Thank you for the opportunity, Chairman McDonald and the committee, to address you today. It was good to see you, Mr. Chair, in the House of Assembly the week before last.
Today, I would like to make three points.
First, let me begin where I must, which is by discussing the issue of jurisdiction. For centuries, Newfoundland and Labrador had one of the most important fisheries in the world. Evidence was provided by Sir Albert J. Walsh's “Report of the Newfoundland Fisheries Development Committee” in 1953, which was a joint study between the Government of Canada and the then Government of Newfoundland.
A line was drawn in the sand prior to our entry into Confederation, which placed jurisdiction for fisheries and oceans with the federal government rather than provincial governments. No exception was made for our province with respect to the vast ocean territory and fisheries that we as a country had brought with us into Canada. No other province in Canada lacks jurisdiction over its most important resource industry.
In the mid-eighties, the Government of Canada chose to make a partial exception for our province by agreeing to the Atlantic Accord, which treats subsea oil and gas resources around Newfoundland and Labrador differently. This allowed our province and Ottawa to manage the resources jointly under the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board.
We have long called for a similar arrangement with respect to fisheries management to give our province a seat at the decision-making table and a direct say in the running of our most important industry. For years, we have been told it cannot be done, but of course it can be done, as the Atlantic Accord proved. You are the ones in a position to facilitate it, so I urge you to recommend that joint fisheries management for Newfoundland and Labrador become a priority. We have no illusions that it would be a panacea for the challenges we face. Indeed, it would bring new challenges. Regardless, it would be far better to be at the table making decisions than to be making presentations to those who hold all the power.
Second, regarding pinnipeds, forgive me if I simply call these predators “seals”, as most people do. Seal predation is an issue for many fishing jurisdictions around the world, including our own. How great is the problem? It depends on who you ask. If you ask fish harvesters and seal harvesters, who have witnessed the large number of seals around our coasts and up into our rivers and who have seen the content of the stomachs or the partially eaten carcasses of fish, seal predation is an enormous problem. If you ask fisheries scientists, you might or might not get the same answer. Why is that? The vast wild ocean is not a controlled laboratory environment.
Harvesters are of one voice when they tell us that there are still too many seals consuming too many fish and altering the ecosystem. The level of predation is making any prospect of fish stock rebuilding impossible. There must be a program for removals. Anything less is an abdication of responsibility.
The last thing I'd like to address is closely related to the first two. That's the issue of the severe overpopulation of seals. Whether it's harp seals off the northeast coast, grey seals in the Gulf of St. Lawrence or the numerous other species of pinnipeds that populate our open water, our coastlines and, yes, our rivers, if nothing is done to reduce the overpopulation, we can say goodbye to ever rebuilding our cod stocks and maintaining the balance of our pelagic species like capelin, herring and mackerel. Predation of salmon by seals of various species in the estuaries and rivers throughout the east coast is an equally critical issue and likely an important issue along the coast of British Columbia as well.
Glenn Blackwood, the co-chair of the most recent report of the Atlantic seal science task team, reported at the federal Seal Summit in St. John's, Newfoundland, on November 8 and 9, which you, Mr. Chair, attended. The report estimated that total harp seal consumption in 2J3KL, which stretches from Labrador down to the Avalon Peninsula, “during 2014 was estimated to be approximately 3.2 million metric tons.... The same year, all commercial landings in Newfoundland and Labrador totalled 265,000 metric tons.” That's 12 times more than our commercial fishery, which is valued at $1.3 billion.
Mr. Blackwood said, in responding to a question, that the science on seal diets is woefully inadequate.
Ed Martin, an attendee at the Seal Summit, asked the chair of the seal task team, Glenn Blackwood, “Seals are having a devastating effect on our ecosystem. Isn't the harvest of seals essential and no longer a consideration?” The chair's answer was, “Agreed”.
The Department of Fisheries and Oceans prides itself on two primary strategies for fisheries management: the precautionary approach and the ecosystem approach. We are in the position we are right now, with regard to seals, because DFO ignored those two approaches for responsible fisheries management. That is their very own policy, and now their very own failure.
The bottom line on seals when it comes to the jurisdictional boundary is this. As long as there is nothing done to bring the seal population back into balance, the minister and the department are using only the “hope and prayer” approach.
Since 1949 the responsibility has rested squarely on the desk of the federal government. The absence of action is an action in itself. The absence of action is an abdication of the federal government’s duty. Removing seals from the ecosystem must be done. You can count all the seals you want, but counting does not remove them.
I look forward to doing my best to answer questions you may have.
Thank you very much.