Fisheries Committee on Oct. 28th, 2024

[David Mitchell]

Yes, the responses were a bit unique, I think. The responses we got when the vessel was first sinking weren't to remove it. It was whether it could be taxed differently. Suggestions were made by other orders of government that the town should perhaps declare it a dangerous and unsightly property. A vessel moored is not something with a PID.

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

Are you telling me that they were worried about wording and categorization rather than dealing with the problem?

[David Mitchell]

That's correct.

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

Wow.

Would that be similar on the west coast, Ms. Brokenshire?

[Bonny Brokenshire]

Yes. As has been talked about, our problem is more that they're pleasure craft. They're small, generally speaking, but it's that cumulative effect. With respect to assessing for risk—that is, a boat that will potentially sink and for which the taxpayer will have to pay for removal and disposal—the risk is not determined to be great, yet there are many of them. As well, the areas in which they are moored are vital areas. They're very ecologically rich and protected areas, such as estuaries and those sorts of places. I would say the risk evaluations are not effective.

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

Would you both describe it as a confusing process currently and as not clear for either the municipalities or key stakeholders? You need a whole lot more clarity around this. Am I missing something here? I just want to be sure.

[David Mitchell]

I would agree with that sentiment. Yes, it is very confusing. Again, the smaller you are as a municipal unit, the fewer and fewer resources you have. For our staff, we can only go to DFO, Coast Guard or Environment. Beyond that, we don't know who to turn to.

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

Then it becomes jurisdictional ping-pong.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Bragdon. You've gone a bit over.

We'll go now to Mr. Hardie to finish up.

You have four minutes or less.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It looks like identifying the owner of the vessel is really a challenge. I presume if we're dealing with a lot of “dock and dash”, where it just sort of appears and blows down, basically, has there been any...?

As a first question, is it easier, as I would presume, to abandon a vessel at a buoy as opposed to the dock? Is it easier to basically leave the vessel and escape undetected at the buoy?

[Bonny Brokenshire]

We have cameras at our docks. I think that level maybe deters some people, but we have had vessels left at docks. I think you're correct that it is easier at buoys.

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

Is there no mechanism by which somebody who comes into the dock or to a buoy has to log their presence with a harbourmaster or anything like that?

[Bonny Brokenshire]

In certain areas, that is the case. Gibsons in Howe Sound has a harbourmaster and has some regulation around what has to take place when you come in to moor.

Too, if you're going to be having a mooring buoy in Mannion Bay, you have to register that through our bylaws. It was through a lot of staff resources and municipal involvement that we established that bylaw. A lot of municipalities don't have those regulations.

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

It would seem that firming that up at the head end would basically remove a lot of additional excess costs at the other end, when you're trying to clean up the mess.

Let me describe a regime here. You come in, you dock or you tie up at the buoy and you don't register. Can there be a mechanism in place that, after x number of days, you can impound that vessel?

[Bonny Brokenshire]

You can if there are bylaws in place at the local government level.

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

Well, there's an idea for you.

[Bonny Brokenshire]

Yes, but to do so, the costs are incurred by the local government.

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

Twice now when we've looked at suggestions cost has intervened. I think we need a conversation that suggests that, again, an investment up front can mitigate a lot of the additional costs, not to mention the disruption. I mean, you guys need to read about “broken windows”, a policing and civic strategy that took place in New York City years ago. I think the same applies here. Perhaps the nature of the conversation needs to shift from what's going on now to a better identification of vessels and owners and the proper legal framework, if you like, and funding up front to prevent the kinds of issues we've been talking about here.

That will go into the recommendations, Mr. Chair.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Hardie.

I want to say thank you to Mr. Mitchell and Ms. Brokenshire for their testimony today before the committee. I'm sure everyone was enlightened by some of what they heard. I'm sure it will show up in the report along the way.

We'll now suspend for a moment as we change out our witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

I'd like to thank the witnesses.

For the second panel, we have Mr. Eric Dahli, chair of the Cadboro Bay Dead Boats Society, and Bob Peart, chair of the Friends of Shoal Harbour Society.

Thank you for taking the time to appear today. You will each have up to five minutes for your opening statement.

Mr. Dahli, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Eric Dahli, Chair, Cadboro Bay Dead Boats Society]

From Cadboro Bay in Victoria, my name is Eric Dahli. I am the chair of the Cadboro Bay Dead Boats Society.

I'm not going to talk at this moment about licence of occupation for mooring buoys, about riparian rights or about intertidal zones. A lot of that is contained in the information that we have provided.

Let's start off, and let's pretend that one day a rusty old RV drives onto your lawn. The RV owner and his friends start throwing their garbage onto your lawn. Then—oh, my goodness—they empty their sewage holding tank in your driveway. Then they move to another neighbour, and the party continues. I also want you to imagine that, while all this is going on, you're living on the seabed with the creatures that live in the eelgrass. Moored boats are dumping garbage and sewage on you.

We have a problem here in Cadboro Bay. Starting in 2017, we removed from the beach over 15 vessels of various sizes, mostly sailboats and one burned-out hulk of a houseboat. We are presently looking to work with the provincial ministry and the municipalities of Oak Bay and Saanich, because Cadboro Bay is blessed with having two municipalities. It's a multijurisdictional thing right from the get-go.

We're also working with the Songhees Nation and a group called SeaChange. We're cleaning up the bay and replanting eelgrass.

With the licence of occupation, which will be managed by the Royal Victoria Yacht Club, boats that come into the mooring field will require insurance. They will require holding tanks. We're hopeful that a minimal fee, which has not been determined yet.... This will be money in and money out. No one is trying to make any money here. We just want to keep the bay clean.

With regard to the people who are mooring in the bay, there's a housing crisis. We know that. If people are following the rules and doing everything properly, that is certainly not a problem—living in the bay. We would like to talk to somebody, perhaps the RCMP marine division, about wellness checks on the people living in the bay. Winter's coming. We get southeasters in Cadboro Bay, and we don't want other boats up on the beach. Once they hit the beach, they become quite dangerous. Every little kid wants to play pirate. They want to climb all over the boats, and these are not safe.

We've looked at other jurisdictions. Washington state, just south of us here, has a system that we think is pretty good. A few years ago, I went back to my homeland of Norway. We took a cruise—and I would call it fjord-intensive—from Oslo to the North Cape. I counted derelict vessels on that trip. When we got back, the number was zero. I don't know what they're doing, but they're doing it well.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you for that.

We now go to Mr. Peart.

You have five minutes or less, please.

[Bob Peart, Chair, Friends of Shoal Harbour Society]

Thank you.

My name is Bob Peart. I live in North Saanich, just outside of Victoria. I'm chair of Friends of Shoal Harbour—or FOSH, as we call ourselves. A priority for FOSH is the proliferation of derelict and abandoned vessels in Shoal Harbour Migratory Bird Sanctuary, so your invitation's timely.

I acknowledge the complexity of this matter, and I thank the employees at Transport Canada and the Coast Guard for their help. We have a positive working relationship with them and appreciate their assistance. We're very frustrated because of the lack of progress on this matter. However, just recently, there was a notice in our local paper to dispose of two vessels in Tsehum Harbour, so there is some progress.

The points I'm making today are national in scope. However, I speak to you from the Saanich Peninsula and the surrounding waters of the Salish Sea. Our harbours are filled with derelict and abandoned boats. The situation is out of control, and local folks are really fed up. However, rather than dwelling on this dire state of affairs or assigning blame, I want to present a few solutions. My overarching message today is that the time has come for the federal government to reassert its legal powers, enforce existing legislation and provide the leadership that's so desperately needed.

One, the federal government needs to empower and support community initiatives, such as what Eric was just talking about. There are a number of positive local solutions evolving in our coastal waters in our efforts to fill the niche vacated by the federal government on Bowen Island; however, their success requires the federal government to fulfill its legal obligations. Likewise, for any initiatives being led by indigenous people or guardians, their efforts will be a moot point without federal support, and similarly for provisions of the B.C. Land Act and the coastal water lease permit process.

Specifically to Shoal Harbour Migratory Bird Sanctuary, any progress being made by groups like ours or the Canadian wildlife service is impeded by the lack of federal attention. The federal government needs to support the difficult work that these community-based measures are trying to put in place.

Two, Transport Canada and the Canadian Coast Guard need to enforce their existing legislation, redefine associated legislation and empower local communities to manage their private mooring buoys. The core source of any vessel of concern is the virtually unlimited supply of private mooring buoys. In 2004, the responsibility for the private buoy regulations was transferred from the Coast Guard to Transport Canada. This was a mistake. Since then Transport Canada has largely failed to exercise its authority to enforce these regulations. As well, the federal government’s narrow definition of a mooring buoy as a “minor work” and the narrow definitions of “abandoned” and “dilapidated” hamper our efforts to enforce. This situation needs to change.

Three, return the oversight, enforcement and compliance of the private buoy regulations to the Canadian Coast Guard. The federal government needs to return to the level of control that existed prior to the 2004 transfer. The Coast Guard is best suited to provide this leadership. We need a single authority to manage the moorings, and this authority should be the Coast Guard. DFO oversees the Coast Guard, so it makes sense from a management perspective to transfer the legal authority and funding back to the Coast Guard.

Four, the owner registry of vessels needs to be modernized. Transport Canada has, for years, repeatedly stated that the owner registry will be modernized. We see little progress. Without knowing the ownership of vessels, our bays will continue to be polluted by these abandoned vessels. As Eric said, Washington state has a system of annual registration. It's effective and enforced. Canada needs to put in place a similar system.

The time has come for the federal government to assert its legal powers, enforce existing legislation and re-establish its role prior to the 2004 transfer. It's time for the federal government to provide the leadership that Canadians expect, so that related governments and community groups can do their work with confidence. The concern is that, without these changes, our coastal waters will continue to be dumping grounds for these unwanted vessels.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you for that.

We now go to our line of questioning from our members.

Members, I'm going to be strict on the time because it's not a full hour. We have 40 minutes of questioning left. If it's six minutes, it's six minutes. If it's five minutes, it's five minutes.

We go to Mr. Small first, for six minutes or less.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the chastising.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.

Mr. Peart, we keep hearing a lot about private mooring buoys. I guess it's more of a British Columbia thing. I haven't seen much of it Newfoundland and Labrador. Who owns these private mooring buoys?