Fisheries Committee on April 6th, 2017

[Catherine Blewett]

One of the things we're working on internally and have talked about is disaggregating that, getting more specific on it. So you're going to see more movement, not just our talking about a plan for our plans. We'll have more disaggregated information, and we would be happy to share it with you on an ongoing basis.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

You have 30 seconds.

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

I want to talk briefly about the government's interest last fall in acquiring so-called bridge vessels for the Canadian Coast Guard. This relates to the review of scientific survey activities, identifying gaps and adjusting activities to ensure that they are fully aligned with departmental priorities.

Now we see it says that the work is complete. Is this only a plan that is complete, or is it actually adjusting activities to ensure that they are fully aligned with development priorities? Have the activities been adjusted, or is there simply a plan that has been completed?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

You're out of time. Please be very brief.

[Catherine Blewett]

I'd like to ask our deputy commissioner to speak about it, because he can talk about the connection between the plans and what is actually happening on the ground to make the difference.

[Mario Pelletier, Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

On the ground we have that the request for information that was issued last fall to bridge some gaps that we might have until we can get new vessels.

In terms of a science vessel, we know there are three offshore fishery science vessels under construction right now at the Vancouver shipyard. They will be delivered by the end of 2018. We welcome that new capacity; they're very capable vessels to conduct the work. After that, we're going to build the offshore oceanographic vessel to replace the CCGS Hudson, and a number of small vessels are being built as well.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

We have to stop it there.

Mr. Hardie, you have four minutes.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

I have an open-ended question, so I'm going hand the floor first to Mr. Finnigan for a quick question.

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

Mr. Hardie, thank you so much. I appreciate that.

I have an example that I want to bring up with you, and I've had a discussion with Mr. Stringer on it. This past weekend, I made an announcement. It was to be a good news announcement about the bass quota this year in Miramichi. It was great until I made the announcement. People were really not happy about it, especially the people along the river, because I kept saying that we were basing our decision on science.

The number of bass increased 6% last year, with 20,000 more bass in the river. We already know that there's pressure from them, and people will say that the bass take a good chunk of the salmon smolt, which is in bad shape.

Within the river itself, they've imposed a three-week moratorium on the spawning period. That also could coincide with the Striper Cup. So if we're talking about the economic benefits, it could have an effect on that. Also, they've increased the number of fish species outside the river to two, but within the river until the spawning, it's just one fish species. After spawning, the bass usually goes out into salt water.

They're really not happy about that, and I have a hard time explaining how we base that on science, because we've had an increase and last year we didn't have any moratorium. How can I explain that to my people in Miramichi?

Thank you.

[Catherine Blewett]

I'm not sure what you were talking about with Kevin, so he can feel free to jump in.

We did try to make sure that it was connected to science. The caveat we heard back from the scientific folks was that the moratorium was to ensure a bit of a break around that time when the fish were reproducing. That's the straight answer. That was the rationale.

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

We could agree on that short period, but the fact is that the population increased last year by 6% even though they fished right through. It's hard to explain that to sensible people on the river.

[Catherine Blewett]

It is.

Jean, you can jump in on this if you wish.

However, one of the things we are seeing in a number of stocks is that there are blooms, or increases, and then they tail off. So just having open floodgates is not necessarily where we would go. The scientific advice was for a three-week halt.

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

I could go on, but I don't want to take the...

If there's time, I'll leave it to Ken.

[Catherine Blewett]

We can get you more detail if you like.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

This is more of a comment, which hopefully we'll have a longer discussion on.

So far this committee, I think, has issued eight reports, and there have been a ton of recommendations. You have the environment commissioner's report on top of it.

The question becomes, at what point do you run out of capacity to do all of this stuff? You've been sitting there very patiently. You come in front of the Spanish Inquisition on a fairly regular basis, and you nod and smile, and you go off and try to get all of this done. The concern that I'm starting to develop is that you're about an inch deep and a mile wide in terms of your capacity to actually do this. You've never really said, “Gang, we can't do any of this.”

I think we are coming to the time where we need to have that discussion. It isn't just a matter of expectation of management here; it's a matter of what you can do to hit the critical mass where you're actually making a difference, and not just scraping the barnacles off the boat.

I'm going to leave it at that, and hopefully we can have that discussion in a more complete manner somewhere down the line.

Thanks very much.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

Thank you.

I'm going to interject here, which is the chair's prerogative.

On the striped bass thing, I very much agree with Mr. Finnigan. Having been a fisheries manager in a previous life, I know that they always tend to err on the side of not harvesting enough fish. I agree with Mr. Finnigan's amplifications that the decision to expand the fishery was a good one in principle, but I don't think you did it enough. I've read some of the reports from his region, and I may even be visiting it at the end of April.

We see this all across Canada. Biologists do this over and over again. When a stock is abundant, it should be fished somewhat hard. You should be willing to sort of push the envelope a bit, because, as Mr. Finnigan is implying, some significant economic activity will not be realized because of a decision that could easily be challenged biologically.

That's enough for the chair to say. I'm completely out of line, so I'll rule myself out of order.

Mr. Doherty has asked for one short question.

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

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the opportunity, and I'm adding to Mr. Hardie's comment.

Ms. Blewett, I'm glad to hear that checks and measures have been put in place since you've been in this position. We talk about fisheries management plans, and we should at this point ask for the department to come before the committee with its departmental management plan. Time and again, we've heard about it, whether it's on the report filed earlier or the disconnect in the studies we have heard about between Ottawa and the regions.

It is important that we make note that regardless of which government has been in place and what funding was in place, there are critical issues in terms of management. It has been noted on record that some of these challenges have been management challenges.

I would ask, Mr. Chair, that the department come before the committee at another time. Ms. Blewett, can you commit to doing that?

I think that is really important for us. I say this because you can throw all sorts of money at an issue, but if you have no plan to manage the resources, meaning not just financial resources but also physical or human resources, as Mr. Hardie was talking about, we'll be here 26 years from now and saying the same thing.

It is really important, if this committee is going to continue the good work that I think we have done—and I think you're starting to put some processes in place, maybe following along in the footsteps of others—that we have an update, perhaps even quarterly. I'm asking if you would commit to coming back in a short time to give us the management plan moving forward.

I think you started to tell us a bit about that today, but I'd like to get an update on that.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

Say yes.

[Catherine Blewett]

It's yes, with a caveat.

I just want to say, though, that I read the committee's discussions with Commissioner Gelfand, and I think you asked her whether it was a matter of mismanagement or not enough money.

I want to pause on that, because we are a massive, decentralized department, and given the mandate and the responsibilities, with a dramatically cut fiscal base—

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

Ms. Blewett, to that comment, I'm sorry, but that is—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

We need to end this discussion.

[Catherine Blewett]

Okay. I'd be delighted to—

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

That point is great, but it has been 26 years, and we see a promise to put forth another plan and that you will do better. I think it's important that we see management changes in the strategy to move forward, regardless of what the—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

Okay, I think the point has been made. I apologize for the time constraint.

Mr. Morrissey, take four minutes.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Are any of the stocks you're monitoring now in danger of collapse, from the perspective of the professional eye your department should be casting on them?