Fisheries Committee on Sept. 26th, 2016

[Alberto Wareham]

If you recall some of my comments in my opening remarks, if we have five or six plants with, say, 250 people in a plant, with 1,250 or 1,500 people we have enough capacity to produce 250 million to 300 million pounds of cod. A lot of new technology for whitefish is being developed in the world, so with a combination of technology and 1,500 people, I think we're okay.

[Pat Finnigan, Liberal, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

I have another question. This time we're talking about gillnets. I'm not sure what the other countries are doing and whether they're still used. Can we remove them and can we remain with smaller boats and compete in the world market?

[Alberto Wareham]

The majority of the fish landed in Iceland is not landed with a gillnet. I think I saw the numbers. It's 10% or 20%, whereas in certain parts of Newfoundland it's 80% or 90% gillnets.

With gillnets you can get a quality fish, but you have to obtain it properly and the weather has to be on your side. On average, you will not get as good quality with a gillnet as you will with hook-and-line. Hook-and-line lends itself to small boats and big boats. It can be done in both.

[Pat Finnigan, Liberal, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

It can be competitive.

Is the industry and are you satisfied with the relationship between the industry and DFO? What else could be done? You have a good working relationship with DFO. Do you think they're doing enough to have the proper data to evaluate the stock? Do you see anything else that could be done to enhance that relationship and get better numbers?

I'll go to you first, Mr. Sullivan, and you might want to comment on the last one.

[Keith Sullivan]

Thank you.

Very quickly on the last one, I think we'll focus on what the market values in the fishery and in catch methods. There are certainly people who would see very good quality from hook-and-line, and some markets may pay less for other fish, particularly those from otter trawls and different gear types such as that. I think it's important that we identify the markets that are willing to pay the most for the best quality and identify whatever catch method that is. There's certainly renewed interest in hook-and-line by all sizes of vessels now.

Moving on to the relationship with DFO—I alluded to this a little earlier—I think it's important that we invest in science. That means looking at the predator-prey relationships and managing from an ecosystem level. We have pieces of the puzzle, certainly, but we could be making decisions with more confidence now.

I think there are some areas where we've seen considerable downloading of science and industry costs to the harvesting sector. It certainly put stress and strain on people to pay for much of that. I think it's good to have harvester involvement. We'll have thousands and thousands of experts involved on the ocean and we can get more information from that, and it should be listened to more. At the same time, we certainly need DFO to invest in good science, and I think we've slipped in recent years and decades.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Arnold, please, for five minutes.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, panellists, for being here today.

I don't know if my first question will be appropriate to ask of you three, because you're all from the commercial processing side. I'm wondering if you have any indication of the value per pound of the commercially caught fish versus what I hate to call the “recreational fishery”, because we've had the same issues on the west coast, whether it's a recreational fishery or a food fishery.

Do you have any references to that?

[Alberto Wareham]

My understanding of a recreational fishery is that it's for personal use, so the only value is that people consume it in their house. That's the best answer I can give on that one.

[Derek Butler]

That's the “alleged” purpose. I put “alleged” in remarks now, but....

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

The next question is around recruitment.

You mentioned that you have a high retention within your workforce. I believe you said that the average age is around 50.

Is that because of low recruitment of the younger generation into the processing facilities? I guess what I'm referring to is that I've seen it in the dairy farming industry. I grew up on a dairy farm. My two older brothers didn't want anything to do with dairy farming, because before the supply management system came in—quotas—dairy farming was seven days a week of work, 24-7. There was no real security and no return on investment that was assured or guaranteed through the quota system.

Is that part of an issue with the recruitment of younger people, both into the catch part of the fishing industry and the processing? Are there any challenges because of lack of security in the future for younger people?

[Keith Sullivan]

I'll touch on a couple of pieces.

To be clear, we represent harvesters in the fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador. This year in the cod fishery, there was a good first step. Obviously, there were challenges, with very low quotas and everything still, but the ability to fish for a longer season is going to provide more opportunities and more security for the harvesting sector. It was a very small step this year, but I think getting people to fish longer is a move in the right direction. That translates into longer and more secure jobs in the processing sector.

In some fisheries, for different reasons, we have relatively short seasons. That doesn't necessarily constitute a good job. A job that only provides employment for 16 or 18 weeks a year does not have the long-term security that people want, and it's obviously going to be hard to recruit for that. I think we have to recognize that as we rebuild the cod fishery.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

A fishery based over a period of time and tonnage, rather than having seasonal or time-limited openings, has a better certainty for both the fisherman and the processors.

[Keith Sullivan]

Yes.

The other thing we mentioned is that it will be important for markets as well to have a consistent supply throughout the year, especially when we look at maximizing values for fresh product as well.

[Alberto Wareham]

From a processing perspective, as I said, if you walk into our plant, it's like an operating room: it's technology and more technology. Generally, the younger people are more comfortable with technology than the older people. As you invest more in technology, it's actually easier to recruit younger people than if you do not.

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

Is there a program in place for the next generation of fishers, whether it's post-secondary training, or even high school, in starting that next generation? I think where my colleague was going is that the farming industry is not seen as a sexy job to go into. I want to know whether we have that shift here. If the cod stock builds up, are we going to see the next generation fall into it? Is there training available?

[Keith Sullivan]

The workforce that we see has considerable experience here as well, but many harvesters have marine tickets and a considerable amount of training. We have a professionalization regime that ensures harvesters have the proper training, credits, and the skills they need, so there are many skilled harvesters, and certainly there is ongoing training. That's not to say that we don't need to do more concerning quality and such things, but there has been some focus on it in the province.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

I'm sorry, Mr. Doherty, but your five minutes are up.

We have a few minutes left. We have time for one more question.

Mr. Johns, please, for three minutes.

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

We've talked a lot about the importance of investment in science. Again, going back to Mr. Wareham's talking about the three-year cycle, what more can the federal government do to ensure we would have a sustainable and economically viable commercial northern cod fishery if it were to be reopened? Ten years out, if we're thinking in terms of investment, marketing, and infrastructure that could be in place, what other support would you like to see from the federal government to prepare us?

[Alberto Wareham]

I would go back to the science piece first. This government has announced $200 million for extra science. The previous government had reduced the budget and had basically put certain things on two- and three-year cycles. One thing I would encourage, given northern cod's recent growth and given its importance, is that this might be moved back to a one- or two-year cycle instead of three-year cycle, so that we are on top of it and see what's happening on a regular basis. If we wait too long....

The industry is not ready. The harvesters need investment and the processors need investment, and we can't go from 10,000 tonnes to 115,000 tonnes overnight. We are not ready. We need to gradually increase so that harvesters have money to invest and processors have money to invest. We can't go from 10,000 tonnes to 115,000 tonnes because today we're not ready.

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

We heard pretty loudly from the previous testimony about the importance of the annual....

Is there anything you want to add, Mr. Butler or Mr. Sullivan?

[Derek Butler]

I would echo what Alberto said. The investment in science is important. The movement to the two- and three-year cycles probably made more sense or could be more justified with shellfish in terms of the nature of the species and what we knew about it, with the science that we built up over the years. Given the increasing importance of groundfish with the decline of shellfish, I would echo what Alberto has just said. We probably need to move the time frame back when we do the assessments.

[Keith Sullivan]

I would agree. Taking a good look yearly at cod at this point, considering its importance to the people of the province, would make sense. Earlier, I also suggested more investment in ecosystem science as well.

What happened in the last 25 years, with much of this slow building up of the cod stock, is certainly believed to have had to do with the environmental conditions around it. Really, part of what happened in the 1980s and 1990s was something more conducive to shellfish recruitment, and we saw large increases in shrimp and crab and decreases in many groundfish species. Maybe more work on that could have helped us to manage better along the way in terms of looking at predator and prey species.

The other part of that I mentioned before but will mention again is getting more information from harvesters who are on the water day in and day out and have so much knowledge and expertise. I don't think we fully utilize that knowledge. It can be difficult to implement it in stock assessments, but we need to do a better job of it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Mr. Johns.

Just for a point of clarification on a question that came up from Mr. Doherty—I'm sorry, but I missed this part—was a question asked in support of a federal-provincial program to provide education about the fishery for younger people? Did I get that wrong or right? Was that mentioned? Is it something you agree with?

[Keith Sullivan]

Was the question about a federal program?

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

Yes, seen from the panel's perspective, is there value in a federal-provincial partnership with regard to education?