Evidence of meeting #13 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 rivers.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Probably one of the major sources of mortality is predation in the open ocean. Is this right?
Professor of Biology, Canada Research Chair in Marine Conservation and Biodiversity, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
Could I answer that in two ways?
Professor of Biology, Canada Research Chair in Marine Conservation and Biodiversity, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
In the first instance, I think predation is an issue. The key question is how the imbalance arose. Now that we have so few salmon smolts leaving the rivers.... One can almost think of this as a threshold, and that salmon must pass a certain numerical threshold before they get above that bump.
Just to be cognizant of this, the other element, as I mentioned, is that as one goes further south there have been shifts in the marine fish community structure such that there are now more fish—such as herring, sand lance, and some other things—that are almost certainly competing with young salmon smolts for zooplankton, the key one being Calanus finmarchicus. There are more competitors in the marine—
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Right, but what I want to focus on.... Looking at the research results we have and doing the specific actions we can do, I don't think there's much we can do about the last item you mentioned.
I want to focus on the issue of striped bass in the Miramichi specifically. Mr. Roach's committee recommended a greatly expanded catch of striped bass. I have a study here from Maine called “Interactions between striped bass...and the conservation of Atlantic salmon....” In the abstract it says, “Moderate to strong correlations were found between estimates of striped bass abundance and the return of Atlantic salmon to three of the four major New England salmon [streams]....”
I gather that in the Miramichi, decades ago the striped bass were almost SARA-listed species, and now, based on Mr. Roach's committee study, we're up to some 250,000 adult spawning fish. The predation rates have to be very severe. I'm cognizant of your point, Dr. Hutchings, that these fish may be in a predator pit and can't get out of it because of this imbalance.
Mr. Roach's committee recommended an expanded catch of striped bass, but the department—and he used a very nice word in a bad way—became way too conservative. About 12,000 fish were taken. The season this year was two weeks long with retention of one fish a day. Clearly that kind of harvest of the striped bass could have absolutely no effect on smolt survival, given the predatory nature of striped bass.
Mr. Taylor, were you disappointed in the very conservative approach taken by DFO, which I think was in opposition to the recommendation of Mr. Roach's committee?
President, Atlantic Salmon Federation
I was disappointed. The Atlantic Salmon Federation was disappointed. We have some data. It's not just an emotional response.
I mentioned in my presentation about the smolt tracking work and adult sonic tag tracking work that the Atlantic Salmon Federation is doing in the Miramichi, Restigouche, and Cascapedia. We've been tagging smolts on those three rivers since 2003, the last 12 or 13 years.
The survival rate of the smolt from the Grand Cascapedia and Restigouche rivers downriver and out through the bay and estuary in any given year ranges from 60% to 70%, yet on the Miramichi it's 25% to 30%. The major difference is the striped bass population.
You have the striped bass, which is the Gulf of St. Lawrence striped bass population from Gaspé to Cape Breton Island. They are in the Miramichi system in the spring. That's their spawning habitat. The numbers have increased considerably over the last number of years. There is strong evidence to suggest that their predation on outgoing smolts is probably quite high.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
To me, adaptive management is the right way to go. We institute a management program, let's say a vastly increased harvest of striped bass, and see what happens, and after two or three years of study we adjust accordingly. I detect, especially in the scientific community, a political correctness that almost is too reluctant to look at the issue of predator control as one of the tools in the tool kit, yet we're very quick to limit human predators when it comes to harvesting salmon, catch-and-release, and reduced limits. When it comes to fish predation from a vastly increased striped bass population, we somehow seem reluctant to do that. I certainly see no downside to doing it.
With regard to the Greenland catch of 58 tonnes, Mr. Taylor, you talked about how Canada's catch is twice as much, but based on the DFO testimony that was given to us earlier this week, all of their fish are large MSW fish, multi-sea-winter fish. All of them are the most valuable fish, so their 58 tonnes are 58 really important tonnes.
The other point is that they don't produce any salmon to speak of. They're basically taking fish that we produce, so I don't think we need to apologize for anything that Canada does, given our conservation efforts.
What recommendation would you have in terms of going to the Canadian government as a committee? What can we do to deal with Greenland, other than just sit around the table and talk and beg?
President, Atlantic Salmon Federation
That's a very good question. I believe there is a lot you can do.
From past experience, in 1993-1994 the Atlantic Salmon Federation and the North Atlantic Salmon Fund NGO partner from Iceland actually paid the Greenlanders not to fish. We purchased their NASCO-negotiated quota of 158 tonnes and 213 tonnes for those two years. It was two years, and then it fell apart.
In another agreement in 2002-2011, we learned our lesson. The deal wasn't to pay fishermen not to fish; it was to invest in alternative economic development opportunities. We helped them to develop a lumpfish roe fishery and a snow crab fishery, the idea being to get salmon fishermen doing something else that was more sustainable and provided a livelihood as good as or better than salmon fishing.
There are opportunities, and we work closely with the U.S. government. We'd like to see that same partnership in Canada, not just working through NASCO but through bilateral discussions with Greenland. I guess, just to confirm your point, the difference is that all the salmon taken in Greenland are large salmon. In any given year, 80% to 90% of them are bound for Canadian rivers, so that's a point well made.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Mr. Taylor. We've run out of time.
For seven minutes, Mr. Donnelly, go ahead, please.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all four of our witnesses for providing your testimony on this important subject of wild Atlantic salmon.
I will start with you, Mr. Taylor. You spoke about the precautionary approach in moving aquaculture to closed containment. My question is, if the salmon farming industry in the east coast moved to closed containment, do you think this would have a positive impact on wild Atlantic salmon?
President, Atlantic Salmon Federation
The short answer is yes. Obviously it couldn't take place in a short period of time. The Atlantic Salmon Federation position is that there should be a moratorium immediately on any expansion of the industry, with a grandfather period, until closed containment on land or closed containment technologies in the ocean or along the coast....
The other point I made in the presentation was the standardization of a very rigid best practices model. If you look at the aquaculture regulations and compare New Brunswick to Nova Scotia to Newfoundland to British Columbia to Norway, they're all different. Norway has the highest standards, but even at that highest standard, there are still a zillion problems with the aquaculture industry in Norway. They admit that as well.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Thanks, Mr. Taylor.
You mentioned Norway. I'm assuming you're familiar with their recent announcement of a U.S. $100 million investment into closed containment.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
That will be one to watch.
Dr. Hutchings, you mentioned—I think I got it—five categories of suggestions. You talked about dams, illegal fishing, habitat, marine issues—of which there was more than one—and aquaculture. Is that the order of priority that you would place on those, or would you recommend a different order of priority?
Professor of Biology, Canada Research Chair in Marine Conservation and Biodiversity, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
From a science perspective, I tend to try to simplify things as well as I can. It helps me think about things.
As I said, there's a broad science consensus on the threats in fresh water and at sea. With respect to what's affecting Atlantic salmon, there are many things we can do and are doing from a freshwater habitat improvement perspective. I think there's more that can be done, but that would be an enhancement of ongoing activities that are taking place, everything from individuals and community groups to NGOs and government initiatives.
I also think there are things we can do at sea. I very much agree with the sentiments that have been expressed that if there was one key objective, it would be to maximize the number of smolts that are entering the ocean. That's money in the bank, basically.
We can't affect, for the most part, what's going on at sea except by controlling legal and illegal fishing activities and by having more means of mitigating some negative consequences associated with aquaculture.
I would say, number one, I very much agree with that. Maximize the number of smolts emigrating into the ocean. The second thing, from an at-sea mortality perspective, is that we need to know when and where salmon are going, and where the mortality is taking place.
Mortality is the key thing. I think there are prospects associated with the tagging of fish and the monitoring of salmon that let us know roughly where they go, but we don't know specifically where they go. We think much of the mortality happens as soon as these salmon that are about as big as this pen enter the ocean, or within a few months, but we don't know for certain. That is quite a black box.
What do we do about it? I think that's a secondary thing, but before we can even contemplate what we might be able to do, we need to know when and where in that at-sea life cycle the survival issues are taking place.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Great. Thank you, Dr. Hutchings.
Ms. Nodding, you talked about a broad recovery plan. If I were to ask you to choose between a broad recovery plan versus addressing a top priority, which would you choose? In other words, if you couldn't get the broad plan, would you choose to wait and build up those funds to be able to address that plan, or would you just recommend picking away at a priority until we get the funding support or the investment, the resources, needed to do that broad plan?
Executive Director, Bluenose Coastal Action Foundation
Obviously, something is better than nothing, so I wouldn't choose to do nothing and wait to get the resources for the broad plan, but picking off one of the priority actions in isolation is not going to solve the problem. You have to work towards solving all the issues to really see the recovery we would like to see for the Atlantic salmon.
No, I would not hold off and do nothing and wait to get the resources, which is why I mentioned, in terms of the Southern Upland salmon, that we know the species has not been listed federally yet, so we have a little time before it becomes a legal obligation, and before that happens, to really try to put some emphasis and be proactive on trying to delay that process or maybe trying to improve the status of the species before that happens.
The time is now to do something, and let's work towards solving one issue if we can. Realistically, you have to look at all them, but I would definitely not stop.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Thank you.
Mr. Roach, in my remaining time, would you tackle that question of choosing your top priority? Your committee has given us 61 recommendations, which is excellent work, and you've talked about additional investments needed for habitat and science . What would your top priority be?
In other words, where do you think the federal government would get its biggest bang for its buck?
Chair, Minister's Advisory Committee on Wild Atlantic Salmon, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
I'm going to answer a little differently. Anyway, I'm going to try.
I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit in those 61 recommendations. We did recommend reinvestment in Atlantic salmon, but there are lot of things that can be done that are not in need of additional funding.
I'm talking about things such as addressing existing commercial fisheries, and perhaps bait fisheries, for trap fishing for invertebrates or bycatch in other species. These fisheries go on there, and there's a very good probability that some of them intercept, if not target, Atlantic salmon. We can clean up on some of those fronts.
On data, there are a lot of opportunities for data that may not cost us additional money. For example, Bill mentioned the tag returns, the tag being the tag on your licence. There's very little return from the Maritimes and from Newfoundland on that, yet there's a lot of data that can be captured. The point is that it has to be formatted so that people can electronically put forward the information of what happened during their fishery. That can then be used to get a good handle on what's going on in the river system. That will be much more informative, I guess, than some of the information we have today.
For the big-money areas, that's difficult, because speaking for the committee, as much as I tried to get some prioritization of the areas, people didn't want to do that. I don't want to pre-empt the committee's word and start making them do it now, but I mentioned some examples—
Chair, Minister's Advisory Committee on Wild Atlantic Salmon, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Yes?
Chair, Minister's Advisory Committee on Wild Atlantic Salmon, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
I guess what I would say is that many of the recommendations we have in that report don't cost anything, such as enforcing existing regulations on the land use practices and using some of the data collection opportunities that are there. For those, we don't need to ask if we have to get money. Let's go for those first.
Liberal
Liberal
Bernadette Jordan Liberal South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Thank you to the panel for your presentations.
My first comments are going to be for you, Ms. Nodding, particularly with regard to invasive species in the LaHave River. We know that the Petite Rivière water system has pretty much lost the Atlantic whitefish. That was mainly due to the chain pickerel and the closure of the Queens hatchery a couple of years ago. Is the chain pickerel actually an issue in the LaHave River, or is it another invasive species?