Fisheries Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2020

[Susanna Fuller]

Absolutely. I think the data from the FSC fisheries and the moderate livelihood fisheries should be made public. I think that has just been made public. The data from the moderate livelihood fishery in St. Marys Bay have been made public.

I think we need detailed information on catch rates, but I would also say that needs to come, as well, from the non-indigenous fishers. The more information that we have together, the better we can understand the impact of increasing the fishery.

I would focus on the information at hand. I know a lot of the questions here are focused on the soft-shell lobster. I don't believe that we have a soft-shell lobster protocol in the commercial fishery right now. I don't know if we know how many soft shells come up during the seasons, so I think that's something that needs to be done.

I would focus on getting us back to having individual fishermen, non-indigenous and indigenous, working together on improving practices. Again, I think that we need to start at the wharf level to build trust again.

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

Thank you very much.

My question now is for DFO.

You said that the lobster stocks are healthy. To me, that would mean there is not a conservation issue. Of course, we know from aboriginal case law that the only way to infringe on aboriginal or treaty rights is through conservation or safety. However, a lot of people don't trust that data and say, well, they don't know.

Can you tell us how DFO measures whether a stock is healthy or not? Are there indicators, kind of like forest fires or COVID, that say this is green, orange or red? Is there any of that kind of information out there? I'm trying to get a sense of how DFO measures whether lobster stocks are safe.

[Dr. Kent Smedbol]

Thank you for your question.

Again, I'll turn to my colleague if he has anything additional to say.

In Atlantic Canada, our lobster stock assessments are indicator based. As I said earlier, we compare recent information and catch rates or landings relative to historical trends.

For most lobster fishing areas, our primary indicators of stock abundance rely on fishery-dependent information, such as catch rates, catch-per-unit-effort, and, in some cases, landings. I mentioned LFA 34 and also LFA 38. We do have fishery-independent information—a couple of other LFAs as well. This includes trawl surveys, dive surveys and recruitment trap surveys for young lobster.

A key point to your question is that most of our lobster stocks have precautionary approach frameworks in place. Abundance indicators are compared directly to reference points on stock status, and, overall, most of our lobster stocks are considered to be in the healthy zone of the precautionary approach framework. We have annual monitoring where we compare trends in those indicators, be they fishery dependent or fishery independent, relative to those indicators.

[Matthew Hardy]

To add to that a bit, as Kent mentioned, the precautionary approach does provide a little bit of that traffic-like approach of green, yellow, red to guide us on whether a stock is in the healthy zone or not.

In southern Nova Scotia, within the gulf region, we also track things in the same way. We use different indicators. For example, in our fishery, we do an assessment based on 10 different indicators, which include fishing pressure, abundance, production, and a variety of blended indicators that provide indications as to whether the stock is doing well overall along those various different parameters.

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

Okay.

Are there any best practices currently being used by DFO where DFO is working collaboratively with Mi'kmaq organizations to co-manage any species in the Atlantic and doing it well?

[Dr. Kent Smedbol]

I'm not familiar with co-management. Speaking again as a member of science sector, we certainly have ongoing monitoring programs that are collaborative in nature...I think in just about every one of our Atlantic regions. It covers a variety of species. Those levels of collaboration are everything from where we are a minor player and the first nation or indigenous group is the main driver of that monitoring program, or, conversely, we are.

In terms of lobster, I'm not familiar with co-monitoring specifically for co-management. I would again turn to Matt on whether he's aware of any examples.

One that does come to mind that might be close is with the Eskasoni-Unama'ki in the Bras d'Or Lakes. They have an ecosystem-based management plan for the lakes which is quite comprehensive. It's high-quality work and a high-quality document.

Susanna might have some idea of this one as well.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Actually, Mr. Battiste, you've gone a little over time.

We'll now go to Mr. Blanchette-Joncas again, for two-and-a-half minutes, please.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans officials.

I'd like to discuss fishery management plans and indigenous communities. Do you think it's possible to effectively manage stocks of a species when different regulatory regimes apply within the same area?

[Dr. Kent Smedbol]

Again, I would speak to our scope, which is in science. In terms of monitoring, we would provide advice related to the overall health of the stock and trends within that population. We currently, and would in the future, look at the issue of total removals relative to a sustainability target or within a precautionary approach framework. Even now, we don't break that down by fleet or the component.

I know that doesn't directly answer your question. However, from a science perspective, we could certainly provide advice, if asked, on a variety of different management schemes.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Smedbol.

Would you be able to follow up in writing?

I'm a bit confused. Earlier, I asked you whether there was a way to measure it, and now you're telling me that it can be managed. Your answers are a bit confusing. I would like the department to provide some clarification, please.

What would happen if the regulatory framework governing an indigenous community was clearly at odds with the department's?

[Dr. Kent Smedbol]

Again, that's directly outside our mandate and area of expertise within science, but I'd be happy to take a follow-up to that question.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you for that information, Mr. Smedbol.

Does the Department of Fisheries and Oceans maintain that its regulatory regime supersedes those of indigenous communities?

[Dr. Kent Smedbol]

Again, that's not my area of expertise within the department. As the minister said last week—

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I would like an answer in writing.

Now I will turn to resource access and conservation. Where do stock levels have to be before it is deemed appropriate to close the moderate livelihood fishery?

[Matthew Hardy]

I can venture an answer, if you like.

[Dr. Kent Smedbol]

I would take a step back and look at it from a broader perspective, not identifying any particular fishery, but for overall health and sustainability of a stock, multiple fisheries of the same stock. Again, we provide advice on the overall trends within the population. How surplus yield within that population is apportioned among users is not a science question; it's a policy question. But in terms of additional mortality or removals within a population, I know this answer is not the most palatable, but it depends on a number of factors within an LFA. It depends on the size of that LFA, population abundance—

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Smedbol.

I would like some clarification in writing from the department, please.

If lobster stock health were to enter the critical zone and the commercial fishery had to be closed, would the Department of Fisheries and Oceans allow the moderate livelihood fishery to carry on?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

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

We now go to Mr. Johns for two and a half minutes, please.

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

Dr. Fuller, it's clear that one of the issues when it comes to conservation is that DFO could be doing a much better job with data collection and catch monitoring. What solutions to this problem do you see need to happen? Is it more a question of funding, hiring more regulators, and greater enforcement of dockside or logbook monitoring? Also, maybe you can also share with us how the federal government can better work with first nations to incorporate indigenous knowledge into the data collection process.

[Susanna Fuller]

For the first part on what we could do better in fisheries monitoring, I am pleased to hear how much the inshore fishery has been worried about conservation because I've worked for a long time to try to get more monitoring. Whether it's video or electronic monitoring or better logbook reporting, it is often opposed by fishermen. I think maybe there's an opening now that we do have a fisheries monitoring policy. We can start to get much better, more timely data from the inshore fishery. I think at the same time we should talk to the Mi'kmaq fishery to figure out what's appropriate in terms of timeliness and data, and there is an opportunity for some collaborative data collection—absolutely. But there is a trust issue that we need to rebuild.

Can you repeat the second question?

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

How can the federal government better work with first nations to incorporate indigenous knowledge into the data collection process?

[Susanna Fuller]

I think you know that the COSEWIC assessments we do under the Species at Risk Act do have quite good terms of reference for indigenous knowledge. I think people are at least thinking within DFO about how to.... The CSAS, the Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, should work on some terms of reference for incorporating indigenous knowledge, and to my mind there has been one in Nunatsiavut that has incorporated western science and Inuit knowledge on a par with each other. I think we need to do much more of this, and DFO needs to learn quickly how to integrate indigenous knowledge systems into that science advisory process.

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

Thank you.

You talked about poverty. In this committee we've heard from the Mi'kmaq about their difficult challenges earning a livelihood even outside the fishery, and it's certainly their right to earn a livelihood through the fishery. We as MPs need to support that so they can exercise their right to do so. You've discussed the Atlantic labour market in the past. What obstacles do you see existing in the current labour market for indigenous people that stop them from earning a moderate livelihood?

[Susanna Fuller]

I think, number one, there is still a lot of racism on the ground. I'm not sure how many non-indigenous fishers hire indigenous fishers to fish with them. It sometimes goes the other way around in terms of licence leasing.

Again I say that we do have to support the moderate livelihood fishery to continue in a way that doesn't jeopardize the resource, but we have to look across all of it. It's not just fisheries that Mi'Kmaq should have a right to. There is forestry. There are other resources. Really, across our economy we need to open up and think about how we do much more labour inclusion. We have not done that.

I think the recent purchase of Clearwater by the Mi'Kmaq is a signal that they're going to go big, right? We still have people in adjacent communities who sometimes will not hire first nations. We need to get through that. It's a fundamental problem of racism, in my mind.