Fisheries Committee on June 6th, 2012

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

I'm delighted to hear that this kind of creative research is being done.

Regarding the Fisheries Act, some of the amendments proposed to the Fisheries Act provide for the establishment of a list of aquatic invasive species and means to control them via activities such as regulating possession, import, and export, and so on. One of you perhaps could answer the question. Have any of you had a chance to review these proposed changes in our Fisheries Act, and does this seem like a common sense thing to do as part of the new Fisheries Act?

[Joe Comuzzi]

I haven't seen anything.

[Dr. William Taylor]

I haven't read it, but they sound like very sensible measures.

[Joe Comuzzi]

Before we leave that, you bring up a pretty good point, I think. Something that we're not doing is on the sea lamprey. All we've done since we found the sea lamprey is control it, and we're doing a marvellous job. I think it's a scientific miracle how we control the sea lamprey on the Great Lakes. But we don't allocate any funds for research to find a solution, to eliminate the sea lamprey.

We did something up at the Soo a little while ago, by chance, where they streamed into a fast current. We found that it eradicated a fair number of the sea lamprey. But we're not doing anything in research to eliminate the sea lamprey. That's something we should really be putting our minds to. I know that when I was around for a while, we tried to allocate funding for the eradication of the sea lamprey. Those guys from the eastern part of Canada weren't interested in it.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

That's always been a difficult nut to crack, I understand that.

Given all of the actors that are involved with managing aquatic invasive species in the Great Lakes, is there a difficulty in coordinating the activities among all of these groups, or is there some kind of coordinating committee or body that brings everybody together on a regular basis?

[Dr. William Taylor]

The short answer is yes, there is quite a bit of coordination. On the particular issue of rapid response, the idea there is that because we might be dealing with international waters, permission might have to be obtained from both sides. That's why we're trying to get those mechanisms and the approved methods all sorted out in advance.

There's a body that meets regularly, I believe four times a year, an aquatic nuisance species panel that's brought together by an organization called the Council of Great Lakes Governors. They invite DFO, Environment Canada, and other people. They come to the same table and update each other on what they're doing. That's also the forum where we've been trying to interact with these folks, bring them onside and include them in the development of our rapid response plan.

Our ulterior motive is to make them think it's theirs, and they own it, so that when we ask them to participate they're glad to. There's nothing like developing something and then trying to tell someone else they've got to execute it.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Excellent. Thank you very much.

[Dr. William Taylor]

We can take advantage of that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rodney Weston]

Thank you, Mr. Sopuck.

Mr. MacAulay.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I don't want to annoy Mr. Sopuck. Whatever I say, I want to be careful, my good friend.

And to the honourable commissioner, Joe Comuzzi, it's a pleasure to have you here--sounds good--and your able-bodied assistants.

On the Asian carp, is it inevitable that they will get in? What needs to be done? I'd like you to elaborate on that. It's a major issue. It will cost an enormous amount of money should it come in, massive destruction, financial destruction. Is there more that we have to do? I'd like you to elaborate a bit on that. Are the electric barriers good enough? Where are we? Is it inevitable that they'll get there, and then we'll have to do what we do with the sea lamprey?

[Dr. William Taylor]

I can give that a stab, if you like.

I don't think it's inevitable, but I don't think it's unlikely either. It's a real risk. Even if we went for a physical barrier, which many people are seriously advocating, as I understand it, it might be a decade or two before it's actually accomplished. The engineering isn't as simple as a few dump truck loads of fill. There will be lots of things that need to be done. We need a plan, at least over that time scale, even if there's eventually going to be a physical barrier.

There are also other aquatic connections besides that canal. It's been discovered that in the headwaters of various rivers in springtime, when water is high, and even possibly in marshy areas in the headwaters, carp might actually spawn there and the larvae go in both directions. There are other connections that the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers are trying to discover to actually make physical alterations to prevent—

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

So what you're saying is that you're giving a pretty strong look at putting in a physical barrier.

[Dr. William Taylor]

Well, people are; there are certainly people who are advocating the physical barrier.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, I can't help but believe, are drawing up the plans and estimating the costs. That will be part of this document that we're all waiting to see in the near future.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much. Of course with the value of the fishery in the Great Lakes, it's something that has to be looked at.

Now, Commissioner Comuzzi mentioned that you haven't done that much on the sea lamprey. I do believe it's very expensive. Plus, there are so many different areas for the fish to migrate to; it's a massive job.

Not to say anything against my good friend Mr. Comuzzi, but it would be a big job to eliminate the sea lamprey. It would be a lot of money. Am I right? And is it even possible—within reason?

[Dr. William Taylor]

In my view, right now it's not possible. We don't have the silver bullet. I think currently the control program costs are approaching $30 million a year.

If somebody could find the silver bullet, that would be great. It would save a lot of money. That shows you the value, if the research could be.... You could save $30 million a year if you came up with the silver bullet.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

But there are so many different environments in the lakes, correct?

[Dr. William Taylor]

Well, actually, as species go, the lamprey is vulnerable compared to many. It spawns in tributaries, and it takes many years between when it spawns in the tributaries and when it comes back down to the lake. All the control measures are focused on the larval stages in the tributaries. In that way, it's more vulnerable than a species that spawns in a lake.

But still, it can be knocked way back—

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

But then come back again.

[Dr. William Taylor]

—and that's what's happening. But to actually eliminate the last one, with current technology it does not seem to be feasible.

If it were a matter of spending twice as much in one year or something like that, it would be done, but it's.... I don't think it's feasible.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Now, on your rapid response plan, I'm interested in the toolbox of preprepared tactics. What would that involve?

[Dr. William Taylor]

It would mostly be biocides, toxic chemicals. The use of those is highly controlled. We've been looking at—we're advocating, anyway--and have taken a stab at all the likely species that haven't got to the Great Lakes yet but could, and what we'd want to use to murder them if and when they were discovered in a local area, and whether those chemicals were approved for use. Often chemicals are.... You know, if we decided that we want to use chemical X, and it's not approved for dumping into Great Lakes tributaries—

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

You're in trouble.

[Dr. William Taylor]

—the legislation to get that won't happen in any short period of time.

Often the things that are registered for use—for example, for killing lampreys—are only registered for that very specific use, not for killing another species of fish that isn't here yet. We need to remove those impediments so that the tools are ready: not just that we have a gun, but that we have a warehouse full of them, ready to move.

If you call up a chemical company and say that you want 15 tonnes of chemical X, they'll say, oh, yes, we could make that—in three years.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

The idea is just to make sure that you have the chemical available—

[Dr. William Taylor]

And it's approved for use.