Evidence of meeting #19 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fishermen.
11:10 a.m.
As an Individual
Yes. Let's say that, tomorrow morning, I lock you up in a cupboard and leave you there for a month. When I let you out and I give you an earth worm, you're going to eat it, aren't you?
11:10 a.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
11:10 a.m.
As an Individual
Nod to say yes because I'm a bit peckish and I'm going to eat all the bait.
11:10 a.m.
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
I'll even eat two or three. Sometimes you eat them and you don't know it.
11:10 a.m.
As an Individual
A hungry seal will go to the bottom of the sea and eat anything: lobster, crab, cod; it swallows whatever it can, if it can digest it. It's like someone who can eat fatty steak, but one day he'll get indigestion.
11:10 a.m.
Bloc
11:10 a.m.
As an Individual
We no longer have any trust; we no longer know who to believe. Why are we here? Because there was no trust. No one trusts anyone anymore. We have to set the record straight. If I give you a glass of water, drink it, but don't put any vinegar in it.
We have to trust each other in order for the resource to be good again. As I told Dominic LeBlanc earlier: there are solutions, but we mustn't tell each other lies. We have to sit down, find the problem and solve it.
Perhaps I'm going to make you laugh, but it's as though I drank five beers and told my wife that I had drunk two. She would tell me I'm a liar, wouldn't she? That's what's happening. We tell each other too many lies and we're not listening to each other enough. You have to listen to the fishermen and to the biologists as well in order to preserve the resource. It's nice when everyone smiles.
Tomorrow morning, if I see my neighbour, a plant worker whom you talked about earlier... At the time, I made some sandwiches and took them to him. Don't you think that made me feel sick? The man had a salary of $4,000; what do you want him to do? They must be good accountants because I can't imagine how they manage at the end of the year. That's the situation: people are dying—I'm choosing the right word; that's it.
The fishery is finished; the boats are finished. Go down the peninsula, go into the houses and open the refrigerator of a plant employee and see what's there. Maybe your heart will be as heavy as mine was earlier.
11:15 a.m.
As an Individual
I would have liked to make a few comments on your two questions, Mr. Blais.
First, we've seen seal in the gulf in the past 10 years like we've never seen it before. Everywhere we see little heads popping out of the water all around the boat. There are so many that, for a few years now, a number of fishermen have been catching whole big seals right in the traps. Probably the seal goes down to feed in the trap, then can't get out and drowns. When we bring it up, it's dead. That increasingly happening.
With regard to your second question about trust, I think we had the best example of that this morning. When the Fisheries and Oceans Canada people were seated here, we were seated at the back of the room. Do you see any Fisheries and Oceans Canada people listening to us now? That's a lack of trust.
Thank you.
11:15 a.m.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you all for coming today and providing your testimony to the committee. It is appreciated.
I want to go on a slightly different track. I have two questions, and anybody on the panel can feel free to answer.
If we're to accept that there is a new reality of fewer crabs in the water, if that is in fact the case, and even given that there may be a rebound in the coming years, can you provide any comment on your thoughts about value-added marketing or marketing your products in a new or different way? Has thought been given to that, how either to produce a different product or to open up different markets?
Second, if the current management model is not working—and there was reference back to days when there was a better situation in place—what needs to be done to get back to that management model or to a model that you feel works?
I'll open it up to anyone who may want to take either of those questions.
11:15 a.m.
As an Individual
I used to own a plant, but, given the circumstances, I had to sell it. The whole industry is sick. Today, we're simply fishermen and owners. There's a lot of talk about value added. On the Acadian Peninsula, the Japanese producer Ichiboshi manufactures value-added products. There are niches, and some things have been tried. It used to be about "staggering", but now it's in sections. There's one market for raw brown crab and another for cooked crab. There's also whole crab.
In the 1990s, when we were owners, we tried a lot of things and we invested a lot of money. The Americans came and simply wanted things to be done in a certain way. They wanted tunnels with automatic [Editor's Note—Inaudible]. The Japanese feel that since they're buying, they're the ones who decide. If they want a particular division, whether it's M, L, 2L or 3L, they want it done their way. In Newfoundland, they want crab for “staggering”, which is crab of poor visual quality. They buy a lot based on visual appearance. A lot of work has been done, but it's not easy. We're not saying that nothing can be improved. Improvements are needed. There's always room for improvement. We have to try something new. Work has been done and is still being done.
You also asked what could be done to prevent a situation such as the one we're currently going through. It's quite simple. Mr. LeBlanc said that, apart from sharing, the major problem is crab fishing overcapacity in area 12. The problem is quite simple. The sharing system was applied when it was time for it, and when it's not time for it... It was shown that it worked. In the late 1990s, we experienced these cycles, and we managed to cope with them. There are simply too many people involved in this kind of fishing. Otherwise, we wouldn't be here today. How to solve the problem? The solution is easy. It's unfortunate that not a single DFO official is here to hear us. It's disheartening to see that. This is an opportunity to understand the situation of the fisheries in Canada.
In Canada, the fisheries are sick for one simple reason: people are no longer connected to the reality of the fisheries in Canada. Journalists are here to listen to us, but DFO isn't here. That's incredible. It's disorienting for the industry. People may not think we've come here. Why is that the case? You have proof. We didn't invent the situation. We've gotten to the point where we wonder whether people really want to hear what we have to say. We're pleased to be meeting with you today and to ask questions. Do you understand what we're saying? We're fishermen, not public servants or politicians. We live from crab-fishing. We're testifying on behalf of the entire industry, whether it's the plants, the deckhands or everything that affects the industry. The problem has to be solved.
The government has to stop managing our fisheries in a political manner. That's clear. A politician says he isn't on the same wave length as we are with regard to sharing and that we're going to move on to something else. What can we do? You always say we have to set sharing aside, but that's not the real problem. Back home, the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. It comes up every morning and goes down every evening. The problems we're currently experiencing are as real as the movements of the sun.
We're coming back to the elevator that goes up and goes down. Some people are closing their ears right now and want to believe this isn't the real problem. It's the real problem. We have political management of the fisheries right now, across Canada. Where's the fish here? Right now, the redfish that supported the residents of the Acadian Peninsula has disappeared. There's no more cod or plaice. We can name them this way indefinitely. The fishing industry in Canada is sick because there have been political decisions and politicians say that sharing is not a problem. They tell us their position is different.
One thing is clear. Here a rock is a rock and a glass of water is a glass of water. We see that the industry people have not been listened to. Now there's a price to pay for that, and it's a heavy one. The industry is in poor shape and really in a state of crisis. It shouldn't be like for a fishery that's managed as well in terms of dockside weighing, at-sea observers, individual quotas and management. It was a model of its kind.
Mr. Moriyasu was seated here this morning. It's unfortunate that he and the other Fisheries and Oceans Canada representatives didn't stay. In 1994, after we had turned ourselves around four years earlier, he said that our industry was a world model, that we had worked jointly with them for it to become a world model. Mr. Moriyasu told me that the scientists and fishermen had developed a world model. Today I realize that these people aren't even in the room. Everybody's at the bottom of the hole and hiding. As for us, we're not hiding from telling the truth. The truth is there and we're going to say it. We hope our message will get through and reach Ottawa and that there will be concrete action.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to everyone for being here and for your comments. They were very interesting.
This morning, Mr. Bevan said the department took into account fishermen's comments on the quotas recommended by the industry in 2009. Do you know the fishermen who made those comments?
Do you know the fishermen who made that presentation to say that the quota was too low and that we should go with a 20,900-tonne quota? Was it part of any of your fishermen's associations that commented to Fisheries and Oceans?
11:25 a.m.
As an Individual
Some participants distributed a table to you. Do you have it? All right.
Last year, the department assessed the biomass at approximately 45,000 tonnes or some 44,000 tonnes. The previous year, the biomass was estimated at approximately 48,000 tonnes. So there was a decline in biomass of approximately 4,000 tonnes from one year to the next. The scientists' figures on pre-recruits, recruitment—it isn't enough simply to verify biomass; you also have to check to see who's entering the fishery and what the new recruitment will be for the following year—was approximately 43 or 47 million specimens for 2009. With all that information, the industry's five or six crab fishermen's associations suggested to the department—since it wanted to reduce the quotas to 19,200 tonnes based on the scientific assessments of recruitment, pre-recruits—that it was also all right to set them at 20,900 tonnes. The difference was only 1,700 tonnes. We said to ourselves that we could reassess the situation the following year.
This year, the scientists have changed all the figures. The pre-recruits from last year no longer represent 47 million specimens, but only 31 million. That's what's happening on the scientists' side. The figures change every month or every six months, and they change constantly. They submit figures, we study them, we have them analyzed. Six months later, we're told that there was a mistake, that it was a cut-and-paste, that the figure shouldn't have been there. That changes all the figures. All that to tell you that, if the department, or the minister, had followed officials' recommendation to set the quotas at 19,200 tonnes, that would have done absolutely nothing to change the present situation. We would be at the same point.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
You're taking me to my next question.
My understanding is that each year the quota is based on three major things that are done: your catch per unit of effort; the post-season trawl survey; and the collaborative trap survey done with the harvesters.
I'm just trying to understand how this plays out over time, because all that data would presumably go to DFO and the scientists would make a decision on it.
Have any of you provided that data to them? When is the first time that DFO comes back and says, “Using that data, here is what we think the harvestable biomass is”? Does that happen in the fall, or do you not find that out until March or April?
11:30 a.m.
As an Individual
Are you talking about the fishing season just completed or the previous one?
11:30 a.m.
As an Individual
The fishery usually takes place. In a given year, we start the fishery. There are observers, people hired by an independent company. They come aboard our boats to assess the catch, that is to say the composition of the catches in the traps. These are independent individuals who do their jobs. They send the figures to Fisheries and Oceans Canada. The fishing continues.
At the end of the fishing season, roughly in mid-July, Fisheries and Oceans Canada starts its trawl survey. When the department starts the trawl survey, it already has the information from the spring fishery. It already has the assessments of the at-sea observers. So the department conducts the trawl survey. It usually finishes it in late September or mid-October.
Starting in late September, mum's the word: no one's allowed to know anything. The department tells us that the figures haven't been compiled and the work isn't complete. It continues that way into October, November, December and January—we're not allowed to know anything. In February, the department publishes a first preliminary document with figures. It's only preliminary. That continues until the meeting of the advisory committee, which usually meets in mid- or late March.
Then the department comes up with the final document. Between the submission of the preparatory document and the advisory committee meeting, there is a peer review. The document is reviewed by all scientists around the world to see whether there have been any errors. Lastly, the document is submitted to the advisory committee.
To my knowledge, that's how it happens in the course of the year.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Okay.
Some of you were here this morning when Mr. Moriyasu gave his numbers. On the high years, he said that in 1995 the fishable biomass was 148,000 tonnes. The next high year was 2005 and it was 85,000 tonnes. Now the fishable biomass for 2010 is 26,000 tonnes. There seems to be a trend.
What did you think about his presentation and those numbers? It seems that we've gone from 148,000 tonnes in 1995 to the last high year of 85,000 tonnes. That's a drop of more than 60,000 tonnes between two high years.
11:30 a.m.
As an Individual
First, 150,000 tonnes or 148,000 tonnes in 1995, these were not realistic measures for us fishermen.
There is one thing that Mr. Moriyasu didn't tell you. In 1995, the biomass assessment wasn't 150,000 tonnes. In I don't know in what year, 2003 or 2004, the scientists had to review their entire system. They told us that all the biomass measures assessed in the past were incorrect, that they had to redo the calculations. It was then that they presented a new biomass calculation for subsequent years. So the figures Mr. Moriyasu gave you this morning are the result of the new biomass calculations in 1995.
In 1995, the official figure was 90,000 tonnes. However, based on their new calculations, we reached 154,000 tonnes. That's quite a big difference. It's very clear that the stock follows a cycle, year after year. There is a downward trend, then it moves up, then there's a downward trend, and then it moves up. It's been that way for the past 30 years.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rodney Weston
On behalf of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, thank you very much for meeting with us, sharing your comments and thoughts, and answering our questions. We really do appreciate you taking the time out of your very busy schedules.
Thank you very much.
We will take a short break while we set up for our next guests.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rodney Weston
I call this meeting to order.
Gentlemen, thank you very much for taking the time out of your schedules to come and meet with us today. We're a little behind schedule. We apologize. You can appreciate sometimes when you get into a subject, it's hard to let it go and keep on the time schedule we've permitted.
The schedule allows for four minutes for presentations or opening comments. I believe you've all been advised of that before today. I would ask at this point in time if you want to make any opening comments.
We'll start with Mr. MacLean, if you would like to proceed at this point in time with your opening comments.
11:45 a.m.
Basil MacLean President, Area 19 Snow Crab Fishermen's Association
Good morning, everybody.
My name is Basil MacLean. I'm the president of the Area 19 Snow Crab Fishermen's Association. I would like to take this time to thank you for giving me the opportunity to address the committee today.
We are located on the west coast of Cape Breton Island. It is a very small fishing zone, approximately 20 miles by 60 miles. Our zone borders the area 12 crab fishing zone. We are an inshore zone. Our vessels are under 45 feet. We operate under a very unique ITQ-style fishery, the only one of its kind in Canada. Our association is made up of strictly owner-operators. I, myself, have been an owner-operator in the fishery since 1992. Our association is the only association that represents area 19. No other associations represent our fishery other than us.
I'd like to talk a little bit about the southern gulf snow crab stock and the history. I know you're all aware of it by now, but according to page 9 of the March 2010 snow crab assessment for the southern gulf, the peak of the stock occurred in 1994 with a total of 154,000 metric tonnes of biomass. I know there are questions of how that number came to be, but that is the number that's in the document.
The fall of 2009 assessment shows a biomass of only 26,000 metric tonnes, which represents a decrease of 83%. That's unbelievable--83%. If you break down that decrease according to the fishing zones, area 19 represented only a 3.5% decrease.
I wonder today how this could have happened. How could the politicians, DFO management, and the fishermen ever have allowed such a huge decrease to happen to our stock? Well, in 1994 there was a huge push from politics to increase the number of participants in the crab fishery. At that time, the area 19 fishers were deeply concerned and wanted to have some control of our fishery. This is where the idea of co-management began in our fishery. Our fishermen spent countless hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars working with DFO, the community, and the politicians to draft a co-management agreement. In 1996, the first real co-management agreement in Canada was signed between DFO and area 19. We are still operating under a co-management agreement today, which is set to be renewed in 2013. The key objective of our co-management agreement was to base our fishery on three simple principles: one, use the best possible science; two, use the best possible fishing practices; and three, maximize the most socio-economic benefits for our communities.
Under this co-management framework we should have been able to avoid political pressure, but unfortunately we were not immune. Political pressure has negatively affected the entire southern gulf snow crab stock in two major ways.
The first one is the number of participants in the fishery. The increase of individuals to the crab fishery has also led to the number of traps now being used. From 1994 to present day, the number of traps in area 12 has increased from 18,000 to over 38,000, which represents a 106% increase. At the same time, we also increased our individuals in area 19, but we tried to minimize the number of traps being increased and we increased only 15%. We believe that a major problem with increasing the number of traps to the fishery is that you have increased the fishing mortality on the non-commercial stock, being the undersized, the females, and the soft shell. This creates a huge stress on the future stock.
The second way politics has affected it is with decisions made regarding the total allowable catch, or the TAC. These have been made without scientific evidence and against DFO management recommendations. A good example of this occurred in 2009. DFO science made a recommendation on page 22 of the CSAS working paper in February. They stated that a 17,000-metric-tonne TAC in area 12 would coincide with the reduced biomass in that zone. Politics determined a TAC of 20,900 tonnes. That is 24% above the scientific recommendation.
The big question is, who is to blame for the current state of the southern gulf snow crab stock? How did we get where we are today? Surely area 19 cannot be blamed for this. We have been managing our fishery on our own precautionary approach for many years.
What is our precautionary approach? We conducted our fishery over the last number of years on a trawl survey that is done just three weeks prior to the fishery. This short timeframe lowers the percentage of natural mortality from 25% to almost zero. It also lowers the chance of outward migration of our zone. As the biomass in area 19 has dropped, we have also dropped our TAC to coincide with the decrease in biomass. We have taken cuts; we have gone down every year.
Area 19 has provided funds to DFO for vessel and air patrols along our boundaries. We've done this to ensure that no outside poaching was done in our zone. We have provided funds for multiple trawls in the same year to make sure our stock was there. We wanted to know what was there. We did the extra trawls to make sure it was there.
We have provided funds for different scientific experiments. Just recently we did a multi-year larvae experiment with DFO science in Moncton, and we just finished doing a trap design study, which will help to leave the small crab, soft shells, and undersized on the bottom.
In area 19 we only start fishing after June 1. The reason is because of the two mating seasons in snow crab. The last season ends sometime in mid-May, according to science, so we wait until June 1. That way every adult male has a chance to mate. Right now, area 19 has currently started with pre-assessment for MSC certification, as we see this as the inevitable future for snow crab marketability. Our fishing practices and management schemes must be working for us, as our 2009 fall trawl has showed an almost 10% increase—a 10% increase—from fall 2008.
Under the new precautionary approach that has been introduced by DFO science for the southern gulf, area 19 has been lumped into the same category as other zones. We feel this is unfair and an injustice to our fishermen. I'm here today, before you, asking that area 19 be recognized for its uniqueness. Given the opportunity, area 19 can prove that we are good stewards to the fishery. A spring survey, a strict white-shell protocol, 100% downside monitoring, and the continuation of our co-management agreement will ensure the future of the stock and the future of the fishermen in area 19 for many generations to come.
I thank you for your time.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative