Fisheries Committee on April 17th, 2023

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

Thank you very much.

MHA Pardy, we've heard some say...especially at the Seal Summit. The minister said more science needs to be done. I think Mr. Hutchings even said that.

When I look back on it, there's been an enormous amount of science done almost every year going back to the 1990s. Even the World Wildlife Fund put out a report in 2006 saying that northern cod would not recover on moratoriums alone and the government had to do something else. There are all kinds of fisheries studies on it. I put forward an Order Paper question on seal stomach samples just for the last five years and got 122 pages' worth of seal stomach samples produced by the Department of Fisheries.

Do we really need to have more science done before we act on getting a commercial seal harvest going again?

[Craig Pardy]

Thank you for the question.

We certainly do not. In our, I think, collective opinion within the House of Assembly here in Newfoundland and Labrador, we certainly do not need any more studies or any more counts to know the impact of seals on the rebuilding of our groundfish stock. I think the data speaks for itself.

As you know and are well aware, we have had harvesters display for the media the stomach contents of the seals. Everyone in Newfoundland and Labrador and everyone who was watching would indicate how much these predators consumed. You had Bob Hardy, who would be our foremost expert, on a panel at one time. I remember him quoting and saying that the harp seal population, according to DFO, would consume one million metric tons of capelin per year. We know how important capelin is, pelagically, to the rebuilding of any stock that we would have. When we have seals consuming one million metric tons and our harvest is 24,000 metric tons, we don't need another study to understand the significance of the predation that we face in our province and in our waters.

I just want to end with one thing. I listened to the broadcast. Todd O'Brien was in Placentia Bay at a river. I forget the name of the river, but this was back in September of the past year. He interviewed a river warden. He said the salmon in the rivers don't have a chance. He was telling Todd O'Brien the fact that there were 200 to 300 seals waiting at the mouth of the river for the smolt to leave, consuming them. He said they never had a chance to get by.

I think the more we wait to take action, the more grave our fishery resource, the rebuilding of it and the situation we find ourselves in is going to be. I would say that in our House of Assembly we're unanimous in that belief regardless of party.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. Perkins.

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

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

Those last comments were very interesting. You need a market. We're not fulfilling our quota now in our harvest, so we need a market and that's where it starts.

I want to go to Mr. Hutchings.

Mr. Hutchings, we're seeing a lot of action on the Canadian side in trying to move the needle on the seal harvest, but what's happening on the U.S. side? Why are we not seeing the fishers on the U.S. side being more attentive to the situation?

We're seeing quotas being reduced in mackerel and the herring fishery in the U.S., but we don't seem to be having any information or parity on the seal harvest in the U.S.

[Keith Hutchings]

Thank you.

I'm not sure of your question. Could you tell me exactly what it is you want me to answer?

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Yes. Why are we not seeing any urgency in the U.S. fishery on the seal harvest?

[Keith Hutchings]

I'm not sure. I don't really know the answer to that question. I know there has been some activity off and on. I don't know whether predation is as big a factor as it is compared to what we see on the east coast and in the gulf. Then you have the Marine Mammal Protection Act. I don't know whether there's a reluctance to pursue that based on some of the challenges, that push-back there, in regard to that.

That's the best I can suggest for why that may be.

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I'll give you a situation that just happened on Prince Edward Island in the last 10 days. We have a company that was making bait. They were using a by-product of seal, and within that first week, they were notified by the U.S., under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, that if any of that by-product was used for lobster bait, they would stop accepting lobsters shipped into the U.S. by Canada.

I think everybody around this table is on the same page on wanting to increase the seal harvest and wanting to find new markets and products, but the struggle here is how do we get to the next level with the United States? Is it through the fishers? Is it through additional trade negotiations? I think the Marine Mammal Protection Act is from 1972. It's obviously outdated, but it seems to be bulletproof to some extent. Are we just dealing with total politics here, as we were in the mid-2000s when there was an animal rights...and when there was possible collateral damage to other seafood exports into the U.S. and we were seeing a call for a ban on Canadian seafood products?

How do we overcome some of this situation? It sounds as though, in general, we're all on the same page in Canada. We want to see a seal harvest. We want to see it grow. We want to see new markets created, but we're running into a wall. Is it totally political in the U.S.? What's your opinion on that?

[Keith Hutchings]

I think it's driven by agendas, but you make an interesting comment when you talk about industry and getting interconnected. Is that a basis to bring together the Canadian industry and American industry with regard to seafood and the fishery? Does that become the advocate and the lobbyist for change? I think that's a very interesting concept. I don't know what the coordination is with that, and whether that is something we should be pursuing as a nation, as a country. Obviously there are political machinations and lobbying going on in regard to the Marine Mammal Protection Act, but maybe it's an industry-driven initiative and we're going to have results from that perspective.

[Heath MacDonald, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I would agree with you. I think the most effective policies and decisions are sometimes made by those sitting here as government representatives, but are usually made by private sector and industries.

You still have to overcome the nuance of animal rights and the activists we've talked about. It's imperative. We can talk about food security and indigenous rights and reconciliation, but they don't care. We need to find a way to better explain the processes. I'm not sure if government-to-government is part of that process or if it comes back to the industry again.

What would you suggest that we as policy-makers sitting around this table try to articulate to DFO or to the bureaucrats at hand who are responsible for some of these decisions?

[Keith Hutchings]

I think I mentioned in my opening comments that there was a real requirement for a commitment. That's a national commitment. It's about elected officials who sit around this table. It's about industry. It's about adapting to a new market and a new vision of what a seal hunt is, and it's about the attributes and the benefits of that mammal when it's harvested. I think it's a very holistic approach, and I think that's the direction we need to go in. Just one-off industry fighting or politics fighting doesn't work.

It's the task at hand, and I think it's all parties together with a clear vision of what you want and a national government, whoever that is, that stands and says, “This is important to Canada. We're going to pursue it, and we're going to provide the supports to pursue it.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Ken McDonald]

Thank you, Mr. MacDonald. That concludes our questioning for today's meeting.

I want to apologize to Madam Desbiens and Ms. Barron for not getting to their two and a half minute sections in this part of it. We have to end at one o'clock. However, I would like to remind members to please be cognizant of the time they're using as we go along. If I were to add up everything from everybody who went over, we probably would have had time to get Madam Desbiens' and Ms. Barron's questions in as well. I'll try to be much stricter the next time.

On Thursday, of course, we will continue to hear from witnesses on this very important topic.

I want to thank Mr. Pardy, Mr. Hutchings and Ms. Peter for attending today's session, albeit virtually, and sharing their knowledge with the committee for when we do write our report.

Again, thank you, and to everyone, have a good day. The meeting is adjourned.