Evidence of meeting #128 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fishery.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Chair  Mr. Ken McDonald (Avalon, Lib.)
Rebecca Reid  Regional Director General, Pacific Region, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Rachel Donkersloot  Director, Working Waterfronts Program, Alaska Marine Conservation Council
Andrew Thomson  Regional Director, Fisheries Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Kevin G. Anderson  Senior Advisor, Indigenous Relations, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Colin Fraser  West Nova, Lib.

4:25 p.m.

Director, Working Waterfronts Program, Alaska Marine Conservation Council

Rachel Donkersloot

I know that there have been reports, particularly on the high seas, and the North Pacific Fishery Management Council pays attention to it. I don't have in front of me any specific statistics to share with you.

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Do you have a link to a website or an area where we may be able to find that?

4:25 p.m.

Director, Working Waterfronts Program, Alaska Marine Conservation Council

Rachel Donkersloot

I can follow up with the clerk after this meeting with a link, if that's helpful.

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Great. Thank you.

Ms. Reid, could you do the same?

4:25 p.m.

Regional Director General, Pacific Region, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Rebecca Reid

Yes.

Can I just provide clarification? My response was intended to refer to the high seas fishing.

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

A research paper published in Marine Policy in 2016 mentioned that despite an initial commitment from DFO to socio-economic objectives related to the owner-operators and limits on processor control, its application was sporadic and eventually it was discontinued in B.C.

For example, there was a 12% cap on total processor ownership with the implementation of the salmon limited entry program in 1969, and owner-operator provisions in the roe herring fishery when licence limitation was established in 1974.

Our current management plans for those fisheries don't contain any mention of those restrictions. Could you explain the evolution of DFO's quota licence ownership restriction policies in B.C.'s groundfish, salmon and herring fisheries under individual ITQs in contrast to the situation that we see on the east coast?

4:25 p.m.

Regional Director General, Pacific Region, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Rebecca Reid

We do have quota limits in some fisheries, such as in sablefish and halibut. Andrew might be able to offer more details.

4:25 p.m.

Regional Director, Fisheries Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Andrew Thomson

In terms of development, my understanding from reading past reports is that there were some trials of owner-operator type and other limitations in terms of the amount of access available. Going back through the historical documents, it appears that there were some unworkable parts of that. It was very difficult to enforce and manage, and it didn't appear to be reaching the objective that was originally intended, so those aspects of those fisheries were abandoned.

In terms of what we have in place, as Rebecca has mentioned, we do have some limits on the amount of quota that can be assigned to one particular licence in some of these fisheries. For example, you can only have 1% of the total halibut quota to assign to a licence, or there are limits for sablefish and a few of the other species. There isn't a lot of that type of limitation that occurs. It's sporadic across the higher value groundfish fisheries.

4:30 p.m.

Mr. Ken McDonald (Avalon, Lib.)

The Chair

Thank you.

Now we go back to the Liberal side, with Mr. Rogers.

January 30th, 2019 / 4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome, guests.

I want to focus on income levels, east coast versus west coast. I think back to a young fisher who testified in front of this committee last fall and talked about the challenges of trying to make a living in the fishing industry on the B.C. coast. I know if we look at the east coast—and Mr. Anderson is quite familiar with this—a number of factors determine income levels for the year, whether it's shortage of resource or it's pricing issues in terms of marketing and all that kind of thing, the market values.

When I look at the numbers in the fisheries labour market information provided by the Canadian Council of Professional Fish Harvesters and read some of the other documentation, there's a stark difference in income levels. This appears to be between east coast fisher people and those on the west coast. For example, they mention that, from 2000 to 2015, while the average Canadian fish employment income rose by 39%, it decreased by 6% in B.C. In 2015, average incomes from fishing employment for self-employed B.C. fish harvesters were only 56% of those of the Canadian average.

Help me understand why. Is the decrease in fishing employment income tied to loss of landed value or are there other factors that explain the lower fish harvesters' incomes in B.C. compared to the average Canadian fishing employment income?

4:30 p.m.

Regional Director General, Pacific Region, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Rebecca Reid

Perhaps I'll start, and I'm sure my colleagues will have some views on this as well.

Andrew spoke to some of the statistics that were being collected, and certainly we looked at that as a question, as there is relative income across the different fisheries coasts. B.C. did come out lower, as you've described.

What are the reasons for that? I think there are a few factors that need to be taken into account. One of them is that the fishery on the west coast is one where diversification is required in order to make a living. You can't expect to have a single licence and be able to have a viable operation over the 12-month period; you need to diversify and you need to have a number of licences. As the cost and availability of licences becomes restrictive, that will impact people's ability to fill out the year with fishing. I think that is a prime driver as well as some of the costs associated with the operation.

The other factor I'll mention before passing this on to my colleagues is that the intent behind attempts over the years to control effort and to manage this overcapitalization or this fishing power that we have through reduced numbers of licences was to generate wealth, to create more money for the remaining fisherman. In fact, we haven't found that to be the case. There are still challenges related to how much money you can make fishing despite our multiple attempts over a long period of time to reduce effort and increase wealth.

There are a couple of factors that need to be taken into account.

Perhaps, Kevin, you could offer some comments.

4:30 p.m.

Senior Advisor, Indigenous Relations, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Kevin G. Anderson

There's no question that Atlantic Canada has benefited in recent years from shellfish abundance, the predominance of what we call the shellfish era since the 1990s. It is very pronounced in lobster in the Maritimes and in the Gulf, and to some extent in crab throughout the entire region and shrimp in the north. That's had an impact for sure on income for harvesters in all fleets, really, the offshore, where there are large corporations, and in the inshore.

Having said that, you're well aware that there are areas where incomes are not as good as in others. The south coast of Newfoundland and the west coast of Newfoundland come to mind, where they do not have necessarily the abundance of shellfish resources to support these levels of income. They've had issues with groundfish abundance.

The other factor I was going to note, at least in the very last two or three years, is price. The Canadian dollar and opportunities for markets for lobster and for crab have certainly resulted in increased price. That's really having an impact on incomes, for sure.

4:35 p.m.

Mr. Ken McDonald (Avalon, Lib.)

The Chair

Thank you.

Back to the Conservative side, we have Mr. Doherty.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's been mentioned a couple of times by some of our members the visit that we had from the B.C. young fishers. I want to take a moment, and perhaps there may be a question at the end of this, but I really want to read into the record and for the officials who are here some insight and feelings that the B.C. young fishers put into a thank-you note to me after our visit:

Thank you again for staying late after the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans hearings and taking the time to listen to our concerns regarding the future of our fisheries on the West Coast.... Chelsea, Ryan, Ross, Ocean, Graham and Fraser shared their stories so familiar to all of us other active fishermen that travelled to Ottawa. We covered a lot of topics [and we are so grateful to have that opportunity]. An unrestricted transferability of licences and quotes has led to the privatization of a Canadian common resource. For us active fishermen, this means unattainable entry costs and unsustainable revenue, creating labour shortages, safety risks, and an aging fishing fleet. As families and members of coastal communities, we are losing our intergenerational knowledge and our connection to the ocean, and the backbone of our communities. Our livelihoods and way of life continue to be threatened.... It is critical the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans [and our department] visit our communities to conduct a review of West Coast policy. Having the decisions being made in Ottawa and away from the voices and hearts of our communities has been a major contributor to the decline of our communities and livelihoods. There are many people in the commercial fishing industry who have given up or on the brink of giving up. These people are our mentors, leaders in quality and sustainable harvesting and honest, hard working people that our industry can't afford to lose.

Mr. Chair, those are powerful words. I think all of us here share the sentiment that when those young fishers came here, they were hard-working. They were looking to their future, and all they were doing was trying to impart to some leaders within our country and within our communities that we must do better.

Ms. Reid, Mr. Thomson and Mr. Anderson, I ask in response to that, how are we going to do better for these people?

4:35 p.m.

Regional Director General, Pacific Region, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Rebecca Reid

We have had opportunities to speak to those young fishermen as well, and I do appreciate their concerns.

Our fisheries continue to evolve. We regularly receive proposals for changes and we have recently as well. We do want to look at them from a fairness, flexibility and economically viable perspective, so the way we deal with proposals—and often these are industry-driven approaches to how to make changes to the fishery that worked for them and worked for their current context—is that we consult on them through our advisory processes and we seek the views and interests of people. Based on that, we generate policies or changes that we can implement. Often, what happens though, is we end up with very diverse polar views. In those situations, it becomes hard to move forward.

There are areas and places in which we could make changes generally to policy, hopefully to benefit those younger fishermen, but we do need to find a way to move forward collectively so we can seek the support of the industry that's benefiting from that resource.

4:40 p.m.

Mr. Ken McDonald (Avalon, Lib.)

The Chair

Mr. Arnold.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC

Dr. Donkersloot, do you have a good stock assessment in Alaska? Are you confident in it and is it up to date?

4:40 p.m.

Director, Working Waterfronts Program, Alaska Marine Conservation Council

Rachel Donkersloot

It depends on the fishery. There is increasing uncertainty across fisheries due to changing ocean conditions. Two years ago I would have said that our fishery in the north Pacific was largely healthy. Last year, many of our salmon runs across the state failed to return in meaningful numbers. At the same time we suffered an 80% decline in the cod total allowable catch in the Gulf of Alaska. That's due largely to that warm blob of water that went through the entire water column and would not move. Our halibut fishery is suffering from a 10- to 12-year decline, largely with the exploitable biomass. That means there's a lot of halibut out there, but they're not growing like they should.

We do have concerns; we do have challenges. Things are changing and changing rapidly. At the same time, there are changes in our state budgets and federal budgets that affect how well we can manage our fisheries. I certainly don't have a silver bullet and I would caution against any sort of single solution in terms of management that can meet the needs or solve the complex challenges along an entire coast.

4:40 p.m.

Mr. Ken McDonald (Avalon, Lib.)

The Chair

Mr. Finnigan, you have five minutes.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Pat Finnigan Liberal Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

I may have some time to share with my colleague, Mr. Hardie.

Thank you for being here.

I want to ask a question regarding the first nations and the court's decision, and rightly so, that they had rights to fish on the east and west coasts. When the quotas were allocated, were new quotas created or were they taken from the industry, from the commercial fishers? How did you base that? Was everybody treated the same way at the time? Also, can first nations outright contract their fishing rights to corporations or other licensed fishers, and have we seen higher economic and social results in the first nations communities as part of that?

4:40 p.m.

Regional Director General, Pacific Region, Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Rebecca Reid

There are two parts to the question. The first part is on how first nations first acquired licences, when licence limitations were put into place. There were a number of programs enacted to ensure and support first nations involvement, so at the beginning licences were first allocated in a limited way.

As the licence limitation has been stabilizing, we have a set number of licences. Further reallocations within any particular fishery are through a willing buyer and seller. That's what is done by the Pacific integrated commercial fisheries program. It asks the market who would like to retire their licence. Someone identifies it, there's an exchange, and that access is reallocated to a first nation.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Pat Finnigan Liberal Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

Quickly to Dr. Donkersloot, we hear that certain industries, processors on the mainland, such as salmon canning, are not profitable. Yet, we know that some have moved to Alaska.

Why do you think that is? Is it more efficient or are the costs less?

4:40 p.m.

Director, Working Waterfronts Program, Alaska Marine Conservation Council

Rachel Donkersloot

I'm not entirely sure. I know there's been a push across the board in Alaska to move away from canning, and into the value-added fresh and frozen fillets and other higher value products. More of the product is staying in the state. Our primary market used to be Asia and Japan. Given global dynamics and other factors, we've seen a push with Alaska-based processors to target domestic markets.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Pat Finnigan Liberal Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB

Thank you. Mr. Ken Hardie will use the rest of my time.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

We talk about the earnings of fishers in British Columbia. Compared with Alaska, I submit that one of the factors, particularly in the most lucrative fishery, which is halibut, is the fact that if a young fisher or any fisher has to go out and lease the quota, 70% of the value of everything they catch goes to the quota owner. Do we track that?