Evidence of meeting #82 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was mpa.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
National Director, Oceans Program, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
I believe about 1% now is fully protected, yes.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Okay.
There was a discussion about monitoring and enforcement and how important that is. Because you have alluded to other jurisdictions around the world, do you have any suggested models of monitoring and enforcement that are effective, and cost-effective, that you could provide the committee with?
National Director, Oceans Program, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
Certainly I could provide some information on that. It's my intention to submit a written brief with full references, and I could certainly look into that further for you as well.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Great.
As a final comment about minimum standards, you mentioned you were happy to see that the minister has announced that a committee on minimum protection standards will be established. What would you like to say to this committee and the government right now on minimum standards and their importance going forward, given that this committee is going to happen at some point in the future, hopefully?
National Director, Oceans Program, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
It's interesting that this meeting is happening right now in Washington, to look at that more clearly and to provide some more detailed recommendations. We've been thinking about this for a long time, and certainly industrial-type activities don't belong in our protected areas, whether they're on land or in the ocean. That's where we've really flagged activities that destroy habitat and that we definitely know have consequences for marine life. At a minimum, activities like bottom trawling shouldn't be allowed. Oil and gas, mining, and finfish aquaculture, we don't think any of those are compatible with achieving the conservation objectives of a marine protected area.
We really like the idea that we're managing to ensure that the long-term ecological integrity of an area is maintained through its protection. That's the standard we use for national parks, and we think that should apply in the ocean as well.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good morning to everybody.
Dr. McKinney, I'm really interested in the concept of adaptive regulation. We all like to work on the basis of the best available information, but the ocean is deep and mysterious, and everything else. Quite often we have to fall back on the precautionary principle that if we don't think we should do it, we shouldn't do it.
Where's the balance there? Is the precautionary principle used as a crutch because we simply will never have enough science to act?
Executive Director, Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, As an Individual
That's probably a fair statement.
I always come at these kinds of issues, whether they're marine protected areas or fisheries management, in a very linear way, which most scientists would. That is, what's your objective? What are you trying to achieve? What are you trying to protect? I start with that. Then I begin to step back. If we can define that, then how do we do that?
It can come to that point of, I'm assuming, a precautionary principle approach, but I've found that you're going to have to make the case that something there needs protecting. That's the very first thing you do. What is it? Then you define it. That's how I start.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
I have a couple of anecdotes. I recall that probably about 20 years ago—maybe more—all of a sudden there was this craze for blackened fish, and in no time, within just a year, news reports were coming out that whatever species they were using was in steep decline and threatened. Is that a common phenomenon?
First of all, did that happen? Have you seen other examples of it?
Executive Director, Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, As an Individual
That did happen, and it was in Louisiana. It was Paul.... I can't think of Paul's last name, but he was a famous chef who started it. At that time I was managing the fishery, and the fish he started with was called a redfish, which is the class of drum. The market value of those went off the chart, and we had to look at that. Fortunately, as I testified, we have a very long, continuous database of information on the status of fish and we noticed right away that they were affecting the redfish, particularly spawning fish.
We took one of the most drastic actions that our commission ever did. We completely decommercialized, if you would, the red drum and made it strictly a recreational fish.
In the U.S., and perhaps not here in Canada, there's a distinction that the states—Texas in this case, because of its previous status—can manage fisheries out to 12 miles. The federal agencies manage fisheries beyond that. The federal agency at that time didn't take that action, but we, within our state, did. Eventually the federal agencies followed, and they put a strict limit and made it non-commercial as well.
I don't know if that's getting at your point, but that's exactly what happened.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
You mentioned that you look at fishers and environmental concerns, and that some natural tensions will develop with agencies that have agenda-driven approaches.
With that, I'm going to turn to you, Ms. Jessen. This may not be a fair question, but I'm going to ask it anyway.
The duty of a government, obviously, is to try to approach things by listening to all parts, and to come up essentially with a reasonable balance. The reasonable balance is fair process on the one hand, because you are dealing with people who make a living in communities that depend on, or have depended on, certain activities, versus the need to be expeditious, to get things done very quickly.
In your experience and observations over an extended time with MPAs, where does the balance lie? As I said, that may not be a very fair question, but give it your best shot.
January 30th, 2018 / 9:40 a.m.
National Director, Oceans Program, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
I think up until now we've actually taken quite a lot of time to do consultations with stakeholders, to gather the relevant information and science, and to review that during the process. It it has taken quite a long time. Many stakeholders are around each of the tables for each individual site, so there are lots of opportunities to have those conversations.
I've read some of the previous testimony by other stakeholders and I don't think there is consensus around that, but when it takes seven to 10 to 15 years, in some cases, to finish a marine protected area in Canada, I don't know how you could take more time. I think it would be better if we took less time, because there are places that are threatened and there are really important areas that need protection but are not getting it while we're having those conversations.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Then to you, Mr. Lansbergen, rather than perhaps look at a situation where obvious stress is recognized, and then all of a sudden everybody springs into action, would your organization consider an ongoing review of everything, through observations, citizen science, etc.? Would you review all of the things that we would need, along with perhaps some beefed up capability from the DFO to do a better job of monitoring fish stocks?
Should we really just take a whole-of-ocean approach rather than wait for the hotspots to emerge, and how could that work?
President, Fisheries Council of Canada
I guess in an ideal world, yes, but I think you would very quickly learn that it would be very challenging to devote enough resources to be able to do that, which is why we haven't done it already.
I would agree with Ms. Jessen that the processes thus far do take a long time, and I'm not sure if anyone is entirely satisfied or happy with that.
The challenge, I guess, is from the fisheries sector, and particularly where there is more of an impact on inshore than offshore fishermen. The offshore is represented more by larger companies that would have some capacity to participate in these types of consultations in a very thoughtful and longstanding or ongoing manner.
When you look at the inshore, I think you see that it's very fragmented and very difficult for the independent fishermen. They're family owned businesses, for the most part, and they're struggling to be successful in running their businesses day to day. Trying to keep up with everything that different levels of government are doing can be a challenge. They don't necessarily have the same scientific background, but they do have a lot of experience because most of them are getting on in age. We have one of the oldest workforces.
I think it's just very challenging. How do you instill or accommodate all of the different stakeholders to ensure that they are participating in a meaningful way and to keep the process moving along at a reasonable pace?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Mr. Hardie.
Folks, we have time left for about two questions. We'll go to Mr. Miller for five minutes, and Mr. McDonald, if it's okay if I play with the order of speakers.
Mr. Donnelly, would you like a couple of minutes at the end for a very quick question?
Liberal
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Thank you very much.
Thanks to our witnesses for being here.
I only have five minutes, so I'll try to hurry along here.
Mr. McKinney, what is the primary purpose of an MPA? Make it a short comment, if you could.
Executive Director, Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, As an Individual
The purpose of a marine protected area is to set aside special regulations for some particular purpose, and there can be a whole range of issues, but your goal there is trying to conserve or protect some specific species or habitat.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Thank you.
My next question you've already answered. Is it necessary to ban recreational fishing in an MPA? Your response was pretty clear that no, you don't, which is contrary to what Ms. Jessen said.
Could you elaborate on what kind of scientific data is required before establishing an MPA or other types of protection zones? With that question, in all of the MPAs that you've worked on setting up or implementing, has somebody ever just said, “Oh, we're going to protect 5% or 10% of this.” Did you ever do it that way? It would sound to me that it's not a very scientific way of doing it.
Executive Director, Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, As an Individual
You had a series of questions there. I'll make sure I get to them.
Again, in looking at marine protected areas, the first step is, what is your objective? What are you trying to accomplish? Once you define that, it tells you what information you need to look at, be it habitat or particular species and those types of things. The next step, of course, is to look at what data and information you have available in that regard and take actions appropriately; time-wise, I think we get at that.
I'm sorry, but what was the last part of that question?