Fisheries Committee on April 17th, 2018

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. I will be your chair today.

With us, appearing by video conference, we have Verna Docherty, Acting Manager of Licensing Policy and Operations, Maritimes region. We also have with us Marc LeCouffe, Director of Resource and Aboriginal Fisheries Management, Gulf region. Also with us by video conference, we have Jacqueline Perry, Regional Director General, Newfoundland and Labrador region.

Appearing in person, we have Mr. Patrick Vincent, Regional Director General, Quebec region, and Mr. Mark Waddell, Acting Director General, Licensing and Planning.

Folks, we are continuing our study on commercial vessel length and licensing policies in Atlantic Canada. With that, I will go to our guests for 10 minutes each.

Are we going to split some time?

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

We understood that the committee members had questions for us. We had prepared opening remarks for our previous appearance but none for this one. We turn to you for questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

All right. With that, we'll go to our first seven-minute round of questions.

Mr. McDonald, please proceed.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses for appearing here this morning.

Ms. Perry, it's good to see you again this morning. We spent a bit of time together yesterday at the Halifax airport. That didn't work out so well for you, as you had to go back to St. John's. Again, thank you for making yourself available today.

We've heard from several witnesses, from people involved in the industry and from fishermen. We've heard from representatives of unions and people who want to be in a union.

Here's my first question. One of the witnesses, a Mr. Roy Careen from Point Lance, explained his enterprise as a fisherman, as a business person. He has to use four vessels to catch whatever his quota might be. He explained that for tuna, for example, he and his son each get in a boat, they go to Nova Scotia, and they use both boats to catch 12 or 13 tuna, whatever the maximum is of his tags for that.

Can somebody explain to me why he would need to use four boats in an enterprise that he owns and operates as a business person, and why DFO as a department dictates through policy or regulations that in order to do the fishing that he's doing it requires him to have four separate vessels?

[Mark Waddell]

I will perhaps turn to my regional colleague, who is more familiar with the specifics of the enterprise itself.

Jackie.

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

I'll start out by saying that each enterprise has a maximum vessel eligibility. We've spoken about that before at this committee. In Newfoundland and Labrador, that's primarily divided into two fleets for the inshore sector, 39 feet 11 inches and below, so less than 40 feet, and then 40 feet and above. Depending on the fishery that a harvester participates in, it can go up to 89 feet 11 inches, which is quite a large vessel.

In addition to the primary vessel, which is what those vessel eligibility break points speak to, harvesters are also able to own, operate, and register secondary vessels. We do not compel any harvester to use four vessels. Those are decisions that harvesters are making based on the operational profile of their enterprise and the fishery they're participating in.

For example, a harvester may choose to use a smaller vessel, one of his secondary vessels, to participate in a fishery where the allocations or their available quotas are much lower and closer to shore. With the costs associated with harvesting those, it might be inappropriate to use a larger vessel.

Those harvesters are making those decisions themselves as independent business people, based on the cost and revenue profile of the individual fisheries they're participating in. There is no DFO policy that forces them to do that. They are making those decisions themselves, within those maximum eligibility break points that we've already spoken about.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

As a follow-up to that, is there a limit to the number of quotas that can be fished on each vessel?

[Jacqueline Perry]

That depends on the fishery-by-fishery basis. For example, for harvesters, a typical enterprise profile is one IQ, in the case of IQ fisheries, but that is subject to a variety of policy constructs. For example, some enterprises are combined, as you are aware, in which case there may be multiple IQs harvested off the same vessel.

In other enterprise situations, the harvesters may be what we call “buddied up”. It's not a full permanent combining of quotas, but harvesters in some fleets are eligible to work together and harvest together on one boat. They're independent owner-operators, independent enterprises, but they're partnering up to use one vessel to harvest for both.

There's a wide variety of combinations of that. You can have combined enterprises buddying up, depending on the fleets. In some fisheries, in some fleets you can have two, three, four, or five IQs coming off the same vessel, but it does vary by fleet, and it varies by fishery.

I believe that in the Maritimes region there are similar kinds of constructs, where there is a partnership or an enterprise stacking option for some enterprises depending on the fishery. I don't know if Verna wants to take a few moments to describe what that looks like in the Maritimes region.

[Verna Docherty, Acting Manager, Licensing Policy and Operations, Region - Maritimes, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Sure, if I may.

We do have several different possibilities for people to reconcile their business in the best way they see fit. We have partnerships similar to the buddy-up policy that Jackie explained, which exists in Newfoundland. We have partnerships in some of our lobster and crab fisheries that allow two individual licence-holders to partner up for the length of the season and fish one and a half times the trap complement that is authorized for that particular fishery.

We allow stacking, which would allow one lobster licence-holder to acquire a second licence and stack them together. In the swordfish harpoon, the groundfish, the fixed-gear less than 45-foot fleets, and in the sea urchin fishery, we also allow harvest benefit combining, which is a permanent combining that allows one or more licence-holders to relinquish their licence back to the department so that a single licence-holder can acquire the harvest benefits associated with that licence. Those benefits can include things like the attribution of catch history, access to new areas, access to new gear types, or access to new gear amounts.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

We heard from a fisherman that a family member had what's called a “core” licence in the groundfish, for cod in particular, and he is compelled to not use a boat any bigger than 28 feet long. To use his words, he said that “we actually tow that boat behind mine so that he can catch his quota when he gets out there and be safe”.

It seems a bit ridiculous that a fisherman.... Whether it's core or non-core, he's fishing the same as anybody else. He's fishing in the same waters, but because of regulations and policy he is.... I won't say he's condemned to a 28-foot boat because a lot of people use them, but he's kind of paralyzed in what he can do. He has to stay with that 28-foot boat. He is not allowed to go even as big as the 39 feet and 11 inches, which would be the limit that he could go to. Can anyone square that circle for me to show why it makes sense that somebody would be actually handcuffed when it comes to vessel size in that particular usage?

[Jacqueline Perry]

Did you want me to address that given that it's primarily a Newfoundland and Labrador construct? I need to go back to the difference between core and non-core enterprises as a point of departure. During the period immediately following the moratorium, an extensive exercise was undertaken by the department to determine what would be characterized as the core professional harvester and enterprise complement for the fishery going forward.

There were criteria established that would determine whether or not an enterprise was core or non-core. I will say that those criteria were extremely liberal, and it was a measure of the dependence and history of attachment to the fishery leading up to that point in time. If a harvester was not successful in keeping this categorization of non-core, it meant that their attachment to the fishery was extremely tangential at that time.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

Thank you, Ms. Perry.

[Jacqueline Perry]

That complement of harvesters is meant to be—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

Ms. Perry, thank you. We are on a tight timeline here. We have to continue. Perhaps you can finish that thought in the next question.

With that, we are going to seven minutes for the Conservative side. I would like to ask permission from the committee to be the person asking these questions.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

My first question is for you, Ms. Perry. We've heard time and again through testimony in this study, as well as in others, that the FFAW is at the table many times when policy and legislation decisions are made regarding quota and policy. How much say does the FFAW have in the day-to-day operations of DFO in Atlantic Canada?

[Jacqueline Perry]

The FFAW is a harvester association. They have been the certified bargaining agent of the inshore professional fish harvesters in Newfoundland and Labrador for decades.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

Are they at the table making decisions with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans when it comes to fishers in Atlantic Canada?

[Jacqueline Perry]

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans makes decisions with respect to fisheries management. We are the regulator. We make those decisions. We consult extensively with harvester associations. We do so throughout the country. This is not a Newfoundland and Labrador [Technical difficulty—Editor] harvester associations exist. They are a significant participant. We consult with them, of course, and we also consult with other stakeholders as well, not just the FFAW. But we are the decision-makers, and we make those decisions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

On marine safety and vessel length, how much consultation or communication and dialogue do you have with Transport Canada?

[Jacqueline Perry]

We have an ongoing relationship with Transport Canada at the national level. We have a memorandum of understanding that provides structure to that. At the regional level, Transport Canada officials are invited and participate regularly in our fisheries advisory processes. Operationally, we consult with them on a day-to-day basis with respect to specific questions from our officials.

In addition, our integrated fisheries management plans include a comprehensive section on vessel safety. Those plans, once drafted, are provided to Transport Canada officials for their review and input.

I would suggest that amount of interaction is fairly extensive.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

Would it be safe to say that part of Transport Canada's mandate is marine safety?

[Jacqueline Perry]

I'm sorry, but the volume, the sound—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Todd Doherty]

I'm sorry. I'll go to Mr. Waddell with that question.

[Mark Waddell]

Absolutely, Mr. Chair. I think it better encapsulates their mandate than that of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, for sure—