from other parties. For example, Cosewic, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife, has decided to submit a notice for a new review of cod in light of scientific opinions that were submitted. So we are facing a situation where there are a number of stakeholders. We want to take the views of scientists very seriously. In fact, as Mr. Cotton mentioned, the minister has decided to put in place a process to bring the groups closer together. We are planning to hold a symposium early in the fall. We are currently working with the fishermen. We have provided them with some resource to prepare a comprehensive brief so that we have the bases of their approach. The idea is not to have a confrontational attitude. We have a picture that we have been following for the past few years, and it is showing a decline. We can compare the southern gulf with the northern gulf, where we have a picture that is indicating the contrary. We can see a recovery there because the natural mortality rate seems to be decreasing. But we are not seeing that picture in the southern gulf where we know that the two stocks are very different. We are not talking about the same stock at all. Although we could say that the gulf is a large lake, it would be a large lake with two very distinct fish populations. If we had the same signal in the southern gulf, a signal showing a recovery, that the fish are larger, that mortality is decreasing—which we are not seeing at all as mortality is decreasing quickly and we think that the grey seal has an impact at that level—we could start saying yes, we can go there.

I don't doubt the fishermen's ability to find the fish. They are professionals, they know their work. But we also have scientists who are professionals, who must follow very strict protocols, and it is at that level that we want to reach an agreement. If there is an issue with the time when the surveys are done, we could consider other periods and try to conduct the surveys at other times to determine if the current models are false.