Fisheries Committee on March 9th, 2026

[Bernard Vigneault]

We consider it significant. That's why we have decided to rerun the model to do our stock assessment for mackerel. It was done on a two-year basis and was last done in 2025. We've decided to accelerate the analysis of the egg and larvae that were collected in the summer of 2025 and advance by a year the stock assessment, because as the member is rightly stating, the U.S. accounts for Canadian catch in their stock assessment. The reverse is also true: We account for U.S. catch in our stock assessment.

We have been collaborating with the U.S. on the science side. We contribute to the stock assessment they do for both the southern contingent, where we have seen a recent increase, and the northern contingent. They could collaborate with our stock assessment for the northern contingent that is fished in Canada.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

You're saying that there's a southern contingent and a northern contingent in Atlantic mackerel. How certain are you that some of the northeastern Atlantic mackerel haven't migrated into our waters and blended with our stock? What do you know of the DNA of European versus American mackerel?

[Bernard Vigneault]

There is ongoing work on that. We are part of a working group with the United States, but also with European countries, to study mackerel in the North Atlantic. We've done ongoing research to look at the genetics of the stock to differentiate, as you mentioned, the northeast versus northwest, but primarily in our case it is to differentiate the northern and southern contingents so we can quantify more precisely how much of the northern contingent is fished in the U.S. during winter.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Central Newfoundland, NL]

What has the budget been that you've dipped into to complete the work you've just described to us? How many thousands or millions? How many scientists do you have working on that project?

[Bernard Vigneault]

We have one research scientist and one full-time employee working on mackerel science based in the Quebec region at the MLI. We also have support technicians.

I don't have the exact figure for the science budget, but it is significant, and it was stepped up to address the concerns and questions that were identified by the industry in our Atlantic mackerel science working group. There's a range of science activities. There's not just the stock assessment, but also research to refine the assessment that is ongoing.

The budget is in the order of several hundreds of thousands of dollars. I don't have the exact figure with me today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Small.

Next, we're going to Mr. Morrissey for six minutes.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Either Madame Gaudet or Mr. Vigneault can answer my question.

When the decision was made in 2022 on mackerel in the North Atlantic, what were the catch rates in the preceding year and a number of years before that? What led you to that? Were fishers experiencing a decline in their catches?

[Bernard Vigneault]

The decision to list the stock was made because it had been deep in the critical zone since 2011 despite a reduction in the TAC. For our stock—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

My question was, what was the experience of fishers with their catch volumes?

[Bernard Vigneault]

On the experience of fishers, the catch per unit effort is not used for stocks that aggregate, like mackerel. Because they aggregate in very dense, small locations, you can fish and have extremely high success in catching the fish despite the overall biomass being very low.

It's not used directly for the stock assessment for mackerel and other species that aggregate like mackerel—mainly pelagic species.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Yes, I understand that, but my question was.... Somebody, I assume within the department, would have verification of the volumes of mackerel that were caught globally in the North Atlantic region by fishers.

Mr. Williams.

[Todd Williams, Senior Director, Resource Management - Operations, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

I have some statistics for you going back to 2017, as an example.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Okay.

[Todd Williams]

Landings, including bait, across Atlantic Canada were at 10,266. In 2018, we saw a slight rise at 11,050, and then from 2019, it was at 8,750, 7,957 and 4,519. Then we got into a closure period, and there are minimal numbers due to bycatch after that.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Up until 2022, there were no restrictions to what the industry could catch.

[Todd Williams]

There were. Those were just the landings. What we had in 2019 and those subsequent years were more or less in alignment with the total allowable catch and the landings. However, in the years preceding that—I don't have access to that information right now—I recall that there was a large discrepancy between what the TACs were set at and what the landings were actually—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Could you provide to the committee, in as much detail as you have, the actual landings that were documented by DFO in the various regions where fishing was considered the North Atlantic stock, leading up to the 2022 decision to close?

My next question is again for whichever witness wants to answer.

Could you expand a bit on the U.S. stock and the Canadian stock? Often, fishers will refer to them as one stock. From what I heard in your opening statements, they may not necessarily be so. Can you elaborate for the committee on whether there is a difference between the two, and the impact that could have on the resources in the northern stock, as well as what's referred to as the southern stock, which would be U.S. mackerel?

[Bernard Vigneault]

Yes, the stock that is assessed in Canada is the northern contingent of the stock. That one is—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Am I right or wrong to assume that the mackerel off the U.S. coast swim up into Canada and are available in Canadian waters for Canadian fishers?

[Bernard Vigneault]

That's the northern contingent. The northern portion of the stock that we assess in Canada comes to Canadian water from the U.S. It migrates in the spring to Canada across the province and goes back to the U.S. in the fall.

In the United States, there's another contingent that we don't assess in Canada—the southern contingent—but when the U.S. does their stock assessment, they do it for the entire population of the northwest Atlantic. They assess both the northern and southern contingent together. In Canada, we assess the northern contingent separately, because that's the one being harvested in Canada.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

On the other stock you referenced in the U.S., the southern stock that they don't consider, where would that stock primarily be located?

[Bernard Vigneault]

It doesn't come to Canada in the summer. It stops in the northeast—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Does it come to Canada at all?

[Bernard Vigneault]

It doesn't come to Canada at all.

Part of the science that's done to do the stock assessment is to establish how much of the fish are caught in the winter in the U.S. or what proportion of the northern contingent, when it winters in the U.S., is caught by the fishery in the U.S. That's part of the stock assessment.

There's quite a lot of uncertainty on that. It ranges from 20% to 80%, and that's why we've decided to redo the stock assessment earlier to assess the change with the decision in the United States.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Morrissey.

I will now give the floor to Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas for six minutes.