Fisheries Committee on May 26th, 2021

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Richard Bragdon]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting 32 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted on April 21, 2021, the committee is meeting on its study of frozen-at-sea spot prawns.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of January 25, 2021. Therefore, members can attend in person in the room or remotely by using the Zoom application.

The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. The webcast and will show only the person speaking, rather than the entirety of the committee.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to outline a few rules to follow.

Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice at the bottom of your screen of either “Floor”, “English” or “French”.

You will also notice the platform's “raise hand” feature on the main toolbar should you wish to speak or alert the chair.

Before speaking, please click on the microphone to unmute yourself. When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute.

I would now like to welcome our witnesses for the first panel we have today. From the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, we have Rebecca Reid, regional director general, Pacific region; Neil Davis, acting regional director, fisheries management; and Nicole Gallant, acting regional director, conservation and protection.

We will now proceed with opening remarks.

Ms. Reid, we're going to turn to you for five minutes or less, please.

[Rebecca Reid, Regional Director General, Pacific Region, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Thank you very much.

Bonjour and good afternoon, Mr. Chair and committee members.

As you have already heard, my name is Rebecca Reid. I'm the regional director general for the Pacific region, Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

My colleagues and I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the committee.

To start, we would like to thank you for turning your attention to this important issue.

Our aim today is to provide you with as much information as possible to support your deliberations. I am accompanied today by Neil Davis, acting regional director, fisheries management, Pacific region, and Nicole Gallant, acting regional director, conservation and protection, Pacific region.

As you know, a key part of DFO's mandate is to sustainably manage Canada's fisheries. Consistent with that mandate, DFO applies a precautionary approach to fisheries management that prioritizes the conservation of stocks. The use of size limits within the commercial prawn fishery is an important part of this approach, as it helps to ensure the prawns are being harvested sustainably and that they reach sexual maturity and reproduce before being harvested, which supports the regeneration of stocks over the long term.

Harvesting prawns at a larger size also increases the price per pound, improving the fishery's economic return. For this reason, the use of size limits has been supported by industry since they were first introduced to the commercial prawn fishery in the 1980s.

DFO has a long-standing constructive working relationship with industry representatives in the prawn fishery, and the implementation of size limits is just one example of work the department has done in collaboration with industry to strengthen management of the fishery.

Recently, DFO has been working with industry representatives to develop packaging and labelling standards that would limit access to markets for illegal products and develop packaging standards that would meet all existing federal and provincial regulations. In the course of those discussions earlier this year, the industry practice of freezing prawns in tubs of sea-water—a practice referred to as “tubbing”—was raised. Our officials noted that freezing prawns in this manner makes it difficult for fishery officers to readily determine whether a harvester's catch is compliant with the size limit, which is a regulatory requirement in section 36 of the Fishery (General) Regulations.

Industry expressed concerns about the prospect that tubbing may not meet regulatory requirements. In particular, they noted the increased importance of tubbing to many harvesters that carry freezers on board, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in weakened international markets. Tubbed prawns provide an alternative, since they are a popular product in the domestic market.

In response to these concerns, DFO met with industry between February and April to explore solutions. Through these discussions, the Pacific Prawn Fishermen's Association, which represents commercial prawn licence-holders, proposed a protocol to help harvesters ensure that their catch, including catch that is frozen in tubs, is readily available for inspection by our fishery officers. DFO confirmed its support for the protocol as an interim measure for this year while we work with industry on longer-term solutions.

While we have achieved a positive outcome for this year, I would like to clarify several points for the committee.

DFO did not ban the tubbing of prawns at sea. The key requirement is that any commercial harvester must package their catch in a way that allows for the size to be readily determined. This regulation has been in place since 1993, applies to all fisheries and is essential for DFO to verify harvesters' catches and properly manage fisheries.

As fishing and packaging practices evolve over time, such as the growing use of tubbing, regulatory issues can be brought into the light, requiring engagement with relevant stakeholders to determine the necessary management adjustments. This is a very typical practice and it is a process we have followed here.

We are committed to working with industry on a long-term solution to this issue. Over the coming year, DFO will engage with the prawn industry on the development of longer-term solutions, such as clearer packaging requirements or other measures that will help ensure the continued sustainable harvest of prawns.

Thank you for your attention.

I would now welcome your questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Richard Bragdon]

Thank you, Ms. Reid. I appreciate that.

We're going to now move to the next witness, Neil Davis, for five minutes or less.

[Neil Davis, Acting Regional Director, Fisheries Management, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Chair, I don't have any opening remarks beyond those made by Ms. Reid.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Richard Bragdon]

Okay.

[Rebecca Reid]

Excuse me, Mr. Chair; I am responding on behalf of the three witnesses.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Richard Bragdon]

Okay, thank you, Ms. Reid. Then we'll proceed to the questions.

For six minutes or less, we'll start with Mr. Arnold.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I was expecting more presentation, but I'm glad that we have more time for questions.

Thank you, Ms. Reid, for your presentation and for being here today to help clarify what has taken place.

In your opening remarks you mentioned that a key part of DFO's mandate is to sustainably manage Canada's fisheries. I fully support this statement and mandate, but it's unclear how DFO's reinterpretation that will outlaw tubbing will promote sustainable management of the spot prawn industry. What is clear is that the determination to outlaw tubbing has cast the future of some 600 B.C. prawn harvesters into great uncertainty.

Does DFO have a plan for assisting the harvesters who could be forced to surrender their livelihood because of the department's reinterpretation?

[Rebecca Reid]

Thank you, Mr. Arnold, for your questions.

To be clear, DFO has not outlawed tubbing. What we have done is worked with the industry to clarify the requirements that products be readily available for inspection. In working with the association, we have an interim solution in place for this year that addresses those concerns, and we will be working with them in the longer term to address the longer-term issues around packaging and maintaining regulatory compliance.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

But there's no plan beyond just not implementing the interpretation as it was put out this year. Is there no plan for beyond this year?

[Rebecca Reid]

The way we work with industry on a regular basis is that we collaborate on issues as they arise.

As I described briefly in my opening comments, this issue has become more prevalent of late. The question around products being readily available was discussed in a meeting a few months ago, and based on that interaction, a protocol was determined for this year. Because of the time of year, we need some longer-term solutions and we fully intend to work with industry on those solutions.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Okay. I'm not surprised that the department has no transition plan for British Columbians who are forced off the water. When we look at the Discovery Islands decision delivered last December, this government has still not provided a plan for British Columbians who are being forced not to work in that sector.

Do you think it would be appropriate for DFO and government to have a transition plan in place before they put B.C. jobs on notice?

[Rebecca Reid]

With regard to this prawn issue, I think that we found a very reasonable solution that addresses the concerns identified by the industry and also meets our regular requirements to inspect the product as required.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you.

As you're aware, many fish stocks in the Pacific region are in decline, and some are near collapse. I believe that many of these dire situations could be improved if DFO Pacific listened to and acted on the input they are provided by British Columbians.

Do you think that this whole spot prawn fiasco could have been prevented had DFO been more diligent in listening to and engaging prawn stakeholders before throwing their futures into disarray?

[Rebecca Reid]

My view of the process is as I described it. An issue was raised. There was a discussion around it. Certainly concerns were identified, and then DFO and the industry reps worked together to resolve the issue, which they have done.

In my view, DFO and industry can't avoid encountering issues or concerns, but we can find ways to work collaboratively together. In my view, that's what we've done in this case.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

It's been interesting hearing your explanations or reinterpretation on the tubbing regulation today, but no one from DFO, including the minister, provided all of these explanations earlier in the year when the fiasco came to light. Is there a reason that the explanations you brought today were not offered to Canadians in March?

[Rebecca Reid]

I can't answer specifically to that, other than to say that we did have conversations with the industry representatives. We have a regular advisory process. Those meetings took place, and it was through them that we worked on a solution.

In my view, we did have those conversations and we did attempt to clarify our needs in terms of the regulatory compliance and to understand the interest of the industry in ensuring that their markets were protected.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you.

In your opening remarks, you mentioned that the size limit also allows prawns to reach sexual maturity before they're being harvested, which supports the regeneration of stocks over the long term. This contradicts some of the other testimony we've heard. It seems that we have possibly yet another interpretation on our hands.

Are you aware that female prawns start breeding at a size greater than 33 millimetres, which is above the minimum size limit?

[Rebecca Reid]

Mr. Arnold, if I could ask Neil Davis to talk about all of the various management techniques used to manage prawns sustainably, I think we can talk about size limits and spawner indexes and other relevant factors.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Richard Bragdon]

Just note that there are about 15 seconds for a quick response.

[Neil Davis]

Very briefly I would just say that there is, with any species, some variability around when and at what size they may spawn, but in general our view is that the size limit helps to support the objective of getting these prawns large enough to spawn before they are available for harvest.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Richard Bragdon]

Thank you, Mr. Davis. Now we'll go to Mr. Hardie for six minutes or less.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the officials for being here.

We heard that tubbing had been a practice in place for decades. What changed? Did the tubs change, or did somebody just have a light go on over their head and say, “Gee, we need to reinterpret this”? It seemed so capricious, so last-minute and so arbitrary.

Ms. Reid, can you speak to that, please?

[Rebecca Reid]

I can, Mr. Hardie.

Also, let me suggest that Nicole Gallant could have an opportunity to respond as well.

I will say that the use of tubbing has gone up recently from being a relatively uncommon practice when there was a higher reliance on export markets and on those types of packaging. With the prevalence of COVID and a turning towards domestic markets, and from meetings that were held with the industry, there was a reflection on the intention to use tubbing more commonly to benefit from the domestic markets.

It was in the context of the conversation around the regulatory requirements about products being readily available for inspection that this was discussed. That's where the issue really was raised initially; it was based on those consultations.

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

Well, I don't know that “consultation” would be an apt word, because the moment the word came down that tubbing was to be forbidden, many people had the definite impression that the interdiction was immediate, that it simply wasn't going to be allowed, and it took a while to extract the information that there would be some latitude.

You say that tubbing prevents the product from being readily available, and yet we hear from the fishers that they can take a tub and thaw it out on the deck in a couple of minutes and give an inspector a very good look at what's inside the tub.

What's wrong with that?