Fisheries Committee on Feb. 1st, 2021

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Battiste.

We'll now go to Madam Gill for six minutes or less, please.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would also like to thank all the witnesses who are with us today.

At the outset, I would like to humbly say that I don't have a lot of traditional indigenous knowledge about the fishery and salmon ecosystems. I'd like to hear from the witnesses here about their knowledge in general.

Of course, there is no order for the interventions.

I would also like to ask sub-questions. I can come back to them later, too.

Does the department have access to sources of information on this topic? Does it consult them?

In addition, I would like to know, although it is difficult to say, to what extent the department understands and uses such knowledge for the enhancement of Pacific salmon populations.

[Frank Brown]

Go ahead, please, Bev.

[Bev Sellars]

With regard to the indigenous knowledge, before the newcomers came, there were the natural laws and common sense of indigenous people. What they do is that they get down into the nitty-gritty of being on the land. They see the small changes, like we did 40 years ago when we started seeing the change in the salmon.

We go from the natural laws and common sense to this whole web of man-made laws that many times are harmful instead of helpful. These laws seem to be focusing more on advancing business development goals, and at some point.... You know, I say that we have two economies. We have the indigenous economy that walks on the land, swims in the waters and grows on the land, and we have the other economy, the monetary economy. That monetary economy is going to eventually kill the other economy.

I'll use my sister Tina as an example of what happens. She's the hunter in our family. She goes out and she sees the changes. She came back one day and was angry because they had logged out the moose calving grounds. If indigenous people had been involved, that wouldn't have happened.

These are just examples. There have to be no go zones.

I'll turn it over to you, Frank.

[Frank Brown]

To the question about resources that are available for reference purposes, in British Columbia, in the International Year of Biodiversity, I was an adviser to scientists exploring this question of biodiversity conservation, and we wrote a paper called “Coastal First Nations Fundamental Truths: Biodiversity, Sustainability and Stewardship”. We had the Haida, the 'Namgis and the Heiltsuk knowledge keepers, who basically were educated in western methods but were also students of our culture. We looked at the question, “Are there core values along the coast?”, and these knowledge keepers said, “Well, of course, silly.”

Then, the next question was, “What are they?”, so we came up with these seven core value statements or fundamental truths. That publication is available. We validated our truths with our stories, practices, languages and maps because it's the language that holds the knowledge. Biodiversity mirrors cultural diversity, so the genetic biodiversity of wild salmon is imperative because that's what gives the salmon the resiliency to adapt to climate change and the other issues that will be challenging them.

It's the same with our culture. There are very rich and diverse cultures that have relationships with this resource. As far as the government-to-government work goes, unfortunately the history has been one of disrespect and exploitation, and the only time we get any movement is when it becomes combative, when we have to stand up for these resources, because they don't have a voice for themselves.

I used to be on a Pacific fisheries conservation council, making recommendations to the federal and provincial ministers of fisheries, and I heard first-hand from the Atlantic Conservation Society about how DFO was hundreds of percentages off the biomass projections for decades, and how the economic pressure of the draggers also caused the collapse of the cod fishery.

As I said, it goes back to the values. What we have observed is that western science takes a little bit of information and then extrapolates out with computer-generated models, but if they're wrong, by the time it gets out here, they're totally off the mark. We have been witnesses to that, and we are the ones, as the indigenous people, who have to live with the results of these decisions that are made in Ottawa.

There needs to be more consideration given to the local people to consider their input in a collaborative way. I appreciate what the other witness brought forward. The first nations are about collaboration. We are about collaboration. We believe in taking the best of what western science has to offer but also incorporating our traditional and local knowledge to allow for informed decision-making and holding the salmon up as the key resource that sustained us all through the millennia.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Madam Gill. That was a little bit over time.

We'll now go to Mr. Johns for six minutes or less, please.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I want to thank all the witnesses as well.

It's an honour to be joining today's committee from the Nuu-chah-nulth people's territory and from the unceded territory of the Hupacasath and Tseshaht people.

Chief Brown, you talked a lot about local and indigenous knowledge, and we continue to hear from the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans that she supports local and indigenous knowledge. When we look at the decision-making, however, whether it be salmon allocation or herring in the Salish Sea, local and indigenous people are saying that they want to see it either suspended or curtailed until a whole-of-ecosystem management plan is in place, but the department continues to ignore local and indigenous knowledge and decision-making.

Do you agree that the minister needs to do more to demonstrate that those words are actually meaningful?

[Frank Brown]

I absolutely agree that the minister has to put into effect a verbal commitment. It's a challenge, because the status quo has been a heavy industrial driver, and it has been to our detriment.

You brought up the issue of herring, which is a main keystone species, a forage fish, a feeder fish for salmon. If you look at what's going on in British Columbia with herring, it's very similar to salmon. The herring have collapsed on Haida Gwaii. The north coast is in jeopardy. The gulf is questionable. There are no more herring on the west coast of Vancouver Island, which is the main food for both salmon and the orca, and that is on the watch of DFO.

We had to, basically, take direct action and occupy a Department of Fisheries and Oceans office because the herring biomass had collapsed in our territorial waters for six years. Finally when it started to come back a little bit, they wanted to have a commercial fishery. We said, “No, you cannot do that. You have to give the herring an opportunity to rebuild.” Look at what happened in the Atlantic. We took it right down to the last cod. When are we going to learn? We have to do things differently.

The other thing is that, yes, I believe the indigenous people are the voice of reason in this deliberation, but we have.... It's massive, because we're dealing with transboundary issues. We're dealing with Alaska and Oregon. Salmon don't know national or international boundaries. We have to work collaboratively so that the salmon can have a fighting chance.

The Minister of Fisheries has to show leadership and courage, and be able to hold back the line and hold salmon as the priority, not only the economic interest. That approach and that business model has not served us well. It's been 100 years, and we have seen an absolute destruction of salmon.

We have over 20 salmon-bearing rivers in our territory, and last year we had six salmon return in one river. It's just like when the inshore cod fishery was saying in the Atlantic, “There's no cod here,” but DFO was saying, “No, our computer-generated model says that there's this biomass.”

The people who are living there, the local knowledge keepers, are the ones who should be advising this process. That's the point.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

I appreciate that.

Ms. Lem, I really appreciate all of your testimony. There's a new mandate letter that just came out on January 15. It directs the minister to “Work in close collaboration with relevant ministers, as well as with First Nations, provincial and territorial authorities, fishing and stewardship organizations”—which I would identify as you—“and implicated communities across the Pacific Region to bring forward a Pacific Salmon Strategy and deliver on our commitment to conserve and protect wild Pacific salmon and their habitats and ecosystems.”

I believe that we're in a wild salmon emergency right now, and we haven't heard the minister come out and call it that. We need to hear that.

Maybe, Ms. Lem, you could talk about what resources you are getting now. You've cited the importance of your management tables. We recognize that. What is needed?

Right now we have a B.C. salmon restoration fund of $142.8 million, literally a drop in the bucket for what's needed. People are saying we need that every year, not over five years. Can you speak about what resources are necessary? What do you see in that mandate letter that you could bring forward?

They're now saying that your groups would be identified in this. What resources would you need to be able to advance this?

[Tawney Lem]

Thank you very much for the question, Mr. Johns.

I think, from an intangible standpoint, from the federal we need that commitment that's communicated throughout government to improve their participation, foster development and remove any barriers that are there for collaboration. As I had mentioned before, it's building that culture.

From a tangible standpoint, it's making sure there is integration within the federal structures so that they can support that ability to work across branches and departments. As mentioned before, it's to invest in that jointly developed research and science that supports these tables, and to seek input from those who are in a collaborative process, asking what they need for their development and success.

I appreciate the commitment of government for collaboration, but in part where we see the most success at these tables is coming from where the need for the table has been identified by those directly affected. It's coming from those internal to the issue, not mandated from an external source.

Collaboration is a choice. There has to be that willingness there. We need to be able to give space to local groups to build a process that really works for them. In essence, it has to be emergent for a group to have that best opportunity to develop that localized solution of how they're going to work together, and to have those groups identify the resources that are needed to support the work that they're doing together.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Johns.

We'll now go to Mr. Calkins for five minutes or less, please.

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

Thank you, Chair.

If I may, can we just use first names? It would make it easier for me.

I am going to start with you, Frank, if you don't mind.

Bev, please feel free to add in if you like.

I want to talk to you a little bit about these weirs and pound traps or the technology that first nations used to use. You mentioned, Frank, the ability to do very selective fishing. Could you comment on how selective weir fishing or pound trap fishing can be?

[Frank Brown]

The weirs are ingenious in their simplicity. As we know if we're coast dwellers, the tide rises and falls every six hours. As the tide rises, those rock weirs catch the salmon. They come in and they get stuck in there and our people used to go and get them.

We had a very sophisticated governance system. The chief was the one who did the oversight in managing the salmon. That was one example of how this could be done.

Also, the Coast Salish on the Salish Sea had the reef net fishing also for weirs. There were weirs in the rivers that would guide the salmon into a certain area and they'd go and pick out specific pieces of salmon. That ancient technology and that sustainable technology still exists today.

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

I visit the coast all the time. You can tell by the wall behind me that I like going fishing and hunting and doing some of those things. I've been a fish counter before for fish and wildlife here in Alberta. I've seen fish counting stations on the weirs and these diversion channels, so I know that you are able to count pink salmon and sockeye as they come through. The ability for selective fishing is there.

I know there are lots of partnerships with first nations in the hatchery processes. Would first nations communities care if they were allowed to use selective fishing techniques if the salmon they were keeping for food, social, ceremonial or even economic considerations were from a hatchery, thereby being able to leave wild fish to continue on up the streams to spawn?

Would that be something of interest?

[Frank Brown]

I don't have any authority to speak for all first nations, first of all. I can speak for myself and I am a leader of my nation.

I think we have had a salmon hatchery for well over 30 years. All of the other systems are basically barren. We would get a little bit of recruitment from our salmon hatcheries, but there is a conflict with this idea of hatcheries because it's the whole issue of the genetics and the monoculture of the hatcheries. For some reason the salmon enhancement program has not been supported. I have talked to many fishermen who have advocated for ocean ranching—

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

I'm not going there, Frank. Let me maybe be just a little bit more specific.

If there were some hatchery fish coming back, first nations would have the ability to actually collect and select all of the hatchery fish out so that they don't get back necessarily into the breeding stock, leaving the wild ones to go back and actually do the breeding. Therefore, you'd eliminate the genetic drift that a hatchery is alleged to cause, but you still have more access to salmon without going to the extreme of ocean ranching. I don't think anybody in Canada wants to go there.

I'm talking about mark-selective fishing. This works for recreational fishermen. Would it work as well for food, social, ceremonial and even some type of economic catch for people for when the salmon return to the rivers?

Right now when I go out there, I see nets being used in our flowing waters and some of them get caught up—sturgeon and bycatch. Fish are caught that are not necessarily wanted. I'm wondering if there would be a consideration for how effective a new technique or a selective technique might be to satisfy everybody's needs including the longevity of wild salmon.

[Frank Brown]

We have a doctrine of priority. Conservation comes first. We are going to have to do everything in our power to save wild salmon. That's number one.

Number two is with food, social and ceremonial. I get coho from our hatchery and smoke them and they are great fish. It's the same thing with dog salmon; it's a great fish.

I draw the line with finfish aquaculture because of the method and the health of those fish. I personally can't support that, but I have eaten hatchery salmon.

If I could, I have to say that in the last few years, when we were getting those coho, there were these little white pellets inside the meat of the coho. We have never seen that before, and I think that's something that's going on out in the ocean.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Calkins.

We'll now go to Madam Gill, for two and a half minutes or less, please.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In fact, my question about sources was answered earlier. I would like to thank Mr. Brown for his answer.

We are talking about a document, but I am well aware of the importance of oral culture among first nations. I wonder if there are other people from the communities who, like Mr. Brown, could testify.

What is the state of this knowledge? We wouldn't want it to get lost either.

Perhaps Mr. Brown can answer me.

[Frank Brown]

We have an oral history. That's how our knowledge has been transferred intergenerationally for 700 generations for the Heiltsuk people.

We are at risk of losing our language, but our young people are stepping up and they're taking responsibility to learn the language. As I said earlier, that's where the knowledge is, because there are certain things you could say in our language that you can't say in English or in French.

We are working to decolonize. First nations people have been the most marginalized people in Canada because of the desire to have access to our resources. On the coast, it's been fish, salmon, timber. However, our people never gave up on our commitment to our place and our values and our system, even though we've dealt with the forces of colonization.

If you don't mind, I'm going to pass it over to Bev, because I've more or less monopolized the comments.

[Bev Sellars]

I just want to say that the knowledge is there. In my territory, we have a group of elders, the Secwepemc elders, who before the pandemic got together every month and talked about things. As an example, Mount Polley is in our traditional territory. When Mount Polley happened and the disaster came down, our elders told the scientists who were working there that there were certain fish—bottom fish—in the lake. The scientists had no knowledge of that, and when they went to check, they found out that this was true. That knowledge is there, but you don't see scientists coming to talk to our elders or have anybody seeking their input.

They're teaching the younger people. They're passing it on, so yes, it is there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Madam Gill.

I have to apologize to my colleague, Mr. Hardie. I jumped over him and went to Madam Gill first.

I'll go back to Mr. Hardie now, and, of course, I apologize.

You're up, Mr. Hardie, for five minutes or less.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was wearing my blank look, so I can understand that.

Is it too simple to ask of all the witnesses whether there is a plan. Is there a plan to restore abundance in salmon? Is there something that glues together all of the issues affecting salmon stocks beyond just managing how many fish are caught, which seems to be the main thing that DFO and others do? Is there something to deal with habitat? Is there something to deal with predation, with disease, with the herring, etc.? Is there a master plan? Is it possible to have one, or does it have to be sort of broken down by region or river?

Frank, we'll start with you.

[Frank Brown]

I think that Tawney has the right idea with what they're doing at West Coast Aquatic. The Delgamuukw decision said that we are all here to stay. We need to work together. We need to set the arena so that we can put our interests forward.

This isn't unprecedented. We have been in this process, in particular with the coastal first nations and the War in the Woods, where we had loggers and other governments and the first nations come together to come up with a more sustainable development around forest management. So I think—