Fisheries Committee on Nov. 4th, 2022

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

Why do you think young people were given the opportunity to purchase a mackerel licence a few weeks before the closure of the mackerel fishery? Why were you allowed to sell your crab licence when it was known that the mackerel fishery you wanted to go into would be closed?

How do you explain that this was allowed?

[Lauréat Lelièvre]

It's really difficult to say.

I couldn't have guessed that the fishery would close on 48 hours' notice. Before taking any steps, I spoke to the person in charge of pelagic fishers at the group of fishers and lobster fishers. He told me not to worry and that the mackerel fishery wouldn't close, since the allowable catch rates had been set for two years. He didn't guarantee that the herring fishery would remain open, but he told me that the mackerel fishery would definitely not be closed.

So I told the young person who wanted my crab licence that he could have it, and he started the process. In January or February, he asked me to sign the bill of sale. His goal was to register 80,000 pounds of mackerel for the season.

When the fishery was cancelled, I no longer had a boat or a crab licence. I had nothing left. And he ended up with 80,000 pounds less mackerel.

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

It's a very unpleasant scenario, but the situation isn't expected to be resolved in 2023. So how do you see the future? Are you hoping for financial compensation and a diversified fisheries portfolio? Is that what you want? Do you think the problem will be resolved in 2023?

[Ghislain Collin]

The members of the Regroupement des pêcheurs pélagiques professionnels du Sud de la Gaspésie have always worked with the department and always provided it with data.

In the best of all possible worlds, we would like to be given some consideration. We would also like to see some financial assistance for fishers to compensate for their losses.

We also want to be able to engage in scientific fishing, exploratory fishing and sentinel fishing, not only to give back income to fishers, but also to keep them in the system.

If the mackerel fishery starts up again in five years, some fishers may not be around anymore, which will deprive us of their expertise. Others may not have a crew. It's a different trade than lobster and crab fishing.

This way, we'll be able to keep the businesses. The fisher helpers will continue to work with the captains, rather than leaving the sinking ship.

In the St. Lawrence, there is also scientific fishing of other emerging species. The members of the group could fish for beautiful, emerging species of fish of very good quality, which would be lucrative and would reduce the pressure on mackerel stocks for a few years.

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

Gentlemen, thank you for coming here.

[Ghislain Collin]

Thank you for listening to us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Madame Desbiens.

We will 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.

Of course, I'd also like to thank the fishers for being here and taking the time share their experience with us.

It's very important, and I thank them.

My first question is for Mr. Sullivan.

In the newest fall edition of your FFAW magazine, there was an article written by Dr. Erin Carruthers. I apologize if I'm not pronouncing her last name accurately. You mentioned the importance of expanding mackerel science. I want to quote something that she said. I believe it's a she; I apologize if not. She said that:

...a long-term commitment to document the abundance, distribution, extent, timing, and age of mackerel in NL waters is needed. Until we bring more observations and data from NL into the mackerel stock assessment, I do not see how we can reconcile these widely different assessments of the health of the mackerel stocks.

Is this also your stance? Can you share a bit about how DFO can best support fish harvesters to participate in the necessary research?

[Keith Sullivan]

Dr. Erin Carruthers is the scientist with the FFAW who works very closely with harvesters. I think the quote was very accurate. I don't know if I could have found a better way to say it myself, so I think that's very clear and well put.

I think that the science is incomplete, not necessarily wrong. I want to interject that out of respect for the scientists who do the work. I don't mean to be really critical of their work. We just need more.

It's like you're doing a woodland caribou survey within a five-mile radius around the Eaton Centre in Dundas Square. You do the work, and you don't find caribou. There's nothing wrong with the methods; it's just that we have to look somewhere else as well if we're going to get the population of the caribou. I think that's kind of the case. I'm oversimplifying, of course, but I'm trying to point out that we're not looking at where the fish really are.

I think we really owe it to the people who depend on this fishery to understand our resource and ecosystem better in order to expand where we're doing work, particularly when we see water temperatures change and climate change documented. There are all kinds of reasons, but none better than a vast abundance of mackerel that harvesters have seen and in many ways documented.

We'll present more to DFO when we can compile all the information. Talk to harvesters and look at the methods that they can use, including acoustic work, which can be done now and, I believe, is done in other jurisdictions in the world.

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

Thank you, Mr. Sullivan.

I have another question for you. Can you share what reasoning or data DFO has provided for allowing the recreational mackerel fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador as well as the commercial U.S. mackerel fishery to continue into 2022? Can you build on some of the ways you've touched on this?

[Keith Sullivan]

There are two real concerns and irritants.

It is a transboundary stock. They are catching the same stock of mackerel in the U.S. and in Canada. Canada has traditionally harvested and depended upon this stock much more, I'd say. More of the stock resides in the area, but now, because of Canadian management, harvesters in the U.S. are building up a history of catching more, I think, just from a long-term perspective. That's problematic, and if we really believe that the stock is in that much trouble, then obviously we have to work with the U.S. to stop their fishery, I would think. That's disappointing from a Canadian perspective.

We just closed the fishery, as I said. We threw people out of work, people who have depended on this mackerel in many areas in Newfoundland and Labrador. That was the case. Obviously the counterparts we heard from today don't have an opportunity to fish, but people can go out and recreationally harvest. I understand that's important, but still, putting recreational needs ahead of people who are depending on it for their livelihoods is not the right priority listing for giving the resource to people. That has to be revisited.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, harvesters collect scientific information, much like those in Quebec, with logs. Every mackerel that comes in is documented and fully weighed and contributes to the science. People who have the privilege to recreationally fish have no requirements to do that, which is also a problem.

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

Thank you. I know we've had you here for a few other studies, and it's always nice to see you here.

I know we have talked briefly about alternative bait in previous times. I believe it's come up. I don't recall if we've had your perspective on it. What are your thoughts on the use of alternative bait? Are you seeing it being used? What's the success with it? What are some of your thoughts around that?

[Keith Sullivan]

People are, for all kinds of reasons, interested in looking at different bait options, but I don't think they are widely used. I think people generally like traditional baits that they can trust and source themselves, but I think there are opportunities for having less impact on some of our fish stocks, so I think it's good to explore.

The other thing, just straight up, for fish harvesters is the increasing cost of some of our bait. Trying to find alternatives can solve a lot of problems for people. I think there's more interest now than ever in exploring alternative and new innovative baits.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Ms. Barron.

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

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you again, witnesses, for attending.

Mr. Sullivan, there's a scientific study or paper on DFO's website that says that mackerel spawn at between 9° and 12°. Earlier today, we heard testimony from one of the DFO scientists about how they will do the spawning mass bioscience in water of 8°, 6° and even up to 14°, outside of the spawning biomass time, and it's all done at the same location in the gulf. I wonder if you could comment on that issue about doing science when the spawning biomass is not in the water temperature that's ideal for spawning.

[Keith Sullivan]

Yes, it's absolutely a concern, and we've seen in the past when they went out to do that survey. As we all know, the date on the calendar doesn't tell mackerel when to spawn; it's the environmental conditions, and those can change.

I understand that it's difficult to manage, but there have been concerns expressed that they're not surveying when the mackerel are most likely to be spawning, and that's been highlighted. That's one issue, I think, one gap in science that we should look to expand upon, and we should do more to make sure that doesn't happen.

I think, as I pointed out before, that we really have to look at where more of these mackerel are spawning to get a complete picture, which I think would eventually explain the massive abundance of mackerel that we're seeing off Newfoundland and Labrador as well, so I think there are a combination of things to improve the science.

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

They go to the same place every year and have been doing that for 10 or 20 years as part of their scientific study, but the temperatures are...and the mackerel are moving, and they no longer have catch data, which was about half of their science. How are they going to tell where the mackerel are without any catch data, when in the U.S. they're still catching mackerel?

[Keith Sullivan]

Well, I'm not sure. We've offered a lot of suggestions, and so far I don't think we've been listened to very much. I think it is probably important to work with harvesters in the regions to get more information on what the makeup of the mackerel stock has been.

DFO put out a call to get samples this year, and I think they were probably surprised by just how many samples they did get—they were very easy to catch, obviously—and they just ran out of freezer space to collect those samples.

I don't know if they're prepared to do that. They're going to have to do, at the very least, something that is more robust, more dependable and more organized and invest in it, rather than just depending on the goodwill of people to collect these samples. It needs an investment and it needs to work with fish harvesters in all regions to bulk up this science.

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

I have a couple of quick questions because my time's short. I think I have about a minute and a half.

DFO officials have said that they can't use acoustic sounding to explore and find the size of mackerel because they don't have bladders. Are fishermen able to find mackerel using acoustic sounding?

[Keith Sullivan]

Oh, absolutely they are, and that's how they catch them. They're not going out on the water and setting nets based on random thoughts. They can actually judge on biomass, and part of the work that fishermen have done, that FFAW has done this year, is to do that and demonstrate that. We hope to have that worked up really soon. The timeline here is quick, but I think something can be done. The short answer is yes, I think we can do that.

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

I have one more question regarding the U.S. side of things.

The U.S. is still fishing the mackerel commercially, and I tell you, from Peggy's Cove to Prospect in my riding where the mackerel fishermen are—the big mackerel—they're finding lots of mackerel out there; they're not allowed to catch them now, because they're lobster fishermen. The U.S. is still catching them, and they set their TAC usually by making an assumption about what Canada's TAC is. If Canada ends fishing, as they did this year, do you expect the U.S. to catch more mackerel next year and set a higher TAC?

[Keith Sullivan]

I would not be surprised. I mean, the combination of things.... I think the observations show that there is a significant amount of mackerel. I don't know if they'll see it in the U.S. or it's more north, but I wouldn't be surprised if they took advantage of the lack of harvest here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Perkins. You're right on the mark.

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

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As a west coaster, I might ask a few dumb questions, but bear with me, okay?

In our past studies of Atlantic cod, one of the things that has been noticed is the size of fish: The big cod are not there anymore. Mr. MacDougall, I think I heard you say that you had not been seeing large fish. Is that correct, sir?