The House of Commons Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans met to continue its study on the Review of the Fisheries Act, hearing from ten witnesses representing harvesters, industry associations, Indigenous organizations, and individual experts.
Bruce Chapman, Executive Director of the Canadian Association of Prawn Producers, argued that the current Act provides sufficient ministerial discretion and that legislative changes are not needed, warning that calls to limit commercial harvests to the “healthy zone” would unnecessarily close sustainable fisheries. He urged DFO to prioritize applied science for stock assessment over broader ecosystem research and opposed including adjacency in the Act, stating that imposing it on the offshore northern shrimp fishery would render the model unviable and that quota shares for Indigenous and northern communities have already risen to 77%.
Melanie Sonnenberg, President of the Canadian Independent Fish Harvesters Federation, recommended four core amendments: legally entrenching owner-operator and fleet separation principles in the Act, designating Canada’s wild fishery as a national strategic asset, mandating the integration of harvester knowledge into DFO science, and applying owner-operator protections nationally, including in British Columbia. She noted that the 2019 regulations have a shortcoming that has allowed controlling agreements to persist and that enforcement has been lacking.
Martin Mallet, Executive Director of the Maritime Fishermen’s Union, supported the federation’s recommendations and added that loopholes in regulations and ineffective enforcement still allow controlling agreements, including through the indigenous commercial communal licence system, which he said should require “boots on the boats.” He called for mandatory consideration of social, economic and cultural factors by the minister, more effective penalties for conservation offences, and a modernization of the precautionary approach to account for climate change, arguing that some rebuilding plan provisions are redundant.
Colin Sproul, President of the Unified Fisheries Conservation Alliance, argued that the Act already provides sufficient regulatory authority and that the core problems are a lack of science-based decision-making and respect for existing law. He expressed serious concern about proposed changes that would allow indigenous companies and corporations to hold licences, which he said would create a back door for corporate takeover through nominal Indigenous ownership, and criticized the growing influence of foreign-funded environmental NGOs in fisheries management.
Carl Allen, Vice-President of the Maritime Fishermen’s Union, agreed that fines for offences like poaching are too low and fail to deter illegal activity, and he noted that the food, social and ceremonial fishery has been turned into a quasi-commercial fishery in some areas, undermining sustainability. He explained that dockside weighing has not been implemented for lobster because it is an effort-based, not quota-based, fishery.
Stewart Elgie, Jarislowsky Chair in Clean Economy at the University of Ottawa, recommended moving from a policy of “no net loss” to “net gain” of fish habitat, citing a 40% decline in fish populations since 1980 and evidence that DFO’s offsets are not achieving even no net loss. He proposed revising the offset policy to require a minimum 2:1 replacement ratio and amending the Act to require net gain, while using tools like third-party banking and fees in lieu to lower costs and delays for proponents.
Denis St-Pierre, a Chartered Professional Accountant, identified drafting errors in the Atlantic fishery regulations that create inconsistencies between the English and French versions, particularly around who can hold non-voting shares or be a beneficiary of a family trust. He also noted that the regulations allow “a” licence-holder, not “the” licence-holder, to control multiple licences, and that Quebec fishers cannot use family trusts because the regulations conflict with the Civil Code of Quebec.
Terry Teegee, Regional Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, called for amendments to align the Fisheries Act with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including preamble options and a proposed co-jurisdictional governance framework. He argued that the lack of space for co-management and co-jurisdiction is a root cause of management problems and that first nations should have the ability to govern their own fisheries, including through Indigenous laws.
Jim McIsaac, Executive Director of the BC Shrimp Trawlers’ Association, supported the federation’s recommendations and argued that the minister’s “absolute discretion” should be replaced with a requirement for collaborative decision-making with harvesters and coastal communities. He stated that B.C. has lost 80 fishing communities and 16,000 fishermen since 1990, and that the shrimp fishery is managed by weak stock management rather than portfolio management, leading to disaster.
Nicolas Lapointe, appearing as an individual, noted that there is a lack of investment in measuring baseline habitat conditions and fish population status, which undermines the ability to assess the effectiveness of management actions.
The committee also debated and voted on a motion by Alexis Deschênes to add at least three additional meetings on law enforcement barriers, with an amendment by Mel Arnold to limit it to no more than two meetings. The motion was carried as amended.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official evidence.