Fisheries Committee on May 1st, 2019

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Good afternoon, everyone.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we will continue our study of the migration of lobster and snow crab in Atlantic Canada and the impact of changes to the lobster carapace size.

We have two witnesses here in person today. From the Fisheries Council of Canada, we have Mr. Paul Lansbergen, president.

Joining us today by video conference is Mr. Richard Wahle, research professor, School of Marine Sciences at the University of Maine.

We will start off with seven-minute presentations from witnesses.

Mr. Wahle, if you're ready, you can go first for seven minutes or less.

[Dr. Richard Wahle, Research Professor, School of Marine Sciences, University of Maine, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

Thank you for this opportunity to be a witness on the question of lobster and snow crab migration.

My name is Richard Wahle. I'm a research professor at the University of Maine's School of Marine Sciences. I also recently became director of the university's Lobster Institute. I have conducted research on crustacean fisheries and ecology for the past 35 years, and much of my research has focused on lobster.

The Lobster Institute serves to maximize the engagement of the University of Maine with stakeholders in the lobster fisheries in both the U.S. and Canada. I will therefore say up front that my experience really lies more with lobster than snow crab fisheries.

Without being redundant regarding previous testimony given before this committee, in this statement I would like to start by emphasizing some basic distinctions in the biology and ecology of the two species, especially with regard to their movements and size at maturity. Second, I will take the opportunity to clarify some apparent confusion between the term “migration” and “geographic range shifts” in the context of climate change. Finally, I'll close by underscoring the need for more cross-border collaboration and monitoring of the living marine resources we share. I will give you an example of one such effort I lead for the American lobster.

The centre of the American lobster abundance is currently the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence and the northeast Gulf of Maine. It ranges northward into Labrador and Newfoundland and extends into the deep waters off the U.S. mid-Atlantic states. There is scientific consensus that the upper physiological limit in temperature is around 20°C and the lower limit is around 12°C, which is the minimum temperature for larval development.

The depth distribution is largely determined by those limits. Lobsters in the Gulf of St. Lawrence are mostly limited to depths shallower than 50 metres. Those further south extend considerably deeper, into offshore banks and shelf waters.

Growth and the onset of maturity are also temperature-dependent. In warmer regimes, lobsters grow faster but mature at a smaller size. These differences in maturation size are the basis for different minimum legal size limits along the species range.

Further, the reported downward trends in the size at maturity over the past few decades have been linked to a warming climate. The optimal thermal envelope for lobsters has been shifting northward in a warming ocean. What has been described as a northward migration in response to climate change is more accurately depicted as a demographic shift in the balance of birth and death rates. I'll add that the depletion of predatory groundfish in the Gulf of Maine and the Gulf of St. Lawrence has also likely contributed to the population surge and the northward shift in the centre of lobster abundance.

The snow crab is a subarctic species distributed around the north Atlantic and Pacific. In Atlantic Canada, it is largely segregated by depth from the lobster population because of its differing thermal preference, despite some overlap in their latitudinal range. The northwest Atlantic population is centred in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and extends north along coastal Labrador and south along the Scotian Shelf.

Snow crabs prefer cold temperatures of between -1°C and about 11°C and therefore tend to be restricted to greater depths and more northern latitudes than where lobsters range off Atlantic Canada. Unlike lobster, they also tend to prefer soft mud or sand instead of the shallower, rocky habitats preferred by lobster. Furthermore, while lobster continue to grow after maturity, snow crabs reach a terminal molt and stop growing. The snow crab fishery targets only the large, reproductively mature males.

As for movements and migrations, both lobsters and snow crabs have two opportunities for movement during their lifetime. One is during the water-borne larval stages, spanning the first weeks to months after hatching, when they may be passively transported many kilometres from their point of origin. The other is by movements along the bottom, mostly as larger juveniles and adults. The smallest lobsters are cryptic and restricted to rocky habitat. Larger ones engage in seasonal inshore and offshore movements and are most prevalent coastally during the summer. Larger lobsters can move tens to hundreds of kilometres over the course of a year, which has been used by U.S. lobster stock assessment scientists as a justification for combining the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank stocks into one.

In contrast, snow crabs settle in sand/mud environments in deeper water than the environments occupied by lobster. They then migrate to even deeper waters as they age. Tagging studies in Atlantic Canada suggest their lateral movements along the shelf are more limited than those of lobster.

Finally, I will close by underscoring the benefits of cross-border collaboration in monitoring the living marine resources we share. I founded the American lobster settlement index. It's a collaboration of U.S. and Canadian academic institutions, industry members and fishery management agencies that monitor the pulse of baby lobsters that repopulate coastal lobster nurseries each year at some 100 sites between Rhode Island and Newfoundland. For 30 years it has been an important early warning system for changes in this iconic fishery. I look forward to continued collaboration on this program with my Canadian and U.S. colleagues, and would be happy to answer questions about it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Dr. Wahle.

We'll now go to Mr. Lansbergen for seven minutes or less, please.

[Paul Lansbergen, President, Fisheries Council of Canada]

Good afternoon and thank you for the invitation to appear before you today. Since I have appeared on a few occasions, I think you all know that the Fisheries Council of Canada represents processors across the country, many of whom also harvest wild-capture species.

In my remarks today, I'll be sharing a perspective that I hope will complement what you've heard from other witnesses during your study, including Dr. Wahle.

I would like to start by applauding the study. Lobster and snow crab represent our two most valuable exports of wild-capture species. In 2018, exports of lobster were worth $2.2 billion and snow crab exports were worth $886 million. These are critical species to our sector's success and it behooves us to ensure that we have a long-term view of their sustainable fisheries management and market access issues.

Sticking with the economics of these species, it is worth referencing Fisheries and Oceans Canada's sector outlook to 2027. The demand side of the market is very positive. The outlook expects the values of both species to remain high, given strong demand and few substitutes. Growing global population and growing affluence are increasing demand for proteins, including fish and seafood, and that is good news for our entire sector.

The supply side is positive but less certain. Lobster and snow crab stocks are generally healthy, as you heard from Fisheries and Oceans Canada. I am sure we would all like to see all of our stocks be healthy and stay that way. That is why we must take a long-term view and base our resource management decisions on science—science that is comprehensive.

Our oceans, their ecosystems and our fish stocks are in constant flux. You saw the charts from Fisheries and Oceans Canada on stock status over the last 20 plus years. The health of our fish stocks is dependent upon many factors, such as ocean attributes, food supply, predation and fish harvesting, to name a few. Since joining the fisheries sector nearly 18 months ago, it appears to me that most of the attention within fisheries management is given to fishing mortality. That is clearly important and it is the one factor we can control. However, fisheries management is significantly more complex than that.

Your study specifically mentions migration of the two species. Three questions come to mind for me. One, is it year-to-year variability in migration; two, is it a longer-term trend in migration, migration that might be transitory; or three, is it a more permanent change in migratory behaviour? For the long-term health of the stocks and our commercial fisheries, we need three things: we need to understand the underlying causes; we need to determine the permanence of the changes in migratory behaviour; and we need to determine what, if anything, should be done to ensure the health of the stocks and the prosperity of our commercial fisheries.

When the department was here, they talked about migration versus displacement, and that is a good question, but it depends on the scale through which you view the question. Fish don't respect our management area boundaries. Migratory patterns within Canadian waters are just simply migration. However, with a narrower view, migration out of one management area into another could be seen as displacement by an individual harvester.

The economic implications of the two perspectives could lead to different conclusions. The extent or permanence of such changes would also suggest different economic implications and consideration of response actions.

Your study also mentions health of stocks. This is a complex question, so I encourage you to consider this carefully. How do you want to approach the question? Do you want to think of it in the context of stable, natural ecosystem dynamics, or do you want to approach it from a longer-term perspective in the context of climate change impacts? If it's the former, we can have an interesting conversation and you will arrive at some good conclusions about how well Canada is managing its fish resources today. If it's the latter, you will want to revisit this question on a broader scale, perhaps next year. There are climate impacts affecting our oceans, their ecosystems and our fish stocks. We need to better understand and project these impacts so we can adapt. This is very complex and the answers won't be reached overnight.

Having said that, I wish to acknowledge DFO and its efforts to assess climate risks within its portfolio. The environment commissioner has said DFO is ahead of the curve among federal departments, so kudos to DFO.

Next, DFO was instrumental in having the Food and Agriculture Organization study climate change impacts on fisheries and aquaculture. That is this tome of a book full of information. Again, kudos to DFO for this. As I pointed out, this resulted in a substantial compendium of research on the topic, which was released last year. lt found that climate impacts on Canada's oceans and fish resources are likely to be both positive and negative.

Moreover, Canada is planning to host later this year an experts workshop on climate impacts and adaptation. DFO wants to know more so we can continue to show leadership in sustainable fisheries management. This is also good news.

However, we need to do more. Taking lobster and snow crab for example, their migratory patterns and overall health will be affected by changing ocean surface temperature, salinity, density stratification and ocean acidification.

ln conclusion, I will offer three recommendations.

One, regarding impacts and adaptation, the committee urges the federal government to deepen its research and consideration of climate impacts on, and adaptation options for, Canada's commercial fisheries.

Two, the committee urges Fisheries and Oceans Canada to undertake analysis of the socio-economic implications of climate impacts on Canada's fish resources and of adaptation scenarios.

Three, for yourselves, perhaps in 2020 your committee can extend an invitation to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to appear for the purposes of discussing climate impacts and adaptation options for Canada's commercial fisheries.

I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Lansbergen.

We will start off on the government side with Mr. Fraser, for seven minutes or less, please.

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you both for joining us today. I really appreciate it.

Professor, perhaps I could start with you. I very much appreciate the comments you've made and also the work you've done in the field for many years on the research side.

What types of resources are put into scientific research in the state of Maine and on the U.S. side with regard to understanding better the movement of lobsters and the migration of the species?

[Dr. Richard Wahle]

There are several sources of funding. They come at different levels of jurisdiction.

At the largest national level, we have the National Science Foundation's support, which is typically more basic science-driven. Then we have sources from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, which runs several programs.

Since NOAA is within the Department of Commerce, it is very much oriented toward fisheries and the commercial impacts of our marine natural resources. There are several programs that fund various aspects of research. Within NOAA, there is our sea grant program, the national marine fisheries service, NOAA's ocean acidification program and several others. There is a co-operative research program, and so forth.

At the state level, within the state of Maine, we have a source of funds that is primarily driven from trap fees to harvesters, which is called the lobster research, education and development fund. Out of that has grown this lobster research collaborative.

There are other smaller pots of money around, but basically it's at the national and state level.

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

I appreciate what you said about the American lobster settlement index and that there is cross-border collaboration.

Is the scientific information that these funding sources support shared cross-border as well with some of the work you do?

[Dr. Richard Wahle]

Yes, they absolutely are.

I should add that there's considerable industry support as well, and again, for that particular program, from both sides of the border.

From our side, Ready Seafood Co., is a big dealer here. It also buys Canadian lobsters for distribution.

The P.E.I. Fishermen's Association has been very instrumental in helping us out, and also on the Canadian side, the Maritime Fishermen's Union. We have also had a bit of support from Fisheries and Oceans Canada for that particular program.

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Okay.

You talk about the predatory groundfish having an impact on the movement of lobsters. Could you explain a bit more how that has an impact on the movement of lobsters and their spatial distribution?

[Dr. Richard Wahle]

Yes. That's a very interesting story. Since really the late 1970s, the harvesting of groundfish on both sides of the border has taken its toll on both the abundance and size structure of groundfish. By “groundfish” I am referring to an assemblage of several species, more than a dozen or so, including the big ones—cod, haddock, halibut, a number of other flatfish and so forth. They have largely been depleted.

As I am sure you are aware, there are now moratoria on the harvesting of many of those species, especially cod. Well, they're chief predators of lobster, so the removal of those species, especially the large individuals in those populations, has essentially relaxed the predation pressure on lobster. That essentially relaxed the predation pressure and enabled them to exploit habitats they had never exploited before, because it had been essentially too risky to do so. That has certainly played an important part in the surge in abundance and the northward shift of the centre of the population.

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

The other way you talked about the movement of patterns is that it's through either the larval stage or the movement of juvenile, or I guess medium-aged, lobsters on the bottom. I would imagine that they would have the greater ability to move further in the larval stage with regard to currents and perhaps temperature changes. Could you explain a little bit more about those types of movements?

[Dr. Richard Wahle]

It's a very good question. It's important to make that distinction between the larval transport opportunity.... Of course, it's only a few weeks in a lobster's lifetime, but in that planktonic stage they have the potential to be transported tens or even hundreds of kilometres, depending on where they hatched and what the particular ocean currents were that they were entrained in.

For example, lobster larvae could be hatched off Grand Manan at the mouth of the Bay of Fundy and be transported easily down to Georges Bank. That's one opportunity. Then they settle to the seabed and are very cryptic until they are a few years old and become more mobile. By the time they are adults, they are capable of longer-distance movements. Again, the longest distance recorded has been on the order of about 100 kilometres in a year's time, but that's probably not the norm. Probably most of the stock would remain within 10 kilometres to 20 kilometres of where they settled.

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Thanks very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Now we'll go to the Conservative side.

Mr. Doherty, you have seven minutes or less, please.

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

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Lansbergen, it's nice to see you here, as always.

In your opinion, has the predator-prey dynamic changed in this fishery?

[Paul Lansbergen]

I think as Dr. Wahle just described, there have been some dynamic changes. The food chain has implications right along. How one fishery gets impacted or one species gets impacted can have implications far up and down the food chain.

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

Would you say that the government has studied this enough or invested in enough science at this point, or would you suggest that more study needs to be taken?

[Paul Lansbergen]

For this particular species, I can't say. In terms of enough research and science for all our commercial species, I think the easy answer is no, more can be done, because more can always be done. It's very complex, and it's very difficult to know all of the interactions.

Last year you had the environment commissioner come and testify on one of her reports that dealt with climate change and, at the time, you had DFO officials come and talk about the work they've done. After that, I followed up with them to ask more specifically.... I come from a history in the forest industry where we looked quite heavily at climate impacts on the forest. The Canadian forest service had done a very good job in projecting out what those impacts could be and trying to figure what adaptation strategies the industry and governments could implement in response to those impacts.

For the fishery sector, it's quite a bit different because DFO takes the active management decisions, not the industry. On the forest side, CFS had developed adaptation strategies and guidance for the industry and practitioners to implement, but for fisheries, it's DFO that needs it itself. The big question is: are they resourced enough to do the science and make the decisions that they need to? I'm not sure if they have enough resources at the time.

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

Like the forestry industry, is the fisheries industry, in your opinion, investing in science or studies?

[Paul Lansbergen]

Some companies are to greater degrees than others, and it depends on their capacities to do so. The industry structure is completely different between forestry and fisheries. The immediate and direct benefits of investing in science are completely different between fisheries and forestry, so I think it's an apples-and-oranges comparison, but we all need to do more, for sure.

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

How heavily, in your opinion, is the department relying on the precautionary principle versus science, and how does that impact your stakeholders?

[Paul Lansbergen]

It's a difficult question. It's a good question, but a difficult one, I think, to answer as a whole, because I think for each species their level of knowledge in terms of stock assessments and things like that is different. Where there's a greater lack of data and knowledge, they have to rely more fully on—

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

Perhaps I'll rephrase that. We heard in a number of reports that our snow crab fishers and our lobster fishers, at the last minute, had to go back out, and, with a stroke of a pen, had to retrieve their pots, risking life and limb, so to speak, to do that just because of, again, no science backing, but the thought that perhaps there were issues and the use of the precautionary principle.

[Paul Lansbergen]

Certainly I heard similar stories with regard to efforts to protect right whales, for example. Even in our standard regulations that have been in place for years, there are certain windows in terms of retrieving your pots, regardless of what the weather is, so that could place harvesters in dangerous situations, because they have to obey that window.