Fisheries Committee on Dec. 2nd, 2024

[Robert Jenkins]

Yes.

I'll give you the example of my tuna fishery last year. My grandson was fishing with me. I was booked in the meetings. We had one fish left to catch. I had one day left on those five days. My grandson was fortunate enough to get that tuna on that last day. Had he not gotten that tuna on that last day of my five days, I would have had to be on the boat every single day after that to catch the fish.

An awful lot of the membership now are telling us—we're hearing it at annual meetings all the time—that the five-day rule has to be looked at. It's just not enough time, Bob.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you. I appreciate that, because I'm hearing that, as well.

I'm going to your next one.

You referenced a modified “new entrant” policy. Again, you're the fisher here—the captain. You're on the wharf.

Expand on this. What's your thinking here?

[Robert Jenkins]

Right now, we have the Atlantic fishery regulations. I don't have the criteria here in front of me, but it's not hard to get a hold of them, if that's out there in the office. I think, of the criteria, there are three or four things right now. What we've heard in particular from the west end of P.E.I.—we've heard it from the east, too, and from all over the island—is that some of these criteria have to be looked at. We don't want to make it difficult. Say somebody was working out west and he's coming home and wants to get in. He may have a tax base in the oil patch out there. He may be a renter and doesn't own property in P.E.I., New Brunswick or any place in the gulf. This applies to all of the gulf.

We're just saying that it has to be looked at and relaxed a bit more, Bobby. The next generation coming up will have easier access.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Right. Some people will go offshore to work in order to accumulate enough money to buy in.

[Robert Jenkins]

Exactly.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

That's tripping them up.

There are a number of them here.

How important is “boots on the boat”?

[Robert Jenkins]

Well, we believe—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

You can tie that in with “same seasons for all”. I think we're seeing some fisheries now starting to show catch declines because of different sets of enforcement rules. I'll be candid.

[Robert Jenkins]

Okay, well, I guess I'll have to be candid back.

“Boots on the boat” came out of the moderate livelihood rule, officially for indigenous people. It came out of the maritime region down there. We adopted it here on P.E.I., like other associations and various unions across the gulf. We feel that's the way it is for us under owner-operator: boots on the boat. I'm not allowed to hire somebody to run my fleet. I have to be present, unless I use up the five-day rule we just talked about.

We feel that boots on the boat is very important to sustain owner-operator.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

In the time I have left, which is less than two minutes, could you focus on “same seasons for all” and on the importance of consistent enforcement for all for the long-term future of this very successful fishery?

[Robert Jenkins]

We ran into a problem—and I don't have to tell you people—and Saulnierville was the perfect example of what took place a few years back. People were trying to fish out of season. The fishermen down there didn't like it. They were very concerned over the sustainability of the stock. We are, here in the gulf, as well.

Our biggest fishery here, Bobby, as you know, is the lobster fishery. We feel that in order to protect that resource to the best of our ability—and we've heard this countless times from all our members—it has to be one season for everybody. You can't fish during the molt. You can't cut a bunch of people loose when everybody else is ashore. It'll be just a free-for-all, and it's not going to do the resource any good.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

For the last part, could you comment on partnership changes? That was in one of your recommendations that you referenced. Maybe Ian or Bobby, or whoever wants to, could take it in the time I have left.

[Robert Jenkins]

Under the streamlining document that we did with Moncton, partnerships were brought up at our various meetings. I'll give you an example of partnerships here on P.E.I. or in the gulf under the Atlantic regulations.

I partnered up a few years ago because my brother had cancer. He had to go for surgery, but he didn't know when he would be going for surgery. To make a long story short, we partnered up my fleet with his fleet. He lost 50% of his fleet. I maintained my fleet and my full trap limit. I didn't realize at the time, until I actually experienced it myself, that was quite a shortfall for somebody who was suffering from a disease like cancer. I've since heard from other people who have done the partnership that 50% is too much and that 25% would be adequate, but not 50%, so that's what I'd comment about it.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Morrissey.

We'll now go to Madam Desbiens for six minutes or less, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would also like to thank all the witnesses for being with us, especially Mr. Bernatchez, with whom I will be speaking for the next six minutes.

Mr. Bernatchez, Dr. Morissette spoke earlier about horizontal mediation, which means giving independent scientists from all kinds of fields, such as ecology, sociology, the economy, sustainable development and, obviously, resource protection and biodiversity, an equal seat at the table. The Réseau Québec maritime has in fact conducted a study on this.

You and I both know that Quebec and the Maritimes very much want to be united in improving, changing and saving our fisheries.

What do you think of this horizontal mediation approach, and how would you make it better?

[Claudio Bernatchez]

There are a number of ways to do that. I'm not very familiar with the concept of horizontal mediation, but I understand what you just said.

Here's another example. A researcher at Université Laval, Dr. Isabelle Goupil‑Sormany, is researching the psychosocial effects on fishers and their communities. Right now, quite a few people are very interested in making fisheries more inclusive and more comprehensive. That includes optimizing various species.

High-volume fishing will become less and less common in the Gulf and St. Lawrence River waters. Fisheries will therefore have to be diversified. To do that, we will have to involve people from all kinds of backgrounds.

In a given industry, it can be good to have people who, though not necessarily leaders or experts in their field, can help us think differently. That's why it's extremely important to have people from different backgrounds. That's kind of how I see things.

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

From that perspective, wouldn't it be more beneficial to move away from purely partisan politics, which we often see in Parliament—I don't need to get into the details—and be more transparent and collaborative?

I also think there has to be a genuine willingness to integrate the skills of people on the ground as well as new factors that make it possible to diversify marine products.

Would removing politics from the equation be helpful?

[Claudio Bernatchez]

I would say yes, but I'm not sure.

However, I am sure that everything we do is doomed to fail if we continue to manage Canada's fisheries as we have done for too long, where everyone looks out for their own interests. Scientists want to protect their department, fishers and processors want to earn more revenue, and politicians just want themselves and their party to keep their seats in the next election. All these fine people neglect the primary objective, which is preserving the resource.

The fact is that this approach has failed, as we've seen recently. Unfortunately, in the four short years I've been here, moratoriums have been put in place for a number of species as well as species that are declining dramatically. People will blame climate change when it suits them, but they don't necessarily listen to the solutions we recommend to mitigate, even very modestly, the effects of climate change.

For the first time in the history of fisheries in Canada, everyone needs to work with one interest in mind: the resource. They will have to co‑operate more and more to succeed. We have common challenges. I'm thinking of my friend Mr. MacPherson from the Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association. The same challenges exist across the country, and the Canadian Independent Fish Harvesters Federation, for example, is trying to address them. However, the government does not seem to be listening.

We may not be good enough lobbyists to advocate for major issues, and we should hire specialized lobbying firms, as others do. The fact remains that, if personal interests, including politically motivated decisions and management, are not set aside, we will get nowhere.

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

Your comments are very interesting.

It's a lot of food for thought, Mr. Bernatchez, because we are in the process of reviewing the Fisheries Act. Some of your recommendations will have to be incorporated.

Should we establish some kind of authority outside the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, or DFO, one that would have significant clout in decisions and ecosystem management?

[Claudio Bernatchez]

That was my very humble recommendation. There are people who are even better suited than I am, people like Mr. MacPherson and people from other provinces. They could think about ways to ensure that the most important decisions do not come down to one person, a minister who has not had the time to acquire the necessary knowledge or expertise.

Basically, it would be a group of well-informed people who would support DFO in making the most important decisions. Such important decisions should not be made by one person.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Madam Desbiens.

We'll now go to Ms. Barron for six minutes or less.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I welcome our witnesses, Mr. MacPherson, Captain Jenkins and Mr. Bernatchez.

Mr. MacPherson, perhaps I'll direct my questions at either you or Captain Jenkins, whoever is best-suited to respond.

First of all, thank you for so clearly outlining the items you see as the most important. That helps us to easily use this information in our recommendations, moving forward.

You spoke about the mandatory use of logs. I don't believe this was expanded on yet. I know you spoke to us before about the importance of e-logs.

Can you share a bit about any updates you have on that, and any movement you see as being required, in order for us to move forward on this?

[Ian MacPherson]

Thank you for the question.

Electronic logs have been discussed for quite a while. I think it goes back to 2014. It's been a few years. It has been delayed, but we are seeing some implementation in the spring of 2025, at least on the east coast for snow crab and lobster. The PEIFA, the RPPSG and a private company called Vericatch are, I think, going to be the three primary suppliers. The PEIFA one is in the last stages.

I think we all understand that, if we're going to protect the resource and make that paramount, there needs to be as much real-time data collection as possible. This is for our international certifications, but it's also for a lot of other reasons. It's not going to be a silver bullet. I think it's also very important. If we can collect data for science and make that more timely, hopefully the people in resource management have more tools at their fingertips to make cases for when a stock is declining, but also for when a stock is rebounding.