Fisheries Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Good morning, everybody. Pursuant to the order of reference of Tuesday, October 17, we are here to study Bill C-55, an act to amend the Oceans Act and the Canada Petroleum Resources Act.

I have just a bit of committee business before we introduce our guests. If members recall, we moved clause-by-clause from December 5 to December 7. That leaves December 5 open, which I think was addressed by Ken McDonald before we shut down.

What I'm proposing is that on December 5 we should do the subcommittee, the steering committee, to discuss future business. I know that in the past we didn't use the subcommittee that much and just used the whole committee, but it was suggested that we should go back to the subcommittee. I'm suggesting December 5, and instead of 8:45 a.m., let's say 9:45.

I know Todd isn't here.

Fin, are you okay with that? Okay.

Are you on it, Bernadette?

[Bernadette Jordan, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Who else is on it?

[Bernadette Jordan, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Ken and me and—

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

You, Ken, Todd, and Fin...? All right. I want to get it straight. It's been a while since we've had one of those meetings. My apologies.

Let's move along, shall we? There are other things to discuss, too, but in the meantime, let's get to what's germane to today's session.

Before I do that, I want to welcome Mr. Blaine Calkins this morning. He's from the beautiful riding of Red Deer—Lacombe. Did I pronounce that correctly?

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

Yes. It's not a hard one, Mr. Chair.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

To our guests, if you've noticed, the chair is usually on the receiving end of some harsh business from my colleagues here. That's okay. It's well accepted here, and almost encouraged, actually.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

It's nice to be back, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

It's nice to have you back, Mr. Calkins.

He is, of course, an experienced member of this particular committee.

That being said, let's introduce our guests.

First I want to introduce, from the Aquaculture Association of Nova Scotia, Mr. Tom Smith, who is joining us in person. Joining us by video conference from one of the most beautiful places on the planet, if I do say so, St. Andrews, New Brunswick—I'm a little biased—we have Maria Recchia, who is the executive director for the Fundy North Fishermen's Association. We also have with us Lois Mitchell, the designated board representative from the Fundy North Fishermen's Association.

We're going to start with you, Mr. Smith. Your group gets up to 10 minutes for an opening statement.

[Tom Smith, Executive Director, Aquaculture Association of Nova Scotia]

Thank you very much.

Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the committee, and ladies and gentlemen.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Tom Smith. I'm the executive director of the Aquaculture Association of Nova Scotia. I've worked in the food industry both here in Canada and internationally with land farmers, sea farmers, food and drug retailers, and food processors for over 20 years.

At the Aquaculture Association of Nova Scotia, the AANS, our mission is to support the production of quality food in the cool, clean waters of Nova Scotia, creating wealth based on a renewable resource. We represent land- and marine-based seafood farmers in more than 14 farmed species, such as salmon, trout, and striped bass, and in the shellfish sector, oysters, clams, quahogs, and mussels, all of the products that we love to enjoy. We represent those farmers throughout Nova Scotia, from the south shore of Nova Scotia and the Annapolis Valley to the north shore and the Bras d'Or lakes in Cape Breton. More than 100 members strong, we represent sea farmers, industry suppliers, academia representatives, and aquaculture processors.

The AANS is proud of its work with Nova Scotia sea farmers to assist in the development and growth of the aquaculture industry in Nova Scotia. Our organization's community outreach and research and development initiatives, we believe, are integral to our collective aspirations of developing greater economic opportunities for our Nova Scotia rural and coastal communities.

We were very pleased over the past number of years to have had the opportunity to work closely with the Nova Scotia Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture in assisting and collaborating in the development of the new Nova Scotia aquaculture regulatory framework that was introduced over the past year. We are also pleased to have worked with Fisheries and Oceans Canada over the last number of years on recommendations to the federal aquaculture activities regulations, the AAR.

I am here today at the invitation of the standing committee to provide our comments and insights on Bill C-55, an act to amend the Oceans Act and the Canada Petroleum Resources Act.

Let me begin by stating that the aquaculture industry is deeply committed to the protection of our environment and the responsible and sustainable management of our natural resources. We believe environmental protection and economic development can both be part of a thriving Nova Scotia community.

Aquaculture development is a key priority for all of us in the province of Nova Scotia. Over the past 50 years our history has shown that aquaculture is a sustainable activity in our waters.

Nova Scotia has tremendous potential for aquaculture expansion in all regions of our province. I was very pleased to have been on the podium last June when Premier Stephen McNeil, and Keith Colwell, the Nova Scotia Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, announced that following years of government and industry collaboration, the Province of Nova Scotia was now accepting applications for new aquaculture leases and licences.

In collaboration with the provincial government, we believe that Nova Scotia has the most robust, transparent, and modern regulatory framework for aquaculture management in Nova Scotia, if not the world. In my presentation that day, I was proud to state that the industry had worked closely with important stakeholders, first nations communities in Nova Scotia that are actively involved in aquaculture development, and with the public, as we participated in the regulatory reform in Nova Scotia.

We believe that all the pieces are in place for the responsible and sustainable development of the aquaculture industry in Nova Scotia. We are now ready to go. With this momentum, there are significant private sector investments being made in aquaculture right now in Nova Scotia, with many more developments being planned.

However, we believe that the current approach to MPA identification and development in the coastal waters of Nova Scotia represents an immediate and significant risk to present aquaculture operators and to future development. To date, engagement on MPA identification and development with the aquaculture industry, in our opinion, has been inadequate.

DFO has not directly provided any indication on what types of aquaculture, if any, would be permitted in an MPA. DFO has met with other stakeholder groups, without engaging the aquaculture industry, and indicated that certain types of aquaculture would not be permitted in an MPA. We believe that this is unacceptable, and we believe this further perpetuates negative attitudes toward the aquaculture industry.

DFO has not supplied any science, to date, to support the exclusion of aquaculture from MPAs. Areas identified for potential MPAs currently have several types of aquaculture that DFO wants to exclude and these are areas of high interest for future developments.

DFO's current approach will affect existing operators and significantly dampen investor confidence. We are asking DFO to slow down the next phase of MPA identification and development, properly engage the aquaculture industry of Nova Scotia, and make decisions based on sound science.

The Nova Scotia aquaculture industry supports the protection and conservation of our marine resources, as evidenced by our progressive codes of best practice, support for the new Nova Scotia aquaculture regulations, and the way we run our farms every day of the year.

Nova Scotia has also made significant contributions to the MPA process already. We believe, as does the International Union for Conservation of Nature, IUCN, that sustainable aquaculture should be considered and included in any MPA development. “Promoting synergies between multiple-use MPAs and identified compatible activities, such as sustainable aquaculture production is essential”, according to the IUCN.

A clear understanding of what will be allowed in any MPA must be determined before our industry can provide any feedback on proposed areas for consideration. The careful inclusion of aquaculture in MPAs, as has been done in Australia and Scotland, could allow DFO to fulfill its MPA objectives without denying Nova Scotians a future in aquaculture.

I do want to be clear, though, that we enjoy a good relationship with Fisheries and Oceans Canada. We work closely with DFO on many files and share many common interests and goals. The AANS is a long-standing member of the Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance, CAIA, and I am joined here today by Tim Kennedy, executive director of CAIA. Working with Minister LeBlanc and his senior staff, CAIA and DFO are fully engaged in discussions around the creation of a national aquaculture act, a process the AANS fully supports.

Just as an aside, yesterday was the opening conference for CAIA, and Minister LeBlanc was very gracious to be there, open the conference, and express his appreciation for the work we are doing.

We've also worked very closely with DFO on improvements to the Canadian aquaculture activities regulations, coordinating this development with industry and the Atlantic provincial governments. As well, we continue to work closely with all federal and provincial regulators to ensure the safe and progressive development of our aquaculture industry, an industry that we strive to ensure will grow and prosper.

Finally, before I finish, I want to extend a warm invitation to all of you to attend our Aquaculture Association of Nova Scotia annual Sea Farmers Conference, January 24 to 26. The theme of this year's conference is “Making Waves: Aquaculture's Next Chapter”, and we believe that, as a result of all the work and collaboration between industry, government, and the public over the last number of years, aquaculture's next chapter will indeed be very bright.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for the opportunity to appear. I look forward to any questions you might have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Mr. Smith, for your time and for your opening remarks.

Now we go to the Fundy North Fishermen's Association.

I'm not sure who is doing the speaking. Ms. Recchia, it looks like that would be you.

[Maria Recchia, Executive Director, Fundy North Fishermen's Association]

Yes, I am going to speak for five minutes, and then Lois for five minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Perfect. Thank you very much.

[Maria Recchia]

I also represent the Fundy association of weir fishermen who are herring weir fishermen in southwest New Brunswick, in the Bay of Fundy. Between the two associations there is a total of 180 members, all small boat, inshore, independent, multi-species fishermen, fishing lobsters, scallops, herring, groundfish, river fisheries, and more.

I'm going to focus on the legislative amendments and then Lois is going to expand on some of our other issues.

We agree that the pace of establishing MPAs has been quite slow. It took 10 years for the Musquash MPA in our region, and that is problematic. Fishermen are deeply concerned about the health of the marine ecosystem they work in. There are occasionally big industrial development projects that threaten the environment they work in, and it would be very helpful if MPAs could go in more quickly. However, we do have some concerns with the legislative amendments as they're written.

One of our concerns is that we feel there may be better opportunities for corporations to work with governments under these amendments. For instance, if an MPA were put in by the minister quite quickly, inshore fishermen associations with very little resources and without lobbyists would have to, very quickly, try to lobby the minister around some of these areas. Whereas corporations are very well placed to do that kind of work quickly, we are not.

We have a couple concerns about freezing the footprint. Freezing the footprint, as it is today, is not a big problem, but when I read how the ongoing activities are defined, there is a great emphasis on activities that were done in the past year. That could be a problem, for instance, for our scallop fishery, which is a dragger fishery that would not be allowed in an MPA, most likely. Scallop fisheries move from fishing ground to fishing ground, so some of the most important scallop fishing grounds are not fished every year. They're fished maybe every three years or five years. They might fall through the cracks. There wouldn't be a lot of time for fishermen to change their fishing strategy or to replace the income from that segment of their livelihood if an MPA were put in very quickly.

We also have a sea cucumber fishery here. There is an area of interest—it's actually not officially an area of interest yet, but we found out yesterday it's in the draft network plan—where we have scallop dragging and sea cucumber fishing, and it is one of our most heavily fished areas in our whole district. The challenge we face is that the amount of fishing that happens there is going to make it very difficult for us to adjust to losing those fishing grounds. In the sea cucumber fishery, 90% of their fishing grounds are within the area in which there is an interest in having an MPA. It would be very difficult if they got word very quickly that they had to find a new source of livelihood.

As far as the amendments around oil and gas, our association and our members feel that oil and gas development should be prohibited categorically in a marine protected area. Not only are we concerned about the footprint of the MPA, but we're concerned when we hear oil and gas companies talk about directional drilling going down outside of an MPA , going horizontally, and then doing their work actually underneath the MPA. We feel there needs to be stronger wording on that. It should be completely prohibited, in our opinion.

There is also the compensation aspect of the amendment for oil and gas. We have concerns that fishermen in the sea cucumber fishery, for instance, who don't have a lot of other licences to draw on, could lose their whole livelihood with an MPA in their area, and there's no discussion of compensation. In fact, we were told that this will not be an option for them, yet the oil and gas industry will receive compensation. So we have some concerns there.

In general, the speed at which this can happen could be a problem for us, but we think there need to be standards. We agree with Dr. Rashid Sumaila that there should be some clear standards as to what's allowed and not allowed in an MPA. That will help us adjust and know what to expect. We also think that there needs to be a more adaptive management approach.

I'll hand it over to Lois now.

[Lois Mitchell, Designated Board Representative, Fundy North Fishermen's Association]

Good morning, and thank you for this opportunity to speak to this issue, which I think is very important to fishermen and to the families and communities in our area.

To give you a bit of an introduction, I am part of a fishing family. My husband, son, and son-in-law all fish together. They fish lobster, scallops, and herring. My husband and I have four grandchildren, all of whom we hope will want to stay in their home community and carry on the family tradition of the fishing way of life.

I've also studied the fishery academically as a sociologist when I did my Ph.D. research on the Deer Island fishing economy, and I'm currently serving as a director of international studies at a small university here in New Brunswick called St. Stephen's University. I speak from personal interest and experience, lived experience. I speak on behalf of the fishermen of Fundy North. My husband is the vice-president of Fundy North, and we're just one and a half weeks into the fall lobster season, which is a huge part of our annual income, so he's out fishing. Most of the fishermen in our part of Fundy North are out fishing and aren't available to speak for themselves.

As I've read through the legislative summary, I am almost persuaded that the MPA network framework is a sensible, and maybe even necessary, approach to protecting the marine ecosystem on which so many of us directly or indirectly depend. I believe and I think I'd be remiss if I didn't at least mention in this short time that there are some gaps and flaws in the approach.

In respect of the process and your time, I'm going to try to frame my responses around Bill C-55. Maria mentioned the length of time that consultation takes, and I know that consultation is a challenging process, but it's an important one insofar as it aims to combine scientific, anecdotal, and industry wisdom and best practices with the regulatory systems that are already built into the marine environment. We all need to come to the table, I think, with a sense of humility in recognition of the challenges before us when it comes to respecting biodiversity on land and in the water. I'm constantly reminded that we know so little about the marine environment, and what we know for sure is literally, quite literally, a drop in the ocean.

I'm going to address three specific things in my comments.

First is a trial period. If there is one thing I am drawn to in this amendment, it's the fact that there would be a five-year period before a permanent MPA is established. Making any MPA permanent is a bit problematic from my perspective, so any delay in doing that may be a positive thing. The reason I am concerned about the permanence of MPAs is that the science on which the proposed network is based is fairly old. Even with the current baseline, which I understand is being established, how do we define the health of marine habitat, and how do we know if fisheries efforts in or around an area are actually detrimental to its long-term biodiversity?

The marine environment is wonderfully dynamic and incredibly resilient. Human activity can certainly be destructive of marine habitat, to be sure, and if we want to survive within the system, we need to manage our activities appropriately.

Second, I want to quickly raise the issue of enforcement. Enforcement of current regulations has been hugely problematic in our area due to lack of resources. There are too few officers and no appropriate boat for enforcement purposes. I think the issue of increased enforcement expectations in the establishment of MPAs, especially if they're introduced quickly, could be a problem.

Finally, there is the precautionary approach. To argue for a precautionary approach, which could be loosely translated as "we think an MPA will be a good thing but we don't actually know that it will be”, and to take it a step further, that it's quite likely we will never know with complete certainty that any outcome is a result of the establishment of an MPA in a specific area, may be sufficient for those of you who are tasked with the enormous responsibility of making laws.

Speaking from the perspective of fishermen, their families, and communities, they—and we—are less enthusiastic about potentially being collateral damage in an experiment of this magnitude. Telling fishermen that they will be able to fish within an MPA under certain conditions or that their current activities will be permitted is a dangerous proposition, I think, and perhaps reminiscent of the way indigenous people lost huge parts of their culture. I don't have time to explain that, but I think there are cultural similarities between indigenous people and fishing communities.

As the marine environment changes over time, so do the fisheries. In 32 years, I've seen enormous changes in fisheries in our area and I expect that they will continue. Whatever we do or don't do affects the marine environment. Fishermen really see themselves as part of the ecology, not as separate from it. I think we have to take that into account in all of these deliberations.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Ms. Mitchell.

Now, we go to our round of questioning. We're going to start with the government side. Mr. McDonald, you have seven minutes, please.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our presenters for making themselves available to the committee this morning.

I'll start off with some questions to Mr. Smith.

How much product is actually produced by the aquaculture industry in Nova Scotia?

[Tom Smith]

The latest numbers for 2017 are going to be estimated at $65 million to $68 million. The total size of the fishery in Nova Scotia is now $1.87 billion, which is now the largest export community in Nova Scotia. Of that, we make up about $68 million or $70 million of the fisheries.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

What do you see as the economic benefit to the province with the industry at the level it is now? Do you operate in certain areas of the province or is it widespread throughout?

[Tom Smith]

That's a great question. It's actually very widespread around Nova Scotia, from coast to coast to coast.

Right now, according to the latest stats, we probably employ around 600 direct jobs and these are high-paying direct jobs.

The other thing that's really interesting is that the industry is evolving. Everybody thinks about aquaculture as a manual labour job where someone is out on a feed barge and walking around a pen and feeding fish, but now it's researchers, technologists, and engineers who work in this industry. The other estimate is around 1,500 to 1,800 indirect jobs through trucking, supplies, feed, and all of that sort of stuff.

We have finfish operations in most areas of Nova Scotia, particularly on the south shore of Nova Scotia in Bernadette's riding. Also, we have trout farming on the south shore, as well as in the Bras d'Or lakes in Cape Breton. Oyster farming is widespread around the province of Nova Scotia, from the north shore of Cape Breton, to the south shore in Annapolis Valley, to the north shore of Nova Scotia.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

With regard to your operation, have you had any major incidents, like escape incidents happening?

[Tom Smith]

Yes.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

What are the results of that? How do you go forward after you see a major escape happening?

[Tom Smith]

There are two sides to that. The first answer is yes. Last year, there was an escape from a trout farm on the south shore of Nova Scotia. There is some humour in it that there was some wonderful trout fishing going on in Shelburne Harbour for a number of months. However, with the 2015 aquaculture regulatory framework in Nova Scotia, automatic timely reporting is in place for any escapes from finfish farms. There is an obligation for remediation and cleanup and there are fines that the province can impose if there is an escape. In that particular instance last year, the fine was assessed.