Fisheries Committee on Oct. 21st, 2020

[Allison Bernard]

There's always a need for dialogue in any place. That's how our country was formed. There has to be give and take in everything that we do. I don't really think what we're doing here will have an impact on any of that, because we are a nation in Mi'kma'ki, so we take care of each other. Whether it's Sipekne’katik or other communities, like Membertou or We’koqma’q or Eskasoni, it will affect everybody at the end of the day. I would hope that if there's any implementation of anything that comes down to how we practice, how we do our fishing, it will go right across the whole nation of Nova Scotia.

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

Mr. Bernard, can you talk about your feelings around the definition of “moderate living”? Do you agree that it should be the responsibility of the Sipekne’katik to define?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

You have 20 seconds.

[Allison Bernard]

It's pretty hard actually to talk about something that you're not really aware of. A moderate livelihood, I think, would be....

I would end up in a lot of trouble if I tried to define it myself. I won't.

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

Would you just put it back to the netukulimk in terms of the principles, as embodied in that?

[Allison Bernard]

The netukulimk would seriously have a whole impact on this. Mi'kmaq won't go out there to get rich. We don't have a lot of rich people around us. We share our resources with everybody, so you're not going to see that. But you do need people out there practising a moderate livelihood to make a decent living for their family outside of social assistance, really.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Bernard.

Thank you, Mr. Johns. Your time is up. I believe you're leaving us now. Mr. Bachrach will be your replacement, and he is already in place.

To our witnesses who have been here for the first hour of our committee meeting this evening, thank you for your time. Your testimony was very valuable. I'm sure it sure will help us in finishing our study when we get there.

We'll suspend for just a moment while we get the other three witnesses ready to go. We may have to extend for a few moments to get in a full couple of rounds of questioning as well.

[Shelley Denny]

Thank you very much.

[Allison Bernard]

Wela'lioq.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Welcome back, everyone.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the new witnesses.

Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. When you are ready to speak, you can click on the microphone icon to activate your mike. All comments should be addressed through the chair. Interpretation in this video conference will work very much the way it does in a regular committee meeting. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of floor, English or French. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly. When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute so that we don't get any feedback from any other noises.

I would like to welcome our witnesses in the second panel: from the Bay of Fundy Inshore Fishermen's Association, Mr. Sproul, president; and from Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels du Sud de la Gaspésie, Madame Canet and Mr. Cloutier.

We'll now go to the speaking part for the witnesses.

We'll start with you, Mr. Sproul, for five minutes or less, please.

[Colin Sproul, President, Bay of Fundy Inshore Fishermen's Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good evening, committee members. Thank you very much for the invitation to speak here today. The members of the Bay of Fundy Inshore Fishermen's Association are grateful for this opportunity to voice our concerns. The association represents nearly 200 family fishing businesses along Nova Scotia's Fundy coast. For 30 years, we have advocated for sustainable practices and community-based fishing management. We have been a leader in peaceful coexistence between non-indigenous and first nations fishers, and we have a long history of co-operation with governments and regulators at all levels. This has given us a reputation as a valuable ally on ocean issues. Needless to say, our members are proud of their legacy as progressive fishers who embrace a different way of doing things. We are all committed, one hundred per cent, to preserving our way of life for future generations of Nova Scotians.

I came here today in defence of a 400-year-old truly sustainable way of life. Last year, the fishing industry exported well over two billion dollars' worth of seafood from Nova Scotia. We are not a quaint, cottage industry. Fishing is the economic powerhouse of this province. It employs 26,000 people directly and 26,000 people indirectly. That makes our industry the largest employer outside of the public sector in Nova Scotia today. But these numbers do not tell the whole story. What's important to understand is how that $2 billion is delivered as a diffuse economic benefit into some of the most isolated communities in Nova Scotia. This is truly the lifeblood of our economy and the only bulwark between the current prosperity enjoyed in many coastal communities here and the drastic economic decline evident elsewhere in rural Atlantic Canada.

The fishing industry did not get to this stage by happenstance. It is due to hard work, respect for the environment and the application of the precautionary principle in fisheries management. We have taken care of our inshore fishery, and now it is taking care of us.

The Bay of Fundy Inshore Fishermen's Association respects and supports indigenous fishery access rights, and we condemn explicitly all acts of violence in the fishery. This begs the important question today of why recently we have suddenly found ourselves in a conflict when we have had 21 years along the road of mutual peaceful coexistence. In his day, my great-grandfather fished from our small cove on the Bay of Fundy in peace and coexistence with African Nova Scotians and Mi'kmaq fishers. We all had things in common—our reliance on and respect for the sea and its bounty, and most importantly of all, extreme poverty. Since that time, terrible things have been done to Mi'kmaq fishers by colonialism and by the government effectively dispossessing them of their right to fish. My grandfather and the others who shared the cove didn't do that to indigenous people; the government did. We should all accept that this is still the case in the present conflict. The problems in St. Marys Bay have been caused in Ottawa, not in our fishing communities of Nova Scotia.

This division is being driven by just that, division in its own right. I have spent my life fighting for social justice for fishermen, regardless of heritage. The government's current attempt to divide us for political reasons is at the core of this conflict. All of our communities, both indigenous and non-indigenous, rely on one lobster resource, and the lobster does not care who catches it. What's really at the centre of the current crisis in St. Marys Bay is sustainability. Lobster landings during the last three years have declined by 65% within St. Marys Bay, while they remain strong across the wider lobster district and across Atlantic Canada.

What is evident is how important it is for all people who participate in commercial fisheries to operate under one set of rules. During my youth, I witnessed the horrors of what happens when politics enters fisheries management. What happened was the total extermination of ground fish stocks on the Scotian Shelf, and it had horrible consequences for all communities in Nova Scotia. Subsequently the lobster industry has been managed with an organic set of management procedures developed by the industry, for the industry. Its outcome has been an incredibly lucrative, well-managed fishery.

Currently, I see the re-entry of politics into fisheries management in Nova Scotia, and I don't want those outcomes for my community, and I don't want them for indigenous communities.

All the remedies for fishermen on both sides of this equation are evident in the Marshall decision as it stands. We must all respect the Marshall decision in all its parts and apply it to achieve peace in Atlantic Canada.

I would draw your attention to section 40 of the Marshall clarification, which clearly says:

The paramount regulatory objective is conservation and responsibility for it is placed squarely on the minister responsible and not on the aboriginal or non-aboriginal users of the resource.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Sproul. Your time is up.

We'll now go to our other witnesses for their opening statements. I don't know if both of you are speaking for five minutes, or if one of you will deliver the opening remarks.

[Claire Canet, JOBEL Project Officer, Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels du Sud de la Gaspésie]

Mr. Cloutier will be speaking.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Mr. Cloutier, please go ahead for five minutes or less.

[O'neil Cloutier, Director General, Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels du Sud de la Gaspésie]

Good evening.

In fact, we're going to split our time and make sure that we don't exceed the 10 minutes allotted to us.

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for agreeing to hear the testimony of the 148 commercial lobster fishers from the Gaspé Peninsula represented this evening by the Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels de homard du Sud de la Gaspésie.

I am O'neil Cloutier, general manager of the Regroupement. I am also the president of the Alliance des pêcheurs professionnels du Québec and the secretary of the Federation of Independent Fish Harvesters of Canada. Finally, I have also been a professional fisherman since 1983.

My colleague Claire Canet is a project manager at the Regroupement. She has a degree in French law and a university diploma in conflict resolution. She has practised as a lawyer and facilitator in New Zealand.

We will send you our detailed written statement within the next 24 hours.

The mission of the Regroupement is to ensure the sustainable development of the fishery by maintaining a balance between the economic needs of inshore fishers in the southern Gaspé Peninsula and the sustainability of the species on which they rely, particularly American lobster.

On December 13, 2019, a mandate was given to the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and Canadian Coast Guard to execute and accelerate reconciliation with first nations. In this context, the process followed by the department raises fundamental questions regarding the way in which fishing activities are managed, access to the resource for all, the sustainability of stocks and the economic balance of coastal communities that depend on the fishery.

The current violence is a symptom of a flawed negotiation process followed by the government and the constant exclusion of commercial fishers from fisheries management discussions. The government approach divides coastal communities that depend on fishing for a living. This is compounded by the repeated public use of violent terms such as “disgusting”, “racist” and “terrorist”. I should also mention that recent events were due to a minority of fishermen, and that the Coalition of Atlantic and Québec Fishing Organizations, of which the Regroupement is a member, does not tolerate violence.

Since October 30, 2019, the Regroupement has been calling on the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to put in place a process of discussion, dialogue and communication involving the first nations of the Gaspé Peninsula, the Regroupement and the department. To date, the department has still not responded to this call.

In addition, the Regroupement has still not received a response from the department regarding the measures that were under discussion. The Regroupement has also not been consulted by the department on these measures.

Any change in the measures of a conservation-based lobster fishing plan in favour of one group of fishers inevitably causes inequalities and tensions within the coastal communities that depend on the fishery.

Since the 17th century, non-indigenous coastal communities in the Gaspé Peninsula have depended on lobster for food and income.

The commercial fishing season lasts 10 weeks, from the end of April to the end of June, a period when lobsters are not moulting and when egg-bearing females are released as much as possible. It is during this period that commercial lobster fishers derive a portion of their annual income.

In 2013, the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans noted that, since 2008, the lobster fishing sector has been facing unprecedented economic and structural challenges. It felt that these efforts should not be relaxed, that the lobster sector must stay the course and continue to make the changes necessary to ensure its stability and sustainability.

Since 2006, the Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels de homard du Sud de la Gaspésie has implemented multiple measures to reduce fishing effort by 30% in order to rebuild lobster stocks. It plays a central role in the conservation and sustainability of the stocks, in order to allow all lobster fishers, whether from first nations or non-indigenous communities, to continue to carry out their fishing activities, on which all depend, in an equitable and sustainable manner.

In 2019, the commercial lobster fishery in Gaspésie in areas 19, 20 and 21 represented close to $45 million, or 24% of the total landed value recorded in Gaspésie. According to public statements from Listuguj, the Mi'kmaq first nations in the Gaspé Peninsula earned more than $40 million in commercial fishing income that same year.

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans issued a total of 163 lobster fishing licences in 2020 for areas 19, 20 and 21: 148 to non-indigenous persons, 12 to the three Mi'kmaq first nations of the Gaspé Peninsula and three to the Maliseet first nation of Viger.

This is the equivalent, in 2020, of one lobster fishing licence for every 610 non-aboriginal residents in the Gaspé Peninsula and one lobster fishing licence for every 223 first nations residents in the Gaspé Peninsula.

[Claire Canet]

I'll continue the presentation, if you don't mind.

I will now turn to the notion of moderate livelihood.

In 1993, in a judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in Van der Peet, Judge Taggart indicated that, in his view, regardless of its origins, the concept of "moderate livelihood" did not provide an appropriate or practical basis for determining the scope and nature of aboriginal rights or the extent of aboriginal priority for the exercise of those rights. He added that the notion of what constituted a moderate livelihood was inherently subjective. In his view, even if it could be determined how and, more importantly, by whom such a fluid standard could be defined, it would not advance the issue of aboriginal rights.

In the same...

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Madame Canet, we're way over time for the opening remarks. Hopefully anything you haven't said already will come out in the rounds of questioning.

We'll now go to our first round of questioning, for six minutes or less, with Mr. Bragdon.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to be deferring my time and relinquishing it to Mr. Calkins.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Mr. Calkins, go ahead.

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

Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Bragdon.

Thank you, witnesses, for your testimony here today.

Colin, if I may call you that, thank you very much. I'm going start my first line of questioning with you. You were very eloquent and articulate in what you had to say, and I understand the frustration you've had.

Can you expand a bit on the 65% decline in St. Marys and what that might be attributed to?

[Colin Sproul]

First, I think it's important to understand what St. Marys Bay is. It's a shallow, warm coastal bay that acts as a lobster moulting and breeding ground. During the warm summer months, lobsters gather there in incredibly dense concentrations. What it means is that when fishing takes place out of season, the catchability of traps in that area is considered by many to be 10:1, compared to fishing during the commercial season.

Even though we've seen a 65% decline in landings within St. Marys Bay over the last three years, compared to a 6% decline across the wider fishing area, which is attributed generally to seasonable variability, the landings don't account for all the damage that's taking place by out-of-season fishing. Also, it is never appropriate to fish in a lobster breeding ground during the closed season, because the lobsters are soft-shelled at that time and really susceptible to damage.

I've heard the defence that Americans fish year-round for lobster, but I think if you spoke to any American fisherman they would talk to you about the incredible strength of the lobster resource in Atlantic Canada, and fishing them during the season when it's most sustainable to do so is really at the core of that.

As for lobster fisheries taking place at different times throughout Atlantic Canada, they take place because of a change in the environmental conditions. Lobster fishermen across the region harvest lobster when it's most sustainable and when it's most profitable.

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

You would argue that if conservation is the pinnacle, then we need a rules-based system in order to govern when to take lobster and how many lobsters to take: the season, the times and so on. The previous testimony we heard from Ms. Denny talked about an alternative governance model, even though she didn't provide details about that. I'm not saying that as a criticism, because I didn't have a chance to ask her any questions, but she was talking about things such as a spiritual limit or a spiritual fulfillment and to fish until that is fulfilled.

How would you expect the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to be able to come to terms with both indigenous and non-indigenous fishers in that type of construct or concept?

[Colin Sproul]

I believe in those ideals and in netukulimk when it applies to food, social and ceremonial fisheries, but when we look at fisheries based on profit, then we have the entry of non-indigenous people into this as consumers of the product. That's when I see problems with fisheries management based on those ideals.

There's also the obvious fact that all Atlantic Canadian communities rely on one lobster resource, which has been managed through the concerted efforts of more than 9,000 lobster licence-holders and a ton of science by the industry and by government, and also a commitment to precautionary principle management and sustainability that has built this into what it is. I think it's really the heart of folly to think that anyone, no matter how well-intentioned, could manage one lobster resource with 34 different sets of management plans as well as the accepted one.

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

Thank you very much for that.

I've been a long-standing member of this committee, and we've talked to a lot of fishermen over the years. I know there have been significant investments by the Government of Canada to assist aboriginal people to be enabled to enter the commercial fishery in Atlantic Canada. Some of those investments would have been to purchase craft, quota and so on, to the point that I believe the total on-reserve fishing revenues for the Mi'kmaq and Maliseet grew from about $3 million in 1999 to about $152 million in 2016. I don't know if that number is accurate or not.

Is the growth we've been able to provide for aboriginal fishers, in your opinion, enough to satisfy the modest livelihood they would have in a communal-based fishery if they were sharing that wealth?