Fisheries Committee on May 7th, 2012

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

Do we have any reason to think that a program like the sea lamprey control program that kills sea lamprey could also negatively impact something like the American eel? I realize it's not the same species.

[Dr. Tim Johnson]

Careful control is done in evaluating the treatment options for things such as the sea lamprey program. Right now, they're moving away from chemical treatments. In the past they relied on using a chemical called TFM, which was a piscicide: it killed things. Now they're moving toward things such as a sterile male program and pheromones, which are natural body odours, to attract lamprey. They only attract lamprey and nothing else.

Moving to these new strategies should have much less effect on non-target species. But, certainly, any of these managed control programs have been very careful to try to ensure there wouldn't be an impact.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

Thank you. That's all for me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Mrs. Davidson.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Again, thank you very much for your testimony here this afternoon.

We've talked a fair amount today and on previous days about sea lamprey control. We've talked about ballast water. We've talked about the live transport across provincial boundaries and CBSA's actions. We've talked about education. It seems the two species that are at the top of everybody's awareness level are the northern snakehead and the Asian carp.

How do you monitor the Great Lakes systems for either of those species, and who does it? Who's responsible for it? Do you monitor for other things as well? Are there jurisdictional boundaries and jurisdictional issues when it comes to monitoring of the Great Lakes or is there a monitoring system for things that we know could be coming?

[Anne Neary]

Certainly we're watching out and monitoring for Asian carp. Whether we will detect the first Asian carp that appears, it's unlikely.

Our scientists have been working on a method that will actually use environmental DNA to test the water to see if there is evidence of Asian carp.

Tim, do you want to speak a little bit about the work you're doing to look at DNA monitoring?

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

So is it your ministry that's responsible for doing it? Is it?

Okay.

[Dr. Tim Johnson]

In evaluating and monitoring, again, I'll bring this back. It's very coordinated. It requires everyone to be involved because we can't be everywhere all the time. We're always looking for new technologies, things such as this environmental DNA where we can go out and sample the environment rather than requiring us to physically capture the organisms.

We look at the scale of the Great Lakes, the volume of water, and the amount of physical habitat. As for whether Ontario or Michigan or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is somehow going to be able to state unequivocally that the species is not in the system, I don't think any one agency can bear that responsibility.

Again, we work to understand where we're all at. We apply emerging technologies. We have coordinated workshops where Ontario ran a rapid response workshop on Asian carp and brought in jurisdictions that involve U.S. as well as federal partners to understand what we can do.

Again, I think that's really the best we can do, to work together and to keep our eyes open. The education/outreach side is key just to help people understand the seriousness of the threat.

[Anne Neary]

Certainly we look at the highest risk areas first.

Right now, we're focusing of course on the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal because that is the most likely vector.

Again, the Great Lakes is a huge area to cover, so we have to focus on the highest risk.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

I'm referring now to the report that was done by the Great Lakes Commission and the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence cities initiative, Restoring the Natural Divide. Do you think that we need to have a physical barrier, or are there are other ways to stop the Asian carp from coming through?

[Anne Neary]

They have electric fences now. There are a number of methods they're using.

As for whether or not that will be effective in the long run, does somebody have more information?

[Francine MacDonald]

The report that was done by the Great Lakes cities initiative is a wonderful report. It does outline three potential strategies for physical separation of the canal and has outlined the economic costs of implementing those options, ranging from between $3 billion to $9 billion.

These are strategies that come with a very significant cost. We have that report, but we also have a report that's being completed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that's also identifying potential control strategies. We hope that report will be completed very soon. It's called the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study. That's supposed to come out soon too.

With those two reports, we can evaluate which strategies are the best approach for dealing with this.

What we've learned from the Great Lake cities report is that we're not just dealing with Asian carp. We're dealing with communities that live on the Chicago waterway system. The city of Chicago depends on that system for flood control and infrastructure and it involves transportation, so it has huge value. There is definitely a weighing and a balancing of impacts. Certainly we would like to see something more in the future than just the electric dispersal barriers currently in place.

[Anne Neary]

Although we recognize that it's a high risk area, reversing the flow, as you mentioned, certainly comes with a large cost. Maybe the Asian carp have come from a truckload of carp across the border that hasn't been caught and has flipped over and released fish into a stream. We could spend billions of dollars and still not solve the problem. We really have to think carefully about where our money is best invested.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Ms. Davidson.

On behalf of the committee I want to thank you very much for taking the time today to meet with us and to make your presentations, and for taking the time to answer our questions. It was very much appreciated.

Committee, we have one item under committee business. We'll take a few moments to excuse our witnesses and then we'll proceed with that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

We will resume.

You all have a copy of a budget that was circulated. This budget is for the study that we're in the process of undertaking. Obviously, it's to cover the travel expenses of our witnesses as they come to meet with our committee, and the committee's own expenses for a number of witnesses, including video conferencing. This is the upper limit, obviously. It's hard to guess the exact expenses until they're incurred and submitted, but the clerk estimates the expenses based on the witness lists you have submitted and where the witnesses come from.

If you go down through the list of witness' expenses you'll see indicated, “city unspecified”. The clerk simply hasn't listed all the cities, municipalities, or individual areas they've come from. He has listed them under “city unspecified”. The major centres are listed there as well.

Basically, this is the budget we propose for the study that we're in the midst of at this point in time. Are there any questions on the budget?

[Robert Chisholm, NDP, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Are these witnesses who have already been heard?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Some have been. We undertook this study as per the motion brought before the committee. As you know, we've been accepting witnesses from all sides of the committee and it's pretty hard to come up with a budget until we have all the witnesses in so we know where they're coming from.

[Robert Chisholm, NDP, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I'm curious as to how much further this will go.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Unless the committee comes up with some more witnesses, I'm assuming that we have the complete list now. It has been open to all committee members to submit witnesses for the past few weeks. Since we've been hearing from members, I'm assuming that we have all the witness names submitted by now. Unless somebody is holding back some surprises for me here, I assume this list should be complete.

[Robert Chisholm, NDP, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Is this the first budget we've done for this study? Didn't we table a draft budget?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

No.

Is there anything further?

Mr. Kamp.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

I don't have any problem with this.

Based on that list that we now think is complete, do we have any estimate of how many more meeting days it will take to hear those witnesses?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

I'll let the clerk explain that.

Go ahead, Georges.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Georges Etoka]

I haven't counted the days yet because we still have to deal with the report coming in on aquaculture, so it depends on how many meetings the committee will spend on that report. I can then figure out how many more sittings we'll have on this study.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

If there were no report interrupting this, how many days would it be until we finish the witnesses? Do you have an estimate?