Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Fisheries and Oceans
Issue 2 - Evidence - November 1, 2011
OTTAWA, Tuesday, November 1, 2011
The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans met this day at 6:05 p.m. to study the management of the grey seal population off Canada's East Coast.
Senator Elizabeth Hubley (Deputy Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Deputy Chair: Senators, it is my pleasure to welcome you to the meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. My name is Elizabeth Hubley, a senator from Prince Edward Island, and I am the deputy chair of this committee.
Before I introduce the witnesses, I would like to invite members of the committee to introduce themselves. I will start on my right.
Senator Patterson: Senator Patterson from Nunavut.
Senator Cochrane: Senator Cochrane from Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator Harb: Senator Mac Harb.
Senator Martin: Yonah Martin from Vancouver, B.C.
Senator Raine: Senator Nancy Greene Raine from British Columbia.
Senator Poirier: Senator Poirier from New Brunswick.
The Deputy Chair: The Fisheries Resource Conservation Council published a report in September entitled Towards Recovered and Sustainable Groundfish Fisheries in Eastern Canada. Representatives of the council accepted the committee's invitation to appear this evening to discuss their report and their findings related to the committee's study on the management of the grey seal population off Canada's East Coast.
I am pleased to welcome you this evening and I thank you for your patience. I would like to welcome Gerard Chidley, who is the former chairman of the council; Donald Walker, former vice-chair; and Mike Calcutt, acting executive director.
On behalf of the members of the committee, I thank you for accepting the invitation to appear today. You now have the floor, and the senators will have an opportunity to ask questions later.
Gerard Chidley, Former Chairman, Fisheries Resource Conservation Council: Thank you, madam chair. Before we start, I will give a little personal background for myself. As you said earlier, I am the former chairman of Fisheries Resource Conservation Council. I currently own and operate an offshore fishing vessel in Newfoundland and Labrador.
[Translation]
Donald Walker, Former Vice Chairman, Fisheries Resource Conservation Council: My name is Donald Walker. I'm an inshore fisherman from the Gaspésie region, in Quebec, and the former Vice-President of the Fisheries Resource Conservation Council, the FRCC.
[English]
Mike Calcutt, Acting Executive Director, Fisheries Resource Conservation Council: I am a public servant with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and was the acting executive director for the duration of the production of this assignment.
Mr. Chidley: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you this evening. We understand that the committee is currently studying the management of the grey seal population on Canada's East Coast. As such, we have been invited to appear before you to answer questions concerning our report that you referenced earlier, Towards Recovered and Sustainable Groundfish Fisheries in Eastern Canada.
This report was released on September 15, 2011. I believe that committee members have been provided copies of the report in advance. Before we address specific questions on the report, I would like to provide you with a short overview for the purpose of providing background and context.
The FRCC was a 12-member independent advisory body established by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans in 1993 in response to requests from stakeholders for more participation in the decision-making process regarding groundfish stocks in Atlantic Canada. The council's mandate was concluded on October 13, 2011.
In carrying out its latest assignment, the council was to consider the conditions necessary for the long-term success in the groundfish fisheries, with an emphasis on cod, and the requirements to meet them and to provide advice on moving forward.
In order to fulfill its mandate, the council consulted with stakeholders through various means, including 27 consultations in communities across Atlantic Canada, Quebec and Nunavut, a workshop focused on the precautionary approach, reviewing 26 written briefs submitted to the council and holding discussions with biologists and managers from the department. The impact of seals on groundfish recovery was a dominant theme throughout the consultations. In fact, two of the major harvesting organizations made a decision during the gulf groundfish meeting to boycott the FRCC consultations, thereby voicing their displeasure with the lack of action to curb the impact of the grey seals.
The council's report includes chapters on the mandate, terms of reference, the history, current status of groundfish stocks and a summary of the stakeholder consultations. These are followed by chapters which focus on the ecosystem considerations, seals, the precautionary approach, governance and socio-economics, and markets.
In the chapter on seals, the council has made four specific recommendations. You will find them on page 35 in the report in the English version, and page 40 to 41 in the French version of the report.
These recommendations include the following: The FRCC recommends that efforts start immediately on an experimental reduction of grey seals in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence to maintain the number of seals foraging in that area at less than 31,000 animals, and that comprehensive monitoring of the effects of groundfish and ecosystem parameters be continued for a time sufficient to definitely test the effect on groundfish population processes and parameters in that area. This recommendation stems from the zonal advisory process held last year to study the impacts of grey seals on fish populations in Eastern Canada. That is listed on the DFO website as SAR document 2010/071.
The FRCC also recommends that a set of scientific meetings be convened to extend and explore hypotheses about whether reductions of grey seals, harps and hooded would enable or enhance the recovery of groundfish stocks on the western Scotian Shelf, and also in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence and on the shelf off Labrador and eastern Newfoundland.
The FRCC recommends the funding of a targeted research effort designed to provide key missing information on seal diets, functional responses to prey availability, foraging ranges, behaviours and efficiencies and methods of population control.
The FRCC also recommends that the strategic removal of grey seals be undertaken in specific areas so as to limit the expansion of foraging, parasitism and colonization ranges into new regions.
The first and fourth recommendations are specific to grey seals, while the second and third recommendations, which are targeted research, are applicable generally to the grey, harp and hooded seals in Eastern Canada. We believe it is important for each recommendation to be read in the context of the report. Lead-up and follow-up text helps to underscore and clarify the significance of each recommendation.
Madam chair, those are our opening remarks, and we will endeavour to answer any questions that senators may have for us.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you very much for your presentation.
Senator Harb: Gentlemen, I very much appreciate the fact that you were upfront right at the outset and indicated that you are working in the fishing industry and therefore you have a specific interest in the issue. That is commendable.
I have a little bit of an issue. You mentioned that this is an independent advisory council, yet we have people on this advisory board who are in the industry. One should really, in fairness, say that these are people, many of whom work in the industry.
Having said that, I did go over your report and I was troubled by a number of elements in it. First, on page 22, if you do not mind looking at it, in March 2010, the Gulf Groundfish Advisory Committee called for a boycott of your meeting. Right at the outset you were upfront and indicated that this impacted your study. Over and over again they were trying to shift the focus of the advisory group from that of looking at groundfish to that of looking at the seal population. They wanted you to just go after the seals. Whether there is science-based evidence or not, that is what they wanted you to look at and they were angry with you.
On page 31, you nicely stated about the current context:
Seals have been evolutionarily and ecologically significant predators in eastern Canadian marine and coastal ecosystems for millions of years. Their rights of place are unequivocal, but we do not yet understand the significance of their contributions to the stability and resilience of these ecosystems.
That is a telling statement. Throughout the report you go back to saying that this is an experiment. We still do not know the facts.
On page 35, your group clearly states the importance of:
. . . scientific meetings (workshops and ZAPs) be convened to extend and explore hypotheses about whether reductions of seals (grey, harp and hooded) would enable or enhance the recovery of groundfish stocks on the western Scotian Shelf, in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence and on the shelf off Labrador and eastern Newfoundland.
You make another recommendation to do more research in order to determine whether or not these grey seals are the ones responsible for eating the groundfish.
However, in the same report you recommend the removal of grey seals to the tune of 70,000. You clearly state that, once you do that, let us go and have a look at whether or not they were responsible for eating the fish.
You commit to the killing and then you want to find out the facts after, rather than doing it the other way around.
In this entire report I do not see anywhere where you guys have looked at the overfishing in the 200-mile limit. In the international community, over 24 countries are now overfishing. I do not see anything in the report where you people have looked at that, yet you decided you wanted to go after the seals. Could you comment on that?
Mr. Chidley: Senator, it is a job to pick a question out of what you asked, but I will endeavour to do it in short answer.
The whole idea of the boycott from MFU and the FFAW at the groundfish level was the impact of grey seals that were seen by harvesters and groundfish recovery. That was the whole idea of the boycott. They said unless something is done about grey seals, then it is useless. The industry has taken itself off the water since 1992 on the East Coast, and the last few years in the gulf region. Industry has done what it can.
The reference to our seal harvest strategy is actually in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence. While one is going ahead, the other recommendation, as we spoke of earlier, actually cover initiatives that could be done to collect data, which is the missing link, possibly, in the other region. The southern Gulf of St. Lawrence is where the targeted removals on forage animals were the focus.
I wrote down some of the stuff you mentioned. Everything is based on the ecosystem. The council also recognizes that when you reduce animals, it has to be done in a sustainable harvesting method. This is one of the things: While we have four recommendations here, only one — the zoning target removals — considers the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence.
That is the control identified with weighted evidence by science for close to 10 years now. There has been data collected over time, and the symposium held in 2010 that I referenced earlier, the SAR document that came out, all the data saying we cannot question the science data. Science provided the magnitude of numbers that would be needed to create the interaction necessary for grey seals to improve the recovery of cod. We did the recommendations on what needs to be done.
I think your other question was on the independence of the FRCC. I do not know if there is any 12-member body more independent that you could put together or of any other thing you can say in regard to how you could put 12 people together and not have someone who can actually be identified some way with a group that would have specific interests or the lack thereof. I think I covered most of your questions.
Senator Harb: My understanding is that there were a number of scientists who attended some of those meetings and they have objected to the report. They wrote an open letter to the minister. You are aware of those five prominent scientists. Looking at your report, I do not see anywhere where you reflect their views. Why is that? Why did you not elaborate on the fact that there was no consensus in the report that you prepared?
Mr. Chidley: We actually took the conclusion of the report that came out of the science report and looked at what the conclusion was. I am unaware of whether those scientists objected at the table in the process of that forum. We did open consultations, and every stakeholder involved in this industry had an opportunity to come and make a presentation before us. That did not happen.
Senator Patterson: With regard to the zonal advisory process organized by DFO in October 2010 referred to in the report, there were some 57 Canadian and international experts in the field of marine mammals and experts in predatory-prey relations. Did members of the FRCC participate in that process? If so, what are your views on that process?
Mr. Chidley: Members privately participated in that process from other walks of life. We had people from universities, from the processing and harvesting industry, and from science. They participated in that meeting, but not as members.
Mr. Calcutt: To clarify, four members of the FRCC participated in some way, shape or form in that workshop. Two were invited in their own right as scientists. I audited, or I participated as an observer, as did one other council member who is a member of the fishing industry in southwest Nova Scotia.
Senator Patterson: There has been a suggestion that the scientists who participated, when they looked at the issue of grey seals, that they only looked at the negative effects of the grey seals and they did not look at the positive effects. I cannot imagine what the positive effects might be.
Do you have any comments concerning the allegation of animal welfare advocates that the scientists had an agenda going into the zonal advisory process and that they did not take a balanced approach?
Mr. Chidley: To my knowledge, there was nothing of that nature. Scientists are professional people.
Mr. Calcutt: I cannot really speak to the allegation, but what I would do is refer to the introduction on the Science Advisory Report 2010/071, which gives a summary of the terms of reference for that workshop. I would not care to paraphrase it, but you would possibly be able to make up your mind for yourself, in looking at the terms of reference, whether or not there was any predisposition to one point of view or another.
Senator Patterson: Putting aside the scientists, you, Mr. Chidley, work on the water; you are a fisherman of some experience, I gather.
Mr. Chidley: Thirty-nine years.
Senator Patterson: Your organization did extensive consultation with fishers, people like yourself, who work on the water. I think they have a lot of knowledge that is valuable to us, and I would like to ask you to summarize.
Putting aside the scientific evidence, what is the belief of fishermen as to the role of the grey seal in the decimation of our cod stocks? What do they say and think?
Mr. Chidley: While the organizations were absent in terms of input, members did participate in the meetings. Depending on the fishing season, sometimes attendance was low and sometimes it was good, but the quality of the information was good.
The fishermen were saying that the grey seal impact on the recovery of groundfish is significant. They see what the seals have been doing to the fishing industry. There is no cod coming back. There is no fishing taking place in those areas. The concern right now is that we need to get the grey seal population under control.
In a healthy ecosystem, there is quite a good balance. In the 1960s, there were maybe 10,000 grey seals in the gulf region; in the 1970s or 1980s, there were around 30,000. At that same time, there was a bounty on grey seals. At a low population level, a bounty works. However, fishermen are saying that with the magnitude of the population increase in the grey seals, there is no way that the fish can recover. Their fear now is that it is not just the finfish. Their next fear is actually the shellfish. That is the biggest concern.
Science has studied the impact and analyzed the diets and the foraging ranges to the point that there is an opportunity now if we are serious about groundfish recovery. I have always said that industry are natural scientists because they are the ones on the water and they are ones who will determine whether they will fish in the morning by looking at the clouds. I do not see any scientific people putting that forward to them. They notice what is happening on the water, so they are the ones coming forward all the time saying that the seal's impact is significant. This is an opportunity to actually test this hypothesis in the southern gulf.
Senator Patterson: I think you said that in the southern gulf there is no fishing going on, but we have heard our colleague say there are 24 countries gobbling up fish. Is there foreign fishing going on in the gulf that impacts the cod population?
Mr. Chidley: Absolutely not. We have some foreign fishing outside the 200-mile zone, plus we have some joint country agreements. There is the Saint-Pierre-Canada agreement. Saint-Pierre/France has some quota in the 3Ps zone. That is not the southern gulf. On the Labrador coast there is joint Canada/NAFO management of 2+3KLNO turbot but no foreign fishing inside the 200-mile limit. All those multilateral agreements do not impact the southern gulf whatsoever. Seals do not seem to be operating with the precautionary approach; I will tell you that.
The Deputy Chair: Why was the bounty on the grey seal discontinued?
Mr. Chidley: I really could not say, unless there were a lot of cutbacks in government. We looked at whether it was government cutbacks. A similar thing is happening now with reduction in services. Whether that was looked at, I am not sure.
Mr. Calcutt: I do not know the background, but I believe it concluded in the early 1980s, so its effect has been nonexistent for quite a while now.
Senator Raine: It is obvious that this is a problem that has been getting worse and worse, and if we do not do something about it, the prognosis is not very good for the cod.
My question is really because I am not a fisherman and I do not understand how it happens. What would be the most efficient and humane way to cull this grey seal herd?
Mr. Chidley: That is something that would have to be worked out with the science body and DFO management. The FRCC has a tendency to stay at the 25,000-foot level and not get down into the operational end of that. We have many professional seal harvesters in Atlantic Canada, and I am sure that if an initiative were taken, they could certainly partake in an education process and get this done in a humane way. We have not gone into the operational end of it.
Senator Raine: I just have to look at the charts, and I am sure you have seen these charts. It is obvious that this is not a normal population growth; it is out of control, for one reason or another. We will have to work hard to get it back into control. If we do not, what do you think will happen to the cod and the other groundfish?
Mr. Chidley: We risk having, especially in the southern gulf, most groundfish species listed as endangered under the species at risk legislation. If that happens, it will impact every fishery that participates in the gulf. Depending on the level of threat, you will end up having certain requirements that will not allow bycatch. Currently, there are some species that are threatened but that you will get allowable harm for. The shellfish fisheries are the heart of the economy in Atlantic Canada as well as the East Coast of our province. That will be curbed because you will not be able to do business as normal, and that is the threat there.
Senator Raine: If we removed 73,000 grey seals from the southern gulf area, is there any risk at all with regard to the population of grey seals?
Mr. Chidley: None whatsoever. From what the scientific data has shown, the herd is sustainable. These are foraging animals; this is not the main herd. The main herd is on Sable Island, 300,000-plus animals. The foraging animals are on the southern gulf. It is only about 10 per cent of the transients from Sable Island that go into the southern gulf area. We are not talking about an interaction on Sable Island; we are talking about keeping the herd from spreading. That is the whole target here, to keep the herd contained.
To tell you the truth, most fishermen have actually given up Sable Island to the grey seals. If it is going to be their home, that is fine, but they do not want to see them curbing their livelihood to the rest of Atlantic Canada, which is why this is happening now. In fact, grey seals are starting to show up in the Northeastern U.S. The seals also like lobster.
Senator Raine: I am from British Columbia. Maybe 10 years ago we had an outbreak of the pine beetle in a park. The park officials decided to let nature take its course. This pine beetle epidemic grew and came out of the park and has now decimated the pine forests across Western Canada.
We really have to take into consideration that humans are also part of the ecosystem, and what we do to manage wildlife and fish stock is very important. I certainly got the message loud and clear. I guess everybody is just waiting for some action now.
Mr. Chidley: I agree with you. Industry has now taken itself off the water. Environmental conditions are changing, and humans are part of the ecosystem. The interaction of all must be looked at. You cannot do a harvesting removal to the magnitude we are talking about without looking downstream and seeing what the effects will be. That is why you are recommending this. It is also based on the scientific evidence that this does not harm. The herd will be sustainable long after this is done. Groundfish, on the other hand, if it is not done, will not be.
Senator Cochrane: I must tell you that about 10 or 15 years ago, when Senator Jack Marshall from Newfoundland was still here, he also advocated that we do something with the seals. This is a long time now, and we are still hassling with the problem, which is awful.
We do know that seals transmit parasites to the fish, not just to cod but to other seafood species. These parasites compromise the quality and value of our seafood products once they go on the market. Has anyone looked at the various parasites in the seafood products that come from seals? Has anyone ever looked at this and been able to determine the cost of these parasites on the seafood industry?
Mr. Chidley: We had the privilege of having two processors on the council. One was involved in the production of salt fish such as one can find in the Nova Scotia region, and the other one was involved with the 3Ps groundfish fishery. They produce a cod loin, three- and four-ounce sections for the French market. The incurred cost at the plant for removal of the worms takes them off the market. If it gets any worse, it will be to the point that it is a zero sum game. That is what is happening.
We do not put fish on the market with parasites in them. The parasites are removed at the plant site. With salt fish, they remove only what they can see because they do not remove the skin. The fresh fish that is in filleted form down the lines is all candled and the parasites are removed.
The market itself does not see it, but the cost of production is tremendous. There is data available on that, and I am sure we could get that for you, if that was something you required.
Senator Cochrane: That is a good idea.
Mr. Chidley: We will make a note of that and provide it.
Senator Cochrane: Do you believe the sealing industry can and should be revitalized? If so, how would you like to see this achieved? What steps can government take to support this vision for the industry?
Mr. Chidley: Senator, to date, there have been several overseas excursions to try to expand markets, but let us not try to blindfold the devil in the dark here. The IFAWs of the world have certainly put their mark and curbed a lot of the markets available for harp seals, and that must be overcome. A sustainable herd for harp seals used to be around 3 million, and we are now at 9 to 10 million. When you look at management of that or if you wanted to employ the old FO.1 rule, you would be harvesting 900,000 seals, but there is really no market for it.
I really believe that the work that the department is doing must be continued, and joint provincial-federal agreements must be recognized in that it is the only way forward. Do your strategies and see if this comes up. The only way this industry will survive is with those strategies; you have to be a joint program to go forward.
Senator Cochrane: You recommend 31,000 grey seals are needed in order to maintain the number of seals in that area. Tell us how you reach figures like that. With respect to an experimental reduction of the grey seals, how did you come up with the figure of 31,000?
Mr. Chidley: That is a number that would be left as foraging animals in the southern gulf after strategic removal of 70,000 seals, whether that takes one year or two. However, this would have to be done within a couple of years for that number to be proven unequivocal. Every year there are recruitments within the seal herd. The longer you delay, the number grows and it does not get any better by waiting. That is the problem.
This was the number that was arrived at by the number of seals there. Tagging work was done and also looking at the number of seals that go to certain areas to forage. That was the number seen in the southern gulf.
Senator Cochrane: Were scientists involved in the process of coming to this number?
Mr. Chidley: Very much so. Scientists have been involved with all of this and over a long period of time, but this is probably the first time that we have seen weighted evidence. There are always recommendations to do something with seals, but this is the first time there has been weighted evidence to the fact that there is a significant impact in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence on groundfish stocks.
Senator Cochrane: That has been noted for years, but nothing has been done.
Senator Poirier: I have a couple of questions, and maybe it is more to hear your thoughts on things.
I have read science statements that say there is no evidence between the growth of the grey seal population and the decline in cod or in the lack of rebuilding. I would like to know your thoughts on that statement.
Also, if it is not the growing population of the grey seal that is declining the cod, then what are your thoughts on what would be affecting the cod at this point?
Mr. Chidley: I will get to your first question, and I will try that one. You are probably referencing a document that came out for the Eastern Scotian Shelf that said that grey seals were not having an impact because there is a growth in the cod stocks in that area. In fact, a longer look shows about a 30 per cent decline. That was only one index that was put forward, and it was put forward testing a hypothesis that because of the lower cod stocks, the pelagics had picked up, and now they were eating the cod eggs. That is a stretch at best, but the evidence is that there was certainly a decrease in that stock. That is all I can comment on because that was also like a scientific paper testing the hypothesis. That is all I can say.
Senator Poirier: Do you believe anything out there other than the grey seal could also be affecting the cod?
Mr. Chidley: Environmental conditions, because industry has taken itself off the water and reduced fishing to the point where there is no gain in groundfish anymore. If Mother Nature sees it fit, we will have a cod fishery again, but I do not know how many of us will be around to see it.
Senator Poirier: From your point of view, if something is not done to reduce the population of the grey seal, how many years do you think it will take before we actually see something? How long a time frame do you think we have?
Mr. Chidley: That is more of a scientific question, but some of the stocks now, I believe, are up for study under the SARA, so you may see some action very soon. My problem with not doing anything is that you will be back here wondering what you are going to do about the shellfish in the very near future.
Senator MacDonald: Gentlemen, I first want to say that it is devastating to see these biomass numbers. I am from the fishing community of Louisbourg, full of Newfoundlanders, by the way, including my brother-in-law, who is an accomplished fishing captain. In the late 1980s, he was the fishing captain on the Gadus Atlantica, which did all the scientific work for the Government of Canada. Sitting down with him at that time, I remember asking him about the future of these cod stocks. He has a great feel for this. He and his five brothers did it, as did his father. He knows the ocean so well and follows the fish stocks around. He said if we leave them alone, there may be a fishery again in 25 years.
Well, that was 1988, almost 25 years ago, and you can see from the biomass that the cod stock has been devastated. Successive governments spend so much time discussing how they can justify or try to establish a market for seals. We do not eat seals; we eat cod. There is no real market for these seals. I think we have to come to grips with a huge problem, and if we have to, unilaterally go after this and start thinning out the huge number of seals, particularly the grey seals that are devastating the cod stock in the southern gulf and off the East Coast of Canada.
I would like some clarification on the grey seals. Do they go up to where the northern cod are spawning?
Mr. Chidley: Their ranges right now, senator, have actually taken them out to Belle Isle, which is on the northeast coast. Fishermen call them "coyotes of the sea." They clear cut like the old days of the forest, before reforestation came in. They will clear cut and move on.
Senator MacDonald: They will go after the northern cod.
Mr. Chidley: They will go after whatever. They are not fussy. They will go after whatever is there to eat. They clear cut around and they move on. There are areas on the bottom around some of the islands where there is nothing left, right down to the sea urchins. They are gone. That is a tough thing to eat.
Senator MacDonald: They have to eat. They run out of one species, and then they start on another.
Mr. Chidley: They just keep moving. That is the problem with the greys, and they are land-based. They breed on land, as opposed to the harps and the hoods that are ice-based and go back north. At least there is a little bit of relief sometime, out sight out of mind, but the greys are not out of sight and out of mind.
Senator MacDonald: The main mass of grey seals is still on Sable Island, and you said the fishermen have turned that over to the seals in that stay there and create more seals and eat. Obviously, once numbers get to a certain critical mass, they are going to become a problem in the rest of the gulf as well. If we are going to cull these seals that are out foraging, eventually we will have to go after that huge number of seals around Sable Island as well. Will that be complicated by the fact that Sable Island has now been partly made a national environmental park?
Mr. Chidley: It is complicated, but we are of the understanding that if it is a scientific program that is done, it will be allowed there. The whole idea is when you work on this harvest strategy or removals in the southern gulf, it will continue. It will not have to be to the same magnitude, but it will be continued. When I referred to the 31,000 animals, that is what that herd should be to be sustainable as foraging animals in that southern gulf. You would have to do a yearly reduction of production to ensure that it stays at that.
Senator MacDonald: I think it is fair to say that time is of the essence. We should have started yesterday.
Mr. Chidley: Time is of the essence.
Senator MacDonald: When I say "yesterday," I mean many months or years ago.
Mr. Chidley: Time is of the essence with this.
Senator MacDonald: I think it is obvious what we should do. I do not think there is a lot of reason to ask a lot of questions about this. I think we should get down and get it done.
Senator Oliver: I am interested in uses for the product of a seal, if it were killed. It is my belief that there is always a use for any product you can grow or that grows and has life. I do know that certain species of fish, if they are not good enough for humans to eat, can be used as bait for lobsters, for cat food or dog food, or you can manufacture them and use them for feeding mink at mink farms. A variety of things can be done with the product of certain fish species.
What would you recommend for this committee to look at in terms of use of the product if there needs to be a cull? For instance, do we need to have more federal research on what can be done with the meat product of the grey seal? Are there government agencies now doing various forms of research on just what can be done? At what stage is that? Do you need this committee to make certain recommendations in relation to it?
Is any of the meat being used now for things like mink farms, cat food, dog food or bait for fishermen to use?
Mr. Chidley: Senator, to date, I believe there were only 200 to 300 hundred grey seals harvested to look at what was available in products that could be utilized last year. Previously, there were probably 1,200 or so harvested on Hay Island to do some work with it, and development of that market will take time. I fully believe that what you are saying is that the uses of the animal or the uses of any animal or species should be first and foremost. The Senate committee may want to take that up with some industry folks and get some heads together to ask about the uses. Ours was a groundfish issue. We just happened to run into grey seals when we were doing this. Ours was a groundfish strategy, just parallel to grey seals. You have a big task ahead of you if you are looking at grey seal management.
Senator Oliver: We know the world's population has now exceeded 7 billion. We know that by 2050 we will have another billion people, and those people have to be fed. There is valuable protein in seals. With millions of people around the world, not just in Africa, dying for lack of food, surely there must be some scientific things we can do to utilize this valuable protein.
When you say that there was some research done and then another 1,200, who was doing that research? When was it being done and where, and with that results?
Mr. Calcutt: I believe last year the 200 animals harvested for test purposes and a look at various different products was initiated by a couple of industry entities. I am not sure of the level of assistance that may have been provided.
Senator Oliver: In what province was this?
Mr. Calcutt: Newfoundland was one.
Senator Oliver: Do you know if any of it is being used now for bait?
Mr. Chidley: I am unsure.
Senator, I will tell you that we have, as an industry, had to be very careful of what we use for bait, especially in shellfish fishery. The technology that we use for transportation of those species now to get them to land is that we carry them in refrigerated seawater tanks. If the scent of the seal is into our crab or lobster, then you have to really worry about the impacts on the markets. The uses for mink food or pet food should totally be entertained. That would be something for industry to look at it.
We are engaged in the harvesting of fish, but the sealing industry itself, there is a fairly large industry. It is just that it has been curbed the last 10 or 15 years because of market issues. Certainly it is something that would be worthwhile having someone from the Northeast Coast Sealers Cooperative and the Newfoundland Sealers Association. I think Robert Courtney could enlighten people on what to do with seals. Anyway, there is certainly something to look at.
Senator Oliver: You have been on the sea now, you told us, for 39 years. Have you ever eaten grey seal yourself?
Mr. Chidley: No, sir, but harps, harbours and hoods, yes; not grey.
Senator Oliver: Tell me why.
Mr. Chidley: They were not predominant in our area of Newfoundland. We had the harp seals, when the ice comes up, and the harbour seals and things like that. I still like the seal oil capsules, two a day. It is wonderful; not for my hair colour, by the way.
Senator Oliver: Apart from use in mink farms or for large manufacturers of dog food and cat food, can you think of any other potential use for the meat of the grey seal?
Mr. Chidley: For the meat, it is actually a food product. If there was some way that the diets of the African people, as you mentioned, could absorb it, it is such high protein. It would take time to actually get them accustomed to that type of food. That is something that would have to be developed. We may be able to do it in some form but there would have to be a lot of research.
The oil from the seals is for pharmaceuticals, but we are talking big animals here. We are talking 300 kilogram animals. It is an animal that, when the decision is made to hunt it, it has to be very strategic because the whole idea is to actually get the animal, to be able to retrieve it. There are only certain times of the year that you can do a retrieval of the animal if it is shot in the water, because of the blubber content. Other times it is like a rock. The same thing happens to a "dog" hood on the Labrador coast. If you do not harvest them at the time when the blubber content floats them, then you do not get them.
Senator Oliver: What months would that be when the blubber is up?
Mr. Chidley: I am not sure. I know some people who have been hunting the hoods in early spring have actually hunted on Hay Island. They talk about the same thing. It is such a big animal. It is not something like a harp seal. A big harp seal is 100 pounds, but those fellows are monsters.
Senator Oliver: How much would those monsters eat in terms of pounds or kilos of fish a day?
Mr. Chidley: Patrice Simon gave us some information at one time. It would be around 10 pounds a day. That would be close to two tonnes a year, or a tonne and a bit a year. When you look at the number that are there, it is not surprising why the cod or the groundfish stocks are affected, too, with the magnitude. That is what they know of. There is higher capacity than that in the southern gulf and that is why that area is so important to try this.
Senator Oliver: Can you tell me what grey seals feed on around Sable Island? What do they eat?
Mr. Chidley: I could not tell you offhand, but I know Sable Island has some wonderful currents, nutrients in the water that attract all species of fish. That is why they are staying there. It is like a buffet; it comes to them every year.
Mr. Calcutt: If I could add a bit of information to that, I think the science advisory report, which looked at stomach contents of animals from various different regions, may elaborate on exactly what the diet was compromised of.
Going back to your question about potential uses, there have been some test shipments done with respect to grey seal meat as protein and they are in the evaluation stages of those. I believe CFIA has been involved with that. That is part and parcel with having signed the agreement with China in terms of trying to open that market for various different products.
Senator Martin: I feel a bit like an interloper, and yet this is such an interesting topic and one that I can see having a great economic impact or devastation on a region of Canada. As a Canadian from the West Coast, this is far removed geographically from me, but it has really got my attention from your presentation today and from this report.
My question is in regard to this important and comprehensive report. I know it is advising the minister, but what about the public awareness or engagement of the public and how much interest it has garnered? That is an important part of moving, whether it is government or society, in the direction. Would you just speak to the kind of attention this has received?
Mr. Chidley: Senator, when this is presented to the general public, the minister gets it the same day. It is a very transparent process, actually. After the department has this document for six weeks or two or three months to really look at it and analyze it, if there is something they see that they want to move on the recommendations, they would engage science and industry to look at how to move forward on it.
At that time, I would think that there would be somewhat of a further consultation process with key groups of how to move forward. From the FRCC standpoint, once we release the report, other than for clarity reasons, we are done with it, other than to pick up the phone two months down the stream and find out from the department where the report is. We will not be there in two months time. Our term ended in October. We are done. We are just delighted to be here to provide you with some information.
Senator Martin: I can see how this is important to the study being undertaken.
Section 9 is on socio-economics and markets. Senator Oliver touched on my question regarding the potential of future markets or opportunities. I was also interested to know if there are any figures on the kind of economic impact or devastation that there would be, but I guess that was not necessarily in the scope of your study.
Mr. Chidley: No.
Senator Martin: I am sure that information is out there. I am curious about the urgency, because Senator Cochrane said that even 10 or 15 years ago this was an issue. I can only imagine the economic devastation that has occurred over the past 10 or 15 years and how urgent this is. I was looking for some numbers or some charts.
Mr. Chidley: We were not charged with putting that piece forward, other than what we thought was causing the lack of recovery of groundfish. This was one thing. We did not do a full-scale analysis of the overall economic loss. We just looked at what the potential could be. We believe that if something is not done about the grey seals it will be a big issue.
Senator Cochrane: Mr. Chidley, I just pulled up a clip from the CBC News, which says:
A New Democratic MP said Monday that the federal government has shut down an advisory body that collected the views of fishermen to help make better science decisions.
Would you like to comment on that?
Mr. Chidley: That is us. It was a bit of a surprise because we did not consider the FRCC work to be done. However, when a department's budget is cut and it has strategic initiatives to carry out, those who are at arm's length are usually the first to go. We always saw the FRCC as trying to work ourselves out of a job, because if all our recommendations on what the industry should do were followed, everything would be good.
The department feels that it is ready to move on some of their new initiatives, such as the sustainable fisheries framework and the consultation process. I just hope that a gap has not been created. We are looking forward to seeing how things proceed from here. As of now, our job is done and we look forward to seeing what will happen in the very near future.
Senator Cochrane: You feel satisfied now?
Mr. Chidley: We produced a good report, as the other FRCC reports were good. The reports are actually the voice of Atlantic Canada and the East Coast of Canada. They are not focused only on the Quebec or Newfoundland region, for example. People were consulted throughout Atlantic Canada. They freely gave their views on how the industry should look and what their issues are with the industry. That was the strength of the FRCC. It was an avenue for input from the natural scientists and fishermen in Atlantic Canada.
Senator Poirier: Senator Oliver asked whether there was a possibility of marketing grey seal products. From my understanding, we do not know yet because not a lot of work has been done on that. That tells me that it could be years before we have those answers. However, I do not think we can wait for years before starting to deal with the problem of the grey seal.
If we need to reduce the population of the grey seal and we cannot wait years for this work to be done, what would we do with the animals?
Mr. Chidley: That would be something for DFO management, science and industry to decide, because market impacts on other species would have to be considered as well as what to do with the animals and how much of the animal can be utilized. Many things would have to be worked out. Sometimes it is easy to sit at 20,000 or 30,000 feet and make the recommendation. We have thought a lot about what has to happen. If there is a will to do something about rebuilding of groundfish, I think we will find a way to accommodate those things.
The Deputy Chair: Towards Recovered and Sustainable Groundfish Fisheries in Eastern Canada was a report to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. Have you received a public response from the minister on your recommendations?
Mr. Chidley: Not to date.
The Deputy Chair: Do you expect a response from the minister?
Mr. Chidley: If we were still active, we would follow up. I hope that the minister will issue a statement in the near future. For us it is not all about the response to the report but about how it is used and if the recommendations are acted upon. I would sooner have some of the recommendations acted upon than to have headlines in the paper saying that the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans accepts them all.
The Deputy Chair: I thank you very much for being here this evening. You have answered all our questions. It has been a rewarding evening.
(The committee adjourned.)