Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and committee members, for inviting us here. As you heard, I'm from the B.C. Seafood Alliance. I'm here with one of my members, Chris Sporer from the Pacific Halibut Management Association.
We are the largest commercial fishing organization on the west coast. We represent the owners and operators of commercially licensed vehicles ranging from less than 40 feet to over 120 feet.
We're here to provide some context for the west coast fishery, and how very different it is from Atlantic fisheries in geography, history, species and structure.
There's no question that B.C. fishermen are fearful. Much of this has to do with uncertainty over the future, thanks to marine protection, which could put many conservatively managed fisheries out of business; and over how reconciliation will work in fisheries. Without secure access to the resource, fishermen do not see a future for themselves.
While the alliance has no official position, a number of my members are also concerned about social inequities in the fisheries: the sharing of risks and benefits. They believe “made in B.C.” solutions through their respective DFO advisory processes need to be developed.
For context, I want first to tackle the myth of the underperformance of west coast fisheries, the argument that our fisheries, unlike Atlantic or Alaskan fisheries, show increasing volume but declining value. Comparing volume and value between regions depends almost entirely on the species mix. Using constant dollars to adjust for inflation, the increase in the value of Atlantic catch is lobster. Take out lobster, and Atlantic Canada is in pretty much the same situation as B.C.
In B.C. we've seen something rather different happen. Harvests of high-value salmon, herring, halibut and sablefish have declined for conservation, reallocation and market reasons, while harvests of low-value species—hake, arrowtooth flounder and pollock—have increased significantly. Careful management has reduced the harvest volume of B.C. groundfish and shellfish to conservative levels, and management changes have significantly increased value in many species.
I have five messages I'd like you to consider.
First, long-standing Atlantic owner-operator and fleet separation policies do not fit in B.C. because of the way our fisheries have evolved, and continue to evolve to ensure conservation and sustainable management.
Second, this evolution is in response to the changing environment: ecosystem understanding, marine planning, reconciliation, markets and social and economic impacts.
Third, before considering changes aimed at addressing the sharing of benefits and risks, the committee needs to understand how B.C. fisheries are managed.
Fourth, barriers to new entrance and intergenerational transfer include the lack of long-term access to the resource, capital and stable income.
Lastly, any new management measures impacting the distribution of fishery benefits and risks need to be developed collaboratively with B.C. commercial fishery participants to ensure that they are not detrimental to conservation and economic stability.
I have a few quick words on the evolution of fisheries management in B.C.
Since the extension of jurisdiction to 200 nautical miles in 1977, fisheries management has evolved differently on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. Atlantic policy is driven by adjacency, protecting provincial fishery access and maintaining an inshore/midshore fleet of less than 65 feet.
B.C. really is different. It's only one coastal province, so the adjacency principle was never relevant.
For more than a century, processors have provided boats, gear, shoreside services and short-term loans to enable fishermen to go fishing.
Limited entry licencing in 1969 was the first of many efforts to reduce too many boats chasing too few fish, and it inevitably issued too many licences and created value in licences. Since then, these have been fully transferable and available to Canadian citizens and companies.
Most, but not all, limited entry licences are vessel-based, rather than party-based as in Atlantic Canada. Multiple ownership of a vessel is common and often means multiple ownership of the associated licences and quota allocations. So, licence owners are more diverse than they might appear. There are many different fisheries in B.C., and dozens, or maybe hundreds, of different ownership arrangements.
Generally, far too many commercial licences were issued for a well-managed, viable fishery. According to Peter Pearse in 1982, for the roe herring fishery, the “Department's goal was to issue 150 seine and 450 gillnet licences”. In fact, 252 seine licences and over 1,300 gillnet licences were issued, “far in excess of the capacity required to harvest the available catch.”
This excess capacity was incompatible with conservation objectives. That's weak stock management, sustainable harvest levels, accurate accounting for the catch. It was also incompatible with economic viability and it compromised fishing safety.
Fisheries therefore started adopting new management measures, such as at-sea and shoreside monitoring, IVQs, quota transferability, area licencing, and licence and gear stacking, as a means to rationalize that excess capacity, provide economic benefits and improve safety for the remaining operators while meeting conservation goals.
The example of the commercial groundfish integrated program integrates the management of 66 different fish stocks, seven limited-entry licensed fisheries and three gear types. It requires full accountability for every fish caught, retained or discarded and 100% at-sea monitoring and dockside monitoring. The David Suzuki Foundation considers it to be among the best-managed fisheries on the planet. It could not operate without quota transferability—leasing—within and between the fleets.
My last message is that we cannot go backwards on conservation. B.C. fishermen need to find their own solutions, not have one imposed from the top down, because that won't work.
Thank you.