Fisheries Committee on Oct. 21st, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Kelloway.

Madam Desbiens, you have six minutes or less, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank our witnesses for being with us today. It's always very interesting and valuable to hear from you.

Dr. Morissette, you said something very interesting earlier. You talked about the coexistence of two realities and that the knowledge of the people on the ground isn't properly taken into account, when we want to save the whales and the fishery.

What would be the ideal approach to address urgency and effectiveness?

[Dr. Lyne Morissette]

Thank you very much for your question.

I think the ideal approach would really be to bring all the knowledge to bear, whether it's the reality of managers having to impose legislation or deal with the economic threats to us, such as the Marine Mammal Protection Act, or the knowledge of fishers on the ground and the scientific knowledge of conservation and biological experts about these species at risk in Canada. All of this knowledge should be brought together to provide the best possible options.

In fact, it's being done more and more. There is an understanding of the value of a coexistence and collaborative approach. And since there are similar problems in the shipping industry, I see that it seems easier on the shipping side than on the fisheries side. However, the will is there. We still have some work to do to get there. It's critically important to bring everyone's knowledge together. With the clock ticking and time running out, we don't have the luxury of doing without anyone's knowledge.

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

Thank you. That's very interesting.

You said earlier that there wasn't one solution to these problems.

Do you think a sectoral approach, depending on area, type of fishing, water depth and the various fishing exercises within that large area, would be promising, in co‑operation with the fishers?

[Dr. Lyne Morissette]

Indeed, the knowledge that fishers have of their fishing grounds and a finer scale approach are crucial. We've done some modelling that allows us to compare at a finer scale the position of the whales at the locations where fishing gear is deployed, which allows us to determine what Dr. Brillant would describe as the risk of co-occurrence of fisheries and whales. This fine scale should be used to identify where the risk is lowest. There will always be some risk, but there has to be an opportunity for fishing to occur where the risks are lower and to make conservation gains while allowing the industry to continue.

I think the best allies we have in saving this species are the ones who have the greatest impact on it. Unfortunately, for all their knowledge, it's not the scientists who have an impact on the species, it's the fishers. So we need to have them as allies. For them on board with our vision to protect the species, we need to involve them in the process.

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

I'd like you to talk about capacity and efficiency. What would you suggest to the committee and to Fisheries and Oceans Canada to improve the capacity to react quickly and the effectiveness of that response?

Is the idea to set up a round table, divide the interventions by sector, and divide the scientists and fishers according to their specialty in order to intervene in different areas as quickly as possible? What would work best?

[Dr. Lyne Morissette]

Issue tables, advisory committees and meetings already exist. The time has come to look at these ideas in a tangible way in order to implement them. It needs to be more than just holding dozens of meetings every year.

The time has come to really have the audacity to do what is being discussed in these meetings and to take into consideration all the recommendations that are being put forward, not just by scientists, but by all the marine experts, in order to give ourselves the best possible options.

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

What could we do to help you and to ensure that the department hears what you are telling us this afternoon? Should the committee give a specific directive to the department?

[Dr. Lyne Morissette]

It is absolutely necessary to encourage real consultation and to highlight everyone's knowledge.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Madame Desbiens.

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

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.

My first questions are for Dr. Brillant.

I note that you talked about the success you were seeing in the whalesafe gear adoption fund. I'm wondering if you could clarify what the participation rate looks like throughout that time. What was the response from the fishers who participated?

[Dr. Sean Brillant]

The participation rate was quite good. We had 10 fish harvesters who took advantage of our lending program. They were the ones who were the most put out because of the closures and most immediately needed access to this gear to allow them to keep fishing in those closed areas.

We probably could have outfitted more, but we didn't have enough gear at the time. We've since been able to expand the inventory. Our hope is that if there is another opportunity in the future, we'll be able to support more fish harvesters to give them the tools they need to keep fishing safely around whales.

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

To build off of that question, what does the future look like? What have you been told? Have you been told when funding ends for this program? Have you been told whether you'll be getting any further funding to continue this project?

[Dr. Sean Brillant]

That's a tough question.

We haven't received any clarity about whether this will continue to be supported. My organization is very committed to finding a way to make sure that we can continue providing this equipment to fish harvesters to use. Many of our fish harvester partners have become quite committed to seeing this program continue. They recognize the value, because you don't know if you have a whale in your area until you have a whale in your area. I think they're starting to see the real value in having access to this gear.

We're in the process of trying to find support from philanthropic organizations and other groups and talking to fish harvesters about the value of supporting this kind of thing. The whalesafe gear adoption fund was only a two-year program that will be ending this year, but it is our hope that we'll find a way to keep the Government of Canada a partner in it as well.

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

I have one final question for you. Can you share your thoughts around how this might be best reported back so that we're hearing about the successes you experience? What do you feel would be the best process to ensure we're getting the best information, and who should be involved in that conversation?

[Dr. Sean Brillant]

I'm so pleased to hear from the fish harvesters who work with us, who do the experimentation, and especially the ones who benefited from the lending program this year. In their words, they talk about how access to this equipment saved their fishery, with 375,000 pounds of snow crab fished out of a closed area, because otherwise they would have had to steam many hours away to fish. At the same time, we also eliminated 500 buoy lines from the area, which is a great conservation success and allowed the fishery to continue.

The fishermen provide some really clear evidence and plain statements about the value of these kinds of programs. Organizations like mine, as well as those of Dr. Morissette and Dr. Brown, are looking at the benefits we are bringing to the whales in terms of prevention. That is also something that's really important, but the real value is this intersection between the fisheries and conservation value. The fish harvesters are a powerful voice in explaining what that is.

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

Thank you, Dr. Brillant, for your work in making our fisheries more sustainable and of course for helping to protect the North Atlantic right whale.

My next question is for Dr. Brown.

You mentioned your work in the U.S. Could you clarify what you saw regarding the death rates and perhaps some of the causes that you saw in the U.S. around the North Atlantic right whale?

[Dr. Moira Brown]

There really is no difference between Canada and the U.S. in what causes serious injury and mortality in North Atlantic right whales. It's entanglement in rope and it's vessel strikes.

There are a number of programs whereby both Canada and the U.S. are addressing it by using different methods, such as rope on demand or weak links. We have success stories on both sides of the border in small experimental fisheries. For example, a fishery that's been closed for 10 years in Florida, North Carolina and South Carolina has recently been reopened. After 10 years of fishermen not being able to fish sea bass, they simply switched over to rope on demand gear and got experimental fishing permits to do so.

We're at a stage where we have many examples. We were drinking from a fire hose in 2017, 2018, and 2019, when we were responding to all of these carcasses and all of this habitat shift as the animals moved into the Gulf of St. Lawrence. We're in a position now to start narrowly tailoring responses—somebody mentioned a sectoral approach—as we learn more and more about the right whales and potentially as they learn about the Gulf of St. Lawrence, because this is probably a new habitat for them as well. We can start putting this into practice en masse, and not an experiment here and an experiment there.

Let's get the gear in the hands of the fishermen. Let's triage this and get various kinds of ropeless gear or rope on demand gear into the hands of fishermen. Let them try it in the closed areas next season.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Dr. Brown and Ms. Barron.

We'll now go to Mr. Perkins for five minutes or less, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll follow up on Ms. Barron's question with regard to the U.S. You said you had studied this since 1985. I won't tell you what I was doing in 1985, but I was at a university.

Specifically, the pieces of information that we're looking for that would be very helpful are actual numbers. We know that in the 1970s, before any changes were made to protect right whales, there were around 250 animals, which rose to as high as 400, and we're now down to between 330 and 350. There's been this variation from 250 to 400 with those first changes to shipping lanes and fishing rules, which paid off, but what we haven't seen are actual numbers on the U.S. performance.

We know and see the right whale death numbers in Canada. Officials here said that in the last five years, the biggest category from necropsies was “undetermined”, that none had been entangled and died from lobster gear, and that only one had dies from crab gear. What kinds of numbers are there from the U.S.?

We're seeing this used perhaps as a trade barrier for us, and people want to use it for all kinds of reasons in the U.S. What is the American actual performance? Do they track it the way we do? Do we know how many deaths there have been? Do we know the results of those necropsies?

[Dr. Moira Brown]

Yes, we do, and a lot of that is published in scientific papers.

In the U.S., since 1996, they've had the Atlantic large whale take reduction team, which has been focused on trying to reduce the risks of gear entanglement for right whales in U.S. waters. They've done broad sweeping measures, such as sinking groundline from Florida to the Hague Line, and measures like that. There are some closures. There are a variety of measures.

Right whales are at risk for entanglement wherever there is rope in the water. With the habitat shift out of the Gulf of Maine in the springtime and up into the Gulf of St. Lawrence, there is still risk in the Gulf of Maine, but the animals are feeding up in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. There seem to be lower densities in the Gulf of Maine, including the critical habitat areas in Canadian waters—the Bay of Fundy and Roseway Basin.

We have more of a problem in Canada now than we did before, because when the right whales were in the two critical habitat areas in Fundy and Roseway, it was not during the fishing seasons. The lobster season doesn't start until various times in November. In the Gulf of St. Lawrence, it overlaps with crab fisheries and lobster fisheries.

There's a lot of overlap with right whales and various kinds of fisheries in the U.S. Some have been closed. There have been mortalities. There have been entanglements. All of those numbers exist. I don't have them on the very top of my head, but they could certainly be provided to the committee pretty easily.

I think it's really important for the committee to realize that Canada has done more in five years to reduce risks than the States has done in 25 years. We have a lot of support from industry to try to solve this problem. They want to solve the problem. I've never met a fisherman who wanted to entangle a whale, ever. It's a big pain in the neck for them in a lot of ways.

I think we need to embrace that. We use a lot of measures in Canada that are not used in the States, such as closures. They may or may not recognize that as equivalent. The bottom line is that when an area is closed or there are no ropes in the water because the fishermen in the closed areas are fishing without rope, it's a much safer situation for whales. I think we're there in Canada. We just need to do that in a bigger way, in a bigger area, with more fishermen.

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

Thank you.

If you have those numbers, it would be great if you could email them to the clerk. We can table them so we can make that part of our report. That would be appreciated.

As a follow-up to you, but slightly different, you referenced that the feeding ground used to be Brier Island. They've now moved into the gulf, and that's changed all of the dynamics that you outlined. A former DFO scientist lives in my riding and was a whale scientist. He's written quite a bit in The Chronicle Herald about the issue, particularly what happened in the two years when, I believe, we had 12 right whales die a few years ago.

I talked to him personally about it. He said that part of their new route was following food, as they do, but actually up in the Labrador Straits. He believed that a number of them were dying because they were following food when there was ice there, and they weren't able to surface. Their carcasses would drift down into the Gulf of St. Lawrence once the ice let them go, and they may or may not have been hit by a ship.

He claimed to have done more necropsies than anybody on them, and he could tell that a lot of them had been dead for a long time. That makes you wonder—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Perkins. You're well over your five minutes.

We'll now go to Mr. Morrissey for five minutes or less, please.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

My first question would be to Ms. Brown.

Are you familiar with the recent review that an organization called Seafood Watch in the U.S. did on the Canadian fishery? Based on the testimony you're giving here today, would you say that they were completely out to lunch or off the mark?

[Dr. Moira Brown]

Well, I'm not necessarily familiar with all of the criteria they use to do this, but I think they made a huge mistake in lumping U.S. and Canadian fisheries all into one red-listing measure. These are very different fisheries, pursued at very different times of the year, with very different protection measures for right whales.

I will add, again, that I think our Canadian measures exceed those of the U.S. They may not yet be enough, but I'm of the opinion—and I don't think many would disagree—that our measures provide more protection for right whales in our waters than our neighbours' measures do to the south.

It certainly drew a line in the sand, and it caused a lot of angst. It has not improved the situation for our working relationship with the fishermen, and that saddens me. I think that's almost the tragedy of it.