Fisheries Committee on March 18th, 2019

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Thank you.

Dr. Visser, I have a couple of questions for you. When you were observing different whales and dolphins at facilities like Marineland and Vancouver Aquarium, what struck you in terms of the behaviour of cetaceans and different types of things that were prevalent?

[Dr. Ingrid Visser]

I have observed literally hundreds of different individuals. I can say without a doubt that every single one of them has shown neurotic, abnormal, repetitive behaviours. The scientific term for those is “stereotypy”. Stereotypies can range from self-harming behaviours with the animal banging their head against the wall until they literally rip the skin off, to chewing on concrete where they will wear their teeth down to the gums and fracture teeth. It can be regurgitating their food continually. That can have all sorts of implications with acid burning of the esophagus.

There are all sorts of other abnormal behaviours like elevated hyper-aggressive behaviour. It all accumulates into what we have termed chronic stress. The implication of chronic stress is exactly the same as it is for us. It's just not good for your health.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Can you—

[The Chair]

Mr. Johns, your seven minutes is more than up. Perhaps you can get in another couple as we go forward.

Now we go back to the government side, and Mr. Hardie, for seven minutes or less, please.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you both for being here, and Dr. Visser. Some of us were a little late. I didn't get to hear your opening comments because we were listening to comments of our Prime Minister in the House on the issues in New Zealand.

I remember when we had our first killer whales, our first orcas, in the Vancouver Aquarium. What we noticed at the time was the dorsal fin. It is usually straight up and down, very rigid in the wild. It was curved over.

Dr. Visser, do we know why that happens?

[Dr. Ingrid Visser]

In essence, yes, and in essence, no. It's a very complicated question with an even more complex answer, but in essence, yes. One hundred percent of the adult male orcas in captivity have collapsed dorsal fins, yet in the wild, it's less than 1%.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

So something's going on there.

I will ask you both to comment on this. We're talking about captivity, but should we make a distinction between being in captivity and being in custody, where for instance an animal could be kept in the ocean, but perhaps limited for a certain period of time, so that medical needs could be administered or we could find out exactly why it's sick?

Being in custody, in that fashion, would that not necessarily fall under the concerns that you have about being in captivity?

[Senator Murray Sinclair]

Yes. If you look at the provisions of the bill, you will see that there are exemptions for the taking of cetaceans into captivity for purposes of addressing issues of distress that the animal may be undergoing or to provide assistance to the animal, to use the wording of Bill C-68.

There is a recognition that, from time to time, that is justifiable and it's an exception to the prohibition that's contained in the legislation.

Perhaps Dr. Visser can talk about how that is best done, but the reality is that we did consider that and there is an exception within the bill at present.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

I have other questions here, so I will have to move on from that.

During our constituency week last week, I was informed about a bit more of the story of J50, a female orca that was evidently very ill and eventually disappeared after some interventions to give her medicine, etc., but obviously, they didn't work.

There appear to be complications because of the lack of symmetry between what we can or can't do in Canada versus what they can or can't do in the United States. In the case of the southern resident orcas, they go back and forth across the border.

Is there anything in the Senate bill that would look to the need to consult with our neighbours to see if we can come up with something that's going to be useful and consistent?

[Senator Murray Sinclair]

Since the Senate bill addresses primarily a Criminal Code cruelty to animals approach, it is really a question of jurisdiction over the animal at the time of the taking into captivity and the things that happen while in captivity.

The question of whether or not, scientifically, there are things that can be done, in order to address the care of the animal, while in the wild or while under distress, is probably something Dr. Visser can better address than I can because that's a scientific question.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Hopefully, we can ask for a fairly short description, please, Dr. Visser.

[Dr. Ingrid Visser]

Sure. I was actually involved with the situation with J50 and was on the ground there trying to help, so I'm very familiar with it. I believe there was a lot of collaboration between both governments.

The legislation that's being proposed before you now does make allowance for individuals to go into sanctuaries. Those sanctuaries are different from the barren concrete tanks that we're discussing under this bill.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Yes and I think the distinction between a sanctuary and custody should be fairly clear, so everybody understands what we are talking about here.

It would appear that our relationship with cetaceans has changed over time. They have imprinted on us.... There's a marvellous video of two orcas chasing a boat that's going at a good clip and these orcas are almost surfing on the wake.

We heard from some folks up in Churchill, where one of their primary industries up there is whale-watching. They were concerned about the space allowance regulation between an observation boat and a beluga. The boats would always be running away because the belugas are naturally curious and want to come up and say hello.

Have we reached a tipping point, in terms of our interventions and our interference with this wildlife, where it's almost impossible to roll back the clock?

[Senator Murray Sinclair]

Well, I'm sure there's a scientific explanation that you can hear from Dr. Visser and others. It's in the material that was before the Senate.

I'll refer to the question I was asked earlier by Mr. Johns, who referenced our mutual friend Barney Williams, who's an elder in Nuu-chah-nulth first nation area. His comments upon things like that are similar to the comments of some of the Inuit people I'm familiar with. They would tell you that when you have that kind of relationship with the creatures around you, you have the ability to communicate with them as and when they want to communicate with you and you want to communicate with them.

I don't think this is a new phenomenon. I don't think this is a situation in which suddenly the animals have started to come to like us from time to time or appreciate us. I think that in fact, when they have been treated well in the past, they've shown a willingness to return that view.

The tribes on the west coast always have talked about those stories as well.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

All right. Thank you very much.

[The Chair]

Now we go to the Conservative side, to Mr. Doherty—for five minutes or less, please.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I still want to call you Justice Sinclair.

[Senator Murray Sinclair]

Don't worry. I respond to anything.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

I only have five minutes, but I first want to preface this by saying thank you for the enormous work you did on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. As a member of Parliament who has the Highway of Tears going through my riding of Cariboo—Prince George and whose wife and children are indigenous, I appreciate the enormous work you did on it. I know it took a great personal toll on you.

[Senator Murray Sinclair]

Thank you very much.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

I'm going to also say that I'm not a lawyer, nor am I a biologist. I have some questions that, hopefully, you can help me with.

Bill C-68 was passed in the House of Commons on June 20, 2018. It bans the capture of cetaceans in Canadian waters, unless the animal is in distress or in need of care. Why do we need Bill S-203?

[Senator Murray Sinclair]

I was here earlier and commented upon that.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Yes. I'm sorry; I missed that.

[Senator Murray Sinclair]

I realize that you were in the House and listening to the statements. Let me just repeat what I said earlier.

Bill C-68 does that, but it does it by amending the Fisheries Act. It's a Fisheries Act offence and therefore not a Criminal Code offence; it doesn't place this activity into the cruelty to animals provisions of the Criminal Code; Bill S-203 does. This is palatable and is something you can do. You can have two pieces of legislation arising from the same incident, creating separate offences under separate legislation.

The other thing Bill S-203 does, which Bill C-68 does not do, is prohibit the sale of cetaceans. It prohibits the sale of parts of cetaceans and controls international trade.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Okay.

You're familiar with the piece of legislation. I have another question. Proposed subsection 445.2(4), reads:

Every one commits an offence who promotes, arranges, conducts, assists in, receives money for or takes part in any meeting, competition, exhibition, pastime, practice, display or event at or in the course of which captive cetaceans are used for performance for entertainment purposes unless such performance is authorized pursuant to a licence issued by the Lieutenant Governor in Council of a province or by such other person or authority in the province as may be specified by the Lieutenant Governor in Council.

Millions of Canadians go south of the border and take part in swimming with dolphins or other shows down in that area. They are coming back and posting pictures to their Facebook or social media of their children and themselves participating in this.

Are they by virtue of this proposed subsection committing a crime?