Evidence of meeting #27 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 iceland.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
To the witness from Iceland, you have a beautiful country. I visited Iceland, and it's unique.
You stated that you were fishing at 22% and then you moved it to 20%, and had a rapid increase in the biomass. That seems like a small adjustment for such a significant.... Could you expand on that, please?
Marine and Freshwater Research Institute
Yes. The original proposal was for 22%, but through negotiations with stakeholders and through Parliament it went up to 25%. It's a small difference, but because of, can we say, implementation [Inaudible—Editor] in the system, the resulting harvest rate was around 30%, rather than the 25% that was set.
Not only when they lowered.... To make it clear that we are catching off the reference biomass, which is age four and older, that resulted in this increase. We went roughly from 30%, which is an F of almost 0.4 to an F of 0.3. That seems to be working in Iceland in a sense that we saw a rapid increase, but I think half of it is the lowering and half of it is because of better enforcement of the total allowable catch.
October 17th, 2016 / 12:10 p.m.
Director General, Department for Fisheries and Aquaculture, Government of Norway
May I add something from Oslo on that point?
Director General, Department for Fisheries and Aquaculture, Government of Norway
I think it's important to work on these issues of fixing fishing mortality according to knowledge about the stock and the conditions of the sea at present. These things worry us quite a lot, depending on the situation in the area that the stock utilizes for spawning or for feeding, and so on.
For instance, in the last five, six, or seven years, we have had a temperature increase in the Barents Sea, which is the important feeding ground for the cod stock. The ice cap has retreated quite substantially in the Barents Sea, and this has made it possible for the cod stock to utilize a much greater area of the Barents Sea for feeding, and so on, than it did only some five to 10 years ago. This meant that the cod stock grew more than we expected, which also makes it possible to fix a higher fishing mortality rate in our management regulations of the stock.
It's important to follow the development of the conditions for a stock and use the knowledge from historical periods for the stock to fix a good harvest control rule. It's not something done once and for all.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Could you expand a bit on the fishing mortality rate? I have a definition of that, but what's the definition you're using?
Marine and Freshwater Research Institute
That's the standard fishing mortality definition that is in the fisheries biology, where it's basically on a logarithmic scale. It's not the same as percentages. For example, a fishing mortality, or F, of 0.2 is roughly 18%, and the difference increases as you go higher up. You can fish at an F of 1.0, and that is not 100% of the stock. You can even fish at 1.2.
This kind of confusion, or the technicality of that term, was one of the main reasons it was decided to go with harvest rate in Iceland, which is this 20% of some reference biomass. It's much easier for people to understand that as a technical fishing term.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Time does not permit, but I find that a bit intriguing.
I have a question for the Norwegian witness. You made a statement that at one time, maybe it was in conjunction with the low point in your cod stock—and did I hear you correctly, that you said there was a seal invasion?
Director General, Department for Fisheries and Aquaculture, Government of Norway
Yes, that's correct.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
How did you get rid of the invasion, or how did you change the invasion?
Director General, Department for Fisheries and Aquaculture, Government of Norway
They went away.
We had serious problems from, let me say, 1984 or 1985, in our northernmost county of Finnmark, with the huge numbers of seals coming in both from the east in the Barents Sea and the Russian side, and from the northwest from the Svalbard area coming in to the coast, and feeding on the cod along the coast, and also on other species. We had big problems with this for four, five, or six years. We paid the fishermen money, with a hunting premium. We paid them to shoot seals.
Director General, Department for Fisheries and Aquaculture, Government of Norway
I think it was nature that took care of it.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Robert Sopuck
Thank you very much for ending on that positive note.
We will turn to Mr. Donnelly, for three minutes.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
One of the elements this committee is studying is looking at the sustainable harvesting technologies for northern cod. I'm just wondering if there are any other suggestions or recommendations either delegation could give us with regard to sustainable harvesting technologies. It's just a general question.
Director General, Department for Fisheries and Aquaculture, Government of Norway
Sure, I can start.
Norway tried to put some emphasis and spend some money on developing more selective gear, both when it comes to the trawl fishery and other kinds of fisheries. The Danish seine fishery, for instance, needs also selectivity. We do try to develop better gear to ensure a better pattern of harvesting from the stocks. In my opinion, that is an underestimated area when it comes to modern fisheries management. It is not the same if you fish in that way or in this way, both when it comes to the impact on the environment and when it comes to how you harvest and manage a stock. Putting some emphasis on developing more selective gear, gear that is more precautionary and does not have that kind of impact on, for instance, bottom habitats and so on, is an important issue.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Before we hear from Iceland, I just want to say that's consistent with what witnesses have told this committee, that fishing gear and harvesting techniques can have an important impact on the sustainability of the cod fishery. We have information here that in 2013 the Norwegian cod fishery was known to use several different types of fishing gear. According to the Norwegian Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries website, it was 30% bottom trawl, 30% gillnets, 15% longlines, 15% Danish seine, and 10% handline. That's the basis for my question.
In the remaining time I'd like to ask Iceland to comment about their gear type recommendations.
Marine and Freshwater Research Institute
It is very similar in Iceland. There's about 45% bottom trawl, 35% longlines, 8% gillnets, 6% Danish seine, and handline or jiggers is 6%. Of course, everything the Norwegians said is correct about the selection pattern, etc., but what I would say is in some cases the theoretical best fishing pattern is not really achievable in normal ways. Sometimes it's not economically feasible to go that theoretical way. Also I would like to reiterate what my Norwegian colleague said when he was talking about the herring fishery, which is that when you have the prospect of starting a commercial fishery for your cod, go slowly. You have nothing to lose by going really, really, really slowly, and do not start with too much force on it. I think that's the fundamental thing you have to take into account. The technical measures, important as they are, I think they are second to just going really slowly.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Robert Sopuck
Thank you very much.
Now to our last questioner, Mr. Hardie, for three minutes.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Thank you to the guests.
I've been sitting here taking notes throughout this study. I'm from the west coast of Canada, where it's more salmon than it is cod. But the thing that you seem to have both keyed in on is the management and protection of the juvenile stock.
Can you expand on why that's important? Can you also define what you call a juvenile cod? Sometimes I suspect that we may define things differently, and that could lead to quite different results.
Director General, Department for Fisheries and Aquaculture, Government of Norway
I'm just checking up on our minimum size for cod. We have a minimum size, which is, I think, 41 or 42 centimetres, if I'm not mistaken, something like that. We have minimum sizes for most of the species caught in Norwegian fisheries. Let me just check.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
I gather, then, it's the harvesting techniques that would tend to take the right-sized fish and allow reasonable escape of the others.