Fisheries Committee on Oct. 7th, 2024

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

I would like, through the chair, to request records indicating that there was NAFO pressure. From the information we have, there was no formal request from NAFO for an offshore fishery. Through the chair to you, Mr. Burns, that information about pressure from NAFO should be provided to the committee in time for this report.

Thank you.

I'll change topics again. This may go to Mr. McGillivray. I'm not sure

Can you give us an indication of the number of jobs per tonne harvested in the inshore fishery versus the offshore fishery, or the Canadian inshore fishery versus the NAFO fishery?

[Adam Burns]

I'll pass that to Mr. McGillivray. I think the question was to him, Mr. Chair.

[William McGillivray]

I don't have information with me on jobs per tonne. I will say that, in an inshore fishery, there are about 1,654 licence-holders right now, for this year.

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

That would, to me, be an important economic decision and a very important factor in determining year-round employment. If you don't know how many jobs there are per tonne harvested by each sector, it seems to me that the department and the minister have failed to be provided with an important piece for the decision-making process.

If NAFO took actions that could impact Canada's management of the northern cod stock, what would those impacts be?

[Adam Burns]

Mr. Chair, it's always difficult to answer a hypothetical question.

What I can say is that NAFO has jurisdiction over the waters outside of Canada's 200-nautical-mile limit. Had we been offside of NAFO, as it were, it could have had the authority to establish various management measures and a total allowable catch for other NAFO-contracting partners.

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

You don't know the potential impacts then. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Mr. Arnold, your time is up.

We'll now go to Mr. Kelloway for five minutes, please.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The “corporatization” of the fishery was mentioned earlier. I just want to highlight that it was the Liberal Party that enshrined owner-operator into the Fisheries Act. Something that we seem to want to avoid is reopening the Fisheries Act and studying it here, which is a real disappointment for me and the folks where I live.

I want to look at the offshore a bit. We've talked about how this may damage the environment. Can you tell us the areas where offshore will be fishing?

Also, what kind of technology is used today, compared to 1973 or 1984 and so forth? Where are we today when it comes to the offshore, compared to those times when, oftentimes, we're comparing decades to decades?

[Adam Burns]

Certainly, the offshore sector is obviously fishing in a different zone than the inshore would. The Canadian offshore sector would be able to fish in offshore zones in 2J, 3K and 3L. The NAFO fleets and other NAFO contracting parties will only be able to fish outside of 200 miles, in area 3L specifically.

In terms of other measures that are in place, we have a very robust at-sea observers program, dockside monitoring, gear requirements, mesh size and those sorts of things that ensure, for example, that small fish are not being caught. Canada has a minimum size of 43 millimetres for cod, which is larger than NAFO's previous minimum size, and Canada was successful in having that changed for 3L cod this fall at the meeting.

We'll also have a seasonal closure that will be in place from April 15 to June 30 to help protect potential spawning activity.

There are a number of measures we've put in place to ensure that the fishing activity is done in a way that mitigates the risk, but is monitored to ensure that the quotas available are respected and not exceeded.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

In 2016, northern cod moved out of the critical zone and into the cautious zone. We found that out earlier this year. Are there any other fish that are in the cautious zone for which we have a stewardship fishery instead of a commercial fishery?

[Adam Burns]

Not that I'm aware of. My view is that the stewardship fishery was a unique fishery specific to the northern cod fishery.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

There was a lot of very interesting and compelling testimony here today, but one thing I want to go back to is the economic benefits with respect to the offshore. We talked about the season and we talked about the potential for continuing the fishery in the winter months.

I think you touched upon the number of people employed and said you have to find more data. Do we have just a general idea of how much employment this will create or sustain in the offshore?

Do we have numbers for the inshore as well? My God, they're absolutely the heartbeat and the lifeblood of the fishery, not just in Newfoundland and Labrador, but in Atlantic Canada and, I dare say, across the country. Do we have statistics on the employment from inshore to offshore that are Canadian?

[Adam Burns]

This year's management decision increased the available quota to the inshore sector as well, so that will have an economic benefit for it. There are hundreds of jobs associated with the offshore fishery, as well as with the processing sector, which will also benefit from the decision on the year-round commercial fishery.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

We don't have specific, hard data per se. We have general ideas of the employment it creates, say, on the west side of Newfoundland and Labrador and the east side of Newfoundland and Labrador. We have general ideas at this moment of how it would maintain and perhaps create new economic opportunities.

[Adam Burns]

We can provide the committee with the number of inshore groundfish licence-holders and the number who were active this year. There may be some data lag in terms of the number of active harvesters for this year.

In terms of the employment levels in processing plants, that's not direct jurisdiction for DFO, so we don't have specific data on exact numbers related to the processing sector.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Madam Desbiens for two and a half minutes, please.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to get a picture of the potential impacts of commercial fishery versus stewardship fishery. These two approaches have different aims.

Could you describe for me the impact on the resource going forward?

[Adam Burns]

The big difference is the inclusion of other participants in the fishery. I'm thinking in particular of quotas for indigenous groups, special allocations and, of course, quotas for the offshore fleet.

Management and sustainability measures are still in place for the offshore fleet; they may have even been strengthened. So there's no difference in terms of protecting stocks. Management measures continue to protect them.

As for the risks associated with the 5,000-tonne increase in the total allowable catch, there's almost no difference from the risks that existed previously for the stocks when the fishery predicted a total allowable catch of 13,000 tonnes.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

There are risks to the stocks, but we also have to think about the risks associated with fishing techniques. In the case of offshore fishing, the risks are known. That has certainly caused the expected results to fluctuate a bit, hasn't it?

[Adam Burns]

Some areas are closed to protect vulnerable species in the ocean. In addition, there are measures in place to monitor catches and ensure that total allowable catches are met. So there are a number of measures in place with respect to the offshore fleet.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

The costs that have—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

I'm sorry, Ms. Desbiens. There are only five seconds left. It's not enough time to get a question in.

We'll go to Ms. Barron now for two and a half minutes.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This is for Mr. Burns.

I'm wondering if you can share a little bit regarding the probability that stocks will dip back into the critical zone and the department will, in fact, have to walk back on this decision. Do you have a rough estimate of the percentage of the risk that this may occur?

[Adam Burns]

As I noted, the difference in the risk to the stock between a rollover, if you were, of a stewardship fishery at 13,000 and the management plan that the minister has put in place is that there is almost no difference. It's a 1% difference between those two. The net effect is, essentially, the same in terms of the risk tolerance for this decision, which is certainly consistent with the fish stock provisions in the Fisheries Act.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Burns.

Can you confirm that the decision will not negatively impact the ability of northern cod to reach a healthy population level? Is this something that you can reassure Newfoundlanders and people across Canada?