Fisheries Committee on May 10th, 2016

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

On that tracking, is that similar to the POST project that was run off the west coast of B.C.?

I'm hoping to expand on that.

[Trevor Swerdfager]

Did you ask me that question before?

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

Yes, I did.

[Trevor Swerdfager]

It's an unusual reference, so I was wondering where you got that one from.

It is.

There are two things we're aiming to do. One is we're hoping to put more tracking devices on fish on both coasts. We are also seeing dramatic improvements in the technology for that. It is similar, sir, to the program you're referencing, but with much more developed technology and much stronger receivers.

As well, we're going to be in a much better position to use what historically we thought of as “other equipment”, and that's oceanographical equipment to track some of these animals that we didn't think we could before.

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

We've seen with wildlife management, although with fish management not so much, that—the fish species that we're talking about, the Atlantic salmon—prey species can only be managed as part of overall predator-prey relationships.

Are you looking at those relationships, and looking at the prey management as part of the overall strategy, as well?

[Kevin Stringer]

What I would say—and I'll ask Trevor to add to this in terms of predator-prey relations—is that when you can't see it underwater, it's hard to notice exactly what's going on. It is a challenge.

We are seeking more and more to manage fisheries with an ecosystem approach and with understanding of the overall impacts of fisheries and of one stock on other stocks.

We have new bycatch rules. If you look at our integrated fisheries management plans, they will speak to the role of this fish in the ecosystem and the impacts on other fisheries. It is difficult to say, “for this area here is a total amount of tonnage of fish that you can take out, and there should be a mix”.

We still manage stock by stock, but we are seeking to do so with an understanding about the impact of the removal of that stock on other stocks.

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

The reason I ask that is because there was a recent article on the survival rates of some of the salmon out of the Chilko system in B.C. When they have huge numbers migrating at once, they have a far better survival rate. I think that's roughly 90% versus 40% if they have low numbers.

We can assume that correlates to the fact there's still the same number of predators out there that would take the same gross number out, but that percentage in a smaller group would be much higher.

[Kevin Stringer]

That means more can get by, right?

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

Yes, so do we need to manage our predator species for the lower abundance that we have out there now?

[Kevin Stringer]

That's certainly a strategy. Looking at timing windows for fishing, and all those types of things, need to be taken into account.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you.

Mr. Morrissey, five minutes please.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

I want to follow up on Mr. Strahl's observations, and I'm a rookie to this format as it relates to the salmon industry.

It appears there have been numerous studies done, and there have been various House of Commons and Senate studies done, on the industry, and the response has been habitat restoration and the various mechanisms we've seen there.

With all the resources of DFO, what has occurred today has not arrested the decline in salmon stocks in primarily the southern Atlantic region. What are you recommending that would be different in your approach to managing this obviously troubled resource?

[Kevin Stringer]

There are a couple of things.

In terms of trying to figure out what we do spend on this...it's fisheries management that's deciding what we should have in terms of the rules. Part of the answer is catch and release in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. That's something we did last year, and that's something we did again this year. It's very controversial with some of the players, but that's the sort of thing...taking further measures to address it. And there's reducing the overall catches. If you actually look at that chart that Gérald showed, yes, we're concerned about what Greenland's doing, especially since we're making such an effort to actually bit by bit get that figure down. So reduce catch.

Enforcement is also important. We're actually moving to different types of enforcement, with fewer fishery officers hiding behind trees, more, I would say, electronic and forensic enforcement, so we'll actually be able to catch bad guys and they've got less of an incentive to do this.

Those are two. I think there are issues around aquaculture as well that we're working with the provinces on. There are issues with first nations, and first nations have taken steps over the last number of years. In the Miramichi, first nations have moved to trap nets instead of gillnets. In Newfoundland, the Conne River First Nation over the last few years has decided they're not going to fish because they're concerned about conservation.

It's all those little steps. I don't know if there is one gigantic step. In fact, the report that we got didn't suggest one gigantic step. The one piece—and Trevor's spoken to it and Gérald's spoken to it—is at-sea mortality and having a better understanding of what's happening in the ocean and actually being able to better diagnose what the challenges are. We think we have programs that work reasonably well on habitat, on management, on working with aboriginal groups, internationally. We need to continue those, and continue to ratchet things down. But that's going to be the big question mark, the at-sea mortality and understanding what's happening in the oceans.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Yes, but everything you describe is in the mirror. My question was, as we go forward, sitting here today with the resources of DFO, understanding the complexity of the issue, and I agree it is complex to a person who's not knowledgeable on that side of it.... But these issues have been addressed for some time. I still go back to: what is the one thing, if it is one—and there's probably no one silver bullet—you're looking at now that would be different on a go-forward basis and you feel may address this issue?

[Kevin Stringer]

This is a personal view, and I'll ask Trevor to jump in—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

No, this is a departmental one.

[Kevin Stringer]

Okay, the departmental view, in terms of what we're doing, is we are doing, I would say, more of the same, because that's where we've been directed. But we do think, and we've said it here a few times, that if there is going to be anything approximate to a magic bullet, it's around science work understanding about what's happening in the oceans and at-sea mortality. I think we have determined—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Away from our coast.

[Kevin Stringer]

I think we have determined that we do need to do more on habitat, we do need to do more in various areas, no question about that. But the big issue that we've got the most questions about, and where we really think there's a lot of loss, is at-sea mortality. It's understanding that. On the west coast you've got the Salish Sea study and on the east coast you could have something similar that better understands the ocean conditions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you.

Mr. Donnelly, three minutes, please.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Just to follow up on Mr. Morrissey's question, I would like to hear about Mr. Stringer's personal view.

[Kevin Stringer]

That was my personal view. But I do think that's where the department's at. I don't think you'll find anything that says we think this is the silver bullet. Seriously, we have to not drop anything because we've actually had some success in terms of what we've done. The amount of catch is going down and we are addressing a lot of the issues. The challenge is we're holding, at best, with all of the efforts that we're doing. Is there something that's going allow a breakthrough? We think—and I think the report points to this—it's the one thing that's the greatest uncertainty that we need to address.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

You mentioned aquaculture, and I just want to flip there for a second.

The report on page 31 of the advisory committee recommends a few things: that DFO work with provincial partners and stakeholders to undertake research into wild/cultured interactions that assesses the impact of escapees on local wild fish; that “Aquaculture fish should be marked so that escapees may be identifiable, genetically traceable and removed from river systems”; and that consequences should be imposed on industry for not accurately reporting escapees in a timely manner. DFO already collaborates in research into wild/cultured interactions with the provinces and industry as part of aquaculture collaborative research and development.

I have two questions. Is DFO considering the possibility of designating areas in which aquaculture development would be prohibited, for example, where wild salmon populations are given COSEWIC endangered or threatened status? Secondly, is DFO considering the possibility of prohibiting aquaculture development in areas near wild Atlantic salmon migratory routes?

[Kevin Stringer]

On the east coast, it is actually provincially regulated. DFO has some responsibilities but in terms of siting and those types of things, those are provincial responsibilities.

I'd also point out the point that was made first around escapements, that they are something that is provincially regulated as well, but we do work with the provinces on it. We do seek to have some consistency across provinces. It is all regulated through provincial regulations, conditions of licence, and codes of containment. This is another area where I think it is fair to say that we have had improvement, and we need to continue to have improvement. All escape events have to be reported to the provincial licencing authority, and they all have a protocol for response, which is usually trying to chase them and not necessarily catching them all.

Escape events have declined dramatically over the years, partly because of these rules and partly because of the technology of the cages. That said, it continues to be a concern. It was in the range of 40,000 escapes last year. That is a dramatic decline from previously, so there have been improvements. There needs to continue to be improvements, and we'll work with the provinces.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Mr. Donnelly.

We've exhausted two rounds, and we have quite a bit of time left. Normally what we did in the past and we can probably do this again—I'll put this out there as a suggestion to the committee—we have one round, mimicking the first round that we normally do: seven minutes government, seven minutes opposition, seven minutes the NDP. Do I see consensus on that? That should take us close to committee business and then we have to talk about four items on committee business. All right?

Mr. Hardie, you said you wanted to ask a question, but do you want to split your time?