Evidence of meeting #25 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 pots.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
4:55 p.m.
Killam Memorial Chair in Fish, Fisheries and Oceans, Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
As I've said for a little while now, it rather depends on what society wants, and this is where the target comes back into play. If we just wanted a small fishery of 5,000 tonnes or 10,000 tonnes a year, we could do that right now, but if we aspire to a 100,000-tonne fishery or a 200,000-tonne fishery, then our decisions about how rapidly we increase the quotas will be affected by that.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Ms. Jordan.
Now we're going over to Mr. Barlow, for five minutes, please.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We do have fish in southern Alberta. Ours are in rivers, but it's good to be here as part of this as well.
Mr. Laughren, I saw that you wanted to chime in there as well. I've looked through the material you have here. Would you say that Canada's cod fishery is a depleted fishery? Am I right on that? Maybe you'd like to expand on what level you feel the cod fishery is at right now.
4:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Oceana Canada
I quote good scientists like Dr. Hutchings and the work of DFO that says it's at one third of what's been established as that limit reference point. It's some 90-plus percent from depleted in a historical sense. I think that's a fair characterization in anyone's mind.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
Mr. Sinclair, I want to move to you. I was looking through some of your material, and you mentioned a report, “Recent Declines in Cod Species Stocks in the Northwest Atlantic”. You mentioned in there, “Research into these mechanisms will be costly, lengthy, difficult and may not prove successful.” You mentioned, “The environmental mechanisms that have been influencing cod recruitment are unclear.”
We've heard a lot today that the science behind assessing the health of our stocks is difficult. Is that still the case, or are there ways now that have improved the science behind assessing the health of our cod stocks?
4:55 p.m.
Co-chair, Subcommitee on Marine Fishes, Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, As an Individual
I think the surveys that have been referred to here, which have been ongoing for northern cod since 1983 and for other cod stocks in other parts of Canada since the early 1970s, are very effective at what they're doing. They're designed statistically to be efficient for species like cod. They work well for other species like haddock and pollock, and things like that.
They collect a wealth of information, it's being done consistently year after year, and internationally these surveys are enviable. It took about 10 years for them to become useful and we began to understand what they were saying and how we could interpret them effectively, but now I don't think anybody would suggest that these things should be done away with.
In addition to that, we're developing much more effective and powerful statistical methodologies to deal with the plethora of information we have on the fish stocks. We have new technologies that have to do with hydroacoustic surveys that allow us to have broader coverage in the water column, and we also have video and remotely operated vehicles used to understand behaviour and what fish are doing in the wild. Those technologies are available and becoming more and more available.
DFO is working hard to keep up with it. Perhaps they could be further advanced, but I still think we're learning more and more as we go forward.
One of the biggest problems I see—and it's always been a problem, and we're still trying to grapple with it—is trying to predict what's going to happen five years down the road. One of the biggest uncertainties is how many new fish are going to be produced each year. It's called recruitment. Given how many spawners there are, and what the environmental conditions are, people have been looking at this like the Holy Grail in fish stock assessment science for decades. It's proving to be difficult to get a handle on it.
What we're good at doing now is monitoring conditions and putting them together in an historical perspective to give us some idea of what we could expect from recovery, for instance. Having precise predictions into the future about when something is going to happen is still a big challenge.
5 p.m.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
You mentioned the inability, or maybe the inefficiency, of trying to predict the environmental factors that are part of assessing the health of the cod stock. Is it still your assessment that trying to assess and predict the environmental side of it is almost impossible, or are we having some progress in that area, as well?
5 p.m.
Co-chair, Subcommitee on Marine Fishes, Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, As an Individual
I haven't seen great progress in that area. I'm also a little bit away from the game these days. Perhaps other scientists in the room might have other opinions on it, but from my reading of things, it's still a great challenge.
It's important we bear that in mind when we're developing fisheries management plans when we don't know the future, just like when we make investments and talk about how people deal with personal finances. You have to hedge your bets, and don't do things that are too rash that could put you in jeopardy in the future.
5 p.m.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
I'm assuming it's difficult for us to influence that side of it as well. Despite having a moratorium on the catch, we can't have an impact on the environmental side of it.
5 p.m.
Co-chair, Subcommitee on Marine Fishes, Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, As an Individual
Except maybe cutting down greenhouse gas emissions and a few things like that.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
All right, thank you, Mr. Sinclair.
Now we go to Mr. Finnigan, for five minutes, please.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Pat Finnigan Liberal Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the committee witnesses for appearing today.
Last week we were all out on the travel committee in Newfoundland, and we ended up with the salmon in Miramichi. We had one particular visit to Fogo Island, and from the fishermen in that community we heard that there are lots of fish in that area and there are lots of cod.
My question is for anyone. Does that fish population migrate? If you were to have controlled management in that particular area, would that affect the stock? If you brought it down to a certain level, does that affect the stock anywhere else? In other words, could you micromanage every area depending on the stock? My question is, does that fish migrate?
5 p.m.
Killam Memorial Chair in Fish, Fisheries and Oceans, Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
In my view, you've just identified the key scientific question for northern cod, that is, is it truly one single unit or is it composed of multiple units? We have very good reason to believe that cod in some areas don't migrate offshore, that they remain in inshore waters throughout their lives, whereas other cod come in from the offshore waters to the inshore waters to feed in the summer months and then migrate back again.
I think it is a really key question in science, and we increasingly have genetic tools to do this. They're doing this in Norway right now. They can grab a cod in Norway and do what's called a “genomic analysis”, and they can determine whether it came from the North Sea or coastal Norway or some other location. I suspect that in five or 10 years we'll know a lot more.
My gut feeling, knowing what I know about the biology of cod, is that northern cod are likely made up of a number of different reproductive units on smaller scales than 2J3KL, but how many of those there are and how big they are remains an open question.
5:05 p.m.
Research Scientist, Fisheries and Marine Institute, Memorial University of Newfoundland, As an Individual
I have a really quick add-on to that. The way we do that type of research really matters. When we're on Fogo Island, we're talking to the community and letting them participate in the research. Getting them involved is a really good way to help people develop their own scientific literacy. This is where I think people like ourselves in academia are a little more nimble about that than maybe institutions like DFO, because it's very easy for us to approach the fish harvesters and get them involved with projects. I'm plugging that aspect of citizen science and involved research about things, because it's not enough to know: we need to have everybody know and understand it. It's going to be a lot easier to manage the stock if we can do that.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Pat Finnigan Liberal Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB
Thank you.
Mr. Laughren, you said in your book that we have sophisticated equipment now such that you can monitor fishing fleets to make sure they stay within the law. From what we've been hearing, we can police them, but then it's up to the flag that's on the ship, to that country. In other words, we can be the police, but we're not the judge. How do we know that the international community is abiding by the laws and that if they're caught they're taking measures to remediate?
October 3rd, 2016 / 5:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Oceana Canada
That's a great question.
Certainly, a fair bit of it relies on co-operation between countries. It depends. If the vessel is within your own waters, I think you have much more that you can do, obviously, than if it's outside your waters.
We do increasingly have tools. Using AIS and satellite surveillance, you can tell where ships are and whether they're conducting what looks like fishing activity. You can flag that ship and identify it for follow-up, including when it goes to ports, both when it goes to your own port or to other ports. These are tools that help us with enforcement, but the ocean is so awfully big and spread out. We get better at it, but that's obviously going to be a continuing challenge.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Pat Finnigan Liberal Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB
We were talking about the pot system. We see a lot of Fogo Island fishers who are still using the line. I think it's also a good method. They bleed the fish, behead it, and ice it right away. Quality, they get it. On Fogo Island, they know that's their future for the community.
If pots are the answer and if we could switch them all to pots, is there any incentive? Do we have any programs that could help everyone to stop using gillnets, first of all, and going either to line or to pots. To me, it looks like pots would be even more efficient. What's your comment on that, Doctor?
5:05 p.m.
Research Scientist, Fisheries and Marine Institute, Memorial University of Newfoundland, As an Individual
Handlines certainly have a role on the artisanal side of things, where they've fetched a good market price for their fish and sold them to fine restaurants as well.
The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador earmarked $2 million towards what I think they call their “groundfish development fund”. That was partly what funded our potting work. I think the economics are going to speak for themselves at the point where you can get twice as much per pound for that pot-caught fish, provided that you've correctly identified what you do with it after you capture it. That matters a lot. There is definitely work to be done in standardizing that and making sure that everybody is aware of how you process that fish and how you keep it aboard your boat to get that really high quality.
We're just getting into the economics of it now a little more, too, and doing almost a business plan for a fishing vessel and what it would look like if you're getting into it and starting up a pot-based boat versus this or that. I think the numbers are going to be very favourable for potting when you look at it that way.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Mr. Finnigan, and thank you to our guests.
Mr. Donnelly, please, for three minutes.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Laughren, how should the department fairly consider science, local knowledge from fishermen and the community, first nations knowledge, and knowledge from the conservation community in developing rebuilding plans, setting targets, and determining management plans? In other words, do you know if there are any good models out there from other countries or even within Canada from provinces or territories?
5:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Oceana Canada
This isn't my area of expertise, but I'm sure there are plenty of good models.
I like what Dr. Hutchings said. The question of how many fish are out there is a science question. The question of what is the effect on the population of different levels of harvest is a science question. Once you know that, it then becomes an informed public policy discussion. Given that, what is the level of harvest that we want to undertake?
I think there's a “render unto Caesar what is Caesar's” mode here, where science informs the discussion, but in the end there's a public policy discussion about what we're willing to accept and not accept. It's that interplay.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Would you encourage the committee to look at models that are inclusive like that and include these different interests?
5:10 p.m.
Executive Director, Oceana Canada
Absolutely, and I think DFO is getting better at that too.
I'm going to look to my colleagues here to see if anyone has a good example to point to exactly that.
