Fisheries Committee on Nov. 7th, 2017

[Melanie Giffin]

I can actually cover that, because it's my file, which I've been taking care of at the FA. We've had the DFO gulf region come in and have discussions with us about the plans, what's going to happen, the process, and the expectations. In terms of follow-up on that, I'm on the tuna file as well, so I attended the ALPAC meeting, which was held in the Maritimes region. The representative on MPAs for the Maritimes region gave a different idea of expectations from what was given to us by the representatives in the gulf. The representatives in the gulf told us that most likely the MPAs that were put in place would not be no-take zones. They might be exclusive to one fishery, and they would say that you're not allowed to fish mackerel there or tuna or whatever it might be, but you would still be allowed to fish, say, lobster.

When we went to the Maritimes region at ALPAC and heard the update from there, the representative from DFO there said that every single MPA put in place would be a 100% no-take zone, so there is a discrepancy there.

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

Thank you.

This basically backs up some of the other testimony we've heard, that there is very little coordination between the fisheries management branch and the oceans branch. Would you say this is an indication that this is being pushed through too fast?

I can let all three of you respond to that.

[Melanie Giffin]

Yes.

[Kenneth Arsenault]

Yes, that's the way it sounds.

[Ian MacPherson]

We understand this is an international program that Canada is getting more involved in. There is a learning curve for all sides. We're certainly understanding of that. As we alluded to earlier, it's really important that we get this right.

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

I fully support you on getting it right.

Mr. Hardie referred to the freeze on activities with regard to what's currently happening. Do you feel the freeze or allowing only activities that have been happening in the previous year is appropriate? We've heard from fishers on all coasts about how fish stocks move from one area to another. In fact, in the Maritimes, just a couple of weeks ago, we heard that fishing grounds had moved 15 miles. They also have halibut moving into areas where they haven't been seen for a few decades.

Would the closures that consider only the previous year be appropriate or should there be more historic information included in those allowed activities?

[Melanie Giffin]

I'm not sure about the previous year.

[Ian MacPherson]

That's something that should be discussed a little more in depth among organizations to come up with something that's workable.

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

We have only a few weeks before this committee has to finish this study and report back to Parliament on that aspect of it.

Currently there is only consideration for activities occurring within the previous one year. Should that be longer?

[Melanie Giffin]

If I can address that, I feel this would be the prime opportunity for that consultation with our actual fishers, the people who that is going to affect. They know their fishery better than I do, for instance, in terms of where they're fishing, and if it's changed over the past year or not. I think they would have a better answer for that.

In terms of consultation with them, I can't say what their answers will be, if one year would be enough, or if a look at a longer historical background would be better.

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

With literally a few weeks left to do this, is there time for that consultation?

[Melanie Giffin]

It would be rushed.

[Ian MacPherson]

It would be rushed.

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

It would be rushed. Thank you very much.

Should there be a closure, an area of interest identified near shore, closer to a community in Prince Edward Island or any of the other provinces, what kind of an impact would that have on the local communities?

[Ian MacPherson]

Significant would certainly be the type of impact. Most of our fishery is inshore, so if something close were closed, it would have a dollar-for-dollar impact on what goes on in those communities or areas.

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

Would those communities—

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Mr. Arnold, I'm sorry, but I have to cut it right there. I'm really short on time. I apologize.

I'm going to Mr. Finnigan now for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the panel for being with us today.

Fishers have always been involved in the protection of their resource. Over time they all realize that, when the resource is gone, there won't be a lifestyle or a way to earn their living. I think they've done a terrific job. We're increasing the carapace size for the lobster.

Fishery closure, whether there is an MPA or not, would be regulated by DFO, I would assume, because, if the resource dwindles, at one point DFO would step in, as they always have. I think that's their duty, to make sure the resource is protected.

I think we have a minister who is very closely connected with the fishing communities. We were talking about owner-operators, and he realizes the importance of having community fishing going on, and I think we can respect that.

I think, from what I've heard—and we've heard different versions of it around the table—the minister has said that, whether you can fish in an MPA or not, there will be other areas surrounding it that could be open.

Having said that, Mr. Arsenault, I know maybe some of the information hasn't trickled down as much as you would appreciate, but how comfortable or uncomfortable are you with the fact that we want to protect ocean areas on our coast?

[Kenneth Arsenault]

I didn't catch the last part of your question.

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

Knowing that, again, as I said, some information may not have been available as much as we would like to see, how comfortable are you with the proposed protection that we have in place, which started under the previous government? We're exactly where we would be, because they had a 10-year target, and we're halfway there, and we're going to meet halfway on our commitment across the globe. We want to make sure that we protect our share of the ocean.

How comfortable are you with what's been happening so far, as far as protecting our shore with MPAs or with Bill C-55 is concerned?

[Kenneth Arsenault]

I'm really not comfortable answering that because I haven't had time to research the bill and what the MPAs are all about. As I said, I've only been president for two months, and I've had a lot on my plate for the last couple of months. To answer a question on whether I'm satisfied on what's been happening, it's way too early in my position as chair to comment on that, and I apologize for that.

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

Mr. MacPherson, could you comment on that same point?

[Ian MacPherson]

Yes, and I hope this answers it. You made some excellent points in the beginning that the fishery is important to the people who earn their living from it, and they want it to continue. If we haven't learned lessons from the crash of the cod, then shame on all of us. I think we have thousands of people who are working hard to prevent that.

At the end of the day, I keep going back to if we don't have current information, then people get positional or concerned about things moving forward. Probably one of the main points of our discussion here today is that people are making efforts. We're not saying they're not, but we're getting a lot of pressure from our members to find out more, to know more, and to get answers to the questions that we asked a number of months ago. It's hard to get behind something if we don't have all of the information at our fingertips. That's what we need.

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

Thank you.

I know you have indigenous communities. I'm from New Brunswick, so I know more about how they work there. What kind of relationship do you have with the indigenous communities in your part of the Maritimes? Have you had consultations with them? Do you feel they are also part of the process?

[Ian MacPherson]

They would probably be the best judge of that. We have a number of advisory boards and we make a point of inviting the indigenous communities to these meetings. Their attendance is optional. We also respect the fact that they are in separate negotiations with DFO on a number of files, which we generally aren't invited to. That concerns me. At the end of the day, all the fishers on the water want the resource to survive, and I think there is an opportunity there to improve that kind of communication. That goes back to what I mentioned earlier about not only having consultations on multiple species but also having all the stakeholders around those tables.