Fisheries Committee on April 13th, 2017

[Alan Martin]

On the west coast there are specific rockfish conservation areas. They are not classified as MPAs under the Oceans Act, but effectively there are area-based restrictions that are designed to conserve areas of abundance of rockfish. I think the idea is good, but the issue is that in order to maintain their effectiveness there needs to be more monitoring and enforcement of that. Rockfish conservation areas are certainly supported by a range of angler groups, both commercial and recreational anglers, in order to maintain those fishery resources.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

I'm afraid we're out of time.

Mr. Arnold, go ahead for seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to both of our witnesses for being available today. I'll start off with Mr. Martin.

You mentioned a couple of documents, one by Murray, Mach, and Miriam O, and I believe there was another one you referred to. If it's possible, could you get the related information to the clerk so that we might be able to distribute that within the committee? They sound like very interesting documents. You mentioned the PNCIMA consultation process and some of the other consultation processes. What has been your experience from an ear-to-the-ground perspective out on the west coast as far as consultations with the provincial government, local governments, municipalities, coastal communities, and commercial and public fisheries out there go?

[Alan Martin]

The consultation around PNCIMA has been focused a lot more on process than substance. It has had good representation from first nations, but in terms of the angling community and the fishing industry, not so much. The PNCIMA process certainly is one that's driven collaboratively by the province, DFO, and first nations.

My view is that it has huge expectations, short timelines, and limited resources. This makes it difficult to do the scientific and other required consultations with communities and stakeholders. These are needed to contribute to the design and successful implementation of what are, at the moment, concepts to protect valuable fisheries and habitats.

The key question is: are marine protected areas the right tool, and what other actions are required in order to maintain those resources?

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

Thank you. That kind of brings me back to a question I had for our previous witnesses. I questioned whether the official definition of a marine protected area needs to encompass areas that have fairly tight restrictions on fishing or other activities that may not necessarily be considered an MPA under the Oceans Act.

Canada has done a lot as far as improving our fisheries management, but we have probably a long way to go yet on that. Should some of that fisheries management also be considered as partial MPAs or included in that grand MPA total that everyone wants to count?

[Alan Martin]

I think the outcome that we're trying to achieve is good fisheries management, not to have a prescribed level of MPAs. If MPAs contribute to good fisheries management and are appropriate, clearly you can apply them. If they're not useful for maintaining the habitat or the stocks, use another method. That analysis is lacking.

I will use an example for you. Northern abalone are rare and are listed under SARA. The SARA recovery plan says that habitat is not an issue for maintaining the species, but overharvesting is. The question is, would you implement MPAs to protect a species where the recovery plan says that habitat is not an issue? There needs to be a clear line of sight between the outcomes that you're trying to achieve and the application of a tool, whether it's an MPA or any other restriction.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Richard, you mentioned that there are certain elements of the mandate letters around consultation and so on that don't necessarily translate through to the department when it comes to being in the field or on the ground.

Can you elaborate a little further on that?

[Michel Richard]

We knew this was kind of a dormant file, which unfortunately had been relegated to the myth or concept of politics. Then our current government opened up the tomb and noticed that one thing was lacking. One mandate of theirs was lacking. So there is a frenzy right now to pass messages along, and we're certainly not saying that we're opposed to it. We're saying—and I'll quote myself—that “little parachute meetings do not constitute a consultation”.

I think we're close to implementing a very transparent process, and I am very honoured and privileged to be part of this for the MFU, but I think this is kind of a ground zero if we want to approach this issue. For example, I can't speak for the representatives of crab fishing area 19 because we don't have members there, but I can relay their expression when one item was added to the advisory committee for snow crab, which was to talk about an MPA in their crab fishing zone. It was total shock and surprise.

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

It's interesting to hear your remark about some rattling within the department trying to meet these targets, because we've certainly heard different things from the minister about things being under control. Everything we hear from everywhere else is that everyone's scrambling to try and figure out how to do this.

[Michel Richard]

We have given our minister the utmost support on these issues based on renewed transparency on these issues.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Robert Sopuck]

That's time.

Mr. Donnelly, for seven minutes.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses for being here and providing your testimony.

Mr. Richard, you talked a lot about the process and the concerns with it. Could you describe for the committee what you think would be a good consultation process for the government? You did make some comments about what it shouldn't be and what it's not, and a few about what it could be, but could you elaborate a little?

[Michel Richard]

I understand, first of all, that they're running against the clock. We have structures of leadership within the associations in P.E.I., and we have memberships in Nova Scotia as well, and to relegate the item of MPAs in the context of advisory committees is totally insufficient. The first step that should be taken is to focus—not to bastardize the word focus—and to have very specific meetings on MPAs and invite industry representatives. That would certainly be a first step.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Martin, were you able to hear the two previous presentations from the IUCN and Dr. Pauly?

[Alan Martin]

No, I didn't.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

We heard the two witnesses state that in the opinion of the global community, there is too much fishing and there is an imbalance of protection. You talked about PNCIMA. Do you agree with that planning process, and does the B.C. Wildlife Federation agree with that planning process?

[Alan Martin]

PNCIMA is a good concept because it involves first nations. It involves the federal government and the province, and it is comprehensive. What I don't agree with is that if individual entities go off and do their own thing, in the absence of that larger planning process, that takes away from the effectiveness and integration,

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Undermines it.

[Alan Martin]

Yes, it undermines it.

PNCIMA is for the northern shelf. There are larger issues in terms of fishery sustainability on the west coast, some of which can be dealt with through a marine protected area process. Others need to be done by a fundamental restructuring of fisheries. It's applying the appropriate tool, at the appropriate scale, and over a time frame that will be effective.

Fisheries and protected areas are part and parcel of the same problem, but they operate at quite different scales, depending on the species and the management objective you're trying to achieve.

I agree with Mr. Pauly that certainly, if you read the fisheries literature, there is a problem with overexpectation. It's increased effort, lack of monitoring and enforcement, and compliance with catch landing. These are all other things that need to be addressed.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Excellent.

Is BCWF a part of PNCIMA, or are you involved at the table in any way?

[Alan Martin]

Yes, we have been commenting on the design criteria and process, and we certainly are engaged in the federal process as well. Our intent is to be constructive, and that these marine protected areas should be focused on achieving conservation outcomes, not arbitrary percentages over a short-term. They certainly need to be adaptive and they need to be improved over time. I would not like to see an implementation of marine protected areas on a rapid basis, and then the agenda moves on, and we lose a tremendous opportunity to manage these resources, including communities, the fishing sector, and first nations.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

We've just heard from Dr. Laffoley from the IUCN, who talked about using MPAs to reverse declines in fisheries populations and to protect the abundance of key species. He said that MPAs can be effective tools for doing just that. Do you agree or disagree?

[Alan Martin]

I think MPAs can be used to protect species, particularly those that are highly territorial or resident in particular areas. For those species that are far-ranging, such as tuna and salmon, MPAs probably will not be effective, because there is a high degree of variation in terms of how these species migrate during their adult life stages.

I think MPAs on estuaries and in rearing areas certainly could contribute to the health of salmonids. It needs to be backed up with science, and it needs to be related to the “valued ecosystem component” that you're focusing on.

I'm not sure that they have the data to drive this. I think they need to invest in the science to design areas that are effective, and they need to adapt them to conditions that change over time. This is a very complex issue that you're trying to deal with, and a simple solution of MPAs.... Well, there is no simple solution. They need to be intelligently designed.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

I think I'm out of time, but I want to say, Mr. Martin, that I've appreciated your testimony, and we could bring you back another time to talk about watershed management. I wanted to get that on the record.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!