Fisheries Committee on April 7th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Madame Desbiens.

I'll now go to Ms. Barron for two and a half minutes to finish out this session.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to ask my last question to Mr. Butterworth.

I appreciate your highlighting the importance of the prevention side here, recognizing the increased extreme weather patterns that inevitably we're going to see, as well as the increased cargo ships that we'll see moving within our waters. I just wanted to highlight that.

I was wondering if you could expand a little on what you touched on earlier about the importance of funding indigenous nations and—perhaps I'll add on to that if you didn't mention it—organizations on the ground. I'm wondering how you envision that looking in terms of funding being allocated to nations and NGOs, and how you feel it may support the response being more efficient when a spill does occur and may minimize the impacts on coastal communities and our marine environment.

[Kevin Butterworth]

Thanks for the question.

The funding is critical. The program that was mentioned earlier, the indigenous community boat volunteer pilot program, is a capital program that has allowed some of the nations—I think there were three in B.C.—to buy a boat and some equipment.

One of the key pieces around this, as I'm sure you're aware, is training. It's getting folks trained up to be able to go out in inclement weather and be able to respond to and support the Coast Guard as and when needed. If you have a look at the volunteer organizations that do that work, they undergo a lot of training to be able to respond in all sorts of weather. That's an absolutely key piece.

Working closely together with our indigenous partners is also key. These folks are living up and down the coast. They know the areas very well. They know the coastline. They know where things wash up. They know how to get to these areas. From our perspective as an environmental emergency response organization, they are key go-to people when we need to go into areas and look to partner to clean things up. Making sure there is funding available for training to get folks up to speed with what they need to know, whether it's marine or whether it's for the terrestrial environment, is a key piece. It comes into being able to respond quickly. It comes into prevention and being able to respond in an effective manner.

I know there isn't much time left, so I'll stop there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Ms. Barron.

Your time is over a bit.

I want to thank the three witnesses who appeared before committee today for their knowledge on this particular topic. It's been insightful, I'm sure, for every member of the committee. It was one of the better testimonies, I think, of witnesses that we've had in a while. It was very informative.

We'll give a moment now for our witnesses to leave before we go into our next bit of business.

[Kevin Butterworth]

Thanks very much for the opportunity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

I think our witnesses have gone.

Before we go in camera for drafting instructions to the analysts on this study, I understand there is unanimous consent among members to deal with the letter submitted under Standing Order 106(4) today.

Do I have unanimous consent to continue with this item of business now? Hearing no dissent, I'll assume that I do.

We'll now discuss a request that was brought to my attention by Ms. Desbiens. I will give her the floor to open the discussion.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to sincerely thank my colleagues around the table for allowing me to make this request.

First, I'll give you a little bit of background. We didn't want to get to this request, but as we move through the file on capelin fishing in our part of the country, we're seeing that weir fishing hasn't had the chance to be well integrated into the thinking of the department, the Minister and her officials. Weir fishing is an indigenous legacy and part of the intangible heritage. There are only two fisheries practising this technique in the entire eastern part of the country. The first nations have this science of going out and tapping into the resource without altering it, so it's fishing that isn't harmful to the resource. We have submitted scientific advice, we have asked that the fisheries be consulted, and we have made representations to the minister and her officials. You've seen the questions I've asked in this committee when I've had the opportunity.

I will give you the facts and explain the situation so that you understand it. Weir fishing is done on the banks of the St. Lawrence River. This fishing technique is used in Saint‑Irénée, Charlevoix, and Isle‑aux‑Coudres, the island where I was born. The technique involves using an L‑shaped screen that moves forward towards the water, so from the bank and gently into the river. As soon as the ice disappears, capelin spawn in the St. Lawrence at the rising tide. After the males spawn, they die on the shore. Instead of letting them dry on the shore, fishers collect them. In any case, the fish die after they've spawned.

This fishery is very popular in our area. Everyone awaits their plate of capelin. When the first capelin rolls onto the banks of the St. Lawrence, there's a celebration in the village, spring is coming. Everyone eats capelin. It's not complicated, no one wonders what will be on the menu for supper; it will be capelin.

Now I'll tell you about the problem. Every day matters to fishers. Last year, because the fishery was set to open on May 1, which was an inappropriate date, they lost more than half of their catch. That's why we've been making representations for the past year to open this fishery earlier.

With climate change and the seasons getting longer or shorter, fishers want to be able to fish when the capelin arrives. Every day counts, because capelin is caught in small amounts, since it has to be processed fresh. You can't say that it's no big deal and that you'll catch three tonnes more the following week. That's not how it works. Small amounts are caught every day. That's what the minister and the officials need to understand. The Charlevoix and St. Lawrence resource is nothing like the Newfoundland and Labrador resource. The fishers we're talking about fish 0.35% to 0.5% of the total quota that's allocated to that type of fishery, so every day counts.

The fishers are ready to fish. They're just waiting for the signal from the minister, who could, in all respects, offer a moratorium and allow them to fish earlier than May 1. They would like to be invited to the consultation table to ensure that there is a clear understanding of the situation and, at the end of the consultation process, that the opening date of this fishery be reviewed.

I hope I've made myself clear and that the common sense of this request will take its place in your considerations.

I realize that I'm asking you to attend a meeting—ideally to be held virtually—during constituency weeks, which are very busy and very important for us all. I realize all that, but at the same time, I couldn't sleep at night knowing that I hadn't done everything in my power to save this piece of intangible heritage, an indigenous legacy that is beloved by every resident of the Charlevoix region, when all it would take for that legacy to continue is some plain old common sense. This is an iconic part of Quebec's heritage, and now that you are all more familiar with it, I'm sure you will appreciate it as well.

With that in mind, I encourage everyone here to consider my request, taking into account the fact that what I am asking of you and of the minister is entirely in keeping with her mandate letter: supporting a responsible fishery and local consumption, while stewarding, not altering, a natural resource.

Therefore, pursuant to Standing Order 106(4), I am proposing the following motion:That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee invite Joyce Murray, Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, along with her officials, for a meeting of two hours, to be held no later than Wednesday, April 13, 2022, to inform the committee about the steps the department has taken on this issue since the spring of 2021 and the steps the Minister plans to take, as well as the time required, to correct the problem, given the unique nature of weir fishing in the Charlevoix region of Quebec, and in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Madame Desbiens.

I'll open it now up to any questions or comments.

Go ahead, Mr. Small.

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

I have a little experience with fishing capelin, having landed thousands of tonnes of it as a commercial fishing captain.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, what we have is stakeholder monitoring, so there's no fixed opening date in Newfoundland and Labrador for the capelin fishery; it's simply the commercial harvesters in the conjunction with the union. When the capelin show up and they're ready to take, we take them. It's pretty simple.

I don't know if we really need the minister to come in for a couple of hours. I mean, it's great to have her here and give her a few questions—who wouldn't want to?—but to bring some practicality into the approach, the local harvesters know when the capelin are there; and when the capelin are there, they go, but the minister and the bureaucrats need to know the timeliness of capelin.... I guess Madame Desbiens would like to see the capelin taken after they've spawned, which is great, but the local harvesters would have that information to supply to the bureaucrats.

We shouldn't have gatekeepers controlling this. We should be more practical. I support what Madame Desbiens is trying to do, and I don't think it should be that complicated, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

I don't know if it's complicated or not, but I will comment on what you said about Newfoundland, Mr. Small.

It's my understanding that it's a competitive fishery in Newfoundland when they open it, and it's DFO that decides when it closes, based on what has been landed, and that always seems to be a problem with some of the fishermen. They're going from one area to another as the capelin progress around the island, and they're saying that the capelin are still in an area, so why can't they take more and that kind of thing.

It is not an individual quota basis. They set a maximum amount to be taken, and if one fisherman gets all of that, it's done and the fishery is over, if that's correct from my knowledge.

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

Yes, that's correct, but in terms of the opening, they decide to open it when the capelin are there and when they're ready for commercial use and in optimal condition. A similar decision can be made in Quebec, for sure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

All right.

Next is Serge Cormier.

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Desbiens, for educating us on this issue. We've talked about it briefly, and yesterday, I did some research in my hotel room when I had a bit of spare time. There are a couple of things in your letter I'd like to clarify.

In your letter, you said the capelin fishery usually opened on April 1 in your region, but according to what I found, the fishery has always started on May 1. You also expressed some concerns.

You told me that numerous discussions with Fisheries and Oceans Canada had taken place to have the opening date changed to April 1, but to my knowledge, no such regulation was the subject of a decision.

As you know, Ms. Desbiens, before a decision can be made as to whether the fishery can begin on April 1, a stock assessment has to be conducted. According to the information I was able to obtain, the stock assessment will be carried out around April 20, so even if the committee were to meet next week or this week, I don't think there's much we could do to have the fishery open on April 1. I'm not saying I don't think the committee should meet; I am simply saying that, even if we do hold the meeting, we probably won't be able to get the decision changed. I do, however, think it's worth looking into the matter.

I'm not sure whether you met with the fishers, but I should point out that, last year, one of them committed an illegal fishing violation by fishing before the season opened. That is something to be concerned about as well.

Were you aware of these things? Did you know the stock assessment was scheduled to be carried out around April 20? Perhaps we could meet with the minister and her officials after the break weeks since we are past April 1.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Madame Desbiens, you have your hand up. You might want to respond, I figure.

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

Yes, I would like to respond to the honourable member.

I am aware of the violation that was issued last year. It has to do with the fact that the fisher had purchased a very special licence, one that was purchased by a family. She bought it from her uncle, and it didn't have a date. The May 1 opening date was dropped on us without warning. It was probably posted on the department's website, but when you have no inkling that a date is going to be set, you don't have the reflex to check the department's website. It wasn't something the fishers knew was coming, so they started fishing the capelin when they normally would have. It was only when she received the fine that the fisher found out that the fishery didn't open until May 1, a date that isn't adequate.

That's when we began trying to understand the department's reasoning. In reaching out to the department, we learned that it had selected May 1 as the opening date without conducting a stock assessment first.

We agree that a stock assessment should be conducted this year, but we maintain that the two weir fisheries, as currently practised, are not the activities that will impact stocks. In fact, these fishers harvest between 0.35% and 0.5% of the total quota.

In an ideal world, it wouldn't be necessary to meet with the minister because it would be possible to communicate to the department that every day counts for these fishers. That is really the point I'm trying to make. It's the same as taking $1,000 a day away from them.

It's about their livelihood. We want the minister to conduct the stock assessment with the understanding that the stocks as they are currently being harvested will not be impacted before April 22. She should therefore allow the weir fishery to proceed immediately. The department can then conduct its assessment and consult fishers to clarify the type of fishing they practise.

If you can assure me that the minister will do that for our fishers, I am perfectly fine not holding a meeting. I would be delighted, in fact. Every single day counts, and that's really the concern here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Go ahead, Mr. Arnold.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will speak in support of Ms. Desbiens' motion.

There seems to be a thought within the department that fish will follow a time clock. I recall speaking to a harvester in Nova Scotia a number of years ago about the eel harvest and DFO was trying to determine when the season should open by a date on the calendar. The harvester's response to the question of when he thought the season should open was that it's when the spring peepers start to sing. It was by weather conditions and when the eel were there to be harvested, not by a date on the calendar.

I think what Ms. Desbiens is saying here is that the fish are only there for a certain period of time. The capelin are only there for a short period of time. To lose out on a full month of harvest because someone thought it was better for the calendar or for the entire stock in general, when such a small number are harvested through this process, doesn't seem to make sense.

I would support bringing the minister in and have her explain why this decision was made in the way it was. Hopefully, it could be changed to salvage a few more weeks out of the season.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Go ahead, Mr. Morrissey.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

I agree. Madame Desbiens made valid points. However, for the first time, it looks like the committee would be attempting to direct the opening of a fishery prior to a stock assessment. The fish migrate. They move. This is an important fishery—I'm a bit surprised by that—in Newfoundland and we have no stock assessment. All of the decisions are made based on the scientific data and assessment based at DFO.

We sometimes disagree, but we also know all too well the history of politically interfering in the management of the fisheries without listening to the scientific and assessment data. The cod fishery collapse in Newfoundland is a classic one, where politicians of all stripes kept interfering until the stock had completely collapsed. That's my only concern.

Madame Desbiens has made some valid points, but I'd be concerned without the department's stock assessment being done. What are the implications on the fishery? What would be the implication on the stock, as it would move into other provinces for other fisheries? It appears to be a bit of an open free-for-all when the season is open.

That's my only concern on attempting to move on this at this particular time.

It surprises me that we may have somebody move from one to the other, supporting this committee trying to influence the minister into moving an opening date without the stock assessment being adequately done.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Go ahead, Ms. Barron.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to Madame Desbiens for bringing this forward. It's clear that this is an important issue to the constituents in Madame Desbiens' riding, so I appreciate the persistence to have this issue addressed.

It feels a little unfortunate that we're here in this circumstance, where we're talking about this in the manner that we are. I am in support of this motion. I am in support of it not to supersede science, but for us to be able to have an opportunity to sit down with the minister and understand what the process is for assessment, why this assessment hasn't been done yet and what this looks like moving forward.

There are some good opportunities for us to ask questions about what the delay is to better understand the concerns that are arising in Madame Desbiens' riding and how we can best move forward.

I'll be in support of having an opportunity to ask the minister some questions around what's currently happening and how to best move forward, and then taking it from there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

I'll go to Mr. Small next and then Mr. Perkins, before going back to Madame Desbiens.

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

For the record, I support Madame Desbiens's motion.

Last year, to my colleague Mr. Cormier's point on the stock assessment, the Gulf of St. Lawrence capelin stock was assessed to be very healthy. These capelin have spawned and they will die, so their purpose in life is concluded. It's not a fishery that's going to be damning to the stock, so I don't see the need for an assessment to have been made before proceeding with this fishery.

Number three, between pinnipeds and mankind, 99 out of every 100 capelin are taken by pinnipeds, so prohibiting this fishery will do absolutely nothing to protect the resource. It will just harm the people of the estuary of the St. Lawrence River area.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone, for bearing with my hoarse COVID voice.

I support the motion and, just to make sure that we're clear, I don't think anyone here is proposing that somehow this committee try to impose some sort of solution on the minister.

I think the point, as Ms. Barron observed, is for us to be able to question the minister, and presumably some officials, on why there is this inconsistency in how this decision-making process is being made. It is urgent; otherwise, we would probably include some of these discussions in the next survey, but it is urgent, given that the season is imminent and we've faced a few of these decisions by the minister in the last little while that happened within weeks of the start of a season, so I think it's good have a discussion before, not after, the horse has been let out of the barn, so to speak.

Thank you.