Fisheries Committee on Sept. 27th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Cormier. Your six minutes are up. We'll get to you again, I'm sure.

We'll now go to Madame Desbiens.

Ms. Desbiens, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Burns, I'm going to ask you some questions that might seem to be related to Mr. Cormier's, because I was very sensitive to the facts he shared with us recently about the United States. We have all seen that certain groups in the United States have a tremendous amount of influence on the environmental front.

I was wondering if there is a counter-propaganda tool at DFO and a marketing mechanism, specifically, to highlight our ability to be good environmental collaborators.

Is there a specific marketing tool in your department to promote our good measures?

[Adam Burns]

That was said by the Monterey Bay Aquarium representatives who did the Canadian fisheries review. We work closely with our colleagues in the U.S. government, who certainly don't make such an assessment of our measures. We believe we have measures that are at least equivalent to those of the United States.

With respect to marketing, we are working with people in the industry, including the Canadian Lobster Council, to help them find ways to do marketing that is similar to what is being done at the Monterey Bay Aquarium.

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

In your opinion, would it be beneficial to budget for this, insofar as we are comparing ourselves to a giant called the United States, which has different means than us?

Would increasing budgets for this improve our marketing performance and how our good measures are perceived?

[Adam Burns]

We have programs that could help the Canadian industry, like the Atlantic Fisheries Fund. It would depend on the project for which funding is being sought.

However, our main approach is to work with industry people so they can do their own marketing based on their particular priorities.

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

With regard to the measures applicable for the protection of mammals, I imagine that there are good behaviour endorsements given to certain fishermen.

Is this something that is in place or should be in place? For example, it could be said that crab fishermen have behaved in an exemplary way, which has reduced the risk of right whale entanglement by 82%.

Is there such a thing as reward mechanisms for good behaviour? I'm a layperson in this area. If not, could we set that up?

[Adam Burns]

We work closely with all sectors of the fishing industry, including crab fishermen and lobster fishermen. I couldn't tell you if one is better than another; it's going very well all around.

However, we are working hard, of course, to try to get the exceptional measures that we have here in Canada understood by different groups in the United States.

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

I would like to come back to the behaviour of the fishermen, which seems exemplary. They are trying very hard, but they are under a lot of stress.

Have you assessed the human impact of these efforts?

[Adam Burns]

The measures certainly have an impact on fishermen. It costs them money too. We can't deny that. However, we are trying to reduce that impact by working with them. Each year we hold a roundtable discussion with industry representatives to identify the measures that affect them most and find different approaches to continue to protect right whales while reducing the impact on the industry.

So it is really the industry that is best placed to identify the measures that affect them most and find different ways to proceed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Madame Desbiens.

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

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, it's timely that we're looking at the study with our friends to the east, where hurricane Fiona recently hit, and I want to express my thoughts as somebody who was born and raised in Newfoundland and is now a proud west coaster. I am sending my thoughts out to everybody on the east coast.

With regard to the topic at hand, I want to thank the witnesses for being here today and sharing with us updates around this important topic.

I'm looking at a chart in front of me. In it, there are some numbers laid out around the mandatory reporting of lost gear to the DFO. That reporting has been implemented in all areas since 2020. I'm hoping you could help me understand some of the pieces here. I'm looking at, for example, Newfoundland and Labrador, where it says that the number of lost gear reports filed is 33. The number of gear units reported lost is 263, and the number of gear units retrieved is 181.

I'm wondering if you can highlight the process that a fisher or whoever would take to file a report, the process of reporting lost gear, and the barriers in retrieving that gear because, as you can see, the numbers don't align.

[Brett Gilchrist]

Thank you.

We have a tool that's available to fish harvesters electronically to allow them to easily report lost fishing gear promptly. When that report is done or submitted by a fish harvester, the department receives that report, and we process that report as soon as possible to determine if there's a retrieval activity by the department or through our partners that can happen in the near term.

As my colleague Adam Burns mentioned, we've had a ghost gear retrieval program that's been in place for the last two years. There was another announcement for $10 million to retrieve additional gear with our partners, including indigenous harvesters, commercial harvesters and experts in retrieving gear, and once those reports are submitted, we use them to retrieve gear. The challenge is that sometimes the gear can't be retrieved and sometimes it can be, and in some cases the harvesters are, in season, able to retrieve the gear themselves, so sometimes the amount of gear reported lost doesn't end up being the amount of gear that's left in the water.

Our goal is to retrieve all of that gear, of course, because lost gear—and this is something Canada has mentioned in the international community as well—is a major source of impact for marine mammals, including endangered whale species, so working with our industry to retrieve that gear is a priority.

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

Thank you.

Because there is quite a low number—although it's all in perspective, I guess, but it appears to be a low number—of those who are reporting the lost gear initially, I'm wondering what the incentives are for them to report it.

Also, are there any accountability mechanisms in place to follow up? One thing I'm hearing over and over is that accountability is missing in many of these ghost gear initiatives.

[Brett Gilchrist]

We do have accountability at this point, but it is a relatively new program. The fact that Canada is the first one in the world to share lost gear reporting suggests that it's a developing program, and in fact we are ahead of the game.

When it comes to the reporting of lost gear, our harvesters are focused, obviously, on not losing their gear, but the reporting tool itself is relatively new, so those numbers have been increasing annually. There are incentives for harvesters to report lost fishing gear. A perfect example is market bodies like Seafood Watch and the Marine Stewardship Council. They are watching very closely what our harvesters do and taking note of lost gear reports and the impact on their bottom line, on their ability to sell their product.

The other incentives are, for example, that our fishing gear for lobster and crab is marked, so if we lose the fishing gear and someone comes across, say, an entangled whale, that gear is marked based on the fishery it came from. We want to do that because we obviously want to take note of gear that's been lost, and harvesters know that. They know the gear has been marked. They want to contribute to the lost gear reporting system. That is in particular for lobster and crab fisheries and fixed-gear fisheries like that.

It's also marked because we want to distinguish between Canadian gear and U.S. gear. It's not uncommon for whales to be entangled and to transit both borders, so we don't want to be identified as a source of gear in Canadian waters when the entanglement may have happened elsewhere.

The marking of gear, of course, is a motivating factor as well for the industry to realize they should report the loss, and we are seeing an increase in numbers in reporting. The uptake has been relatively quick, considering the program has been in place for a very short time in the fisheries world.

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

Thank you.

I forgot to set my timer, Mr. Chair. How much time do I have left?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

You have a minute and 10 seconds.

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

It's a minute and 10 seconds. Okay, let's see.

Can you provide high-level...? I know you spoke about the consultation process that's happening with first nations, with harvesters, with fishers and so on. What have been the impacts on these closures? With regard to the most recent closures, what are, say, the top four impacts that you've been hearing that you could share?

[Adam Burns]

Broadly speaking, we would note that particularly in the crab fisheries that tend to be most impacted, the vast majority of the quota continues to be caught each year. That's not to say that there aren't additional economic implications for harvesters who may have to travel further to complete their quotas and what have you. As I say, it's those types of impacts that we're continuing to work on with the industry. We want to hear other innovative solutions they might have—clearly, though, ones that won't reduce the level of protection for North Atlantic right whales. Really, it's about working with the industry to find that sweet spot.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you.

We will now go to Mr. Arnold for five minutes or less, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Again, with my colleagues, I've been watching from the west coast what's happening on the east coast, and our thoughts go out to everyone affected by the storm.

I have a series of about eight or nine questions that I'd like to go through. I'll keep my prologue short, and if you could keep your answers as short as possible, hopefully we can get through them.

What type of DFO and Coast Guard vessels are used to observe right whale-related measures in the Gulf of St. Lawrence?

[Brett Gilchrist]

For our detection program, we use aerial platforms like planes from Transport Canada, DFO science and DFO conservation protection. We also have acoustic monitoring devices, buoys in the water to constantly listen for right whales. As well, the DFO, the Coast Guard and the DFO conservation and protection program have vessels on the water, so that's all hands on deck.

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

Okay. I asked about the types of vessels. If you could provide details in a written response later, that would be appreciated.

As right whale measures have been increased, has there been a corresponding increase in the DFO's budget allocations for the conservation and protection branch to enforce the new measures?

[Brett Gilchrist]

Yes, there has been. Under whales initiative 1.0, $167.4 million was allocated to the protection of right whales and two other species. Of that, approximately $700,000 is allocated to our conservation protection officials for surveillance—for example, the use of planes to monitor right whales.

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

Okay. Thank you.

In 2019, the federal government awarded PAL Aerospace a five-year contract to provide aircraft assistance in the enforcement of right whale measures. Is that correct?

[Brett Gilchrist]

That is likely linked to that $700,000.