Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Fisheries and Oceans
Issue 14 - Evidence - February 12, 2013
OTTAWA, Tuesday, February 12, 2013
The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans met this day at 5:06 p.m. to study the lobster fishery in Atlantic Canada and Quebec.
Senator Fabian Manning (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honourable senators, I welcome everyone here to the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. My name is Fabian Manning, a senator from Newfoundland and Labrador, and I am chair of this committee. Before I give the floor to our witnesses, I would ask the members of the committee to introduce themselves.
Senator MacDonald: I am Michael MacDonald from Nova Scotia.
Senator Unger: I am Betty Unger from Alberta.
Senator Poirier: I am Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick.
Senator McInnis: I am Tom McInnis from Nova Scotia.
Senator Raine: I am Nancy Greene Raine from B.C.
Senator Hubley: I am Elizabeth Hubley from Prince Edward Island.
Senator Watt: I am Charlie Watt from Nunavik.
Senator Harb: I am Mac Harb from Ontario.
The Chair: The committee is continuing its study of the lobster fishery in Atlantic Canada and Quebec. We are pleased today to be hearing from the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture of Nova Scotia. The committee heard from the fisheries departments of the provinces of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador as part of this study, and we are pleased that the government of Nova Scotia has also accepted our invitation to meet with us today. On behalf of members of the committee, I thank Minister Belliveau for being here. I understand the minister has some opening remarks. Please introduce the person with you. The floor is yours.
The Honourable Sterling Belliveau, MLA, Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, Government of Nova Scotia: I want to thank you all for the opportunity to present today to the Senate standing committee on some of the issues facing our lobster industry. There is a bit of homework we need to do first, Mr. Chair. I have some maps of our fishing districts for your privilege, if the members want them. I also want to introduce my staff member, Leo Muise, Executive Director of our Fisheries and Aquaculture.
Mr. Chair, ladies and gentlemen, the lobster fishery is certainly the most important fishery in the Atlantic provinces. It is the backbone of our coastal and rural communities. It is worth over $1 billion in export value and employs thousands of Atlantic Canadians. Nova Scotia represents the largest landed total of lobster, at about 70 per cent of the lobster landings in Canada. We are Canada's undisputed lobster capital.
You may ask why that is important. It is important because it matters to the families, and to thousands and thousands of them. In Nova Scotia alone, there are about 3,000 active in-shore lobster licenses, with each vessel carrying an average crew of three people. This means there are 9,000 people directly employed in the lobster fishery. For context, that makes the industry one of the largest single employers in the province of Nova Scotia.
We need a clear direction from the federal government to reflect the needs of our lobster fisheries.
Our government has a plan to create good jobs and grow a strong and more stable economy throughout the province. The commercial fisheries have been identified as a key priority in the area of jobs here. As we move forward, we must make decisions and offer the lobster industry support to ensure its sustainability.
Sustainability is critical for the future of this industry, as is stability. A sustainable fishery relies on management plans, vessels and training requirements, marketing, traceability, protected areas, DFO modernization initiatives, safety, scientific research, and the list goes on.
The industry is facing some challenging times. There is much uncertainty. It is important that we do not further destabilize the industry.
Recent federal announcements have caused great concerns among Nova Scotians due to the potential impact they have on our communities, communities where the main lifeblood of the economy is the fishery, communities where the fishery has supported families for generations.
These troubling announcements by the federal government include fleet separation and owner-operator policies, EI reform, the idea of lobster quota systems for the inshore lobster industry being floated with no input from the industry, changes to the lobster trap tag program and environmental assessment changes to the federal Fisheries Act.
The federal government's decision not to eliminate the fleet separation and owner-operators policies in the Canadian fisheries was good news for Atlantic Canadian fishers. I commend the federal government for making this decision. Nova Scotia was the first to call on the federal government to clarify its position on these policies, and I thank you for listening.
Canada is a diverse country with a range of realities regarding employment and earning a living. The lobster fisheries employ thousands of Nova Scotians, many of whom are seasonal employees who rely on EI benefits.
The federal government needs to understand the realities of living in rural parts of Canada, like those near my own home, in communities throughout Shelburne, Barrington, Queens, Argyle, Yarmouth and Digby counties, as well as Cheticamp, Pictou and Canso. Throughout Nova Scotia's coastal areas, the lobster industry depends on these experienced workers. If these workers cannot rely on EI benefits, our rural communities will lose our experienced workforce. This is the wrong time for changes to EI benefits when the industry is having such an economic struggle and is at its most vulnerable.
The lobster industry is one of the most dangerous to work in. Having experienced workers is key to creating a safer work environment. I was on the wharf in southwest Nova Scotia in November before the start of the lobster season, as I am every year, to witness the boats preparing for their departure. Traps were piled high and joined by lines; decks were covered with buoys, floats and heavy anchors. You really need to know what you are doing, and having inexperienced people on the vessels puts everyone in danger.
For that reason it is important to have experienced crew in our fishing communities. Without them, the lobster industry is not safe; and if it is not safe, it is not sustainable.
Our government has made its concerns known to the federal government on numerous occasions regarding changes to EI benefits and the impact on those who rely on the fishing industry to earn a living. Impacts on our livelihoods deserve in-depth consideration prior to implementation.
As we all know, good politics do not always make good policy. The wrong decision, even though it may be a popular one in some parts of Canada, is still the wrong decision.
I would say the same about the recent comments about the possibility of lobster quotas for the inshore lobster fisheries. Those comments caused great alarm at a time of uncertainty for lobster prices. Politicians making these kinds of comments show a profound lack of understanding. It is a bit like saying a recession presents a good buying opportunity.
Any changes to the management of the lobster fisheries need to be industry-driven. I have spoken to many fishermen, harvesters and the community leaders who are concerned that the recent federal comments about a quota system for the inshore lobster fishery could jeopardize the independence of the fishery and further erode small business and reduce independent harvesters. We must make decisions that offer the lobster industry support to ensure its sustainability.
The lobster fisheries are facing another disruption with DFO's decision to download the lobster trap tags program onto private sector interests and fisheries management groups. This will affect fishing activities occurring after March 31, 2013.
For the lobster fishing areas 25 through 32, the lobster tag program changes will come during the spring season and will negatively affect them due to the insufficient time to organize. Across Nova Scotia, industry has appealed to DFO to reconsider or at least delay the process to allow proper time to organize the best approach.
While change and evolution may be required, I strongly urge a measured and considered approach involving input from the industry regarding potential implications for the fisheries. DFO must delay these proposed changes, allow for the fish harvesters to complete their season and then consult our industries. These changes cannot simply be forced upon these fish harvesters. Time needs to be taken to ensure the changes are fixing a problem and not simply change for change's sake.
I realize that change and evolution are required, but I strongly urge a measured and considered approach regarding potential implications for our fisheries. It is important to delay these proposed changes, especially during mid-season.
My department is working in numerous ways to assist and support the lobster industry throughout the value chain. We must look at all stages of lobster growth and development. We have supported science and stewardship initiatives through the Fishermen & Scientists Research Society and the Atlantic Lobster Sustainability Measures program. We recognize the significant contributions they are making to our industry to ensure long-term sustainability. In past years we have made good investments in areas such as lobster science and quality, infrastructure renewal and seafood marketing and product development.
The province is committed to helping industry build new markets so the lobster fishery may continue to thrive. Our government is working in the international markets with industries and the Lobster Council of Canada to grow markets.
China is an excellent example. The Nova Scotia lobster exports to China increased by over 200 per cent in 2011. The Lobster Council is working on a number of initiatives focused on quality and the lobster brand. Both government and industry will have to work hard and creatively to expand markets and increase the value of lobsters. Both the province and the industry cannot and should not be expected to do it alone.
The federal government has a moral responsibility to support the important Atlantic fisheries at this critical time. We need the federal government to step up to the plate when it comes to opening up new markets internationally for lobsters.
We have been dealing with a number of challenges impacting the industry; however, the resource has continued to remain very productive. Landings have been at historically high levels in many districts. Nova Scotia is fortunate to have the advantage of a diverse species of shellfish, such as crabs, lobster and shrimp, as well as other fish species, and a varied product base. For example, Atlantic snow crab will continue to play a major role in the fisheries in eastern areas of the province.
There is an opportunity for the development of new species, which include stone crab, green crab, whelks, Irish moss, hagfish and quahogs. It is an opportunity to help those in the lobster industry to diversify to supplement their income, thereby making it more sustainable. Several Nova Scotia fish harvesters have applied to DFO to fish stone crab and other undeveloped species but have been denied due to a lack of scientific information or old data. Well, let us get some.
We want action to develop exploratory species such as stone crab and other underdeveloped species. Our government is willing to partner with DFO to help support the scientific research necessary to develop two exploratory species and pay our share. Our government is committed to finding fish harvesters who are willing to help gather the scientific information. Experimental licences have been successful in the past and were instrumental in the development of the off-shore lobster fishery, as an example. It is important to ensure healthy stocks through the management of effective science.
Much more work needs to be done to gain complete scientific knowledge of such an important resource. We need to think about how to approach science in the future. For example, due to rising ocean temperatures, fish harvesters have observed an explosion of shellfish species. Our industry needs investment in the science required to address issues such as climate change, changes in the moulting seasons of lobsters, the increase of soft shell lobsters that are being landed, and opportunities to develop new species.
That is why it is disappointing that the federal government is reducing its support for fisheries science at a time when it is of critical importance. I urge the federal government to reconsider its dwindling support for science.
As we promote Atlantic seafood products all over the world, we must be ready to address eco-labelling and traceability. Third-party seafood sustainability certification, in the Marine Stewardship Council in particular, is becoming a requirement for access to certain export markets.
The lobster industry has been important to Atlantic Canadians, and we want to keep it for our future generations. Our federal government is the governing body of the lobster industry. Our lobster fishers are under tremendous pressure. Decisions must be made to help stabilize the industry.
Government policies intended to shape the next generation of this industry need to be thoughtfully considered. The federal government must continue to invest in the lobster industry with a strong focus on science, marketing and species diversification. Before moving forward, government must work with industry to fully understand the impact of policy changes, especially at a time when the industry is facing economic struggles and is so vulnerable.
Thank you very much. I am open to questions at your pleasure.
The Chair: Thank you, minister. You have expressed a variety of issues and concerns, and we are delighted to have you raise them here this evening.
I welcome Senator Don Oliver, from Nova Scotia, to the committee.
The first questions will be from the deputy chair of the committee, Senator Hubley.
Senator Hubley: It is a pleasure to have you here this evening. Your presentation highlighted much of the information we heard from other Atlantic regions. You have pointed out many of the issues that we found in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island.
The committee heard positive comments on recent federal initiatives, including the Short-Term Transitional Measures program, the Atlantic Lobster Sustainability Measures and the Community Adjustment Fund Lobster Initiative. However, numerous witnesses stressed that federal support must continue.
Would you share with the committee your views on the strengths and weaknesses or the benefits and drawbacks of these three programs?
Mr. Belliveau: The weakness is that there needs to be more work in the science. As in my presentation, I want to emphasize that there are things we need to know. Fishermen have seen tremendous changes in water temperature over the last decade. Our water is warming. I made reference to the fact that we need to understand that.
The weakness is that there needs to be a political will to address what is going on in our waters. I made reference to the various species of shellfish that are exploding in numbers. I can identify a number of them, such as some of the crab species. I am going a long ways back to make a point. In the early 1990s we saw the removal of the cod fish and finfish from our fishing ground. With that, other species took over the area. This is what we have been seeing. There is a lack of political will from the federal government to have access to this science to assist the fishermen. They want to have these jobs in these communities, so there needs to be more emphasis on that.
You talked about the money and the programs, but in my view money needs to be going directly toward marketing. We made reference to China and some of these other areas. When I hear about a second-tier city of six to eight million people who do not have access to lobsters, it is a light bulb moment for me. The opportunities are there, but we are so dependent on our good friends in the United States that 75 per cent to 80 per cent of our lobsters go there. We need to diversify and find new markets. There are opportunities around the world, and we can create added value through new ways of packaging lobsters. These are the kinds of transitions going on elsewhere that need to happen in our industry.
I made reference to historically high catches. We are seeing an increase of three times the landing value of lobsters over the last 25 years. It has tripled across the board.
The emphasis needs to be on the science and on marketing.
Senator Harb: Minister, you have made the point very well.
Would it be your position that this committee, at the end of its report, recommend that the government increase funding for research and development? Is that one recommendation you would like to see?
Mr. Belliveau: You will make my Christmases for the rest of my life if that is a recommendation. Seriously, I believe that needs to come forward. I look forward to the completion of the committee's report. To me this is crucial because we are so fortunate to have this valuable resource on our doorstep in Atlantic Canada. We need to capitalize on that in new markets around the world. The opportunities are there. I look forward to the completion of the report.
Senator Harb: You make an excellent point in saying you want to partner with the government to ensure the sustainability of the industry.
Mr. Belliveau: Yes.
Senator Harb: Thank you very much.
Senator Poirier: Thank you for being here and for your presentation. It is greatly appreciated. When Nova Scotia decided to increase the maximum size of the lobster, can you tell me about the immediate impact for the industry and the harvesters?
Mr. Belliveau: I do not know whether you know my background, but my background is that of a fisherman. I fished for 38 years. I remember when Nova Scotia introduced five increments probably 15 years ago. The industry was somewhat resistant at the time. The lobster industry is very healthy. The point that I am trying to make is that the fishermen made a lot of conservation measure policies. One of them was having escape vents in the lobster trap, those panels. To me, that was important because it allowed a lot of juvenile lobster to get out and not compete in the lobster traps. With the policies that were done 25 years ago, the combination of climate change and all the right conditions, the removal of the predator groundfish, we have seen an explosion of lobsters in the environment right from Rhode Island all the way up to Newfoundland. The lobster and shellfish are benefiting from all the things that I mentioned earlier.
If you are getting back to where the measure was, there were five increments that were talked about being introduced. They initiated the first one from three and three-sixteenths to just a size larger, and there was resistance. The long story short, they stopped the last three steps, and it has been held at three and a quarter, I believe.
The industry is very healthy. There are a lot of females on the ground. Again, the numbers are off the scale, with historical highs in lobster landings from Rhode Island right on up to Newfoundland. I hope I answered your question.
Senator Poirier: I asked because we know that Quebec, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia have gone with the larger size. Right now, we know that New Brunswick would like to go to the larger size, and we also know and heard from P.E.I. where they seem to have a market for the smaller size. It is becoming an issue, and the debate is going back and forth because they are fishing in the same zone. In your opinion, should the carapace size vary from LFA to LFA, or should it be standard through every zone?
Mr. Belliveau: When you have overlapping zones, you will have a difference of opinion. I would suggest that the different respective leaders and government come to the table and sit down and make the best decisions for the industry. Again, I made reference to it. It has to be industry-driven because each zone usually understands that particular region. To me, it needs to come from these policies. They must be community-driven, and they need to have in mind the best interests of that community. It is difficult for someone from Newfoundland to make a recommendation that will affect southwest Nova, and vice versa. That is my point. However, if you have the people who are most affected, I would recommend bring in those people and putting the right facilitator in place. Then you will have a policy that will have the best interest of that community at heart.
Senator Poirier: I think that has been happening. Meetings have been going on with the two provinces and with the industry and with the fishermen, but I am not sure they have come to a consensus on the issue at that point. However, that is ongoing.
Last summer was extremely hard for the New Brunswick fishermen, specifically up in my end of the province. Was this the case in Nova Scotia? Did they face some of the same issues that we did in New Brunswick?
Mr. Belliveau: I am very familiar with that. If you look at the issue in Maine, U.S., that issue basically rippled all the way from the Maine border and up to New Brunswick and came to Nova Scotia in the fall and winter season. We saw historical landings and a very low price. I made a plea here to get some scientific information because things are taking place in our water column with water temperatures two to three degrees higher than most fishermen have seen in their history of spending 50 years on the water. We need to understand what is going on. We know that lobster moult probably twice a year, and we are seeing more and more of these lobsters on the ground. They are bringing historical catches in. We need to know the science behind that. To me, again, that is another call for science. This is something that is happening. We need to understand. The levels in the U.S. are off the charts.
Senator Poirier: During this crisis that affected the fishermen in Nova Scotia as well as in New Brunswick, did your government take any action, and if so, what, to help or support the harvesters at the time?
Mr. Belliveau: That is a great question. We asked for our Atlantic ministers to come together. We could predict that low prices were going to be following what took place last August in Maine, coming right up to New Brunswick. We had our ministers come together, the Atlantic ministers provincially, to address that issue. We all sympathize.
Again, we want to be supportive of the Lobster Council of Canada in trying to find new markets. We are paying attention to this. Again, the emphasis is on the Lobster Council of Canada, which talked about traceability and creating a branding name for our lobsters. A lot of work is being done, and it is basically a slow process moving forward. In the last decade we have seen tremendous landings, and we are dealing with three times the product that we did roughly 10 years ago.
Senator Poirier: What do you consider to be the biggest challenge facing the lobster industry in general right now in Nova Scotia? What is your biggest challenge?
Mr. Belliveau: The biggest challenge is to know that they have a plan to move forward so that young fishermen, 25 or 30 years old, can say that they are confident that the federal government has put forward the issue of owner- operator and they are there to protect the independent fishermen and they will put science in, because we need to understand what is going on in that water column when the water temperature is rising and we have all of these lobsters on the ground. To me, they would feel a lot more comfortable. They know these other species are out there, and they want to have the political will to go out and harvest these. To simply say ``no'' to an individual fisherman who has the experience of knowing that that biomass for stone crab literally goes away from the gulf, Cape Breton, all along the Scotian Shelf up to the Bay of Fundy is not the right answer. They know that this species is there and the biomass is there. We need to have the commitment that we believe in communities. We want these communities to thrive. Therefore, we will put policies in place that will protect them. That is what they need.
Senator Poirier: Thank you.
Senator McInnis: Thank you for coming here, minister and deputy. You have referred to the fact — and we have been told — that there have been some tremendous landings of lobsters. We always say that we are open to change. In your statement, you mentioned these troubling announcements by the federal government, and you listed three or four.
The committee has just been forwarded a letter dated January 28, 2013, from Clearwater Seafoods Limited. If I may, I would like to quote. This is signed by Christine Penney, Vice-President of Sustainability and Public Affairs. Obviously John Risley and Colin MacDonald and others would have been in support of this. I am just picking a couple of sentences and a paragraph or two. They say:
However, fishery resources naturally fluctuate and the current industry structure lacks the ability to effectively adjust to the inevitable turn in the status of the resource. Without the proper incentives to reduce effort when stocks inevitably decline, the health of the resource may be at risk.
Further on they say:
The government will need the courage to provide the courage, leadership and resolve to act in the long term best interest of this valuable and iconic fishery and the Atlantic Canadian economy. There is strong resistance to change in the lobster industry. However, there is an opportunity for government to implement policies that will facilitate much-need self rationalization. The lobster industry is diverse and needs rationalization across a number of sectors. A one size fits all solution is not likely. Options should be evaluated based on the likelihood of success in a particular region and best practice options from around the world should be considered.
The industry has many thousands of participants and it often seems difficult to align the interest of different sectors. However, there is more evidence than ever that the nimble global marketplace has and will continue to take full advantage of a fractured and disorganized industry. The lobster industry, from fishing, processing, live distribution and selling must come together on important issues.
You have mentioned record-setting landings at the moment, and it is a fact. Our federal government is attempting to make changes. We will not debate tonight the merits of them, good or bad. This committee will want to recommend what is in the best interest not next year but in the future. That is our purpose here.
We have heard from the Lobster Council, and the Lobster Council is referred to in this letter as a great vehicle of change in the future. What can you tell us? I have a lot of respect for Clearwater, and I am sure you do.
Change is never easy. When you mention here ``troubling'' regarding these items here, what would you suggest? Do you agree that change is needed? This is not a criticism; we are seeking information here. If you agree change is needed, what change and how?
Mr. Belliveau: Thank you very much for the question. There are many points in that particular letter. First, I emphasized a number of times that we are talking about the lobster industry, the inshore lobster industry. First, I want to make reference that Clearwater represents the offshore lobster industry. I think this will echo through the Atlantic provinces, especially my hometown in Nova Scotia. I emphasize that the points of any policy that will have an effect on the lobster industry must be industry-driven. It must come from the industry.
You are probably alluding to the federal government's announcement on lobster quotas. If you want to dismantle communities in Atlantic Canada, that is the route to take. You will see the cod moratorium in 1992 simply referred to as a Sunday school picnic if you introduce lobster quotas in the inshore fisheries. I am giving you that head's up right now.
What I am suggesting here is that the lobster industry is going through a crucial time now. They have made a number of recommendations. Just this fall in southwest Nova Scotia they voted on reducing trap limits. The industry knows that they are going through this difficult time now and need to introduce the solution. It should not be the other way around, coming from the federal DFO down to the industry. It will tear apart our coastal communities. If you go down that road and introduce a quota system in the lobster industry in the inshore fisheries, you will see the communities further deteriorate and erode and will see the cannibalizing of quotas and the loss of our independent fishermen. I am here to say that we will stand up for independent fishermen in Nova Scotia.
The answer to your question about how we can make this stable is what I just got through saying. The fishermen know that there are other species out there and we can diversify and create some stability in our community. They also know that it is important to understand the science that is it going on in an ecosystem with water temperature and historical landings and high temperatures that have never been recorded before. You need to understand that, and the fishermen understood that. They put policies in place 30 years ago that are having a positive effect today in our lobster fisheries. I made reference earlier to the escape vent and the ghost panel. These are all positive steps.
I know that probably you do a lot of research in your reports, and I look forward to your report, but I encourage the senators to go back to 1975 to the Lobster Fishery Task Force report and review it. I could recite a number of paragraphs in my head.
I am going a long way to make a point, but my belief in the lobster industry and my communities has not changed about how lobsters reproduce and how they are put on our grounds. The task force in 1975 said there were two separate stocks. The offshore had one stock, the inshore fisheries had another; there was a brick wall and the two did not intermingle. My grandfather taught me how the inshore works. The large females lay their eggs, which float to the top. In 8 to 10 days the small larvae go to the bottom and replenish the inshore area around Nova Scotia. It goes on forever. The policy changes made 30 years ago with the introduction of the wire trap and escape mechanisms worked. It is working today because we are seeing more and more juveniles out, and the large females are producing their eggs, and because of climate change, we are seeing an explosion in shellfish — not only lobster but other ones.
We have seen the effect of the cod moratorium, and our fishermen are saying there are other species. Give them the opportunity to go out and make our communities stable. I think they have the knowledge and expertise, and we should be politically encouraging the acquisition of scientific information to make the right decisions to keep our communities alive.
Senator McInnis: Minister, I would not want you to leave here thinking we are advocating a quota system. We are on a fact-finding mission; we should be clear about that.
What changes would you suggest? Are there no changes? Is there a glut on the market? We talked about markets and branding. Is there anything else?
Mr. Belliveau: We need to be understanding and patient with these advisory committees. They are going through these issues and have made recommendations to the federal government and held a vote about reducing effort in the opening of the seasons. There are initiatives going on about how to address some of these landings, the large increase. I have the confidence in the industry that they make the right decisions, and again, I keep emphasizing that it needs to be community- and industry-driven because they will make the right decisions. I pointed out the science. We need to have the money to understand and make these decisions in the future. The fishermen and communities would benefit from that.
The other part is the marketing. We continue to rely on the United States. I am very pleased with that, but if we keep shipping 80 per cent of our product to the same market and the economy is struggling there also, there is an opportunity in other parts of the world. I think there will be 2 billion more people on this planet by 2030, if my numbers are correct. To me, it is a simple equation. The world wants protein. We have these resources literally at our doorstep, and we need to have the science and the marketing done to explore the new opportunities and expand on that.
Senator McInnis: For clarification, you mentioned EI reform. What aspect of EI reform created difficulty for seasonal workers?
Mr. Belliveau: The difficulty to me was making it more restrictive. We depend on seasonal work in our fishing industry. Basically, a lot of communities rely on one or two species of lobster. We have herring plant workers that are vitally important. Again, I made reference to having experienced people on the deck of the boats. I encourage you to come out to our communities. Take your camera and go out on the fishing boat and see if you want an inexperienced crew member going back on the deck of that boat. To me, that simply does not make sense. We have to protect that. We want these seasonal workers to have an opportunity to stay in these communities. If we allow that to happen and tell people to go to different areas to look for work, they will be pulled away from that industry.
Senator McInnis: I guess I am misunderstanding the policy. When seasonal workers are laid off, find another job and work elsewhere, they can go back to their old jobs when they are recalled. Where is the difficulty with that? Is there any?
Leo Muise, Executive Director, Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, Government of Nova Scotia: If I might, a lot of it is fear of the unknown.
Senator McInnis: Is it fear of the unknown or not understanding the policy?
Mr. Muise: Possibly both. Many of these workers are already heading west and leaving our communities. The big fear in the fishing industry is that they are not coming back. It is getting tougher and tougher to find crew members in areas where normally in the spring of the year there would be a lineup to try to get a job on a boat. I have had many captains call me to say that they are searching far and wide to find people. As the minister said, it is no place for someone like me, trust me, on the back of that boat. You need your trained crew and a safe crew. In the shore-side plants, it is difficult to get labourers. Many people are bringing in foreign works offshore as they are in other industries.
Senator McInnis: That has absolutely nothing to do with the EI change, not a thing. That is a myth being propagated by several provincial governments. Quite frankly, I find it quite abhorrent because it is untrue. There are a number of myths on this. There are all kinds of criticisms, but that should not be one of them.
The Chair: Would you comment on that, Mr. Muise?
Mr. Muise: It may or may not be a myth, but I can tell you that sometimes perception is reality. It is floating through the communities. People are afraid and they are nervous.
Senator McInnis: It is, and you know what? I had to contact HRSDC to talk to them and discuss it. There are six myths with respect to this that are being circulated, and they are wrong, simply wrong. I can provide you with them and I will.
Mr. Muise: Thank you.
Senator McInnis: I have to raise this because the Lobster Council of Canada was here a while ago, saying that the most potential damaging act against the lobster industry is aquaculture.
Minister, I will not go into all the details and the recent announcements that Sobeys are talking about not being a retailer for the sea salmon, all kinds of other disputes and the people that I am sure you have heard about. It is interesting tonight that you talk about wanting more science. Yet associations in Nova Scotia, one of which I was a former president of, have asked for science from the provincial government and have not gotten it. There was little or no public engagement. Yet now we are on the verge of probably another announcement of setting pens on the eastern shore, which will bring about a real problem. You have such divergent points of view when a government that is in partnership with an organization that is setting the pens is making an announcement just before Christmas Eve that the pens are being dropped.
You are in favour, and I understand; you have said that. However, when you have such a multitude of individuals and groups, over 100, that are opposed to this, do you not think most reasonable people would sit down and say, ``Look. It is time for a time out. Let us sit down as reasonable people. Let us take a year or two years. Let us analyze this. Let us bring the science out so that we can question it, and so on.'' What is the hurry? There is no doubt that around the globe, and you have alluded to this, there is a need for protein and there will be a greater need all the time. However, can it not be done properly in consultation with the people? That is what the Lobster Council of Canada spoke directly about here in an emotional way.
I do not understand why. You talk about consultation with the federal government. You want the federal government to talk to the industry, and certainly we will be doing that, but why is it the reverse when it comes to this?
Mr. Belliveau: Certainly, that is an interesting question. Regarding the eastern shore, no decision has been made. There is a process in place, and we evaluate them.
I am glad you raised this question. I want you to go back to November 6, 2012. Mr. Stewart Lamont was at the Lobster Council of Canada, which the senator referenced. Stewart Lamont stated:
Pesticides are frequently used for the treatment of lice in farm-raised salmon, and pesticides are potentially lethal for lobster in infancy.
I want to tell you that the information you received that night is inaccurate. It is misleading. There has never been sea lice treatment in Nova Scotia in the last 10 years. I want to put that on record. I thank you for the question, and I will try to address a number of points.
There is no hurry in Nova Scotia to deal with this particular topic. In fact, since I have been there, over the last four years two different sites have been approved. I want to talk a bit about the footprint. I will show you, through our aquaculture strategy, how we have addressed the concerns of the fishery. We have put a lot of time and energy into ensuring that protections are there. There is a clause in there that you do not muck around with the environment because the licence can be taken away by the minister. We take it seriously. The protection is there for the environment. I want to point out that in Nova Scotia, the footprint that the senator talked about, there is no hurry when it comes to aquaculture applications and understanding that process. The average application process is something like 36 months. The footprint in Nova Scotia is such that you can combine all the active salmon sites and put them into Bedford Basin, if you are familiar with it, 10 times over. In my background as a fisherman, I understand the distance around Nova Scotia with over 13,000 kilometres of coastline. When I got up at 4 a.m. I had the opportunity of steaming 50 miles to the west of Nova Scotia. That is the distance that the inshore lobster fishermen have to travel — a vastness to the ocean and the small footprint of aquaculture we have to understand and appreciate.
Finally, Mr. Chair, on aquaculture, I had the privilege of talking to a fisherman where I made a decision in St. Mary's Bay off of Digby about two years ago. He was at my fisheries conference just a few days ago. I asked him if he would give me the privilege of understanding his concern about aquaculture in his community. He said, ``Mr. Belliveau, I can show you and tell you that my landings increased from 30,000 three years ago, 50,000, to 80,000- pounds of landed lobsters in that community where the salmon cages are now.''
If you look at the numbers, we can give you the numbers and present them to you for your discretion, but the value in the landings of lobster landed in southwest Nova Scotia and the Bay of Fundy has not had any effect from the salmon aquaculture industry. I hope I addressed some of your questions.
Senator McInnis: I have to make this point just to show how fallacious this statement is about the coastline. I have heard you say that before. Minister, let me tell you something. It is less than a kilometre on Pope's Harbour where an 18 hectare pen will be dropped. That is not 13,000 kilometres. That is less than a kilometre, and that is where it is being dropped. The same situation is involved in Spry Harbour. It is not 13,000, it is not 1,000, but it is less than a kilometre, right in front of where the people live. You have not been able and willing to show us the science.
It is important for this committee, whether it be in this study or a future study, that we come to understand why it is that there is not an open dialogue here. That is all that has ever been asked for, whether you are right or wrong or whatever, but do not say 13,000. If it is 13,000, put it out in the ocean, but do not do it in an inlet where you have not been able to show or no one has been able to show that it would not be a pollutant.
The Chair: This is an interesting discussion, and there is a great possibility that our next study may be aquaculture, so we look forward to our hearings in Nova Scotia.
Senator MacDonald: Thank you, minister, for being here today.
I have a few questions in regard to lobster. There have been huge increases in the landings of lobster around the province. My friends that lobster fish in my hometown tell me how lucrative it is and how many there are, not lucrative so much in return but in terms of the numbers of pounds that is landed.
With regard to the price of these lobster, I think it is fair to make the assumption that there is supply and demand at work here. I think it is also safe to assume that eventually the law of diminishing returns will kick in, and we may see a downturn in the number of landings.
You mentioned the change in water temperature and things of that nature having a positive effect on the number of lobster, but the scientists will also tell us that the lack of predators for young lobster, such as cod, also has an effect on this. If we get our wish and get some of the cod stocks rebuilt, we may have to accept the fact that we will have fewer lobster landing.
This brings me back to some of the points that you made in regard to quotas. I have no strong opinions on this stuff. I want to learn from people what they think. You said that if you imposed a quota system for lobster, it would destroy all these communities. No one wants that to happen, but I want you to educate me on that. Most of these communities have crab quotas. They can go out and catch all their quota in 10 days. Why does the crab quota not destroy the community but a lobster quota would? I want to know the difference.
Mr. Belliveau: First of all, I think you need to understand and really look at the lobster industry, the industry of the lobster industry and the large number that depend on it. They have a conservation measure called a trap limit. They are governed by certain variables about what effort they can introduce. There is a very controlled mechanism, and I can go back 30 or 40 years. To me, there is a crucial policy conserving the lobster stocks, and we have seen the evidence of the increased landings.
Part of my presentation is the emphasis on finding new markets and exploring the world. To me, there is the potential. There will be some time before the cod come back.
Senator MacDonald: I want to understand this. I am not saying I disagree with you, but I want to understand specifically why a quota system for lobster would have a different impact than a quota system for crab. There has to be a reason.
Mr. Belliveau: I made reference to the large number of fishers that are using this particular lobster industry as it is today. If you go to a quota system, you will see that diminish dramatically. The evidence across the world is that when you introduce a quota system, the players become very competitive. It is the independent fishers who will be diminished.
I want also to point out that if you do your report, go to Atlantic Canada and talk to the people in the communities, my communities, and the people who are the buyers, the processers. They are all dependent on independent fishermen for their product supply. If you remove the independent fisher, the dominos will start tumbling by the processes in my community, and the numbers will get smaller and smaller, and there will be corporate ownership.
Senator MacDonald: I am not asking about corporate ownership. I read in your report where you kept referring to fleet separation, owner-operator. That was a no-go out there among everyone I know, certainly the people I spoke to and the senators I know around the table, and there was very little consensus that there was support for this. I am not talking about owner-operator.
Should the crab catches not be on a quota system? Should they be on a different system? I want to be educated on this.
Mr. Muise: I think the difference is that not everyone has a crab licence. They are limited. It started as one of these underutilized fisheries in the 1980s and 1990s. If every lobster fisherman had a crab fish licence, that would change the whole dynamic of it.
I think the fear amongst the lobster fishermen that I speak to is that quotas can be bought and sold, or why have them in the first place, and there will be winners and losers. Some communities will win because some people will go out and gather up quota, and because if it is a finite resource, once you set a quota, you capped it, and the effort will migrate.
One nice thing about lobster fishing in Nova Scotia is there are lobster fishermen in Bay St. Lawrence and lobster fishermen in Pubnico and probably every wharf in between. When you look at it with the exception of Area 34, which is fairly well concentrated, the numbers of fishermen in the rest of the regions is pretty even throughout. I think the greatest fear of quotas is that eventually it will turn into many fewer individuals with more quota, and I guess it depends on your philosophy as to whether that is a good or bad thing.
Senator MacDonald: The lobster industry is the backbone of our fishing industry now in Nova Scotia. We have to handle it right. We know that. We know how important it is.
I want to speak to the exports of lobster overseas. You mentioned China and said there was a 200 per cent increase in 2011. If we sold one pound last year, then that means two hundred pounds this year. That does not really tell me anything. What is the actual volume of lobster sold to China?
Mr. Muise: Percentage wise, it is still quite low. I am stretching here.
Senator MacDonald: I do not mean percentage wise. I am saying actual volume.
Mr. Muise: It is probably 5 per cent or 6 per cent of the landings. It is an emerging market. It has a lot to do with transportation routes and how you get it there. When I speak to the Lobster Council and others in the industry, they feel we cannot ignore it. We have to explore it.
We have managed somehow to take a product that exists only between Massachusetts, say, and Newfoundland. It is a luxury product. I think every one of us would agree that to go out for a lobster is a luxury, and we have made it almost into a commodity. That took a lot of work, and I do not know how we did it, but we have natural advantages here. We have a luxury product. It is only in that part of, say, New England and Canada, and we have to figure out a way that other people will buy it, because you are right. If the landings decrease, it is a relationship there with the price; but the Holy Grail is to have the high landings and a high price and everyone is a winner.
Senator MacDonald: I want to follow up with the minister on this. You encouraged the federal government to get more involved with the marketing of lobster overseas, say in China or Southeast Asia. These products are purchased by private entrepreneurs and resold. How would you see the government involved in terms of marketing? I guess if it was an egg marketing board or even a wheat board where you purchase everything at one price and resold it there would be a natural mechanism for the government to be involved, but I am curious how you would integrate the federal government to marketing a privately held product.
Mr. Belliveau: To me it is a question of saying put your money where your mouth is. Excuse my interpretation of that. To me there has to be a financial commitment. There are opportunities to diversify and find some new markets. Our government helped expand the Halifax International Airport to bring in large commercial aircrafts to take that product out. To me there are opportunities there, and we continue to rely on the same markets that we have in the past, and I really believe that through financial assistance, even helping our province initiate that or working with the Lobster Council of Canada, there needs to be a financial commitment from the federal government.
Senator MacDonald: Do you think the province should be committed as well to participating in this?
Mr. Belliveau: We have been there. We helped establish the Lobster Council, and we are committed to addressing this. I go back to why we came here. We know this also plays an important role of diversifying and helping to stabilize these communities in this difficult time. To me, we put our money there to ensure we can find some other different species to help out these communities.
We have come to this table to say we are willing to do that. To me, there has to be a political will to ensure these communities stay and are stable in the future. The key thing here about fishermen making a decision is they want to be there 15 or 20 years down the road.
Senator MacDonald: Will there be an election this year in Nova Scotia?
Mr. Belliveau: I think the premier can answer that one on my behalf.
The Chair: That will be a recommendation for the committee.
Senator Oliver: My question is about research. At the beginning of your speech you talked about the troubling announcements that you have had from the federal government, and then you said that because of rising ocean temperatures, and so on, there has been an explosion in shellfish. You also said that the Lobster Council, which you helped to fund, has said that some of the work we have to do is on traceability and branding, and that is very important.
It is my view that any company or industry that really wants to succeed must continue to do research and development. They have to keep ahead of all the rest, and that is how they can continue to make money. It cannot be done by industry alone. The provinces also have to help and help fund these things.
You mentioned, for instance, that there is an opportunity for the development of new species including stone crab, green crab, whelks, Irish moss, hagfish and quahogs, and I would like to take those as an example and ask what have you, the Government of Nova Scotia, done to set up research and development work for those species to help inshore fishermen diversify and have an opportunity to do something other than lobster.
If I were the minister, for instance, I would have gone first and looked for cooperation with university researchers. I would have gone to industry associations and asked them to support, and I would have put money in my budget and set up the researchers with experience in these areas.
I want to know what you have done to help Nova Scotia lobster fishermen diversify into this explosion of new shellfish that we have not otherwise been fishing.
Mr. Belliveau: A great question. First, we have listened to the fishermen, fishing communities. I made reference to the stone crab; I have a picture here. The fishermen have observed there is tremendous biomass out there, and the fishermen have put their application forward, and they get stonewalled. The federal DFO says we have science 15 or 20 years old, and no.
Senator Oliver: Let us look at the stone crab. How big is the biomass? How many tonne?
Mr. Belliveau: I do not have the number in front of me, but I can tell you that fishermen have observed this from Cape Breton, the whole way along the Scotian Shelf, up to the Bay of Fundy and around. We have fishermen on a daily basis observing 200 or 300 pounds in their lobster traps. They know that biomass is there. They also see an explosion of these species because they were never there before. The point I am trying to make is that the science needs to be updated.
Senator Oliver: That is the essence of my question. Science is important. To be successful, we must have the science, which costs money, and I think the Province of Nova Scotia has a responsibility to put up some of that money and lead the cooperation with university researchers. What are you doing?
Mr. Belliveau: We made the commitment to put our money there to research two species. I can identify at least 10 or more, and we identified two species. Somewhere along here, since the federal government has jurisdiction over these development species, they need to come to this table and say they are willing partners and have that cooperative atmosphere and say, ``We will match your money, Mr. Minister, and we will do two, four or six.'' All of a sudden we have an industry in our community that can supplement the lobster industry.
Senator Oliver: You will do two species.
Mr. Belliveau: That is correct.
Senator Oliver: What are the two and how much have you put up for that?
Mr. Belliveau: We want to understand. First, we recognize the stone crab will be the first one.
Senator Oliver: Have you set aside something in your budget?
Mr. Belliveau: We have not set a budget number, but we are trying to get the federal government's attention. It is interesting that your report is almost finalized. To me, we have made a commitment in identifying two species that we will financially support, and there has to be a commitment that comes from your final report saying it is a reasonable idea to match the money with the minister, and the communities will benefit.
We would want to go back and identify stone crab. Here is a list of other species, and they would give us direction. All of a sudden, if you are willing, Mr. Senator, we have the interests of five or six species that can be developed, and we will create jobs in the coastal communities and it will be a success story.
Senator Oliver: In your department, have you set aside a sum that you might consider putting up for, say, the stone crab, which would be your number one? Are you prepared to say that you would put aside $5 million for research and development in the stone crab over a three-year period? Is there a number you can help us with?
Mr. Belliveau: We have no number. First I want to get your attention and to get the Senate standing committee's attention on this and see if you are taking this seriously. We have made the commitment for two species, and to me we enter into some kind of an agreement, an MOU, and we can move forward. I am telling you that the communities would be very appreciative, and I would think that is an opportunity to stabilize these communities.
Mr. Muise: If I may give a concrete example, there is a company in Senator MacDonald's hometown of Louisbourg trying to access the offshore clam fishery, the surf clam fishery, and they have worked closely with Cape Breton University and ourselves. Between all of us, I can tell you we did not spend anything close to $5 million.
Senator Oliver: However, there are several groups interested in the surf clam industry.
Mr. Muise: Presently we have a budget of about $250,000 that we put towards various science-related projects to do with lobster. We work in Cheticamp and different smaller communities. Many of these are small projects working with small university researchers. Much of it is at the University of Moncton, Dalhousie and Cape Breton University. With their limited funding, there is no multi-million-dollar science research, but it is a start. A small amount of money sometimes can leverage a little bit of extra money and we can get some of it done. Is it enough? We would like to do more.
Senator Oliver: Does your surf clam research indicate that there is a biomass sufficient for some of the inshore fishermen to get a crack at it?
Mr. Muise: Yes, I believe it does.
Senator Raine: I do not quite understand how the dates for the seasons are set. It seems that with changing temperatures, there is a need to adjust them. Is that working well in your point of view?
Mr. Belliveau: It is working extremely well. There is some issue around some of the areas in August, the moulting season. Again I make reference to the high temperatures. That is something particular to that region. I have a map that I can give to the senator for her to review. The seasons were set by our grandfathers over 150 years ago, and they got it right. With climate change, we probably have to revisit them. The ones I reference are those that have fishing in August. That is up to that particular district and region to review. During the moulting seasons, lobsters are very vulnerable.
The point I want to finish on is that our forefathers made the policies, which came from the church basements and the recreation centres. They got it right on the seasons. Thirty years ago, the fishermen got it right about having escape vents and ghost panels. They got it right, and we need to listen to the fishing communities to make the right future policies to take it to the next generation.
Senator Raine: There is a mechanism for listening to the fish harvesters in terms of the seasons. Is there one in terms of aquaculture's impact on lobster?
Mr. Belliveau: There are numerous lobster communities in every region and district, and we have input. We consult with the lobster industry regarding aquaculture. There is a consultation process and an evaluation if you are getting into the application process. There is a time to consult and to listen to the communities. Believe me, as a fisherman, I have a great feeling of accomplishment in terms of our aquaculture strategy. I ask you to review our aquaculture strategy, which was released last May. All the protections of the environment and the traditional fisheries are in that aquaculture strategy. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, that we took great pains to ensure that traditional fisheries are protected and the environment is protected. I have the confidence that aquaculture is there to assist our communities, same as the lobster industry.
We have to make the right policies and decisions to ensure that we are protecting our traditional fisheries and communities.
The Chair: Thank you, Minister Belliveau and Mr. Muise. That was one of the more interesting conversations we have had here. It is too bad we could not delve into a few more things. Thank you for taking the time to visit us. We look forward to finalizing our study and making some recommendations to help this important industry in our provinces.
We will adjourn for five minutes and then come back for an in camera discussion.
(The committee continued in camera.)