Fisheries Committee on Nov. 1st, 2018

[The Chair]

You have about 20 seconds.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Do you feel you have enough data from 2018 to put a regime in place for 2019 that has a more minimal impact on the lobster fishery, particularly in northern New Brunswick in the Caraquet region and the Gaspé region, which were heavily impacted?

[Adam Burns]

We're going to wait for the science information that we'll be getting in early December, but certainly our objective is to achieve the protection of right whales that's necessary to ensure their survival and at the same time to minimize, to the extent possible, the impacts on harvesters. That's exactly what we're trying to accomplish.

[The Chair]

Thank you, Mr. Morrissey.

Now we'll go back to the Conservative side.

Mr. Arnold, you have five minutes or less.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

For the DFO officials, I'm just going to quote from the notice about yesterday's announcement. Believe me, I believe we need to do everything we can to protect the whales and rebuild the southern resident killer whale stocks, but it says, “The Southern Resident Killer Whale is an iconic species”.

What is iconic? How does a species become iconic, and are they managed any differently from a species that is not iconic?

[Philippe Morel]

I was telling your colleague earlier about the importance it has for the B.C. population and the importance is has also for indigenous people. Each of those southern resident killer whales is followed electronically by residents, so the value in the eyes of Canadians and indigenous people on the west coast is very high, and that's why we say it's iconic.

Is it managed differently? No. We manage all the endangered species and species at risk in the same way. What it means for us is that when it's iconic, the engagement is certainly more thorough. We need to engage more deeply with indigenous groups, particularly on the southern resident killer whale.

In B.C., salmon is also an iconic species. Every school has a program with salmon. We have the salmonid enhancement program, and it is very valued by the school system and people on the west coast of B.C.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you for mentioning the salmonid enhancement program. That was a program that was going to be cut until there was enough uproar from the schools and teachers, and so on, that this government actually decided to reinstate and not cancel it, as had been originally proposed.

Could you tell us what is being done to monitor, enforce and penalize those responsible for unreported and illegal fishing?

[Adam Burns]

We certainly have fisheries officers who patrol and enforce all of the regulations.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Are they able to enforce offshore?

[Adam Burns]

We certainly do have offshore enforcement. Conservation and protection officers engage in patrols based on an intelligence-based system to determine—

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

I am aware of some of the patrols in the international partnerships and so on. In fact, I believe in one study I looked at, I saw that they had spent millions of dollars in patrols, basically, and had landed on four vessels and investigated, but there was never any evidence of any charges being laid or any actions against the guilty country. How can that be factored into the prey species management that's so important for this?

[Adam Burns]

Yes, illegal and unreported fishing is certainly a focus of international collaboration for Canada—

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

But I didn't see anything in this document yesterday that mentions any of that unreported, unregulated fishing.

[Adam Burns]

The measures yesterday were focused on a specific set of initiatives, but that's certainly not to minimize the importance of other initiatives that are already under way. We certainly collaborate with a number of other countries through various regional fisheries management organizations in a variety of capacities—science and other things—but also in terms of high seas enforcement.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Along the same lines, what has the department done to manage bycatch of these species that are so important on both coasts?

[Adam Burns]

Specifically, are you talking about chinook salmon?

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

I guess on the west coast that would be an example, yes. What has been done to manage the bycatch that happens there through gillnet fisheries, through the offshore marine fishery?

[Adam Burns]

I don't have all of the information in terms of specific bycatch measures that are in place in fisheries that may have a bycatch of chinook salmon, but certainly we are always looking at the total removals of a particular species and looking at management measures that can be put in place to reduce the incidents where incidental catch of a non-target species is occurring.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair]

Thank you, Mr. Arnold.

We will go back to the government side for five minutes or less.

Go ahead, Mr. Hardie.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for being here.

Mr. Burns, you've had a good afternoon here. Does the DFO have an official recovery plan in place for chinook salmon?

[Philippe Morel]

The chinook is not listed under a species at risk, so there's no action plan. It's because it's not listed.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you.

[Philippe Morel]

We have a fisheries management plan for chinook that Mr. Burns can refer to.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

As a commentary, some of the things that we've heard so far would include the health and size of the fish coming out of DFO-sponsored hatcheries versus others. In particular, there's one on the west coast of B.C., and they claim to have a much greater success rate. It would be worth casting your net as wide as possible to make sure that as you try to rebuild those stocks, you're doing it in a way that produces the results we need, which are big fish, which is what the orcas like to eat.

On seals, we have heard a couple of times from a couple of people on a couple of different issues in this story that, “Well, we just don't want to do something because we don't know enough yet. We don't have enough data.” We heard that on vessel speed. We've heard it from you today on measures dealing with seals and sea lions. I guess the question becomes, when does the precautionary principle kick into gear?

Let's face it: It's pretty common knowledge, if you ask the indigenous people and the people who live close to some of those chinook-rearing streams, etc., that there are at least a small number of seals lying about with their mouths open, right? All we've heard is that there's a choice between a full-fledged cull, which some of the first nations talked about this morning, or at least targeted harassment to get rid of the ones that are causing the majority of the damage.

Is there a point at which you would apply the precautionary principle in the absence of the concrete or total surety of scientific data, which is always impossible to get? When would you do that? When would you make a move to do something about the seals?