Evidence of meeting #91 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 boat.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:15 a.m.
Fish Harvester, Glen and Jerry Fisheries Inc., As an Individual
You can't combine everything, no. Some things, he's going to lose. He's going to lose his core status, his cod shares, and maybe some other small licences, and I don't think that's fair.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Okay. Thank you.
We're now on to our next harvester.
Mr. Woodford, go ahead, please, for up to 10 minutes.
9:15 a.m.
Eldred Woodford Fish Harvester, As an Individual
Good morning, Mr. Chair and committee members. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you here today.
My name is Eldred Woodford. I'm here representing the Fish, Food and Allied Workers Union of Newfoundland and Labrador. I represent the fish harvesters in my region on the Fish, Food and Allied Workers inshore council.
I live in Herring Neck, a small rural community on the northeast coast of Newfoundland. I've been fishing 30 years. I started out as a crew member in the inshore. For the last 25 years, I've been the owner-operator of a multi-species 50-foot enterprise, primarily fishing snow crab. Almost all of the fisheries we prosecute today are competitive ones of some sort, with the exception of snow crab, which since 1996 has been an IQ fishery. Generally speaking, most of my fishing occurs offshore.
I am pleased to be here today to talk about vessel length. There is no doubt that vessel length policies are a frequent topic of discussion in the fishery. My goal here today is to share the perspective held by the majority of fish harvesters in my area. Some people would want to use this opportunity to tell you something that would personally benefit only themselves, but I would be doing a disservice to the fishery and the majority of fish harvesters in our province if I did that. I'm here today speaking on behalf of the fish harvesters who elected me to represent them in my region. These are their perspectives, not ones that I've cherry-picked to cater to the interests of one or two individuals.
As the committee is likely aware, the fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador has gone through many changes in the past 30 years. We went from a fishery based on cod and groundfish to one that was shellfish-dominated. Now we are transitioning once again. As a result of these changes in the ecosystem, many fishing enterprises in the province are multi-species enterprises.
Previous presenters to the committee have talked about safety. They've talked about competitiveness in the fishery. To be clear, snow crab is an individual quota in Newfoundland. So is 3Ps cod on the south coast. But many fisheries are still competitive, and it's because of this that changing vessel length restrictions could result in increased safety issues in the fishery.
It's true that fishing is one of the most dangerous occupations in the world, but a larger boat does not always guarantee safety. Safety is a mindset. It's the decisions you make as an enterprise owner and the steps you take on board your vessel, regardless of length, that contribute to safety. As I said, most enterprises in Newfoundland are multi-species, and the majority of harvesters in the province participate in a competitive fishery, whether it's shrimp, turbot, cod, capelin, mackerel, herring, or seals. Allowing for increases in vessel length may satisfy the demands of a few harvesters who own multiple enterprises, but for the many more harvesters who can't afford to buy the larger vessels, it will force them to try to make more trips and go out in dangerous conditions in order to compete with the larger vessels. This will do nothing to increase safety in the industry.
In 1995 DFO began issuing snow crab permits to the inshore less-than-35-foot vessels in our area. At that time, about half of the supplementary snow crab fleet was fishing inside the line, basically within the bays. The other half of the supplementary fleet was fishing outside the line, or offshore. As more less-than-35-foot vessels entered into this new inshore crab fleet, those of us in the larger supplementary fleet, who traditionally fished inshore, were forced to move outside or offshore. DFO practically doubled their IQs to compensate them for moving out of the bays or the inshore areas. Because of these increased quotas and the increased number of larger vessels that were fishing outside of this line, or outside the bays, or offshore, however you refer to it, this resource was overfished. Along with changing environmental conditions, the stock has since declined.
In 1997 DFO changed the licensing policy with respect to vessel length for the supplementary and full-time fleets. As a result, most of the supplementary, who were operating smaller vessels, were permitted to acquire larger vessels. At that time, the resource was strong. It allowed the fleet to harvest their allocations with little difficulty. Currently, these fleet vessels range from 40 feet to 70 feet. At present, even though the snow crab is an IQ fishery, because it is a declining resource there's an element of competition in that fishery. In my fleet, prior to policy changes made in 1997, there was only a handful of 65-foot vessels. There were no issues with crab resource abundance.
After the change, the number of boats over 65 feet practically tripled. Now, the resource has declined. Smaller vessels that can carry only 300 crab pots are at a competitive disadvantage to the larger 65-foot fleet that can carry 800 pots. This has forced some fish harvesters operating in smaller vessels to fish in poor weather and compete with the larger vessels, thus negatively affecting safety. I've used this as an example of how changes made to policy can have negative impacts on some.
Before I turn things over to my colleague, I want to speak on the issue of consultation. Based on previous presentations to the committee, you might have the perception that the opinion of the majority of fish harvesters in our province is being ignored by DFO or our union. This is simply not true.
The reality here is that changes to vessel length policy are not supported by the majority of harvesters in our fleet. In fact, at recent crab consultations in Gander, I spoke to several harvester representatives, in both fleets, who raised concerns about the committee's ongoing study. What I heard from the majority of those harvesters or those representatives is that they were not concerned with this issue and they were not in support of changing the existing policy.
If that policy is changed to allow fewer fish harvesters to use vessels of up to 45 feet in the inshore, it will create more pressure on the harvesters operating under the currently existing policy, many of whom have already spent thousands of dollars to modify their vessels under the existing policy. This policy change will force some either to buy larger vessels or to fish in poor weather in order to compete with the larger ones within their fleet. This policy change will do absolutely nothing to improve safety within that fleet. It will increase the harvest, and it will also increase the harvesting capacity in the turbot fishery, thus decreasing the viability of existing turbot-fishing enterprises.
No one here would disagree with you that consultation is key when it comes to how our fishery decisions are made, but we must be careful not to make changes to our fishery based on the views of a minority. We have a democratic structure within our organization and our fleets that allows for significant debate on the issue, and time and time again the majority of harvesters have come to the conclusion that they are satisfied with the existing policy with regard to vessel length.
These are the views that representatives like me bring forward to DFO. When the time comes that the views of the majority of harvesters change, then I will bring those recommendations forward, but we cannot bend to the demands of a few individuals who hold many multiple enterprises and who want to push out those who can't afford to compete with the larger vessels. This is not in the best interests of our harvesters or our communities.
I'll now turn things over to my colleague, Keith Smith, who will share his views. I look forward to answering any questions.
Thank you very much.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Mr. Woodford.
Before we do that, I want to beg Mr. Greenham's forgiveness. I mentioned that we were going to him next, but Mr. Woodford spoke, obviously on behalf of FFAW, and we are going to go to Mr. Smith now for his comments.
We'll end on a high note, Mr. Greenham, and you'll be the last one. We'll be with you in just a few minutes.
Go ahead, Mr. Smith.
9:25 a.m.
Fish Harvester and Inshore Council Member, Fish, Food and Allied Workers
Thank you, Mr. Chair and representatives, for letting me speak here today.
I represent the under-35 fleet in Trinity Bay.
9:25 a.m.
A voice
Under 40 feet.
9:25 a.m.
Fish Harvester and Inshore Council Member, Fish, Food and Allied Workers
Under 40? I always considered it 34 feet 11 inches, but under 40. I'm crab committee chair of that fleet.
This question arose when I was asked about it by a representative. He wanted the question asked to see how people felt about it two years ago. I let it go down to the floor. Discussion happened. Everybody put in their views. At the end of it, overwhelmingly, over 90% voted to leave it like it was. They didn't want to compete with the bigger individuals and be plant controlled.
Most of the fishermen I speak for are definitely not plant or corporation owned. They are themselves. They do not want to have the expense and have to compete in unsafe conditions against the bigger boats. Most of the boats are from 30 feet to 36 feet. We've been doing pretty good. Their opinions are that if we go bigger we will need more resource. As everybody has said clearly here today, the resource is declining. I hope everybody takes that into consideration.
I've been in this industry since 1979. I started by myself. My brother joined me the next year. I fished all the species that I could possibly get a licence for. I've never been tied to a plant, a company, or even a bank. I have always done it on my own, on our own, and have built a good livelihood. I've always spoke as.... My partner here goes back a good many years. We're on the board of directors for the Sealers Association. I always speak as the majority, as each one of you does here in your job: it's the majority.
That's the biggest concern I have. We have a few outspoken individuals who are looking at their own agenda—or even companies pushing them for an agenda—to change these policies to their benefit. They don't look at the overall picture. The vote in 2017 in my two meetings, in the 206 pieces of pie that I represent, was still an overwhelming 90%. I hope you take into consideration how these people feel about this.
How do you pay for individuals...? Most of us are my age. We have a few younger guys, but not very many. I think the average age in my fleet is around 58. That's for the owners. These younger guys who have committed don't want to be forced to have a bigger boat to compete in the competitive fisheries such as capelin and cod. It is a competitive fishery, even the crab. It's IQ, yes, but it's still competitive within your zone. It's a big concern. I hope you all look at it and say that the majority should have the biggest say here, not the minority. That's a big part of this.
Look at this fishery. Some people are looking to get out and to just try to spend their last few years there. When that thing came out on the lobster, that V-notching, I was one of the first guys who started voluntarily doing it. I tried to persuade my fishermen in the area to look at the future, for the future of people, so that we could leave more resources in the water than when we started. I think that should be taken into consideration. I don't know about having the same numbers, but we need to have people actively involved in the fishery. If we all go bigger, I'll tell you, there are definitely not enough resources there for everybody. That's a huge concern from my perspective overall.
I think this is a major way of getting rid of the small guy. I think that's the way the finger is pointed. I'm very upset over it, honest to God. I wouldn't be here today if I didn't feel this way, and it comes from inside, not from writing the damn cheques. I hope that everybody can see where this is going. I can, Eldred can, and so can some of the other fishermen.
Thank you.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
9:30 a.m.
Fish Harvester and Inshore Council Member, Fish, Food and Allied Workers
Yes., I think that's the correct number for the licence owners. Most of them are not owned, operated, or driven by companies. If that is lifted to 44 feet 11 inches, they feel that we will be forced to be tied to a plant and we're very uncomfortable with that.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Mr. Smith. We appreciate that.
Last, but by no means least, we have Mr. Greenham. You have up to 10 minutes, please. Go ahead.
9:30 a.m.
Fish Harvester, As an Individual
Thank you.
Hello. My name is Collin Greenham. I am an inshore fisherman from Pacquet, which is located on the northeast coast of the Island of Newfoundland. I am the owner of an inshore fishing enterprise and operate a 39-foot vessel to harvest my quotas. I have a fishing master fourth class and 25 years' experience fishing.
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans for providing a platform for my voice to be heard. My presentation will put forward my views of the commercial fishing vessel extension regulations, combining quotas, and commercial fishing capacity.
First, the commercial fishing vessel extension regulations must be amended to allow inshore fish harvesters the right to increase the length of their vessel to enhance safety for all those on board: family members, crew members, owners, and captains. It is my view that the restriction of vessel length at 39 feet 11 inches, should be amended to allow a minimum vessel length of 44 feet 11 inches. The implementation of new regulations a few short years ago forced inshore harvesters to travel further out into the open, unprotected, and dangerous waters of the North Atlantic, approximately 200 miles offshore, to harvest turbot. This has been my experience for the last three years of fishing turbot: at one time, you could fish turbot near shore, but now, like I said, through regulation changes and so on, we have to go out to the continental shelf.
As you are aware, Newfoundland and Labrador is the most easterly province in Canada, and the island portion of the province, located far out in the North Atlantic Ocean, provides fish harvesters with no shelter within minutes of leaving its rugged shores. Yet our western neighbours in the province of Nova Scotia, attached to the mainland, who primarily fish with shelter from the islands in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, have regulations that permit their inshore fleet to reach 44 feet 11 inches. I ask you to help me understand why this could be: the most easterly province in Canada does not have the same regulations as our western neighbour regarding inshore fishing vessel length.
Should you be thinking of increased competition in the fishery as per such a regulation amendment, I say that nothing could be further from the truth. I have three IQs, which include snow crab. I have two capelin IQs. I have the toad crab IQ. When I go after turbot, I have a trip limit quota, the same as every other vessel. This is a decision not about competition but rather safety—the safety of those putting their lives on the line each time they leave port to steam out into the open North Atlantic to put food on our kitchen tables.
My other points are about combining quotas and commercial fishing vessel capacities.
My view on combining licences is that it would be a positive step for the industry, a step in the right direction. With the amount of outmigration from rural areas becoming more apparent year after year, the combining of quotas could assist with efforts to curb this trend. It could provide crew members with the necessary income to survive and thrive, not to mention the added benefit for enterprise owners like me to be able to retain properly trained crew members, who otherwise would collect a paycheque and migrate to better prospects once the season has ended.
Combining quotas would also offset the financial burden for enterprise owners who bought quotas based on prices and quotas in previous years to find out that a third of their quota has been cut the following year.
In terms of commercial fishing capacity, all key species are on either IQs or trip limits. Like I said, in 2007, the changes in regulations granted offshore harvesters an overall increase of up to 25 feet, while inshore harvesters were given only five feet. I don't think that was fair, and I think vessel length should be between me and Transport Canada. I can understand it for some guys who like fishing in the bottom of the bays in a 20-foot speedboat, yes. I mean, they're landlocked, or they're on a small vessel.
When I leave my port, I'm open to the ocean, the North Atlantic, one of the most dangerous oceans in the world. I travel every year. For the last three years, I've been going to the continental shelf to fish turbot. That's not going to change; I'm still going to do it. I just want a bigger vessel, the gold 44 feet 11 inches, so I can make it safe for myself, my crew, and my family. Like I said, before now, we could fish turbot closer to shore, but DFO regulations stopped us from doing that.
I acquired my licences from my father, my mother, and my father-in-law. I bought them out when they retired. This goes back generations of fishermen in my family. Originally from the Horse Islands, my family is. Like I said, I think it's a big safety issue. We should be able to go to 44 feet 11 inches. That's my biggest concern.
Once again, I would like to offer my sincere thanks to the chair and the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans for providing this platform for dialogue. I hope we can move forward in a unified approach to strengthen the oldest traditions so they continue for generations to come.
Thank you.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Mr. Greenham.
Before I go to the questions, I have a very quick question and clarification. You said you're fishing turbot and you're going to the continental shelf. Just to give the committee an idea of how far that is in miles, how far would you steam out to catch turbot on average?
9:40 a.m.
Fish Harvester, As an Individual
Last year I travelled and I was in 2J. I was 225 miles from La Scie, and I've been travelling to that area now for the last three years. I went up to 3L. I fished two years up in 3L. That's about 130 miles off Cape Bonavista.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
The most is just over 200 nautical miles from the port where you live?
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you very much, sir.
Now we go to questions, folks. Votes are still possible, so we have at least four questions.
We're going to start with the mover of the motion, Mr. McDonald.
You have seven minutes, please.
I remind the committee members to please identify who the question is for, because we have a lot of witnesses here.
Mr. McDonald.
March 27th, 2018 / 9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Ken McDonald Liberal Avalon, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, witnesses, for appearing today.
I just want to let the committee know, because Mr. Stratton mentioned that I invited him and Mr. Careen, that I actually invited five fishermen to come here because I wanted the committee members to hear what I hear on a daily basis, whether I'm in Calvert, Point Lance, or Harbour Grace, and to give them a chance to tell their story.
I do believe that the five fishermen who I invited to be witnesses are not owned by a company. They're individual company owners. They own their own enterprises, but some of them—and probably all of them—have a lot of money invested in their enterprise. They're not owned by anybody. They might be owned by a bank—
9:40 a.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Ken McDonald Liberal Avalon, NL
—but as long as they keep making their payments, they're in control. I just wanted to state that.
Mr. Woodford, you stated that the majority of people are against increasing the size of the vessels from the current limit of 39 feet 11 inches to 44 feet and 11 inches. For the committee, what size of vessel do you fish in?
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Ken McDonald Liberal Avalon, NL
A 50-foot? Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Thorne, I've met you a couple of times. You mentioned you were building a new boat last year and you had problems with the one that got leased or purchased in Nova Scotia.
On the deck of that boat one day when we were having a chat, you made a statement that stayed with me, and that's kind of why I invited you to appear at the committee. Your statement went something like this. ”People talk doom and gloom in the fishery,” you said, “and there's no doom and gloom in the fishery if the bureaucrats would just get out of our way and let us fish.” Could you explain what you meant by that statement?
9:40 a.m.
Fish Harvester, As an Individual
I'll try.
Every time you turn on the radio or TV, especially back in Newfoundland, back home—I don't know about up here, because it's new to me—it's always doom and gloom. You see fellows going around in all kinds of different small rigs. You never see the people who put a lot of money into it, and God love the ones who don't put the money in it—it's up to themselves. I'm not trying to make bad friends here.
I started off with a small boat and worked my way up. We built a new 80-footer. We have a 55-footer and we have two 40-footers. No company owns us. I can guarantee that, boys. Everything we've got is owned, and we'd own a lot more if the companies would get out of the way or you people would let us.
For me, sitting back here now, I want to buy more licences. They can say what they like about it. A good many of us want to buy licences, but we're too limited, three and combining, and I have to sit back now and let Mr. Quinlan and the rest of the plants buy up stuff and give to those people. If our combining was changed, I'd go four, five, or six in each one of the boats so Mr. Quinlan can't get so many. Then you have way better jobs and more men employed, and then doom and gloom wouldn't be there.
If a plant owns it, he can tell you to go and fish. You get one licence, you go do this, you go do that, and you do that. There is a nice bit of that. A lot of it is our fault for sitting around the table and letting that happen. That's where I think the doom and gloom would come into it. If a plant owned me, I'd go this way.... I wouldn't be able to afford the licence that we have because he wouldn't go along with it. He'd send me off fishing. When we're independent, we can buy our licences.
We don't want money from anybody. We can go to the bank and get our own money and do our own thing. Over the years, we've done very well. Let us do that, and we can turn stuff around a nice bit, in my opinion. We have 13 of us on our boats now making very good livings. Leave us alone and we'll make 26 very good livings. That's about as good as I can tell you.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Ken McDonald Liberal Avalon, NL
Thank you for that. As I said, I did see the new vessel you built at Harbour Grace Ocean Enterprises, and you didn't buy that for a dollar, I guarantee you.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Ken McDonald Liberal Avalon, NL
You have millions of dollars invested in your enterprise, for sure.
Mr. Careen, you mentioned having to own four boats and fish two at a time. How frustrating is this as an enterprise owner to know that in order to fish what you have in quotas, you've got to have four boats and you've got to have a certain size? How frustrating is that for you and for your enterprise?