Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The decision of Fisheries and Oceans Canada to hold consultations stems from a recommendation of the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, or COSEWIC, that dates from 2011. It was recommended that the Atlantic Sturgeon be designated a species at risk. A lot has happened since 2011. Indeed, for the past three or four years, the sturgeon stock has increased.
It is important that the committee consider the following for a few moments. All provincial scientists that monitor this species tell us that if this recommendation were to result in a designation of species at risk, this would, in this particular case, go against the existing policies that made it possible to save the species.
We are talking about a traditional fishery that is threatened, even though it is a major contributor to tourism in Bas-Saint-Laurent and Chaudière-Appalaches. The collaborative relationship between fishers and provincial scientists makes it possible to monitor the species. If we adopt the decision recommended by COSEWIC, which seems to be what Fisheries and Oceans Canada is planning to do, scientists and fishers will no longer be able to maintain the collaboration they have enjoyed for over a decade. Moreover, this collaboration has contributed to the recovery plan for this species.
I am asking the committee whether it is possible to devote even just half of a committee meeting to this question. We would need to meet with the stakeholders who are concerned, so that we can at least forward our views to the House and help the minister realize the danger of going ahead with this decision, which is based on 2011 data and even goes against the current recovery plan for the species.
The stakeholders are not opposed to giving this species a status indicating that it is in some way threatened, but not the at-risk status, as COSEWIC recommended, for the reasons I just explained.
History is much like an onion, in that it has many layers. This would be a way for us, federal representatives, to ensure that the committee is looking into an issue that is of serious concern to provincial authorities. We must send a clear message that collaboration is an option, and that the federal authorities will not remain in their bubble and recommend things that would undermine a recovery plan that has been successful on the ground over the past five years and has led to an increase in the sturgeon stock.
In closing, there are consequences for the maintenance of the sturgeon fishery. As I said, tourism is directly affected. The volume is not very high, but the families involved in this fishery are managing a major tourist attraction along the St. Lawrence. These people are also pleading that we do not do that, because it will be bad for their business and for tourism in the region. In addition, all scientists specializing in the field are telling us that this is not the thing to do.
I hope I have managed to persuade my Conservative government colleagues to give a bit of time to the committee to ensure that the federal government will not make the wrong choice. This would be a mandate that the committee would agree to take in the short term.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.