Fisheries Committee on Jan. 30th, 2019

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

Thank you.

[The Chair]

Now we'll go to the Conservative side and hear from Mr. Arnold.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Reid, you mentioned that some salmon stock assessments are complete on the west coast and others are lacking. Could you provide us with a summary of the assessments that are current and those that are still outstanding?

[Rebecca Reid]

Yes.

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

Thank you.

I would like to get back to the equitable distribution of benefits you mentioned in your opening statement. What sorts of factors play into that, when you're looking at those assessments? Is it overall GDP to Canada? Is it to the local communities? Is it to the provinces? Is it to first nations? What sort of factors are taken into consideration in those decisions?

[Rebecca Reid]

I'll start with a couple of factors. Some of the things we take into account you've already mentioned.

First of all, first nations participation is very important to us. We have processes in place that provide us advice about the impacts on local communities. There's an example in the groundfish industry, where there's a board that provides us advice about shares of quota, as an example of a way to provide equity.

We do work with the Province of B.C. and get their input on issues, as well. Then we undertake our consultations to consider the views of fishermen, at the local and regional level, about how we're managing the fisheries from a policy and practical perspective. All of those elements are taken into account.

Is there anything else you would like to mention?

[Andrew Thomson]

Going to the question of allocation, particularly between recreational and commercial fisheries, there are a couple of fisheries where there are very clear policy directions. We have a salmon allocation policy that gives preferential access to recreational fisheries of coho and Chinook, and preferential access to commercial fisheries of the other three species. Similarly, in halibut, there is an allocation policy that provides 15% for recreational fisheries, and the majority for commercial fisheries.

I think that reflects quite a significant amount of consultation and discussion with the various interests in trying to come to those. Maintaining those, or operating within those, provides some of the stability for both the recreational and commercial sectors to have that opportunity.

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

I've heard about the PICFI program. Can you enlighten us a little bit more about that? It was basically taking retiring licences from the marine fleet and, I believe, transferring some of them to more inland-based fisheries. Has that affected this fleet separation or owner-operator system on the coast at all?

[Rebecca Reid]

The PICFI program is essentially a licence transfer program, so you're moving willing buyer/willing seller commercial licences to first nations communities. It can be marine. Coastal communities or inland communities can also benefit from it.

It's a bit of a long answer that you probably wouldn't like, but as we talk about access to inland groups, we have taken salmon licences and essentially split them up so that the species that are available to those first nations can have demonstration-style commercial fisheries on them through the access provided by PICFI, but PICFI overall is about transferring access from the regular commercial fleet to indigenous groups.

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

You said access to those fisheries is on a divided basis. Is that access in the river situation its source, or is it in the marine environment and transported up?

[Rebecca Reid]

Andy, why don't you talk about the Harrison example?

[Andrew Thomson]

Just in general, there are 25 commercial fishing enterprises under PICFI. These are indigenous commercial fishing enterprises. Five of the 25 are in the Fraser interior area, in the inland areas where, as Rebecca was saying, we've allowed for movement of some of the access that was retired to now be caught further inland. A number of first nations have developed rather substantial businesses of catching salmon much more terminally, so you can get a much clearer indication that you are only catching healthy stock as opposed to a mixed stock fishery, and are able to catch that fish and market that fish in the commercial marketplace, but the rest of the CFEs operate fisheries in the normal marine fishery.

[The Chair]

Thank you.

Mr. Donnelly.

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

I wanted to come back to my original question about vision. It is on a similar track.

Ms. Reid, you've talked about PICFI as the vision going forward. That's one thing I remember. If there are others, you could add to it, but if co-management were a directive coming from the minister, for instance, is PICFI the best place to go, or would there be a more substantial change in how the fishery is operated if there were a more focused effort to co-manage the fishery, if that makes sense?

[Rebecca Reid]

Just to add to the vision piece, PICFI is an element, but the big, broad vision has been and continues to be conservation and sustainable harvest.

On the question of co-management, are you talking about first nations co-management? The idea behind co-management is that we would work with a particular first nations community on managing a fishery. The role of that first nation would depend on the nature of.... It's hard to be hypothetical about this. They would have a role in how the integrated fisheries management plan is developed as it relates to their interest, so it becomes an important part of it but not the only piece. You still have the other commercial fishermen who are part of the advisory process and who have input into the direction that's taken.

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

On that note then, what is showing the most promise looking forward, considering our past? On the west coast I hear about boat-to-plate programs. We talk about demonstration or pilot projects or programs. What is showing the most success or promise on the west coast?

[Rebecca Reid]

Is that for salmon?

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

That was going to be another question, because here on the east coast, once we lost cod, there was a movement to shellfish, and I don't see that happening on the west coast, so what's the promise forward? What are we looking at? Is it salmon? Is it halibut?

[Rebecca Reid]

Oh, I see. You're asking what the future is; what, from a fisheries perspective, is most promising.

That question really comes down to conservation and sustainable management. Some of the shellfish fisheries are very successful, well-managed and sustainable. You can see the wealth in those fisheries as a result of the controls and management that are in place. They could be under stress as well, considering future changes and conditions in the ocean environment.

Halibut is also a very well-managed species, as you heard from the other witness. There are changes in productivity that are impacting many species, including halibut, but particularly salmon. There's a lot of variability and question about the future of salmon. I think you see in the Fraser River, where we have a number of species being considered by COSEWIC and such types of things, that we have some very significant concerns about the future of those fisheries.

The question really comes down to where it is that we're able to maintain a robust, sustainable fishery and where we have conservation concerns, given changes to ocean conditions and other factors.

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

I appreciate that, but what I was hoping to get to as well is whether there are any specific programs that are showing promise. I talked about “boat to plate” and referenced earlier the Harrison Fisheries Authority. I heard a presentation by Dave Moore. It was incredible. This is after 20 years of problems. I think it's a very promising look at a way forward, talking about a selective fishery and reducing bycatch—all sorts of promise.

[Andrew Thomson]

That is one of the demonstration fisheries we're looking at under the commercial salmon allocation framework that we just renewed.

We have a few instances in which we're looking at...we use the terminology “small bite fisheries”: we know there's a particularly abundant stock in a small area and we can introduce a small number of vessels to catch it. Of course, it's always under the lens of conservation. You want to make sure that you have good data available and are catching the appropriate amount and doing good catch monitoring, all of these things.

Trying out some of these things through a process gives us the chance to spread some of the fishing effort out and maximize the benefits without getting large mixed stock fisheries, which could have unintended consequences of captured bycatch.

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

Okay. That's helpful.

[The Chair]

Thank you.

I know time is very short, but I would ask the permission of the committee to ask a question. Something came up in the testimony that sparked my interest a little bit.

I'll ask a question to both Ms. Reid and Dr. Donkersloot. Both of you mentioned diversifying a particular enterprise, especially for young fishers who are getting into the fishery, acquiring quotas and whatever it took to make sure you can survive in the business and make a living.

I was thrown back a bit, because we had a fisherman from the east coast present in an earlier study on vessel regulations—a gentleman I'm sure Mr. Anderson knows, Mr. Roy Careen. He's a very aggressive fisherman. He usually buys up any quota he can get, especially if it's something that he sees a profit in down the road, or something to keep his enterprise going. On the other side, he gets punished to some degree because, if I remember his testimony correctly, he stated that in order to fish the quotas he owns, he has to have four separate vessels. It seemed as though he was being penalized for trying to diversify and be more aggressive in the fishery and acquire more quota.

Can the same be said for somebody on the west coast, whether it be in Alaska or B.C., that a fisherman getting into the industry and buying up quotas would have to operate more than one vessel? Would the same restrictions apply in those areas?

Perhaps Ms. Reid, you can go first, then Dr. Donkersloot.

[Rebecca Reid]

Unfortunately, I think the answer is that it depends.

For a vessel-based licence, you can only put a licence on that fits the vessel length requirements. It would depend upon what it is that you're trying to diversify.

There are other examples of diversification. For example, in a salmon fishery we have area-based licences. You have to pick one area and one gear. You could, however, stack licences onto a vessel so that you could go to different areas and fish for a longer period of time. That's an example, and there are other examples, so you would have to be careful.

With a party-based licence you would have more flexibility, but you would need to think that piece through. I think it's a good consideration.

[The Chair]

Dr. Donkersloot.