Evidence of meeting #24 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was hatcheries.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Hardie. The time has gone a little over.
We'll now go to Mr. Mazier for five minutes or less.
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Mr. Hauknes, you mentioned the large investment it takes to enter the fishing industry. I can totally understand that, as I'm a farmer myself, but on the prairies.
Can you explain what the impacts to Canadian fishers such as you and to the surrounding communities would be, if the Pacific salmon stocks continue to decline?
5:50 p.m.
Fisher, As an Individual
It would have a devastating effect. A large portion of our yearly income is from salmon. We support a lot of local businesses. This last year we've spent probably $25,000 in Prince Rupert just on building a herring skiff. Two years ago we put a new refrigeration system in. That was done out of North Saanich. We put an engine in the boat. That was done in Nanaimo.
In the last three to four years, we've spent a significant amount of money in local communities that just wouldn't be there. Salmon is probably about half of our income each year. If we didn't have a salmon fishery, it would be really devastating.
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Half your income; that's good to know.
Mr. Temple, other witnesses have alluded to the lack of collaboration on the future of Pacific salmon. What do you think the federal government should do to improve communication and collaboration in relation to improving Pacific salmon stocks?
5:50 p.m.
Capt Josh Temple
I'm sorry, but I didn't really hear that myself in other witnesses' testimony. I'm a firm believer that the collaboration has been fulsome and that it continues to grow. I think that continued and enhanced collaboration among the federal government, the province, first nations, scientists, academia, and ENGOs is critical, if we're going to see positive steps in the recovery of salmon.
I apologize, Mr. Mazier, but I did not hear that perspective today.
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Okay, that's good.
You commented on the impacts of aquatic invasive species to ecosystems and fish populations, particularly the impact of green crab on wild salmon. Do you believe that the current federal government has provided enough support for AIS prevention and control in British Columbia?
5:50 p.m.
Capt Josh Temple
I wish you would ask me that question two or three weeks from now. I might have a better answer. Right now we're still up in the air because some funding decisions have been delayed due to COVID and a variety of reasons. but we expect to hear some dramatic progress decisions soon.
I do believe, from what I've seen over the last year and a half, being engaged in the green crab issue with both the province and the federal government, that significant attention is being given towards green crab, not only at the regional level here in British Columbia but from Ottawa as well.
Certainly, I'll get back to you in a couple of weeks.
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Okay.
Dr. Riddell, you mentioned something about the tools you're using in addressing climate change and how we adapt to the changing environment. Can you expand on that a little bit? What tools should we stop using? Is there something that should be addressed in this changing climate?
5:50 p.m.
Science Advisor, Pacific Salmon Foundation, As an Individual
If a tool was mentioned, I don't think it was about the chemical analyses we're doing, but probably more in the context of major hatcheries. Major hatcheries are seen as a management tool. As you just heard, they can produce large numbers of fish. But the intention in doing that is that you have a certain minimum survival; therefore, it has a cost-benefit factor that they go ahead and build a hatchery. The issue is whether the environment is the same now as it was before. And it's not. So you have to think very carefully about how you're going to invest to do this. It may be that the timing now is much more conducive for small-scale, diverse community hatcheries.
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Have we adjusted the research enough to do that? That's the question. Have you seen enough adaptation in the research community to adapt to that?
5:55 p.m.
Science Advisor, Pacific Salmon Foundation, As an Individual
I wouldn't say enough to do the adapting. We have developed the tools you could use. Now it's a matter of how you implement them. But there's not a great deal of additional money in the enhancement program, where they want to spend more money, so there's been slow take-up of some of the real opportunities.
That said, they have used some very new tools, something called “parental-based tagging”. This is amazing. In hatcheries where you could maybe produce 10 million juveniles, you can take one individual from a pond and we can tell you its parents. It's amazing what we can do these days.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Mazier. We're out of time.
We'll now go to Mr. Morrissey for five minutes or less, please.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Thank you, Chair.
Any of you can respond to my question, and could you clarify the following for an eastcoaster?
On the various panels I've sat through on salmon, the issue of hatcheries comes up. I interpret that there's a conflict in the advice given to government and to the department. Are hatcheries part of the solution as it relates to conservation versus commercial and both? Is the requirement to have an effective hatchery system a key part of maintaining salmon stocks into the future? I ask because at the same time, studies will show worldwide the oceans are not going to sustain the protein level of production they have. The trajectories are all down. Am I missing something here? Do we need them, and can we maintain both the stocks with hatcheries?
5:55 p.m.
Science Advisor, Pacific Salmon Foundation, As an Individual
I can maybe start on this.
I think what you're perceiving is correct. In the scientific community, there is very definitely a split. Recent COSEWIC decisions about west coast salmon really criticized industrial-scale hatcheries. These are the large mega hatcheries, not the community-based hatcheries. The concern they have is that these large-scale hatcheries will produce large numbers of juveniles that will compete with the wild salmon that we're trying to restore, and that may not be positive.
The other side of the coin is that you can't just write off hatcheries. We talked with Josh that you can get down to very few fish in some streams on the west coast. Letting that go is irresponsible, because all you're doing is what we would call a “genetic bottleneck”. You are going to inbreed that population. What you would do is to use a conservation-type hatchery—maybe just for a short period of time—to restore some spawners in there to get the population production up.
Hatcheries are becoming quite a polarized source of discussion. I think it really depends on the problem you have and the tools you have available on how to address it.
Your perception is correct. There is a difference out here, and it really depends on what your objective is on what to do.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
5:55 p.m.
Fisher, As an Individual
I would echo what Mr. Riddell said. However, I would also say, as a commercial fisher that's my goal: to have as much fish available to harvest as possible.
You look up in Alaska and Russia with their mega hatcheries and how much fish they produce, and what we're producing here in B.C. is inadequate. If you're trying to conserve a stock, you have to be cognizant of the fact that if you have a mega hatchery, it's going to impact the foraging habits of those stocks that you're trying to recover. They're going to have to compete against those other hatchery fish.
I would just like to see more fish.
6 p.m.
Science Advisor, Pacific Salmon Foundation, As an Individual
Could I make a comment on that?
6 p.m.
Science Advisor, Pacific Salmon Foundation, As an Individual
I don't disagree with anything we just heard there, except I want to point out that when you talk about Russia and others, they are producing a different species in the hatcheries—these huge numbers. They are not doing this with the chinook and coho. They have some hatcheries for those stocks.
We invested back in the early 1980s. We used to have hatcheries designed to produce large numbers of sockeye, pink and chum, and our program was changed to focus on recreational-type fish—chinook and coho. The huge numbers that we see elsewhere are really not comparable to what we're producing. Again, it's a different set of objectives.
Now, if you want to produce large numbers of fish that we potentially could harvest, I think there's opportunity—if the Pacific can produce them—for pink and chum. We have very successful chum hatcheries when the environment is good. We haven't done much with pinks: that's more the spawning channels. Sockeye can be too good. Our spawning channels there have different types of effects. They can have effects on the local populations, because the channels can be highly productive.
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Morrissey. Your time is up.
We'll now go to Madame Gill, for two and a half minutes or less, please.
6 p.m.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Earlier, I asked Mr. Riddell about the repercussions of other countries' fishery practices on salmon. Mr. Temple, Mr. Hauknes or Mr. Riddell could answer this next question, which has to do with existing research and their own knowledge on the subject.
As far as the salmon situation on the west coast goes, has the same thing ever happened elsewhere, perhaps with other species? If so, could we look to those situations for possible solutions?
April 14th, 2021 / 6 p.m.
The Clerk
Sorry to interrupt, Mrs. Gill, but could you lower your microphone? We couldn't hear you clearly.
6 p.m.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
That sort of thing certainly keeps the ego in check.
I asked whether the reasons behind the situation plaguing Pacific salmon were exclusive to Canada's west coast. I was wondering whether the same thing had been observed elsewhere.
We talked about North America and Russia, of course, but are there any cases where this is currently happening elsewhere? If other countries took steps to effectively protect their salmon populations, could we look to them for solutions? If so, how can we do it? It's a multi-faceted question.
6 p.m.
Science Advisor, Pacific Salmon Foundation, As an Individual
Maybe I could start again, gentlemen. I think the best example is in Russia. They have a very large pink and chum hatchery program. In 2000 they lost 40% of their catch in one year. Their hatcheries didn't change in any way, but the ocean environment was so much different that the fish returning had much lower survival rates.
Your original question was really about interaction or mixing among different hatchery groups in the Pacific. If that is the case, maybe we'll see a little bit better return to Canada. My expectation, from looking at many populations, is that we will not, because there's a common factor in the North Pacific. It has been very poor for our fish and for their fish.
Once the ocean changes, it's pretty much unavoidable.