Fisheries Committee on Feb. 15th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Good morning, everyone.

This morning we embark upon a study put forward by Mr. McDonald, the MP for Avalon, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), a study of the Atlantic Canada commercial vessel length and licensing policies.

We want to say a special welcome to our numerous guests this morning, some joining us by video conference.

We have Jacqueline Perry, regional director general for Newfoundland and Labrador region. Thank you for joining us this morning.

We have Verna Docherty. Ms. Docherty is acting manager, licensing policy and operations, Maritimes region.

We have Marc LeCouffe, who is director, resource and aboriginal fisheries management. He is joining us from Moncton, New Brunswick.

We have Patrick Vincent, regional director general for Quebec, joining us from Ville de Québec. Bienvenue.

And we have Mark Waddell, acting director general, licensing and planning.

Ms. Perry, please, you have up to 10 minutes.

[Jacqueline Perry, Acting Regional Director General, Region - Newfoundland and Labrador, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and members of the committee for the opportunity to speak to you here this morning. I'm Jacqueline Perry, acting regional director general for Newfoundland and Labrador of Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

I am pleased to be here with colleagues from other regions in the Atlantic and our national headquarters to provide you with information related to the department's rules for vessel registration length and to answer any questions you may have.

Vessel-length restrictions are applied in all fisheries in Canada. They were implemented in the 1970s primarily for conservation reasons, and they were applied in competitive fisheries to control the catching capacity of vessels and therefore the amount of fish harvested. That said, the policies have evolved over time and now contribute to the achievement of several fisheries management objectives including economic viability, equitable access to fisheries resources, and vessel safety.

More specifically, vessel-length restrictions provide for an equitable and orderly harvest of fishing resources, promote viable and profitable operations for the average participant, and promote consistency while recognizing that specific provisions may be necessary for certain fisheries and geographical locations. Vessel length is one of many complex and interrelated factors contributing to safety at sea in Canadian fisheries.

Vessel lengths are also used to define fleets for the purposes of fisheries management. Commonly, vessels over 100 feet are considered the "offshore fleet", vessels 65 to 100 feet represent the "midshore fleet", and vessels less than 65 feet are generally understood to represent the "inshore fleet". These fleet distinctions are linked to specific licensing policies and management measures.

Vessel-length restrictions have evolved over time and their application may vary based on regional factors, although the department strives for consistency where possible and appropriate. While effective control of fishing effort and vessel capacity remain key objectives of fisheries management and licensing policy in Canada, over the years and in consultation with industry, DFO has reviewed rules governing vessel length in certain fleets with the objective of providing industry with increased flexibility. DFO has provided this flexibility to fleets when proposals are supported by a clear majority of participants and do not compromise conservation or fisheries management objectives.

Proposals to change vessel registration rules are reviewed in open, transparent processes using existing consultation mechanisms and involving all affected stakeholders. Consultations have been held over the past couple of years and feedback tends to be mixed, with some stakeholders favouring vessel-length extensions, while others favour limiting criteria to meet conservation and fisheries management objectives.

Since 1997, DFO has provided greater flexibility to fishers operating under self-rationalization systems such as individual transferable quotas, ITQs. In 2003, a new approach for changing vessel replacement rules for Atlantic Canada was adopted following an extensive industry consultation process. The new approach responds to industry requests in the development of new rules as long as the proposed changes are consistent with principles that were established at the time and continue to be applied today.

In 2007, DFO approved changes to the vessel replacement rules in Newfoundland and Labrador region after extensive consultations with industry, and increased the length barrier for all of the inshore sectors. These changes were accompanied by the introduction of the enterprise-combining policy to ensure that much-needed fleet rationalization occurred while allowable vessel sizes were increased.

Quebec region also undertook changes to its vessel replacement policy following extensive consultations with its industry liaison committee in 2014. The gulf region likewise implemented changes to its vessel replacement policy in recent years following consultation with industry stakeholders.

In 2012, changes were made to the vessel replacement rules for the area 12 traditional snow crab fleet in eastern New Brunswick and gulf Nova Scotia, which is under an ITQ regime, to increase the vessel length to a maximum of 30.5 metres or 100 feet.

In 2014, following a policy-streamlining exercise in the gulf region, the rules for the remaining groundfish ITQ fleets were changed to remove a 50-foot vessel barrier and to allow vessels of up to 65 feet to be used by those fleets.

There were also changes made that saw the removal of the requirement to cap vessels to a limited cubic measurement and to allow the use of primary vessels in the competitive groundfish fishery.

In the Maritimes region, modified vessel-length rules are in place in lobster fishing areas 33 and 34 to cap the fishing effort on the resource. The maximum vessel length is restricted to 45 feet, with an allowable maximum stern extension of five feet. This policy has also been extended to the fixed-gear groundfish fleet operating in the same area. These modified actions resulted from extensive consultations.

The department frequently receives requests from individual harvesters for exemptions to these vessel-length policies. Requests are reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and decisions are made weighing several factors including conservation, competition, the economic viability of the fleet, vessel design, and the fishery profile.

Despite requests from individual harvesters to either review vessel-length restrictions or to be exempted from them, there has been no significant interest in review by major fisheries organizations. There are concerns around the approval of exemptions for individual harvesters given that this may enable individuals to overfish certain species and, more importantly, to achieve competitive advantages over other participants in the same fleet.

Allowing individual harvesters to exceed the applicable vessel registration rules has consistently created controversy within the fleets. It is generally not supported by fishery associations, and DFO's approach to requests for individual exemptions is to deny them.

Issues related to vessel-length restrictions are complex and challenging. Decisions taken, whether on an Atlantic-wide, regional, fishery, or fleet basis, need to ensure that conservation and other fisheries management objectives are not compromised; that the required consistency between regions and other government departments such as Transport Canada is maintained; and that they remain consistent with fleet-based approaches to ensure equity and fairness for all involved individuals.

With me today are representatives from all the DFO regions in the Atlantic and from our national fisheries policy group. We are happy to take your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Ms. Perry.

Your title is relatively new for you, isn't it?

[Jacqueline Perry]

This is week three.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Congratulations on your new position. It is well deserved.

Now, we're going to go to the questions. I remind you that we have two people on video conference.

Mr. McDonald.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you to our guests, both here in person and by video conference.

Jacqueline, I was surprised to hear you talk about consultation. I recently attended three outreach meetings in my riding, consultations by DFO. In total, there were probably over 150 fishermen who attended those three meetings, and the overarching complaint from fishermen.... It was the first time they had seen anyone from DFO come out and talk to them. They had never heard tell of anyone doing any consultation, even to the point where regulations were changed over the winter behind closed doors with no consultation. A fisherman actually had to use ATIP to get the information, to know what actually took place and what was said at that particular meeting. Consultation has been lacking, big time.

On the vessel lengths, in listening to what you're saying, I gather that the overall length regulations can be Atlantic-wide or regional, correct?

[Jacqueline Perry]

We have an Atlantic-wide policy that speaks to the significant licensing policies that apply to the inshore sector, but, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, there are provisions possible for individual fleet sectors that come forward as a fleet in a particular fishery, potentially in a particular area, to make representations to DFO to modify or to depart from that Atlantic-wide policy.

Some of the examples that I gave in my opening remarks are illustrative of those types of exercises. In all cases, they are a result of consultation, either on a regional basis or on a fleet-wide basis.

I take your point, Mr. McDonald, on the need for the engagement of harvesters on all matters, not just on licensing policy. It's very important. I think it's a priority for all the regions.

Certainly, in Newfoundland and Labrador, we put in a significant amount of extra effort over the fall and winter, going to small communities, hearing from harvesters directly, and getting their perspectives, not only on fleet exemptions and length policies but on all fisheries management approaches.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

You mentioned that allowing somebody to have a larger vessel would enable them to catch more fish, but everybody has their own IQ, they have their own quota. If it's enforced properly and watched, dock monitoring or whatever, fishermen are only allowed to catch what their quota is, whether it's a daily limit, a weekly limit, or whether it's the quota for the season.

If I have a quota to catch 250,000 pounds of crab, whether I catch that in a 39'11" or a 65-footer, I'm still only allowed to catch that quota, so how can I catch more by having a bigger vessel?

[Jacqueline Perry]

Certainly, in the Newfoundland and Labrador context, and I believe also in other regions, fishing enterprises tend to be multi-species, which means they can fish groundfish, shellfish, pelagics, etc. Not all of those fisheries are individual quota fisheries, so in some instances, a harvester who will have access to crab, for example, with an IQ—you're absolutely right—would be limited by the amount of fish associated with that, but they could then potentially use that same vessel to fish in a competitive fishery for which there is no individual limit.

In that instance, a larger vessel would put that individual participant at a distinct competitive advantage against other participants who are not using the same size vessel. Further, there have been some concerns expressed about competition, even in IQ fisheries, because a larger vessel is able to carry more gear and is able to fish in potentially more challenging environmental conditions, thereby perhaps having competitive access to preferential grounds. Not only is competition an issue in competitive fisheries, but there are also some competitive advantages that a larger vessel would confer over a smaller vessel.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

But those vessels are limited to the amount of gear they can carry as well. Even if it is a bigger vessel, they are limited to the amount of gear they can carry in some of the IQ fisheries.

[Jacqueline Perry]

You're absolutely right.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

In the crab fishery, for example, they're only allowed so many pots—

[Jacqueline Perry]

Exactly.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

—on the boat, so whether they take it in a small boat or big boat is not going to matter.

To me, what's being forgotten is the safety issue. You said certain vessels will go a certain distance, and somebody now with a 39'11" could go to the edge of the 200-mile limit and fish their quota, depending on what they're fishing. Wouldn't it be safer for that person to be out in a 44'11" or a 65-footer and let the fisherman decide where he wants to fish? It's a business decision, his or her decision to go to a bigger vessel and invest that kind of money.

Somebody with a very small quota, yes, they're not going to invest in a 44-foot or a 65-foot vessel. For somebody who has obtained a large quota, whether it was through buying quotas or inheriting it from a father or grandfather, whatever, if they want to go and catch that quota and do it safely.... I'll use this example. In Nova Scotia, the base size for a vessel is 44'11". In Newfoundland it's 39'11".

The last review that was done, as you mentioned, was in 2007. At that time, the 34'11"s were allowed to go up to 39'11", and 39'11" went up to 44'11", and anything above that went up by 20 feet to a 65-foot. There was a huge jump there, and there was no consideration there for competition or that vessel being able to catch more fish than a 44-footer. He was allowed to go a full 20 feet bigger.

It seems like in Newfoundland, for some reason, they're kept back from making the proper investment, and once they go to that 44-foot vessel, it falls then under Transport Canada's CSA rules and regulations. It has to be inspected every four years and carry more safety gear.

As you know, we've had instances over the past couple of years when fishermen were forced to use smaller boats, and several of them did not return to the wharf. It happened in St. John's last year to three fishermen from the Shea Heights area. They had to go out in a smaller, open boat when they had a 35-foot boat tied to the wharf, and because of the regulations, they weren't allowed to use it.

It doesn't make sense for a fisherman to be dictated that they have to go in an unsafe vessel when they have a safe vessel tied to the wharf. It should be your decision if you want to burn that extra fuel to go a short distance to catch your quota. It just doesn't make sense.

Can you rationalize why it would be the case that you put fishermen in harm's way because of the regulations?

[Jacqueline Perry]

I think the issue of vessel safety is an extremely complex one. Certainly the Transportation Safety Board's report coming out of the Pop's Pride incident, which you referenced, articulated that. Vessel length is only one of many factors that contribute to whether a vessel is being operated safely and to the level of risk that is associated with a particular fishing enterprise. We are not in a position to say—and I don't believe Transport Canada would be in a position to say—that a larger boat is, in and of itself, a safer boat. It's a very complex situation, and there is a variety of factors that would contribute to safety.

The rules we have today evolved over a 40-year history. Are the current break points we have the right ones? I think we demonstrated over that 30- or 40-year history that the department is certainly open to engaging with fleets and having the conversation about the appropriate vessel length to be used in the fisheries that are being prosecuted by those participants. I think our history demonstrates that we're responsive to evolution in fisheries where they are moving further offshore, changing the nature of the gear types that are used. That's something that we've done, but we've done so on the basis of consultation with the fleets, particularly where it's supported by the fleet to ensure that the principles and the objectives that we've established aren't compromised and that the implications—the consequences on conservation, viability, and safety—are all taken into consideration.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Ms. Perry, I have to cut it right there. We're well over the time. We'll come back to that.

Mr. Arnold, you have seven minutes, please.

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

Thank you to all of the witnesses for being here today. I guess I'll initially direct the question to Ms. Perry, but if any of the others have further explanation, I would welcome their comment as well.

Can you explain how it is that DFO regulates vessel size requirements and yet Transport Canada regulates vessel safety requirements? Is there a silo effect there within the two different ministries and agencies that makes it difficult for boat builders and fishermen to understand the regs?

[Jacqueline Perry]

From a regulatory perspective, DFO's role is to ensure that vessels that are used in commercial fisheries are registered with the department. As I've indicated, the policies around that to determine what size of vessel is appropriate to be used in a particular fishery have evolved over a significant period of time. I obviously can't speak to the Transport Canada regulatory environment, but in terms of the liaison between the two departments, we have an MOU with Transport Canada that obligates and requires us to consult with it on all vessel-related measures and to ensure, to the degree possible, that there is alignment between our objectives to achieve safety at sea for our commercial harvesters. Is it perfect? I wouldn't suggest to you that it is. We engage with Transport Canada officials when we develop integrated fisheries management plans. We're working at improving that engagement.

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

You've said it's not perfect. Could you provide your recommendations on what would improve it? That's really what this study is about.

[Jacqueline Perry]

I think it's more frequent interaction between us and our colleagues at Transport Canada to ensure that, when we're developing management measures—not only related to the vessel size but also related to season dates, opening times, and things of that nature—their input on vessel safety and their expertise are brought to bear when we're developing our measures.

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

I'll open it up to any others who have any comments on the difficult connection between DFO and Transport Canada.

[Mark Waddell, Acting Director General, Licensing and Planning, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Perhaps I can build on Jacqueline's response a little bit. We do have an MOU with Transport Canada and the Canadian Coast Guard, which was signed in 2006. It was renewed in 2015. In the intervening period, in 2011 we signed a letter of intent with them to share information so that we would all be privy to greater access for our respective information holdings and be able to draw on that for policy and regulatory development. Over the last year, in particular, we have had a series of renewed meetings and engagement with them at the assistant deputy minister levels and below. We continue to engage, as Jacqueline referenced, with them and have representatives from Transport, and we also invite TSB members to our advisory committee processes that we hold with industry when we're developing integrated fishery management plans.

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

Thank you. I saw our witness on teleconference.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Mr. Vincent.

[Patrick Vincent, Regional Director General, Region - Québec, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Good morning. I would like to give you an idea of relations with Transport Canada.

The Quebec standing committee on fishing vessel safety meets every February. People from Transport Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the Canadian Coast Guard, and even Quebec’s labour standards, equity and occupational health and safety board hold a workshop for fishers on vessel safety.

They review unfortunate incidents that have occurred in previous years and discuss what can be done to improve vessel safety. This is a forum where Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the Canadian Coast Guard, and Transport Canada work together to improve vessel safety. It is an excellent opportunity to bring everyone together and to have discussions. Policy changes, including vessel length rules, can be addressed here.

This is an example of a situation where there is good interdepartmental communication.