Fisheries Committee on June 9th, 2022

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for joining us.

I will first turn to Mr. Lanteigne and Ms. Roussel. I have so many questions to ask, but I have only 10 minutes.

Mr. Lanteigne and Ms. Roussel, we often have an opportunity to talk. I want to discuss shrimp with you today. As you know, this year is difficult, just like recent years have been.

Mr. Lanteigne, I will start with you. I will put a question to you that I have put to a number of witnesses since the beginning of this study. It concerns figures the department provided this year concerning the quantity of shrimp redfish eat. This year, redfish supposedly ate 221,000 tonnes of shrimp in the gulf, while shrimp biomass is approximately 54,000 tonnes.

What is your interpretation of those numbers, Mr. Lanteigne?

[Jean Lanteigne]

Like everyone, we see that things aren't working from a numbers standpoint. That tells us we have a real problem that needs fixing. I talked about it in my opening statement. We don't have enough analyses or data to know exactly where things stand.

What is certain, though, is the huge quantity of redfish in the Gulf. We even think we're seeing new year classes, especially in the Esquiman Channel, in Newfoundland and Labrador.

More data is imperative. Doing a single scientific survey in August doesn't cut it.

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

Some of your fishers are participating in the exploratory fishery for redfish, and I think they catch their quota every time they go out.

If it's 221,000 tonnes this year, we can probably expect that to rise to nearly 300,000 tonnes next year, assuming there's a 30% increase. What should we do, Mr. Lanteigne? Taking steps to protect shrimp stocks is well and good, but if redfish keep eating the shrimp, we won't have a healthy biomass.

[Jean Lanteigne]

That's exactly right. The department needs to open the redfish fishery as soon as possible, but the answer we get from the department is that redfish aren't the right size for commercial fishing nets.

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

Yes, but other steps could be taken.

[Jean Lanteigne]

That's right. The department needs to open the fishery and examine the options. I realize that making fishmeal may not be desirable, but surely, it's possible to do something with redfish. The commercial fishery needs to open as soon as possible. That's the first step.

Furthermore, we need to have the ability to figure out exactly what the distribution of redfish in the Gulf is, and the analysis work needs to continue. Fisheries and Oceans Canada tells us that the closer redfish get to adulthood, the less they eat shrimp. We don't have that information yet, but that's the type of scientific analysis we absolutely need.

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

Very good.

I noticed that, yesterday or the day before, Quebec fishers decided to stay in port because of the price the Quebec agricultural marketing board was paying.

Did your fishers in the region make a decision? Are they going to go out anyways, or will they think twice about incurring expenses—which, as you know, can be enormous—and run the risk of not being able to at least break even?

[Jean Lanteigne]

In order to protect market access, producers in our region asked fishers to make an extra effort. Fishers agreed to go out approximately three times to see whether they could cover the costs of those trips. If not, they will likely stay in port. I can tell you that they didn't do well on the first trips. No one had a profitable trip, so it doesn't bode well.

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

I'm jumping around a bit here. I have so many questions.

Can you tell us quickly why you disagreed with the precautionary approach that was taken this year and the resulting quota decisions?

[Jean Lanteigne]

We already have a precautionary approach. What Fisheries and Oceans Canada did this year was ignore that approach. The department basically scrapped the approach and said that it was going to do something different. It doesn't make sense. Either we have rules or we don't.

It's not a good sign when the police don't follow their own rules. That was more or less what happened with the department this year. They bring us into a process and force us to make decisions, but when it's time to abide by those decisions, the department does something else. That doesn't work.

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

I would say your comments probably reflect what we are all thinking. We know we have to protect the resources and keep them healthy for future generations.

Do you ever feel that the department makes quota or fishery management decisions without really taking into account the repercussions they could have on communities? Would you say that the way things are currently done does not adequately take into account the repercussions on communities?

[Jean Lanteigne]

I think it's safe to say that, most of the time, the department is reactive, rather than proactive. Back in 2011, when fishers started reporting sightings of small red fish—which we used to refer to as peanuts because they were just three centimetres long—it should have immediately raised a red flag at the department. It should have realized that a phenomenon was emerging and that it needed to analyze the situation right away. That didn't happen, though. The department lets things drag on until its back is against the wall; then it starts asking what it can do. Very often, it ends up closing the fishery because that's all it can do when things get to that point. That's no solution.

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

I saw that—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Your time is up, Mr. Cormier.

We now go to Monsieur Desilets, who I believe is sitting in for Madame Desbiens today, for six minutes.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm new to the committee, so I'm constantly learning. What I'm hearing is not only surprising, but also unsettling.

My first question is for Mr. Lanteigne.

Do you think the Department of Fisheries and Oceans does enough to consult your organization, harvester organizations and collaborative science networks so that it can make sensible decisions?

[Jean Lanteigne]

I don't think we have bad communication with the department. We talk to people there, we can discuss issues with them, but after that, the door closes—and what goes on behind that door, we have no idea. We usually have to be insistent. We have to keep knocking on the door. It's really tough to know what comes of our discussions with department officials.

In 2017 or 2018, we set up a joint working group on shrimp, and we had excellent meetings with department officials, but nothing more. It's like talking to someone, who then tells you that they're going to go home and mull it all over, and get back to you with an answer. There's a clear lack of transparency, and it makes no sense, especially since communities are visibly impacted. Thousands of workers are affected, and the impending possible collapse of the shrimp fishery is a perfect example of that lack of transparency.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

In a nutshell, Mr. Lanteigne, the department listens to what you have to say, but doesn't hear you.

[Jean Lanteigne]

You hit the nail on the head.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

All right. Thank you.

I have a question for Mr. Mallet.

What do you think of the department's ability to conduct socio-economic analysis? Wouldn't the department do well to seek out the expertise of economic and social science researchers to take into account the socio-economic profiles of the various regions and, above all, small communities?

[Martin Mallet]

It is crucial that the department start making significant investments to that end, because—as I said in my opening statement—our fisheries are facing a growing number of risk factors, on the west coast and east coast alike. The ecosystem changes we are seeing are going to have repercussions in the next 10 to 15 years. Just look at what is happening today with redfish and shrimp. The interaction between the species is affecting an entire fleet as we speak.

If we had a department with strong economic science capacity, it could come up with possible solutions years ahead of time, in co-operation with organizations like ours and Mr. Lanteigne's. We are here to work with the department, not to be at odds with the department. We want to be partners.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

In the past, the department has worked well with fishers, specifically regarding the management of lobster and crab stocks in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Problems have, however, been flagged in the herring and mackerel fisheries. Has any co‑operation been established? If so, why isn't it working? Where do you think the problems lie?

[Martin Mallet]

I did indeed refer to the management of the lobster and snow crab fisheries as success stories, because we were able to establish a model after decades of work and co‑operation. I think that same model could apply to herring, mackerel and other species. In the case of both of those fisheries, some very tough decisions are being made or, at least, have been made by the minister's office in the past six months.

If the department was more receptive to what those of us in the industry recommended, we wouldn't have the current moratorium on spring herring and mackerel.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Mallet.

That's it for me, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you for that.

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

Go ahead, please.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses who are here, and thanks for all the information you've shared.

I have many questions. I'm going to get right to them.

My first question is for Mr. Bird and Mr. Paish, who are here today from the Sport Fishing Institute of B.C.

Welcome. Through the chair, in our previous conversations there were discussions around the successes of salmon rehabilitation along the Cowichan River. I'm wondering if you could speak a little bit more about what you feel led to this success and what we could learn from this particular example.