Evidence of meeting #36 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was year.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you. I'm sorry, but your time is up.
I'm going to go now to Mr. Small.
You have five minutes, Clifford.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Central Newfoundland, NL
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Harvesters in Atlantic Canada have practised extreme conservation when it comes to fisheries for pelagics, otherwise known as forage fish by foreign-funded activists who lobby DFO and the minister extremely hard to keep these fisheries at such a low level, or even closed, as is the case with mackerel.
We look at herring, and we had openings not long ago in Conception Bay, Trinity Bay and Bonavista Bay. If you look at the areas that are fished in that herring fishery, you're looking at possibly 5% of the waters that are fished. That quota is getting taken in anywhere from 12 to 24 hours.
Would that indicate to you somehow, possibly, that the stock is so healthy and the quota is being cut so fast that you may have the quota set at a very low exploitation rate? Do you ever look at the speed at which the quota is caught when you look at the opening and closing of these pelagic fisheries?
Senior Director, Resource Management - Operations, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Thank you very much. I can certainly start.
Yes, the catch per unit effort is something that we do look at. We do know that with those pelagic stocks like herring or mackerel, and particularly with seining vessels, which are remarkably efficient, they can catch a lot of tonnage very quickly over the course of several days. It really depends on gear type as well, and there are other considerations.
Yes, we do consider that as part of the information that we collect.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Central Newfoundland, NL
What other information are you leaning on in the herring stock assessment on the eastern and northeastern coasts of Newfoundland and Labrador?
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
The stock assessment is done with part of our science data.
As part of the stock assessment, we also look at the catch per unit effort. Cases where you would have extremely high catch rates could be an indicator of a healthy stock, but in several cases it cannot be used as the indicator of the stock status because the stock aggregates and there are fishing methods that are—
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Central Newfoundland, NL
Are you saying to me that high catch rates are not an indicator of high abundance in a stock?
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
There could be many reasons. You could have a stock that has been depleted and, despite that, has a very high catch rate. There are actually several examples of that, especially for pelagic stock, shrimp in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, mackerel and others.
It's certainly discussed as part of the science, but often it's better to use other sets of data to assess the overall stock.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Central Newfoundland, NL
Thank you.
I'm going to look at some other species here on the continental shelf. There's redfish in 2GHJ and 3K. There's witch flounder and winter flounder. There haven't been assessments of these species in quite a few years, which limits fishing potential for harvesters and for processors. Why does it take so long to have an assessment of some of these species?
Fishermen talk about the abundance of these species, yet we can't get assessments to prove their abundance and give additional fishing opportunities to harvesters. Why are you holding back these assessments?
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
We're prioritizing the science work to make sure there are regular updates to the stock assessment in general. There are capacity limitations, especially for some of the stock that's in remote areas for sampling. There are other examples like redfish in unit 1 and unit 2, where we have increased the more recent stock assessment that enabled the opening of that commercial fishery.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Central Newfoundland, NL
I'm talking about redfish on the northeast coast now.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
We're up to five minutes now. Thank you, Mr. Small.
We'll now go to Mr. Morrissey for five minutes, please.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Madam Chair, through you, my question is for Monsieur Vigneault.
You provided good testimony. I want to focus on the mackerel stock on the east coast of North America.
We had testimony given earlier. Could you confirm and expand on the difference between the U.S. southern stock versus the northern stock that is shared with Canada? Are they two distinct stocks?
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Yes. They are two different biological units. In fact, in Canada, the only stock that we assess and manage is the northern component.
In the United States, because they have a broader area where fishing occurs, they actually do an assessment of the overall combined stock, which is the northern stock that they share with Canada and the southern stock that is just fished in the U.S. The science for the northern stock is similar in our stock assessment and that of the U.S., but because the U.S. includes in its assessment the large southern component that has seen a recent increase, they have different overall science advice.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
How much of the quota that the Americans have set for harvesting mackerel is allocated north, and how much is for the southern stock? Do we know that?
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
In the U.S. they don't separate the stock. It's a single quota allocation for mackerel fish in the U.S., which de facto is—
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Historically, then, how much of that would come from the southern stock versus the northern stock?
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Our estimate is that about 20% of the northern stock would be captured in the U.S., but that will be part of the science peer review committee that's—
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Just to be clear, then, whatever quota allocation they give historically, about 20% of it comes from the northern stock that's shared with Canada.
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Yes. In the U.S., they have a single quota for the stock. In their calculation, they account for how much Canada is setting as a quota, and we do the reverse from a science perspective in terms of our projection of the possibility of growth given the fishing in both countries.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Some fishers would be led to believe that the total American quota is coming from the northern stock shared with Canada. For the record, is that correct?
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
That is not correct, and we do a specific estimation of the smaller portion of it in our science process.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Thank you.
Mr. Vigneault, we had an excellent presentation given explaining the difference, which speaks to the issue of what fishers see at sea. You can see an abundance of mackerel, but could you explain to the committee the significance of the size of the fish versus the impact on rebuilding the stock? It's my understanding that juvenile mackerel are in abundance, but they are not the size limit that the stock's future depends on.
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
We'll see what our updated science will provide, but in our latest science advice, yes, there was still, as we call it, a truncated population. We see much fewer large fish than we see in a healthy period. Those fish are important because they contribute more to reproduction and spawning.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Could you elaborate on the significance of large mackerel on egg bearing, which is what the stock depends on? If we increase the quota and pick up a lot of the smaller mackerel, how could it negatively impact on the rebuilding of the stock, which everybody acknowledges is moving in the right direction?
Am I correct?
Director General, Ecosystem Science Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Yes. We've seen some signs of stock growth in our latest assessment. For this stock, we have a model that gives us a sense of, with any amount of fishing or including fishing reduction, what the related improvement will be in the probability for the stock to grow. That is directly related to the health of the population in terms of having a normal distribution of fish. We will be doing a research project this year to further work on the size and the reproductive status of fish, including around Newfoundland.
That's all very important information for our ability to project the efficiency of reducing the fishing effort in terms of promoting the rebuilding of the stock.