Fisheries Committee on Oct. 21st, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Welcome.

We have two witnesses who are signed in for the first panel. We have Moira Brown, senior scientist with the Canadian Whale Institute, and Lyne Morissette, marine biologist and environmental mediator, representing M-Expertise Marine.

I know that Ms. Morissette has presented to committee before, and I think Ms. Brown has as well.

I'd like to remind those participating by Zoom that you have the choice at the bottom of your screen of either floor, English or French. As a reminder, screenshots or photos of your screen are not permitted. As well, when you're asking a question, please identify who the question is going to.

I'm sure there's something else I'm supposed to say, but we'll get into the presentations by the witnesses to enable us to ask them some questions.

What I've decided to do is to split the two panels equally, with 35 minutes each. Wherever we end up at that 35-minute stop is where we'll finish off.

I'll now ask Ms. Brown for her five-minute opening statement.

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

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

I'd just like to ask you to let everyone know that everyone has passed the sound test. Thank you.

[Dr. Moira Brown, Senior Scientist, Canadian Whale Institute]

Thank you very much, sir.

I am a senior scientist at the Canadian Whale Institute and the Campobello whale rescue team that responds to entangled whales in the Canadian Maritimes and Quebec. I'm also a scientist emeritus at the New England Aquarium in Boston, Massachusetts.

I started right whale research in 1985, and, my goodness, that's 37 years ago now. I've studied right whales in all of their habitat areas, from the calving ground in Florida to the fairly new habitat in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. We use all of the data that we have collected on right whales over the years in all of these different habitats.

I was the lead author on the first recovery strategy for Fisheries and Oceans Canada. I led a working group in the early 2000s to relocate the Bay of Fundy shipping lanes and an area in the Roseway Basin area to deal with vessel strikes in the two critical habitat areas for right whales in Canadian waters. Our conservation efforts at that time were focused on vessel strikes, because that was the leading cause of mortality in the 1990s and early 2000s.

We started studying right whales in the Gulf of St. Lawrence in 2013 and 2014, partially because we were seeing fewer and fewer animals in the Bay of Fundy. Now, of course, since the unusual mortality event in 2017, most of my work is focused in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, doing field research, responding to entangled whales and using those data to work with the various advisory groups led by Transport Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada to respond to the right whale emergency that came up in the gulf.

I would say that Canada has done an incredible job, with a very fast response, on what happened in the gulf in 2017, and again in 2018, with the high number of mortalities from human-related activities, vessel strikes and gear entanglements. After working in this for most of my adult life, and also spending part of that time in the United States, I can tell you that this work was started down in the U.S. in about 1996. In the five ensuing years since 2017, we have not only met similar protection measures for right whales in Canadian waters, but we have exceeded what's being done by our partners in the states to the south.

There is still work to be done—we haven't solved the problem yet—and like many conservation actions, it is not “one and done”. This is something we will have to keep doing in an iterative way for years to come, if we're going to recover the North Atlantic right whale and have coexistence between fisheries and the shipping industry in Canadian waters.

Thanks very much. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you for that.

We'll now go to Madame Morissette for five minutes or less, please.

[Dr. Lyne Morissette, Marine Biologist and Environmental Mediator, M-Expertise Marine]

Mr. Chair and honourable members of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, thank you for inviting me to this meeting.

My name is Lyne Morissette, and I'm a marine ecology researcher specializing in ecosystem functioning, fisheries and ocean conservation. Since 2015, I've been interested in the situation of the North Atlantic right whale from the perspective of its ecology, migration and interactions with human activities, including fishing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. I had the opportunity to dive into this world and to participate in a multitude of brainstorming sessions, management meetings, scientific exchanges, sea trials of new fishing technologies, as well as necropsies on whales. It is in this context that I present my remarks today, with the aim of improving the situation and giving the best possible chance to the survival of both species at risk and of humans who must coexist on the same territory.

The situation of the right whale is critical. We're talking about a species that could be extinct in 20 years if nothing is done. In that context, we have to be effective and don't have the luxury of doing without anyone's knowledge.

Since 2017, key representatives in the fisheries sector have consistently encouraged the development of improved knowledge and tools to prevent negative interactions with right whales. Unfortunately, in several critical aspects, there are still major gaps in our knowledge and actions. These gaps also raise risks that are important to note.

First, the lack of knowledge about certain aspects of whale ecology can lead us to spend time and energy on ineffective or unnecessary management and protection measures.

Second, there is a large category of knowledge that isn't optimally integrated into the usual way of doing things, namely, our knowledge of fisheries. These knowledge gaps also pose significant risks, both socioeconomically and environmentally, such as harming fisheries without a clear, valid and quantifiable reason, or ignoring fishers' knowledge of the environment of the species at risk. This is particularly true in the case of threatened species, and we don't have the luxury of turning our noses up at knowledge and ideas in this area.

The current challenge is to try to save a species, the North Atlantic right whale, by managing crab or lobster fishing, in most cases. Saving the right whale is done on the basis of what is called the best possible science, while managing fishing fleets is done by having conservationists and biologists protect whales with crab or lobster fishery management tools without knowing how the fishery operates, its limitations and its opportunities.

Trying to drive a nail with a screwdriver can be ineffective. It's a bit like asking a neurosurgeon to drive a race car. They are both areas of excellence, but you can't ask an expert to switch from one to the other. This mismatch is at the root of the current inefficiency and lack of cohesion in our actions to protect the right whale.

In addition to this imperfect fit, I've noticed over the past five years a distinct lack of consideration for fishers, who are invited to meetings, on a few days' notice and are seen more as decorations or names on a list, rather than being included for all the highly relevant input they can provide to discussions and decisions.

Coexistence is defined as the simultaneous existence with other people or phenomena. Its antonym is succession, which in an ecological sense means that new species can supplant existing species in the quest for resources, leading to the extinction of the main species. Coexistence is a concept often used in ecology to describe the interaction between different species in an ecosystem. We may not realize it, but we're really dealing with issues of two species here: Homo sapiens and Eubalaena glacialis. It reminds us that we humans are also part of the ecosystem.

To coexist is to avoid the disappearance of one of the two components of our system. It's trying to save the fisheries and the whales, and allow them to survive simultaneously in the same territory. To coexist is to ensure that we don't ban fishing and that we don't ignore the plight of a species at risk.

The right whale is an endangered species. As with all species facing the same fate, urgent action is needed. This urgency requires effective measures, not intimidation or indiscriminate actions. The precautionary approach is a solution, provided it isn't one‑sided and also assesses the impact of saving whales on a fishery and coastal communities. To have the best chance of saving the right whale, we need to be effective, both with the tools we use and with the experts we bring to the table. Whenever we've included the views and experience of fishermen in the process, we have had great opportunities, probably the most promising and the most effective.

I think it's by working together that we'll arrive at the best solutions for coexistence.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you for that.

We will now go to Dr. Sean Brillant, representing the Canadian Wildlife Federation, for an opening statement for five minutes or less, please.

[Dr. Sean Brillant, Senior Conservation Biologist, Marine Programs, Canadian Wildlife Federation]

Good afternoon, everybody.

My name is Sean Brillant. I'm the senior conservation biologist at the Canadian Wildlife Federation for the marine programs. I have been working on right whales since 2007. I have the benefit of sitting on several national and international committees concerning the management and study of North Atlantic right whales: the Ropeless Consortium; the North Atlantic Right Whale Consortium; Transport Canada's technical advisory committees for vessel safety; and DFO committees such as the large whale disentanglement advisory committee, the right whale technical working group and the advisory committee for right whales.

I’m grateful for the invitation to appear before this committee. I hope I can bring you some additional information today.

CWF is a national wildlife conservation charity with over 200,000 supporters. We have been working on endangered species for 60 years and on the threats to right whales for coming up on 13 years.

I’m also really pleased to be the third set of witnesses to be speaking with you, because I won’t need to spend too much time giving you information. I recognize you all have a good understanding of the dire and urgent situation that is being faced by one of the most endangered large whales on the planet and by our fishing industry, particularly with respect to its access to the U.S. market.

I am going to get right to it. I have three recommendations for your consideration.

First, we need to reduce the risk to right whales by at least 90% to ensure it survives. If nothing changes, it will go extinct within our lifetime. We will all be around when the last one dies.

As you’ve already heard, my team and I did an investigation to determine how much risk has been reduced between snow crab fishing gear and right whales due to the static and dynamic closures that have been in place since 2018. This was approximately 60% to 65%; it's commendable. We need to get to 90% for all fisheries. This is not a time to tap the brakes or to cut corners. The job is not done.

You've also heard that there are probably fewer than 350 individuals remaining in this population. Research published just last week shows that at the beginning of 2018, there were only 72 reproductive females, and that was four years ago. As we all know, females are the most important part of a population for a variety of reasons, but most especially because they’re the only ones that can create new individuals. We talk about an endangered population with only 350 animals, but in reality, the situation isn't even that rosy.

Second, we have to continue to study and monitor this species and other whales.

Looking for whales isn’t easy. The only ways we can detect whales is by seeing them, which is hard because they live underwater, or by hearing them, which is hard because they don’t always make noise. Let me repeat that last point: They don’t always make noise. That means that when you hear a right whale, you know there's a right whale around; when you don’t hear a right whale, that doesn't mean there isn’t one around. That is why closed fishing grids can’t be reopened using acoustic detection, for example.

We also need better knowledge about the harm we cause them. More than 85% of the individuals of this population have scars indicating they’ve been entangled at least once in their lifetime, and some as many as seven times. Every year, a quarter of the population has new scars. A quarter of this population runs into ropes every year. Our ability to determine the origin of the entangling rope is very poor, because by the time we can investigate an entanglement, the gear is unidentifiable more often than not. Any fishery that is leaving rope in the water is part of the threat to entangle these animals and other animals. It is the rope that is the problem here.

Third, solving this problem is going to require leadership and change from the fishing industry, from Canadians and from our governments. We want to make sure we continue to benefit from using the ocean, but we have to do it in a way that doesn’t destroy other species. We can’t continue to fish the way that we have been for the last 400 years. This change is difficult, and it must be done collaboratively and be guided by the best available science.

For the last four years, CWF has collaborated with fishermen to study ropeless or on-demand fishing gear. Contrary to what you may have heard, this technology is not science fiction, it is not a science fair project and it is not a threat to the industry. It works. This is based on more than 600 trials of seven different ropeless systems we have been working with, and we tested this with 14 different snow crab and lobster fishermen throughout the maritime provinces.

This past summer, with support from DFO’s now sunsetting whalesafe gear adoption fund, we set up a gear lending program. We call it “CanFish”. It’s a fisherman assistance program, similar to a community tool library. We did this just in time. In early May, right whales showed up on the fishing grounds of snow crab fishermen out of Tignish, P.E.I. These grounds were closed to fishing and remained closed for the rest of the season. The fishermen contacted us in a bit of an understandable panic, and we were able to help them out. We provided 54 units of on-demand gear to 10 different fish harvesters. We taught them how to rig it, we taught them how to use it and we taught them how to fish with it on their vessels.

They fished for between four to six weeks in closed zones, using on-demand or ropeless gear. They did more than 150 hauls and landed more than 370,000 pounds of snow crab. This also eliminated 500 buoy lines from the area, making the entire gulf that much safer for right whales.

I'm very pleased by this. It was a real accomplishment that helped fish harvesters, and it helped whales. I'm confident that this is the way of the future.

Thanks for your attention. I look forward to your questions and discussion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you for that.

We'll now go to our round of questions. For this portion, we'll only have one round.

Our first questioner will be Mr. Small for six minutes or less, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My first question is for Mr. Brillant.

Mr. Brillant, it seems like we have a one-size-fits-all policy for Atlantic Canada. I'm just looking at a map here now on Whale Insight, and I'm looking at the sightings in the Newfoundland and Labrador side of it. Why I'm going to a one-size-fits-all question here is that there haven't been very many sightings.

I look at the dates, and every single date of a whale sighting—and I only have five here since 2016 around the island portion—is outside the crab and lobster seasons. There is a sighting there on June 17, I believe it was, in 3Ps, but that's outside of their lobster season even. That's the end of their lobster season.

The ones on the Avalon Peninsula—two in 3L and the two in 3K, and none in Labrador whatsoever—were all in September or late November, well outside the lobster and snow crab seasons.

Why would these harvesters be subject to any of the requirements of right whale protection when there is zero chance of their being there? You're well inside your 90% chance or your 90% protection, because there is zero risk. What do you have to say on that?

[Dr. Sean Brillant]

Many of the fish harvesters that we work with have a saying, and I like this saying. They say you don't have a whale in your area until you have a whale in your area.

One of the things we've seen in recent years with these whales is that their habitat is shifting, and they are moving to different areas. Yes, if there's a very low chance of whales being in an area, then that's excellent. We still need to be attentive to tools that are available to fish harvesters to reduce the risk of entanglement, but we have to be attentive to the fact that because there has never been a whale there yet doesn't mean there never will be a whale. We need to make sure that everybody is prepared and improving the sustainability of their fishery.

That's part of the answer.

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

I'm looking at these sightings, these whale observations: “definite visual”, “opportunistic”, “opportunistic”. How verifiable are some of these sightings, in fact?

[Dr. Sean Brillant]

There's quite a lot of confidence with regard to those types of sightings. Everyone's very attentive to the fact that there can be misidentifications. Often there are photographs that need to be seen by experts who can identify right whales or parts of right whales. We're quite certain that those are correct.

The opportunistic sightings refer to sightings of right whales that occur when there aren't dedicated surveys looking for right whales. Someone happens to see one and gets a good picture. It gets verified by somebody, and it gets included in the mapping program.

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

Okay. Thank you for clarifying that for me. I appreciate it.

Some of the fisheries off the Labrador coast and all around the northeast coast and east coast of Newfoundland and Labrador have quite deep water. In fact, sometimes they're using gear that's down 800 fathoms. That's a mile deep, pretty much.

These breaking string mechanisms cannot work. The rope is so taut on those vertical ropes, and there is so much strain, that it's basically like a steel pole. I've been out there. I've seen it myself. You can hardly get that buoy aboard sometimes, so there is extremely low risk of a whale tangling up in something that is a taut as that.

I can't see how those release.... I don't know what you call them. I forget the terminology now, but they blow up on the bottom—

[Dr. Sean Brillant]

You mean the on-demand systems.

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

Yes.

There's an extreme risk of having ghost gear in those types of waters, so what types of solutions do you propose for those harvesters?

[Dr. Sean Brillant]

It definitely takes experimentation, and it takes experimenting with the fishermen.

We've not fished this on-demand gear in 800 fathoms of water, so what you're saying is exactly correct. There are a lot of challenges and stresses that are involved in those kinds of fisheries, especially if you have 800 fathoms of buoy line and you're probably fishing a two-to-one scope, so maybe you have 1,600 fathoms of buoy line. That is a lot of rope that can entangle whales, and maybe not even right whales. Now we're talking about northern bottlenose whales or sperm whales as well. It is a long piece of rope that whales are going to be able to run into and bend.

I know it seems like an immovable object to little weaklings like you and me, but a 50-tonne animal that runs into that rope is going to find itself capable of winding that up.

What is the solution to that? It's not clear. It can only be solved by testing, and involving fishermen in the testing. We could find out if this on-demand stuff works or not.

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

Industry stakeholders who have real families, real bills to pay and real communities are extremely stressed out about some of these measures. They are finding that these breaking mechanisms don't work. On top of that, they're extremely low-risk to the right whale populations.

I think one-size-fits-all for this is not right. Do you think there's a possibility you could modify it?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Small. We've gone just over your six-minute mark. If I let it go over, somebody is going to be cut short at the end.

We'll now go to Mr. Kelloway for six minutes or less, please.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Hello to my colleagues and to the witnesses.

My questions will be for Ms. Brown and Ms. Morissette.

We heard a lot in our last meeting, and we've heard in this meeting so far, about concerns with weak rope gear. It's mainly that it creates more ghost gear and could be potentially unsafe, and that more testing is needed.

I have a series of questions, and then I'll hand it over to Ms. Brown and then Ms. Morissette.

Can you speak to those concerns and possibly help explain why such measures are being pursued as they relate to trade, and specifically the Marine Mammal Protection Act in the United States?

The second question is, is weak rope gear working elsewhere?

The third question is, are the claims of it being unsafe and untested true?

How do our measures compare to the United States?

We'll start with Ms. Brown and then Ms. Morissette. If you need clarification on the questions, I would be glad to provide it.

Go ahead, Ms. Brown.

[Dr. Moira Brown]

Thank you, Mr. Kelloway.

I'm going to start with your last question first. How do our measures compare to the U.S.?

The closures that Fisheries and Oceans Canada is putting in place in Canadian waters due to the presence of right whales is unprecedented. It is a solution that removes rope from the water that overlaps with whales, but it causes a great burden to the industry. There are several examples, in addition to the ones Dr. Brillant presented, such as snow crab being caught in CFA 12 and getting to market over the last few years using ropeless gear in closed areas.

I will add that ropeless is not truly ropeless. It's rope on demand and line on demand.

I would add, for Mr. Small, that a lot of the manufacturers of this technology started in the oceanography business, where they were recovering gear from 5,000 feet of water. In likelihood, as we work with fishermen, we can start to address some of these bigger problems.

To the weak links part of the question, Mr. Kelloway, there is a concern that this is going to cause ghost gear. There's no doubt about that. The work is being done in Canada. There's also work being done in Massachusetts waters with lobstermen in that area, who have come up with a couple of different kinds of weak links that are being tested. They are finding that they can do it.

The key in all of these measures.... There is no single silver bullet to solve this problem and there's no single gear type, whether it be rope on demand or weak links, that is going to solve all of the problems for all of the fish. One size does not fit all in this issue.

That's why programs from the Canadian Wildlife Federation and others that we're working with, primarily in P.E.I. and down in the U.S., are demonstrating that when you bring all the various kinds of systems to the fishermen and let them try them, they can figure out what works best and what adapts to their fishery.

I hope I've hit all your questions.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

I think you did, for most of them. Thank you, Ms. Brown.

Perhaps I can pass the mike to Ms. Morissette for her comments on those questions and any elaboration she may want to make on them.

[Dr. Lyne Morissette]

Thank you, Mr. Kelloway.

Actually, Dr. Brown's answer is fairly comprehensive. We know that weak links work. This is one of the potential solutions being tested and that works in England and Australia. There are also examples in Brazil in various fisheries, but it's not the only solution.

As Dr. Brown and Dr. Brillant mentioned, the important thing is really to test under in a variety of conditions, taking into account the different needs of the various fisheries, be it crab, lobster, offshore species or coastal species. Some crab fishers, particularly Acadian and Gaspesian, have completely different fishing grounds. The parameters or the context of the tests vary. Obviously, no one solution will work universally, and that's where the risk lies. There is no silver bullet. There's nothing that works 100% right now.

At this point, we shouldn't be too quick to believe that we have an effective and functional solution. We really need to continue to document our knowledge of potential solutions as best we can. I would reiterate that the people who know the most about how their fisheries work are the fishers, and we're trying to work with them more and more. The other two witnesses today are really inspiring proof of that.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Thank you, Ms. Morissette.

Mr. Chair, how much time do I have?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

You have 30 seconds. I don't think you have much time for both a question and an answer, so I think we'll move on.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Absolutely. Thank you.