Fisheries Committee on April 6th, 2017

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

We will come to order, please. There's a new sheriff in town.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

I want to say welcome to everybody, including our witnesses. This is one time I'm very disappointed to be in the chair, but I suspect that the witnesses are actually quite happy because I won't be able to ask any questions.

They're being very professional about it and not reacting to what I said. I do enjoy questioning our officials, given their wealth of knowledge, and I'm sure we will get a lot of very good information today from the briefing on the report of the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development. I would assume this briefing is on the department's reaction to the report.

Without further ado, the first speaker will speak for about 10 minutes, and then we'll have questions and answers after that.

Please begin.

[Catherine Blewett, Deputy Minister, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for inviting the department to appear before the committee today.

I would like to introduce some of my colleagues who have joined me.

They are Kevin Stringer, the associate deputy minister; Mario Pelletier, the deputy commissioner of operations for the Canadian Coast Guard; Jean Landry, the director of the fish population science branch; and Marc Clemens, the manager of national fisheries policy for the department.

Our department welcomed the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development's report , “Sustaining Canada's Major Fish Stocks”, which we received in October 2016.

We very much value the work of the commissioner, the work that went into the review, and appreciate the insights on how we can improve our management approach in critical fisheries that affect thousands of Canadians in rural, coastal, and indigenous communities.

As you know, Fisheries and Oceans Canada agreed with each of the eight recommendations put forward. We are also actively working on addressing them, as evidenced by our management action plan, which is now publicly available on our website.

The commissioner was very clear about the intent of the audit: to ensure that we manage the 154 major fish stocks under our control in a way that is sustainable and with the ultimate desire to avoid the potential collapse of another stock.

While the commissioner highlighted several gaps in our management delivery, to ensure the committee has adequate time for questions and answers I'll limit my introductory comments to address perhaps the two most significant recommendations.

First, the commissioner expressed her concern related to our integrated fisheries management plans, more commonly known as IFMPs. IFMPs are our core fisheries management documents for each major stock, which outline our objectives and how we manage a fishery. At the time of the audit, management plans were in place for 110 of the 154 major fish stocks, including those with the greatest commercial and economic value. However, the remaining 44 major stocks had either missing or outdated plans.

I'm happy to be able to have a conversation today with the committee about the progress we're making in that area. Today, IFMPs are in place for about 79% of the major fish stocks, while the remainder continue to be managed using other fishing plans. That translates into around 26 IFMPs that still need to be completed, and 14 that require updates.

Going forward, DFO has a work plan to address the priority IFMPs that will be updated or completed within the current fiscal year, including publicly posting those that are complete. Also, we have established timelines for completing or updating IFMPs next fiscal year and in subsequent years until the work is complete. I'm happy to provide any further details on the exact number of plans that need to be posted, completed, or updated, and will be able to provide you what you need.

The commissioner also expressed concern about the lack of rebuilding plans, coupled with continued fishing of some of the major fish stocks currently in the critical zone. I want to take this opportunity to reassure members of this committee that although formal rebuilding plans may not be in place for all stocks in the critical zone, DFO has strict fishery management measures in place to control fish harvests for those 16 stocks.

Those measures include a variety of actions. For example, some of the stocks are caught only as bycatch; directed fishing on them is expressly not permitted. For those that are fished directly, measures such as quota limits, restrictions on small fish, and catch monitoring and enforcement programs are in place to ensure harvests are kept within limits.

These management measures are based on scientific evidence and guided by our sustainable fisheries framework, a key policy instrument that provides the basis on which to develop environmentally sustainable fisheries that also support economic prosperity within the industry and within fishing communities.

Developing these formal rebuilding plans takes time. It takes scientific advice, and it takes considerable engagement with stakeholders, but we're very much committed to achieving the task.

This fiscal year we're seeking to add four more rebuilding plans to the existing three in place. This includes yelloweye rockfish, southwestern Nova Scotia cod, and redfish in Unit 1 and Unit 2.

We are also advancing work so that we can have plans completed next year in a number of other areas, including northern cod. We very much appreciated the opportunity to review the excellent work done by this committee on northern cod as well.

We're putting in place a strategy that's going to allow us to focus on the most pressing areas of concern in the near term while at the same time ensuring that we have a long-term strategy and capacity to guide the completion of IFMPs and rebuilding plans in the years ahead.

To support this effort and to continue to strive for further transparency, we'll be annually publishing our sustainable fisheries survey—we call it the fisheries checklist, somewhat informally—as committed to last fall. This will identify the status of the work that is to be completed each year and indicate how we're doing in implementing our sustainable fisheries framework, which includes our rebuilding plans, reference points, ISMPs, and other elements.

Mr. Chair, this is just a brief overview of some of the work we have accomplished since the commissioner tabled her report last October. Going forward, our department will continue to use scientific evidence to guide our work.

The $40 million per year that was set aside in budget 2016 for aquatic science is helping us fill some of the gaps mentioned in the commissioner's report. Approximately half of this funding is going directly into fisheries science, such as stock assessments, data analysis, and environmental monitoring. It's also being used to support and expand DFO's survey program for fish and marine mammals. In addition to the work, we're developing a national catch reporting and fisheries monitoring policy.

The additional funding for science will allow us to improve our stock assessments and our capacity to make projections about future harvest levels. For the stock assessed on a multi-year basis, it's also going to give us the chance to put in place the necessary tools to ensure that when unexpected changes in stock status are identified in interim years, science will have the capacity to carry out full stock assessments ahead of schedule.

An important element tying all of this work together is being more transparent with Canadians about how we're managing our fisheries. Making our science, information on fisheries, and our progress to implement our sustainable fisheries policies more accessible to Canadians is important, and it's a priority for our department. We've already taken important steps in this regard and will continue to do so.

Before closing, I just want to reiterate our department's commitment to building indigenous commercial and recreational fisheries that are economically prosperous and environmentally sustainable. As deputy minister, my goal is to ensure that we have the key management tools and policies in place to manage each of these fisheries responsibly. By continuing to take action on each of the recommendations put forward by the commissioner, I'm confident we're going to be in a position to achieve just that.

I understand that I've only touched on a few of the significant recommendations at this time; however, we're happy to answer any of the questions that the committee may have on the full report.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

Thank you.

I should have noted before we began that this session will go for not quite an hour, and then we'll go in camera for a very short period of time because we have some committee business to deal with—for five minutes at most. Then we'll have our guest for the next half.

For seven minutes, then, the first questioner is Mr. McDonald.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning and welcome to our guests. Thank you for coming back again this morning to appear before committee.

What level of resources does DFO require to close the gaps that have been identified in the commissioner's report?

[Catherine Blewett]

Through you, Mr. Chair, thank you very much for the question.

Resources, as you will know, are something that the commissioner pointed to in her concern about our capacity to deliver and ensure that we have a sustainable approach to fisheries going forward.

It's difficult to put a specific and precise dollar amount on it. It's a cumulative picture of financial resources, human resources, and stakeholder input. A dollar amount won't necessarily fix it, but we would be happy to talk through the elements of that.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you.

DFO indicated that it will increase its monitoring coverage of key areas and species of marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates. Will DFO increase the frequency of full stock assessments and monitoring coverage for northern cod and capelin? The reason I ask that is that it's very important to my home province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

[Catherine Blewett]

I must say that we're certainly following Newfoundland and Labrador very closely at the moment, given some of the developments and challenging shifts in some of the stocks.

We may talk to you about some of the pieces. We have Jean and Marc here who can talk about the process. We are going to be doing more monitoring.

Jean, do you want to respond on the cod?

[Jean Landry, Director, Fish Population Science, Ecosystems and Oceans Science Sector, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Yes, we plan to do more on those species.

You mention capelin. We recognize that we have a gap to fill in our knowledge of capelin. In using the funding from budget 2016, we plan to improve our knowledge of capelin. For example, we plan, in fiscal year 2018-19, to conduct a major survey of the whole capelin stock off Newfoundland and Labrador. This approach should give us an opportunity in the future to develop real abundance indices of the value of biomass for this stock.

This is roughly a $2.3-million investment for that year. I expect that once this development is done, it will fill an important gap in our knowledge of capelin. We recognize that it's really a key species that lives with cod.

For the cod assessment, currently the frequency of the full assessment of the cod stock is three years. We fully recognize the importance of that stock, but in terms of the frequency, I would say that the approach we have put in place currently is probably adequate.

I'm going to explain what I mean by that. We made a substantial improvement in our approach to assess the stock in 2016. We have a very good model and a more robust approach. We now can forecast three years in advance when we provide this assessment.

We monitor carefully the species each year. Each year we do an update on the stock, as we did in March 2017. Moreover, as part of the recommendation of the commissioner's report, we have developed indicators that would trigger an earlier assessment during interim years if something happened. This is quite important.

We don't want to miss anything important that could put the resource at risk. So, during interim years, if we see something happening that is not what we expected, we can immediately do a full assessment and make sure that we act rapidly on the stock.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

I appreciate that.

DFO committed to implement the program to verify observer companies' compliance with its policies. How does DFO verify the compliance of observer companies with the national dockside monitoring program policy and the at-sea observer program?

[Catherine Blewett]

That was another very pointed recommendation the commissioner made. Actually, as we were reviewing all of the elements, the department pointed out the specific cases to the commissioner, because we were very aware of it.

Kevin may want to talk a bit to you on it. What's so interesting, about it is that balancing third-party monitoring is a challenge in different places. In small, rural outport communities, there are fewer resources available. There are fewer vessels and industry members available. So, we have worked carefully on that.

Kevin, you might want to give bit of an update—but we've taken a serious look.

[Kevin Stringer, Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thanks. I'm happy to add to that. As the deputy said, it is a challenge in rural coastal Canada to have observers and dockside monitors who have no relation to the fishery. It is a challenge, so those conflicts exist.

We do two or three things that we've done for many years. First, for a dockside monitoring company to be designated, it has to be approved and has to meet a number of conditions. It is approved by the regional director general. Second, RCMP officers—our conservation and protection officers, our enforcement people—show up at the dock, sometimes in uniform and sometimes not, sometimes announced and sometimes not. We have a certain number of random samples that we do.

What we've added now, following the CESD report, is to look at at.... The issue was conflict of interest. There are all kinds of potential conflicts that you might have. One is if someone had been a fisherman, left the fishery, and became part of the dockside monitoring company or the observer company. Another might be if a close relative is in the fish-buying business. Those potential conflicts always exist, and the challenge is to declare them and mitigate them. We now have a form and a system whereby we are asking the dockside monitoring companies and the observer companies to identify those conflicts and to explain how they are going to mitigate them. We are developing and testing a verification system, in terms of how we go through with the company to check that they are doing it. They also need to maintain a list of current conflicts and let us know when any of those change. Those conflicts will exist.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

Thank you very much.

We'll have to stop there. I suspect you'll be able to develop that answer further with other questioners.

Mr. Doherty, you have seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, again, to our guests today. I have a question for Ms. Blewett.

You mentioned that management plans are now up on the website. I'm looking at the website as I speak. Can you tell the committee which plans have been updated and added since October 2016? The report has been filed since the last time we spoke about this. I see one report that has been updated as of 2016. Which reports have been updated since then? You have testified today that, after the report was tabled, you now have management plans. I believe 79% are in place, and 26 are still needed. Which ones have you updated since the report was tabled?

[Catherine Blewett]

Just to be clear, our plan is on the website. The actual IFMPs are still being developed. I don't know that you'll see all of them up there on the website. What we did, and wanted to have done by the end of last fiscal year, was to make sure that our plan, our approach, was up there.

I see Marc furiously flipping through his paper there.

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

Perhaps we can have that supplied to us after this, for the sake of time. That would be great.

[Catherine Blewett]

Okay.

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

I have another question to follow up on. I think I mentioned this at the time. We've mentioned it a few times, and I think our colleagues across the floor have mentioned it, because obviously this hits home for them. Northern cod has been an issue for over 26 years. Why is the plan still not done?

[Catherine Blewett]

We are looking carefully and hope that we will have a plan in place—

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

Ms. Blewett, you mentioned that time is needed. Is 26 years not enough time to understand?

[Catherine Blewett]

I would say that in 26 years an awful lot has changed. We've brought in our sustainable fisheries management practices and we've started to manage with the precautionary principle. There has been a lot of study and work done on the stock. While a formal plan, as I mentioned, isn't in place for some of those stocks, we are focusing very closely and managing the science. We know where the stock is in the zone and track it very carefully. Again, although you may not see a formal IFMP in place for every one, every fishery is covered by another type.

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

Okay. I appreciate your comment. I still don't understand why. It's been 26 years, over successive governments, so you would think we'd have plan in place.

Mr. Landry, you gave what I believe were two conflicting comments. One was that we don't know enough about capelin. The next comment you made was, well, I think we know enough to move forward with capelin.

I think we heard on the ground how important the capelin biomass or fishery is. It's a food source for our northern cod. How come this hadn't been studied previously?

[Jean Landry]

I thought or hope that I mentioned that we recognize there is a gap on capelin and are ready to move forward. I wanted to highlight the fact that we are engaging in plans and actions to fill that gap.

I just want to make sure my comment wasn't misinterpreted.

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

Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Stringer, on September 21, in the context of the committee's study on northern cod, Mr. John Brattey stated that the limit reference point for the stock is 900,000 metric tonnes. However, on February 7 your testimony indicated that the reference point is 660,000 metric tonnes. Why is there a discrepancy there?