Fisheries Committee on March 12th, 2009

[Jean-Guy d'Entremont]

I think we've covered every part that should have been covered. I don't think we avoided discussing the tough issues. I think the quota situation is one that is a quick rationalization plan that involves industry buyout, and it's one that fishermen don't want to talk about, but we talked about it. We felt it was important to discuss it as an option.

The native issue is more polarized in certain areas, but for the most part natives have been integrated in the fishery commercially and share fishing grounds with other commercial fishermen, non-native fishermen, and that's not an issue. I don't think it's a huge issue except for a few areas.

I'll ask my colleagues if there's any issue that we didn't touch.

The only one that is prevalent now that wasn't as important back then is eco-labelling. Something that wasn't really in the forefront is MSE approval and access to markets. Because of a lack of information and proper monitoring, I don't think we'll pass MSE approval very well, or eco-labelling standards. And that will force changes, as well. But that's not something we heard a lot about while we were in consultation in 2007. It happened more in the last couple of years.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Anybody else?

Gerard.

[Gerard Chidley]

Mr. Chair, I'll just expand on it slightly.

The difference between 1995 and 2007 was that in 1995 the room wasn't full, there was still room for expansion. If you look at the difference in some of the graphs that we've shown, like the vessel size changes, technology changes, horsepower curves versus landings, you will realize that there's no substrate left, to add to your point, where the lobster has to hide. Now we have the table full, and the only way things can change is if people start dropping off the edge.

Two of the things we talked about in predictions were the change in the economics, whether it be into currency or market availability, and fuel prices. We had 83 briefs and we did 20 consultations, and I don't think there were too many rocks that weren't unturned. The consultations were very well attended and very well focused and the reports that we put together certainly reflected what we saw and what we heard.

It wasn't our job to follow the report through. This was presented to the minister and the public. Under the cooperative management scheme, that's how you proceed. The minister then has to take it and move forward, like with consultations with the respective LFAs, lobster fishing areas, and see what pile of the tool box they're going to pick apart and what wrenches they'll use.

I hope that helps.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Mr. Chidley.

[Jean-Guy d'Entremont]

May I just add something?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Very quickly.

[Jean-Guy d'Entremont]

Everything that we have received is on the website, our FRCC website, all the briefs. All the information is open and transparent, and anything we've heard you can find there.

If you need information or before you go to consult, if you'd like some help I'm sure the secretariat would be quick to help you find where to go and how to go about setting them up to get good consultations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Mr. d'Entremont.

Mr. Andrews.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you.

Thank you, guys, for appearing before us today.

Obviously we've heard much today about the size of the female lobster and how important it is. My question is with regard to V-notching, and the practice of that.

I find that there's always this great debate between DFO scientists and the fishermen, and sometimes we don't use the fishermen as the greatest scientists we have. In speaking to some fishermen in my riding, and from a group of fishermen in one bay who practised V-notching, they swear by it. And then you go to the next bay, and they're not practising V-notching. And for the ones who are practising V-notching, keeping the bigger females there to spawn more eggs, it's phenomenal

Why aren't we doing more? Why don't we protect those animals that have been V-notched, make them illegal to sell? How widespread is the practice of V-notching? Is there any research there that could give us some more information, saying this is a good way of keeping the females spawning?

[Jean-Guy d'Entremont]

I'll ask Donald to answer.

[Donald Walker]

The V-notching process was big in Maine before it became apparent in the eastern Canada area. It's practised in many different areas in many different forms. We started it very early on. We've gone to a maximum size, because we felt that the possibility of injury to the lobster becomes greater every time you cut the pleopods or the tail flippers, depending on how it's done, and on whether it's done properly. How far in you make the incision, because you're causing an open wound, is something that some fishermen worry about.

Also, the control you have over whether it's a natural notch, whether it's a V-notch made by a fishermen, and whether it's on one side or the other, became problematic. So some areas went away from it and went to maximum size, for both female and male lobsters. With the V-notching, in most cases you're only protecting the females.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Is it a practice we should look at?

[Donald Walker]

It's a practice that's being done, and it has evolved. In areas that have evolved beyond it, they've moved closer to a maximum size, because you're protecting both the female and the male with a maximum size, whereas with the V-notching you're only protecting the females.

Doing nothing is no good; V-notching is better than doing nothing. Then you have an evolution to another level, in my belief, which is the maximum size.

[Jean-Guy d'Entremont]

Another point is that the Americans swear by V-notching in protecting larger females, and the Canadians for the most part swear at it rather than swear by it.

It's very difficult to enforce, because of neighbouring LFAs. As you mentioned, if one group has one style, such as protecting females by V-notching, and others release them, and others catch them and bring them in, who are we saving the lobsters for? Is it one bay saving it for the next bay? This causes problems between LFAs. We've mentioned the connectivity of LFAs or lobster fishing areas in our report.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

But is it a good practice? If the Americans swear by it, is it a practice we should seriously look at doing on a widespread basis?

[Gerard Chidley]

From the standpoint of lobster production areas, if there were a lobster production area such that the larval drift in the one area depended on the success in another area, then it might be worth looking at for the early stages. And then you would evolve to the maximum size limits for both male and female; that's quite apparent.

The problem with it is that the next step has to be taken: to take out the word “voluntary”. That's one thing we have seen. Those who love it love it; those who don't like it just don't like it. But it's the voluntary thing: while you may V-notch and you know that what you're doing is really good, but I'm hauling gear alongside you and don't have the V-notch, then the only person you're saving it for is me.

Until there's a measure to put that kind of thing in place.... That's why it's offered for discussion in some cases; it's like part of a tool box for each area to discuss with the DFO management. Believe it or not, a lot of the local area committees work really well with DFO management. They just look for things seen to need doing. That's what we heard: there are areas that do really good work with DFO. I think that has to be expanded.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Chair, could I just clarify that V-notching is something that's done to the lobster, not to the fishermen?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Gerard Chidley]

There are some who may say it should be done to the fishermen too.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

That's definitely not a point of order.

Monsieur Lévesque.

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you for coming here, gentlemen.

Mr. d'Entremont, you mentioned earlier that the situation now is more serious than in 2007. Is that because stocks are disappearing, because boats are bigger, or because of the prices that are being offered for the catch?

[Jean-Guy d'Entremont]

The costs of doing business are higher, including the costs for the boat. The fisherman only has one choice: land more lobster in order to earn more money so that he can solve his economic problems. That puts more pressure on the resource, not the other way round. The balance between the four components I mentioned, ecology, economics, social systems and governance, must be maintained. At the moment, things are tight in the economics, so the ecology, meaning the lobster in this case, is going to bear the brunt. Fisherman have to put out more fishing effort in order to pay their bills.

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

The requirements of the business are increasing. To meet those requirements, the fisherman operating that business has to overfish.

[Jean-Guy d'Entremont]

Exactly. They push harder.