Fisheries Committee on June 14th, 2016

[Dr. Arran McPherson]

I'll admit that the folks you have in front of you tend to have more of an east coast emphasis, just by virtue of the geography of the scientists we're here with today, but that's not to say that we don't have a significant investment in new research dollars going to B.C. I can't commit to the details at this moment, but that's a question that I'd be happy to follow up on if there is a request.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

Okay.

I've seen that there have been some concerns raised by some fishermen regarding turbines in the Bay of Fundy. Can anyone on this panel speak to the scientific work that has been done and assure fishing groups that this will not have a negative impact on fish habitat in that area?

[Dr. Arran McPherson]

That's a very specific project question, so I'll ask Blair, just because he happens to be from the Maritimes region, if he has any information he could share with us on that.

[Dr. Blair Greenan]

That's not my area of expertise. There was a CSAS report released recently on assessment of the turbines in the Minas Passage, and the recommendations from that report are public, but again, it's not my area of expertise, so I really don't want to comment.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

That's all I have.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

Go ahead, Mr. McDonald, for five minutes.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and welcome to the presenters here today. It's great to see you here at the meeting.

First off, it's great to see that some of these new scientists are going to be involved in a bigger way in doing stock assessments, especially as I'm from Newfoundland and Labrador.

My first question would be whether, even with the new stock assessments that are going to be done, we are still going to take into account the people involved in the industry, the fishermen. I go back to the closure of the northern cod fishery in the late eighties and early nineties. The fishermen kept telling government officials and kept telling DFO that the stock was in trouble, but nobody paid attention, and eventually, instead of lowering the quotas that were being taken, in some cases they actually were increased.

Of course, we all know what happened. They eventually closed down the fishery.

[Dr. Arran McPherson]

Thank you for the question. By no means are we—DFO science—planning to replace the valuable contribution that industry is making around the table in project design and implementation and the results of research in stock assessments. A key difference will be that there will be more of us that you're able to talk to.

When I talk to fishing industry associations, what I hear is that there used to be more scientists coming to advisory committee meetings, that there used to be somebody they could call to ask these questions of, and that they've been struggling to find the right person in this organization of 10,000, as I described. I think one of the key differences and benefits will be having more people working on fish science for industry to talk to and work with.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you.

Another interesting point was the mammal survey. I presume that would include the seal herd. When that is done and your department looks at it and sees the number that are actually there, would your department be prepared to recommend an increased seal harvest to some degree, to make sure the herd is maintained at a level so that, number one, they can sustain themselves, and number 2, that seals won't have a major impact on fisheries stocks that are in place at that time?

[Dr. Arran McPherson]

Some of the work, as I said, that we're going to be doing on marine mammals is focused on whales. We'll be looking at how many there are, both in the north and on each of our coasts, but as you said, we'll also have more money in the future to spend on seal research to make sure we're keeping up with our assessments in a schedule that we think makes sense for the species.

The question you're asking is one that I might pose to my management colleagues if they were here, because our job as scientists is to provide the information, provide an analysis, and answer questions. We don't recommend management measures, because those have to factor in other considerations, not just science ones.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

My next question would be to Mr. Parsons, because it deals with aquaculture.

Do you believe aquaculture should have its own separate act and not fall under the Fisheries Act? There seems to be some confusion. When they're trying to establish a location or whatever, it falls under fisheries, and then fisheries says no, this particular part of it falls under transportation. It's as if they get kicked from pillar to post in trying to move their development or project forward.

[Dr. Jay Parsons]

Again, as Arran just mentioned, that's really a question that should be directed towards our management colleagues. It's really a decision on their part as to what approach and advice we should be providing to the minister in terms of decisions in that area.

What I can say is that we work in a fairly complex jurisdictional system in Canada. It is a multi-jurisdictional regulatory system between the provinces and the federal government. There are a number of federal government departments involved in the regulation of the sector, and as well, the paradigm changes depending on whether you're dealing with the east coast, the west coast, the central provinces, or other areas.

It certainly is quite a complex question. It's one that I know the departmental management officials are working on in terms of understanding that complexity.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Time's up.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

Mr. Donnelly, you have three minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In terms of transparency, I want to mention that on May 19, Oceana Canada welcomed new investments in science, but indicated that the “historical lack of government transparency regarding our fish populations means it's nearly impossible to understand where things stand and where we're headed.”

How do you think DFO can improve information sharing regarding the state of fisheries in Canada, and will DFO set targets for the rebuilding of our depleted fish stocks? As well, in terms of organizing data, will that be made more consistent across the country, through the regions, and accessible to the public?

[Dr. Arran McPherson]

Thank you for your question.

Open data, making data available, absolutely is a priority. Will it be consistent across the country? Yes, it will be, but I cannot give you a date today as to when we'll achieve that goal.

Our fisheries data, our oceanographic data, and our Canadian hydrographic survey, which are our nautical chart data, are at different stages of advancement in their progress toward going online. I would say that fisheries data are slower. We're slower in being able to get all of that information posted for everyone to see.

I know we've committed to making improvements in our website. I recognize that there are some challenges in navigating through the science advice to the management decision for species to the TAC decision rules to notices to fish harvesters. We are taking steps to streamline that, to reorganize it, to share more about the information we have that can be provided. Then, recognizing that it's a longer-term process to make all of our data available publicly, it is an objective that we're going to realize.

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

Harmful algal blooms are becoming more common due to climate change, but are made more toxic and significant by fish farm feces. Just as we have seen with harmful runoff in other contexts, the impacts on wild salmon and other wild aquaculture are real but hard to measure immediately.

The most affected species would be juvenile salmon, which can't swim out to the deeper water to escape the bloom, and shellfish, as the species do not move around, obviously.

We've seen how these algal blooms can devastate wild fish stocks in Chile, but we've yet to determine....

On the west coast of Canada, for instance, there was a recent outbreak with fish morts from aquaculture. Maybe, Mr. Parsons, you could comment on this. Then, essentially, is there any focus on addressing this issue?

[Dr. Jay Parsons]

Certainly. As you mentioned, there are certainly harmful algal blooms that have occurred. This is a phenomenon that's been known for a long time. It's not a new phenomenon by any means.

There are known triggers, such as temperature. Certain nutrient levels can also cause these types of conditions. I think there was quite a big phenomenon that occurred last year on the west coast, and a recent one.

With increasing temperatures, there are indications that we might see more frequent outbreaks of these harmful algal blooms. That does present challenges to both the fishing industry and the farming industry, whether it's finfish or shellfish. There is work to better understand these phenomena and what type of mitigation measures, if any, can be taken to address them.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

That's time.

I was just wondering if the committee would allow the chair to ask a couple of questions.

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

Are we doing another set of rounds, then?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

The committee is the master of its own destiny. It is 4:40. We have time.

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

Are we doing another seven-minute round?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

I see heads shaking. If I ask a few questions, will that be it? Is that fair enough? Our time is pretty good. We can be generous.

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

I have questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

Who else wants to ask a question? There are four people, so with three-minute rounds, that's 12 minutes.