Evidence of meeting #4 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 mi'kmaq.
A video is available from Parliament.
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
That's not a problem.
Mr. Arnold, go ahead. When you're ready to share your time with Mr. Calkins, you can do so.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to start by asking both of the presenters if their organizations have been consulted by the minister or her department for their input on how this is affecting the fishery and the businesses they've created.
6:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
Certainly, any consultation with the PEIFA has been at a high level. We've been working with a number of other groups to get these ideas out on the table in discussions. Certainly, a number of groups, including the PEIFA, have been frustrated that we haven't had direct input into some of these ongoing situations.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
So you haven't had direct discussions with the minister or her department?
6:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
We've been on some calls. We've also submitted documents, but we haven't had any formal responses to any of those—much the same as the list I gave, Mr. Arnold.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
6:05 p.m.
Cape Breton Fish Harvesters Association
Our association, the Cape Breton Fish Harvesters, have not received any direct correspondence from the fisheries minister. She has not responded to the letter we sent on behalf of the stakeholders. There has been just a little consultation with other members of the coalition of fishing associations, and I've received that information from the other groups. Those are all the dealings we've had with the fisheries minister.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Okay. Thank you.
In some of the earlier testimony last week, we heard that part of what's taking place here is government-to-government negotiations, with government to first nations or the indigenous community. What communication methods would you suggest using between the non-first nation fishers and DFO and the non-first nation fishers and first nations to negotiate the implementation of these treaty rights?
6:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
In our local situation, the chiefs have agreed to go back to their members to discuss what they feel a “moderate livelihood” definition would look like or a “fishery” would look like. We'll be reconvening, so we see that as a positive step.
Certainly the resource is so important to everyone that we need to have a three-party dialogue. Obviously, we've heard from other witnesses that there's a lot of frustration with DFO. Perhaps an independent facilitator would make those talks productive, but definitely there have to be discussions with the non-traditional, the traditional and DFO in a three-way conversation.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Okay. Thank you.
I want to move on to another question here.
In the 2000 report by the fisheries committee on the Marshall decision and Marshall II, the committee recommended that “any transfer of access to fisheries resources to First Nations communities must be accomplished through a federal government-funded voluntary buyback of a portion of existing commercial licences as they become available.” We've seen that some of that has taken place, but the government's response to this was, “the Government recognizes that most fisheries are fully subscribed and that increased Aboriginal participation in the fishery can only occur without serious disruption to existing fishers through the retirement of existing capacity.” That was 20 years ago. Has fishing intensified? Has it become more efficient? Has the demand on the resource increased in that 20 years?
6:05 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
I would say the demand on the fishery is stronger now than it was 20 years ago. I would also like to mention, as Mr. MacPherson did in the presentation, that when we went under ASLM to buy up existing licences and do trap reduction, part of the reason we did that was for the sustainability of the resource. At the time, the resource was not in very good shape. That was not that long ago, and we started ASLM in 2009. We see it rebounding now, but the demand on the stock today is probably more than it was in 2000, and the technology to catch them is definitely better.
6:10 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Thank you.
Mr. Barron, do you have a comment on that?
6:10 p.m.
Cape Breton Fish Harvesters Association
I'm in agreement with what my counterparts in P.E.I. are saying. The effort has increased, but that effort has increased through the stock being built up over the years by the conservation the commercial fleet has done over the years through escape mechanisms and stuff like that.
6:10 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Okay. Thank you.
I'll ask this to any of you. How should DFO implement the Mi'kmaq treaty fishing rights in support of a moderate livelihood, while also providing for certainty and predictability regarding access to the aquatic resources for all fishers?
6:10 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
We listened to witnesses. We did the same thing. We met with Chief Bernard and Chief Gould from Lennox Island and Abegweit, on P.E.I., on October 2. To my knowledge, sir, nobody's given us a definition of moderate livelihood yet, and I certainly haven't heard a definition of moderate livelihood here this evening. It's kind of a loaded question. We don't know what moderate livelihood consists of at this point. I could probably go into a room with 20 people and maybe we could hammer something out regarding what we think moderate livelihood would be, but would that be appropriate to the rights holders? Probably not.
6:10 p.m.
Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
I just wanted to add—
6:10 p.m.
Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
We were a late addition today, so you didn't get our document.
The 10 points that we've outlined were meant to get a dialogue going, but we're not a part of the dialogue now.
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you for that.
Anything that was submitted, once we receive it and get it translated, will be distributed to committee members.
Thank you, Mr. Arnold. That is the full six minutes. I didn't know you weren't going to share, but anyway you used it regardless.
We'll now go to Mr. Morrissey for six minutes or less, please.
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Thank you, Chair.
Mine are going to be short and to the point to whomever wants to answer it.
Can fishing out of existing seasons be more lucrative?
6:10 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
I don't mind answering that one.
Depending on the definition of fishing out of a regulated season and on the number of traps, it could be more lucrative depending on where you go and what your competition is like. If your competition is down and you have 50 to 100 traps, you could probably build that trap to its maximum size—say it was 50—and haul the traps probably four, five or six times a day. If the competition is not there, you're fishing basically with no competition and yes, it could be more lucrative. Yes, depending on how you look at the situation, it could be just as good as the way it is with regulated seasons with, say, 55 days and a 300- or 272-trap model or whatever.
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Fishing with very little competition means more trapping per trap and you can capture more. Am I correct on that, Mr. Barron?
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
For clarification to the committee, in 2004 LFA 25, which is shared between New Brunswick and P.E.I, the total fishery on both sides of the strait was in collapse and nearly ruined. Anybody participating in it could not even pay their fuel costs, let alone anything else.
Significant steps were made to restore that fishery to the very strong one it is today, which included removing a significant number of licences and therefore the traps and including the carapace size. Were those two measures what brought that fishery back to where it is quite successful today?
October 26th, 2020 / 6:10 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
It absolutely did. It was a bitter pill to swallow for some of the harvesters in area 25 at the time. You're absolutely correct. Nobody made any money there, or very little money, for a couple of years. After taxes and stuff, they probably didn't make any.
But the measures that were put in place on behalf of the fishermen in that area—we're talking escape vents, carapace size, releasing of bigger females—a lot of that stuff played a part in where the stock is today. It was on a downhill slide there for a few years and the fishermen bit the bullet and did a lot of management stuff to bring it back to the kind of fishery it is today.