HANSARD
Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services
Mr. John MacDonell (Chairman)
Mr. William Dooks
Mr. William Langille
Mr. Gary Hines
Mr. Charles Parker
Ms. Joan Massey
Mr. Wayne Gaudet
Mr. Keith Colwell
Mr. Gerald Sampson
[Mr. Wayne Gaudet was replaced by Mr. Harold Theriault.]
In Attendance:
Ms. Mora Stevens
Legislative Committee Clerk
Mr. Bruce Osborne
Department of Agriculture and Fisheries
Mr. Clary Reardon
Department of Agriculture and Fisheries
Lobster Fishing Area 33
Mr. Wilford Smith
Co-Chairman
Lobster Fishing Area 34
Mr. Ashton Spinney
Co-Chairman
Mr. Wayne Spinney
Vice-President, West Nova Fishermen's Association
[Page 1]
HALIFAX, TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2005
STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
1:00 P.M.
CHAIRMAN
Mr. John MacDonell
MR. WILLIAM DOOKS (Chairman): Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It's my pleasure to stand in today as vice-chairman, replacing the Chairman, John MacDonell, who has to leave early.
We welcome the witnesses here today. Gentlemen, I'm just going to outline how we go through this process. After the appropriate introductions are completed, we are going to open the floor for you to do your presentation. I believe you are familiar with the process anyway and we want you to feel very comfortable here. We are here to listen to what you have to say. So in doing your presentation, you usually are afforded 20 minutes to 25 minutes and at that time we will open up the meeting for questions from committee members, not really so formal but yet we have to keep some order.
So we do welcome you here. We will ask the witnesses to introduce yourselves. We know there are two organizations here today. We are pleased to have you. Then we will start with you, Mr. MacDonell, and we will go around this way. Then you will have the floor.
MR. WILFRED SMITH: Wilfred Smith, LFA 33, Co-Chairman, Advisory Committee.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Ashton Spinney. I'm the Co-Chairman of LFA 34 Advisory Committee plus the President of LFA District 34 Lobster Committee.
[Page 2]
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: I'm just saddened you that you wouldn't start on the left side. (Laughter)
MR. CHAIRMAN: That left side can be dangerous at times.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: I'm Wayne Spinney. I'm a lobster fisherman from Cape St. Mary and I'm also Vice-President of the West Nova Fishermen's Coalition and Vice-President of the LFA District 34 Lobster Committee.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: Mr. Chairman, if I could, I would just like to add one thing for the record, that with no intent on the witnesses today, I did receive a call from Natural Resources that they are doing a briefing from 1:30 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. and they wanted me there simply because they said it directly affects my riding so I will be leaving possibly at 1:20 p.m. and coming back as soon as I can.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Also, gentlemen, we have observers today from Fisheries and Agriculture from the province. Nice to have you with us as well. The floor is yours.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Are these gentlemen not going to introduce themselves?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Gentlemen, would you like to introduce yourselves?
MR. BRUCE OSBORNE: Bruce Osborne, I'm an advisor with the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries.
MR. CLARY REARDON: I'm Clary Reardon. I'm a Groundfish Advisor with the same department.
MR. CHAIRMAN: This gentleman over here is with the NDP caucus. He is a researcher, and members of the media and staff are here. We have one person behind, I believe, who is with your organization. So there.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you people. We certainly appreciate it. It's a privilege that we come and have this opportunity to share some concerns. Our Lobster Fishing Area 34 covers 22,000 square kilometres of fishing grounds. We have 968 licence holders in this area and this means over 10,000 direct jobs and this is not including the indirect jobs. The main problem that I put for you today that directly impacts on the owner/operator issue that is so prevalent is the access of funding for new entrants into the fishing industry. The two issues are inseparable.
[Page 3]
Between the Marshall Decision and DFO's subsequent purchase of numerous licences for the First Nations fishery, combined with the over-zealous businessmen using trust agreements to circumvent DFO owner/operator and fleet separation policies, often these are the same people who made a killing in the groundfishery or scallop fishery and are now doing the same thing, or trying to do the same thing in the lobster fishery. These events pushed the value of licences to the point of making it prohibitive for new entrants into the lobster fishery.
If we can find a solution to this problem, we will be well on our way to end the problems of trust agreements that undermine the independence of the inshore lobster fishing fleet. New entrants into the fishery will help elevate the problem of losing local jobs in coastal communities as well as it will go a long way to stop the erosion of owner/operator and the stockpiling of licences.
A solution that must or, in our position, should be put in place could include for the Nova Scotia loan board to set aside x number of millions of dollars for new entrants into the fisheries with the low interest of 1 per cent and it should be for the licence. Opening up an avenue for new entrants to get funding would automatically lower existing rates for lobster licences. Nova Scotia Loan Board would need to work with DFO and local LFA Management Boards. A new entrant applies for a loan, meets the criteria set up by the local LFA Management Board; two years' fishing time, first time lobster licence holder. The younger generation would ensure long-term stability in the inshore fishery and our communities. One hundred per cent of the licenses would stay in the LFA it originates.
In order to give the lending institution a comfort level that the loan would be honoured in case of a default of payment, for example, DFO would bank the licence. Another new entrant approved by LFA 34 Management Board and DFO and other interests would step in to take over the defaulted loan. The incentive for a new entrant to honour the loan agreement would be higher knowing that on default of payment, others are waiting in line, qualified to take over the loan. There would be an agreement between the lending institution, DFO and local area LFA Management Board. This process would be a deterrent to stockpiling of licences and acts as a deterrent to non-owner/operators controlling the licences. A lending institution would be the loan board - a dealer, a bank, et cetera.
A template for the loan agreement could be developed by the management boards for new entrants, to ensure they have safeguards with their loan agreement, to circumvent loss of control of licences to the lender. A letter of intent can be given to DFO at the time of the licence transfer, signed by the new licence holder and lending institution that clearly outlines that the new licence holder has the beneficial use of that licence and makes a business decision for that enterprise. There is a clear time frame for the new entrant, he's no longer tied to that lending institution.
[Page 4]
The second critical issue is the illegal fishery. There is a lack of funding for enforcement by DFO. DFO has qualified enforcement officers but not enough funding directed to enforcement sectors to carry out the required work. Provincial government must or should be requested to pressure DFO to increase and to maintain a reasonable level of enforcement - and you can ask questions on that, if you want to note that, later. There is a lack of deterrents in the court system for illegal fishery. I would like to read that again, there is a lack of deterrents in the court system for illegal fishery. The justice system must increase the deterrents. They must increase the costs of doing illegal business.
The illegal fishery is destructive to the lobster stock. The illegal fishery is disruptive to the communities. Illegal fishing has pitted communities against communities, neighbours against neighbours, families against families and brothers against brothers. Illegal fishing and the lack of enforcement from both the federal and provincial governments and bureaucracies, has created destructiveness as people see lawlessness continuing and being ignored by the powers that be. Community members are beginning to take the law into their own hands to deal with the destructiveness of illegal fishing.
Suggested solutions. Pressure must be applied internally and between levels of government to deal with this issue. Lobby the federal government for more enforcement. The provincial government can tighten up on the transportation of illegal lobster, plug the loopholes being used by buyers to transport and to sell illegal lobster, if there is a method in place use it. Any businesses holding lobster must have invoices to show and match inventory.
An offshoot of the illegal fishery is a health concern. There is a clear health risk of operations that catch and cook illegal lobsters and sell to restaurants, et cetera. The processing method used does not include refrigeration and the cleanliness is questionable. This is a question for the Health Department but it comes back to the lack of invoices and deterrents to buying illegal lobsters. Plug dealer loopholes that allow them to purchase and sell illegal lobster. There is a loss of tax dollars to governments as a result of illegal operations.
The province's lack of enforcement must be addressed. The justice system must impose stronger penalties. If a dealer or illegal fish harvester is fined, let's say, $2,000 to $4,000 when caught, this low-level fine is considered the cost of doing business. If operations are pulling in $20,000 a week for 10 weeks, these types of fines are not a deterrent.
A third issue is the need for lobster science. This is a major concern and we're trying to address it by doing scientific studies. We do thank the provincial government for their support to carry out lobster science. We have had that, by the way, I'll interject there. We need a commitment from the provincial government to financially support a long-term plan to carry out lobster science. If we could establish a fund that could be accessed for science by fishing groups in Nova Scotia LFAs, science endeavours would benefit the industry, our
[Page 5]
communities and the province, to ensure a healthy lobster fishery for the future. It would be expected that the access to funds would come with in-kind contributions from LFAs. Thank you.
[1:15 p.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, very much.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: Do you want to continue with LFA 34?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, please do.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: I, like Ashton, thank you all for the opportunity to present to you concerns about our resources in South West Nova. There are many concerns that need to be addressed which we do not have time to address today. You people do have a lengthy document, I have a shorter version, so I pretty well follow in line but there are certain sections that I skip.
The urgency is for immediate action to safeguard the economic base of Nova Scotia's coastal communities, through the enforcement of the owner/operator and fleet separation policies. The importance of this issue begs for support through action from our provincial political leaders.
The problems and facts resulting from the problem. We have stockpiling of lobster licences through trust agreements that contravene DFO policy. These agreements transfer the beneficial use of the licence to the landlocked person/company, who may or may not live in the area, or in our country. Processors/fish buyers and others are now owning many lobster licences and owning licences in more than one LFA.
The vertical integration of the inshore lobster fishing fleet is following the same route as groundfish, scallop, herring and the tuna fisheries - to the demise of the inshore fishing industry in our communities. The crew on most of these non-owner/operator enterprises earn less and have less job stability. There is less money to be spent in the local communities and all three levels of government have their tax revenue greatly reduced, and non-owner/operator enterprises cause increased effort on the lobster stock.
A call to action - Nova Scotia Government - priority. It is critical that a letter be sent immediately from the Hon. Chris d'Entremont, Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries, demanding that the federal government, DFO, maintain, enforce and strengthen existing owner/operator and fleet separation policies. All Atlantic Provinces, and Quebec, with the only exception being Nova Scotia, have written to DFO, Ottawa, strongly supporting owner/operator and fleet separation policies.
[Page 6]
As an all-Party Nova Scotia Resources Committee, you must pressure Minister d'Entremont to support his coastal communities and his province, in writing to the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, put pressure on DFO to implement regulations in licence conditions tying beneficial use of licence to owner/operator; implement a sunset clause for owners that are not operators to divest themselves of the lobster licence where the trust agreement undermines the intent of the owner/operator policy. A sunset clause would give a two- to five-year window for trust agreement owners to divest themselves of the licences, with no extensions to the agreed upon window for divestiture. No grandfathering in. These licence holders knowingly contravene DFO policy and must not be rewarded for doing so. There is to be no more than one lobster licence per person, per company, that is wholly owned by a fish harvester.
The problem DFO is having in dealing with this issue is the question, what do you do with those people/companies gaining beneficial use from fishing that is contradictory to public policy? DFO fears a backlash because by its own non-action, it has sanctioned the stockpiling of fishing licences.
If I found a way to defraud the bank of their money and the institution found out 20 years later, would they say, thank you for showing us our weakness. We will just close that channel you used to contravene company policy and for that we will reward you for your wrongdoing and let you keep the money. I don't believe they would.
A second call to action for the Nova Scotia Government - priority. The provincial government has the power, it has the ways and it has the means and must demand full disclosure of ownership of our fishery resources. We want a transparent disclosure process for anyone holding the economic rights to natural resources and in this case, the lobster fishery.
This isn't a Wal-Mart. We have to understand here. This isn't a fly-by-night thing and this isn't Wal-Mart, this just isn't blue jeans and commodities. The fishery is the lifeblood of Atlantic Canada and the sooner we all understand that, the sooner we can get down to work and solve some of these problems. Almost everyone knows how Wal-Mart has put local businesses under by undercutting prices until their competitors die. The same strategies have and are working in the fisheries and it's going to get worse.
The rules of free enterprise and cheating and lying and hiding behind front groups in order to operate a vertically integrated economy is not okay when we are talking about the lobster fishery. It is not a difficult process for DFO to work with the Canada Revenue Agency to track the beneficial use of each licence. DFO has an updated list of each licence holder. Canada Revenue Agency has access to those who have beneficial use of those licences. We need more stringent checks and balances to ward off the corporate game playing that hides behind privacy laws. I have listed several government departments that must get involved and support us to maintain a healthy, independent inshore fishery because 74 per
[Page 7]
cent of your revenue in this province comes in from support from the rural and coastal communities of Nova Scotia.
Over the past 20 or more years, the stability of the inshore fishery has been eroded as a result of DFO's blind eye to non-compliance of owner/operator and fleet separation policies. The LFA 34 lobster fishery has grown from some $20 million in 1980 to $243 million in 2001. Today, our lobster industry is worth well in excess of $0.25 billion. This industry is threatened by various sources of invading species, disease, illegal fishing in season and out of season. It is critical that you, as MLAs of this province, assist us, the concerned harvesters in protecting this valuable public resource from further erosion, destruction and depletion. We ask that you take immediate preventive steps to stop further erosion of the inshore, independent lobster fleet by writing, calling, putting pressure on DFO to enforce existing policies of owner/operator fleet separation, to partner with the provincial governments to enable a source of funding for new entrants to buy lobster enterprises, to increase enforcement funding and to partner with inshore lobster fishery to fund lobster science. Thank you very much.
MR. WILFORD SMITH: Mr. Chairman, members of the committee and invited guests, one concern I have is the trust agreements, owner/operator and fleet separation policies where it is undermining communities and could create a great problem. One solution I see to this problem is the federal and provincial government working together to set up a fund that new entrants could borrow from that they may purchase these licences without going to trust agreement. The second solution that I see is a federal and provincial government employing a tax break to allow the father to pass it down to the son or family member or a crew member without being penalized on the tax.
The fourth concern I see in our fishing industry is the Department of Transport is coming out with changes in our regulations that will greatly affect the small inshore fisherman and maybe force them out of business because of the additional cost. They sent out a brochure stating some of the things that are coming and it is very difficult for a lot of the fishermen to understand these because of the way they are written. One, for instance, is anybody operating a boat from December to March where ice conditions may be present, has to go under a stabilization for the boat which would cost up to $9,000 for each vessel. I mean these costs are very high and these changes are quite dramatic to somebody who has been in the fishery all their life and understand these conditions and there are many more that they are, not forcing but regulating, that the fishermen have to have them. No word of grandfathering ones that have been in the fishery. Everybody has to go through the same training, which has become very expensive for the small, inshore operator.
Another concern, as I was driving through our community in southwest Nova Scotia, the businesses that have come in, like the large businesses, for instance in Barrington Passage we have the Superstore and Sobeys, which is very big, car dealerships are moving in, a lot of fast food places, businesses and they all depend on the lobster fishery because the
[Page 8]
groundfishery is at a low state right now and that's all we have left is the lobster fishery so it would be a great loss if we lost this industry and we would see collapse of our businesses and our communities. These businesses also provide jobs for many of the people as well as the fishing industry.
The sixth concern I see is foreign boats visiting our ports. They have ballast water in them and as they enter our ports and unload their cargo, they dump this out. I was to one of the meetings and it was stated that 10 new species come into our waters each year. One of them is a green, kelp-like substance. I don't know what the proper name is, but it grows on the bottom and where it grows it wipes out the kelp beds which the juvenile lobsters are in and also the big lobsters. It's killing our bottom and there is no practical use to it. Another one is a green crab which will kill clam beds. They are death on clams and I feel they also drive the lobsters off the inshore spawning places and moulting places. So that is a big concern. It's something that is going to affect our lobster industry.
The seventh concern I have is the seal population. As you know, there has been a downturn in the groundfishery and as that is depleted, they have to have something to feed on. I was to a meeting last week where it was estimated there are around 383,000 grey seals which have 60,000 pups a year and the population, he estimated, would double every four years, and that's just on Sable Island. There is a person there from Cape Breton who said there are around 10,000 pups born each year and these travel anywhere from the St. Lawrence back to Sable Island. They have done a branding on them and they found them off of New York State now, there are colonies down there that they branded on Sable Island. As the groundfish stocks are depleted, they have turned to eating lobster and I think they eat somewhere around 20 pounds a day, so that would be devastating to our lobster in the Strait if the groundfish keep going and they have to have something to feed on as they keep multiplying. I would strongly urge that there be a seal harvest to try to avoid the population explosion that there is going to be in the near future.
[1:30 p.m.]
In closing, I would like to thank the province for their support of the science project this year in LFA 33 and 34 so that we may continue it on for another year. There needs to be a steady fund or ways of getting money to match provincial funding from federal government, buyers and industry. We must jointly combine finances to the lobster science and the industry to continue the growth and remain stable in future generations. I would like to thank you people for the chance to present this.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Now we'll open up the questions from John MacDonell.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Thank you, gentlemen. We had a similar presentation not long ago actually, so your presentations only serve to reinforce the same issue. I have a
[Page 9]
pretty clear understanding of owner/operator and if I did have a clear understanding of fleet separation, I can't grasp it. I'm wondering if you could just refresh my memory on how to define fleet separation?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Back in the 1970s, I think, they came out with fleet separation. As I understand it, fishermen could not have fish plants, there were protections there and that's how it initially came in. What had happened over the years that has caused a lot of disgruntled feelings is that the fishermen have gotten in there one way or the other. It's not answering a whole lot there, I don't have a lot of history on it for you, I'm sorry. It has caused us a lot of difficulty because what happens with owner/operator - and it's supposed to happen with owner/operator - is that the owner operates it, it's very simple. You can't run a fish plant at sea and not be home to do it.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: That's basically the way I understand it also but it was for the fleet under 65 feet and the fisherman couldn't be a processor and the processor couldn't be a fisherman. It was to separate the two identities.
MR. MACDONELL: The problem with them not being separated, is it that all of a particular fisherman's catch goes to one plant or how does he monopolize it so that it is a disadvantage to the community?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: The problem that we have encountered, we can speak to the problem that has come to us, is that people are using trust agreements to circumvent Department of Fisheries and Oceans' policy that says, you're allowed one lobster licence. They have taken a trust agreement and they're circumventing that policy where they're amassing large numbers of licences, I mean, it's the entrepreneur, this businessman - let's use that phrase - who has the zeal to go out - they are overzealous - and they're amassing licences and that causes a concern to our fishermen and causes a concern to us.
It came up in our meetings that if we looked down the road a few years, what would be the end result? When we reach a certain age - and I'll use this example - if I amass 10 or 15 licences under my control through trust agreements, and when I pass out of the scene who is going to purchase them? Then comes the entrepreneurs who look at it and say, I can buy a block here and then it went wildly down the table as the men thought of it and said, well, we can show you examples. We can go to Canso with what has happened there. We can go to Yarmouth and say, what happened to the scallop fleet there? We can go to all these different places along the Shore, Lockeport and all the others. That is not in the species we're dealing with, which is lobster, but it was in the other groundfish.
We saw the same attitude starting to appear where there was an amassing of licences and it has caused us tremendous concern. It has come into being - like I said to you there - because there is no way for a new entrant to get into the fishery unless his dad has plenty of money and wants to pass it out, or somebody wants to buy it for him. What is happening is
[Page 10]
when these new fellows are buying licences, they're not buying them on the trust agreements so this young fellow is going to have it 10 years or 20 years down the road, what's happening is the person who is lending the money or going good for this, a lot of the time, is amassing that under his control and it will go into his portfolio and he sells it when he wants.
MR. MACDONELL: What you're saying is, there is a policy within DFO, they're just not enforcing it. This really isn't something that DFO can't get around, if they want to enforce their policy they just say, you can't do that. Wouldn't that be it?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: But the problem that comes into being with an agreement, as I understand it - I'm a fisherman and I'm going to be very careful here - it's an agreement between two parties and they do not have the power to access the agreement between two parties. If you and I do up a trust agreement, they have no authority to go in there. If we walked into the DFO office and I say to the Department of Fisheries, listen, I'm transferring my licence over to this gentleman here and he meets the criteria, he's been fishing for two years, they can't stop it, that's simply it. As far as they know, you own it but in all actuality, I'm the one who owns it, you're going to be the hired man and you're going to be that way and if you don't function satisfactorily for me, I'll replace you with somebody else, because I'll tell you that you're going to sign it over to Junior, for instance, or Mr. Theriault I should say - he's gotten out of it now, anyhow, but even he might want another one some day. You just keep passing it on.
Here's the amazing thing, it keeps passing on, but there's never any other problems that I hear of encountered by Revenue Canada. If I sell a licence for $0.5 million, I'm going to get a tax bill and if it goes to you and it transfers over, it's showing that there's some fly in the ointment here that's not taking place. Revenue Canada doesn't recognize that that licence is being transported to you, but we have a privacy problem here and I don't know how you get around it. I know government is up against it, their hands are tied in some areas, but there has to be ways that we can circumvent these things.
Like I said to you - and we've done a lot of work - the province has done some work on this at the provincial ministers conference in Truro. We have done a considerable amount of work on trying to get new entrants into this fishery. Look at it, I'm 60-plus years old and it's not long and there's a lot more of us at that same stage who are soon going to be stepping out, unless - like I said - there's dad or somebody has a big amount of money to help, where is it going? Who can afford to pay to the extent that we are facing, $800,000 to $1 million or more for a licence today in our area. A young fellow coming out of school, spend two years in the stern of a boat and he's going to cough up $800,000 or $1 million? It's hard enough to even get enough to buy a home for $50,000 to $100,000, let alone $0.75 million to $1 million.
MR. CHAIRMAN: In the area LFA 34 you state that there are 968 licences. How many of those would be non-owner/operator?
[Page 11]
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: We understand somewhere in the vicinity for non-owner/operator to be possibly 200 right now, it could be, let's say 150 more or less.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So, obviously, if you're in disagreement with that, it's the fisherman entering into this agreement and you're stating clearly the reason why they have to do it is because they're unable to find funding in some other manner? They are sort of being forced to take that option even though, probably, they don't want to but to get into the fishery they have to have a trust agreement. Thank you, I just wanted to clarify that. Charlie Parker.
MR. CHARLES PARKER: Welcome, gentlemen. I come from a fishing community, too, along the North Shore and our fishery is certainly a bit different than yours. Our lobster fishery is smaller, it's at a different time of the year, May and June, and probably the value of our licence, boat and gear, everything added up, is quite a bit less money, mainly because there's less money being made I suppose or less value overall. Maybe when our licences transfer from one person to another it might be $300,000 to $400,000, something in that range is probably more realistic, where yours is perhaps $800,000 or $1 million or above that, isn't it? So there is a difference in that regard.
The problem that you've identified, the owner/operator, I'm certainly familiar with. We had a press conference last week with MP Peter Stoffer and Wayne was there. It's a huge problem, it really is, and it's not going away, in fact, it's getting worse, isn't it? It's probably the largest problem we have right now in the fishery, is this whole trust agreement, owner/operator mess that we're in. As was mentioned, it is partly because DFO isn't enforcing it or is turning a blind eye, really, to the problem. I guess we're looking for support from our provincial minister, as was mentioned earlier, and from all of us, really, to lobby and write the federal minister and do what we can to see this overturned and put back in the hands of the fishermen, back in the hands of the community where it belongs.
Mr. Chairman, you touched on a topic I was going to ask about, the number of people who have maybe turned over their licences to a processor or an outside interest. My question is, do we know who these people are, if it is 150 or I heard 250, that high, are they fish plant operators in Nova Scotia or are they fish plant operators in Boston or along the seaboard, or are they outside foreign interests, or a combination of all of those? I'm just curious, who is doing the buying of the licences?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Right now they are mostly local.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: If the local company is owned by local people. See, we don't even know who the shareholders are of some of these companies, they could be owned by Tom, Dick or Harry in Taiwan. We know there is somebody there operating these so-called corporations from the local area but what we don't know for sure is if that plant or corporation is locally owned.
[Page 12]
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: We have an example to give you. The situation that we've encountered - there's many of them, - is there is a family close to where I live and they sold out of the groundfishery. They had amassed five or six licences now among the two or three brothers who are there, under their control. There are others in the communities who are doing the same thing. There are companies around who have done this and they're fishermen who have done this.
[1:45 p.m.]
If I may for just a minute, I would like to say something here because I think it needs to be said. I talked to these men about it earlier at lunch. Our communities - and I don't know how it works in your communities - looking over its history, for as long as I can remember, we had men who bought lobster, let's say - I'm not going to use names because it wouldn't be nice - in Woods Harbour, Pubnico, Wedgeport, Yarmouth, a long way and they would assist somebody in the community, he needed a boat. We're not talking $0.5 million but back when a boat would cost you $3,000 or $4,000 to go, that's a 40-foot boat ready to go and that's telling you about the area where I started, but that was the full price. They would assist in that, with lobster gear, the traps, the equipment, bait, everything. That has been the practice for as long as I can remember and it's still ongoing. There are still a lot of good, reputable men out there who are doing just that, they're helping men in the fishery and communities. A lot of our communities wouldn't be there today if it wasn't for that.
I just don't want you to think that we're giving the impression here that the big bad ogre is all these corporate interests, it's not. What is the big bad ogre here, from our perspective, is the abuse of the use of a trust agreement, as we understand the trust agreement. Most of us have entered into an agreement to purchase a home or something like that and we used a trust agreement, but at the end of the period of that agreement, it becomes yours. In this situation here, the trust agreement is being used so that the person who has loaned you the money or did the purchase is circumventing DFO policy and the person who is operating it really doesn't own the licence and is not ever going to own the licence. That was given in evidence at a review that came from Ottawa, the learned counsel who sat there said very simply, that the trust agreement will never ensure that that person, whose name is on the licence, will ever own it, that's not the way it is written. So, there's the difficulty we have.
The major difficulty we have - and I come back to it again - and I know the province and people grapple with it but it's to get these new entrants in here. If the new entrant has a way in, we're not going to be in this problem, because nobody is going to go out there and work for somebody else to become rich when he can go out and borrow the money and at the end of the same period of time it's his and he can pass it on to his family. The option was there for me and the option should be there for others.
[Page 13]
MR. PARKER: Thank you for your answer. It's a real concern and we're losing control in our communities, there's no question. That control is going out of the hands of the fishing families and it's going into the hands of large corporate interests, call them what you want, but it's not the community of Lower Pubnico, or Wedgeport, or River John where I come from, the control is going out of the community.
I guess I was asking about who it is and we don't know for sure, although there is some evidence that maybe there are some of the larger American interests perhaps coming in and getting some control of our fishery. Maybe nobody can substantiate that but there is some evidence or talk of tens of millions of dollars from American interests coming into our fishery in South West Nova. I would just like your comments on that, do you have anything to back that up?
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: I would not be surprised.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: But we don't have any evidence.
MR. PARKER: In a related question then, I understand in the Province of New Brunswick they do things a bit different in that maybe DFO is acting in a more responsible manner there. They are actually taking people to court who are violating the owner/operator policy and there's one case, I think it is, Doucette versus Jones, at the present time, that DFO is doing their job, is enforcing the rules. So why is one province or one part of DFO doing it differently in different areas of Canada? It seems to me if they can take people to court for violation of the policy in one area of the country, in one area of the Maritimes, why can't they do it here, in Nova Scotia?
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: That question was asked in writing to Mr. Neil Bellefontaine, who is the Regional Director here, why doesn't he stand up and lead like his counterpart in New Brunswick. He didn't have a clear response as to saying it would be out of line for him to do it at this particular time when that case is before the courts, but no, he has not done it.
MR. PARKER: It appears to be a different interpretation of the policy in one area of the Maritimes as compared to another. It would be nice to get that answered.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: That's right.
MR. PARKER: I have some other questions but I'll come back maybe after others have had a chance.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Junior.
[Page 14]
MR. HAROLD THERIAULT: Thank you, for your presentations. I know exactly where you're coming from and what it is all about. In one of your solutions here, Ashton, you talk about opening up financing to buy one of these. If the young fellows had the financing to buy one, they couldn't pay for it, because it has been artificially inflated by what is going on. It's by DFO competing with the few small corporations around who does own them that has put a lobster licence up to $1 million.
This past season, would you want $1 million over your head with even only 1 per cent interest on it for the lobsters that were caught? No, I wouldn't. Not up around my area, I wouldn't. Somebody would be going home without any food for the Winter, I'm sure of that, if they did pay it. It is all artificially inflated and it's not the small corporations, it's not the small businesses that is buying them up around here. It's artificially inflated to $1 million now, because it's a money game, it's all about making money, it is to make money on the licence with the licence. Even some of the fishermen are doing it, they own three, four, five licences, they are accumulating three, four, five of those licences for $3-, $4-, $5 million, they did it in New Zealand in the 1980s.
Do you know who owns the fishery now in New Zealand? Proctor & Gamble and Campbell Soup of the United States. The fellow who bought the three, four, five licences for the $3-, $4-, $5 million, is going to sell them for $8-, $9-, $10-, $12 million, that's the game that's being played. To hell with the coastal communities of Nova Scotia, I got my $3-, $4-, $5 million, you can all go to hell, I'm going to live happily ever after, and that's the mindset of the people doing it. The government is allowing this to happen, we are allowing this to happen, they're playing a monopoly game with the lifeblood of our province. Can I put it any clearer? Does anyone need that any clearer than that? Do we sit and let it happen or do we find a way? Ashton, have any of these solutions been properly put to DFO and the province?
Have they been put forward to them?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Junior - I know you as that, I'm sorry, I apologize, I should say Mr. Theriault, it would be proper here.
MR. THERIAULT: You can call me anything you like.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: When we came here to sit down and make a presentation to you people - you know where I come from, you've been there many times - I'm a firm believer that you present the problem but you should present possible solutions. I'm not saying that you have the complete answer, but you may trip off something that will bring out an answer or solution to the problem. So that is the reason that these are there, they are put there as food for thought, they are possible solutions and as you know, as we've worked over the years, how we've had to come up with possible solutions. Somewhere, at the end of the day, we come out with one that is workable and is the final result and that is why they were put to you today.
[Page 15]
Yes, we have talked and are talking. The province, at the meetings they had in the Spring and Fall in Truro with the Minister of Aquaculture and Fisheries, they have wrestled with some of these things here and we made what I thought was some excellent headway and did some really good work. The area that seems to be the plug to the solution is in the event of a default. If a loan goes out to an individual and he defaults, the bank or lending institution cannot come in and take that licence, they have no control over that, although I know there's an exception to that. I know there is an exception in the Nova Scotia loan board, when you get an agreement from them it is written in there that they will take the licence and hold it, you'll lose it, I can't give you the wording of it, but with DFO there is a problem.
I have gone to banks and credit unions and sat down and talked to the managers and said, how can we get around this problem? I don't look at the amount, what I'm looking at here is are there solutions to get new entrants in there, and then once there is a solution to getting them in there, maybe we can do something about it. We're headed for serious problems not very far down the road here and will we end up - like you suggested - where some foreign interest from Europe is going to have control of our huge resource here? I would hope and pray that we don't have that. Sorry for being so lengthy.
MR. THERIAULT: But that's how I feel it's headed, I believe everybody knows where it's headed. How can a new entrant pay for a $1 million licence, even if he could get that loan? I don't think he can do it.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: If we have a chance, Mr. Theriault, to be able to return those 150 to 200 licences back to the community for sale, that are now in trust agreements, that will automatically reduce the price of those licenses.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Who would determine the price of those licences?
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: The marketplace. And I agree with Mr. Theriault and I agree with anybody in the lobster industry, I would not want to have a $1.3 million or $1.4 million above my head this Fall, or any Fall or season, and try to expect to pay it on a lobster licence in LFA 34.
The nickname of LFA 34 is the millionaire club but it is far from the truth. There are some fishermen who have done very well but there are others whose gross income is perhaps $100,000 a year. You may say, that's a lot, but 50 per cent goes right off the top for wages and 50 per cent goes to the boat. You are left with maybe $25,000 or $30,000 income out of that $100,000. You can't put a blanket over everybody that everybody has made this humongous amount of money of $100,000 annual income, it's not true.
If these licences can come back to the community on a seniority system or whatever, I don't know, we don't have the answer to that, but we believe there should be a sunset clause of two to five years where these companies have to divest themselves of them. Can
[Page 16]
trust agreements be used for these licences to be bought up? I don't know, that's work for an internal committee to sit down and draw up these dialogues. But first we want the federal government to recognize this is occurring and stop it, we have to have it stopped now.
MR. THERIAULT: I would just like to change the subject for a second and go to Transport Canada. Transport Canada wants to do all of its roll tests and put all of these small boats through steamboat inspections, the same as we have to on the over 45-footers, we're doing that in the whale watch business. We had a new boat built back in 2001 and I gave up on Transport Canada in 2003 with it because I don't think they ever would have completed that job.
We had a new boat built last year, my son did, and they watched it being built every day, Transport Canada did, and that boat went afloat last June and we have not had a certification yet from Transport Canada. There is a dozen of these whale boats in western Nova Scotia that haven't got certification yet. How in the hell are they going to certify 1,500 or 1,800 other ones down there? Have you asked them that question?
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: We hardly know what's coming down.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: I have, Mr. Theriault.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And what did they tell you, I'm curious?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: It's going to take time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You will be able to retire before your boat is inspected.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: I will say, in all fairness, the office in Yarmouth, the gentleman I talked to there over these proposed changes and the drafts that are there, he said, go through it, identify the paragraphs of pages where there's questions or a problem, bring it in and we'll sit down and try to explain it to you. What I'm saying here is so that you will understand, it may be written that it says, if you have onboard life jackets, classifications 2, 3, and 4 must be worn at all times on open deck. That's what it says. The interpretation we got at the public meeting was, no, that's not exactly what it's meaning, that's not what it's saying. Well when I read that and it says must, that means I have to. There's no way out around and if you have these classifications, you have to have it. They say no, that's not what it means at all. I said, okay, we need to have it simplified so that we can understand it, that we understand exactly how you are going to interpret it, not how I interpret it. I need to know how Transport Canada is going to interpret it so I know how it is going to be imposed on me. So we are looking at that and there are more problems in that, Mr. Theriault.
[2:00 p.m.]
[Page 17]
Classification is coming, voyage classification. That is where everyone who will be at the wheel will have to have a ticket or a classification, it's called now, voyage classification. That will mean that everyone will have to have a physical. If they have colour blindness, which is going to rule out a lot of people in the lobster fishery, they will not be able to have that. Another problem is, if you are out on the water for more than eight hours, the captain can't be at the wheel, he is only allowed eight hours at the wheel and then he has to have a mate. Think of the nightmares that are coming at us.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It seems a little severe.
MR. THERIAULT: I will pass for now.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Junior. Gary Hines.
MR. GARY HINES: Thank you, gentlemen, for coming in. I'm just curious as to the organization of the industry. I know you gentlemen each represent specific lobster fishing areas. How is your provincial association? Do you have a provincial association that actively pursues these things and stick together so that you are not all going off on a tangent that might specifically affect your area? Do you have any strength with the provincial association?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Let me tell you the situation I'm in, okay, and perhaps that will explain it to you. That's the best way. I am an elected representative of a port cluster, so many ports, so many wharves in areas and I'm an elected representative, and I have an alternate. We have 14 elected reps and the alternates who sit on an advisory committee for DFO and from that, when the Marshall Decision came down, there were six of us who were chosen to be representatives to deal with the Marshall situation and from that we formed, by the elected reps and the alternates, an LFA District 34 Lobster Committee and that was to help us in a lot of areas. We are still working on strengthening that, building and getting the by-laws brought into being and having the public meetings. So we are still working on that, or I am, and I think my counterpart here can speak for himself, but that is how we are there, okay? So we are elected by our peers to be where we are at and I was elected as co-chairman of LFA 34 Advisory Committee and, as I said, I am the President of the LFA District 34 Lobster Committee.
MR. HINES: Okay, you have partly answered my question. I know now how you are organized within your own area but is there a strong provincial body because without a strong provincial body, I think, is where you are running into so many problems. Everybody's issues are somewhat similar but I guess there are strengths and weaknesses in each specific area and I just wondered if you had attempted to organize a provincial body so that your district or your group would have representation of a provincial body so that you could negotiate directly with the department as opposed to trying to do it all on your own for your specific area.
[Page 18]
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: There is an undertaking on behalf of this organization that Ashton spoke of earlier, this LFA 34 Lobster Committee is being transformed into a new identity. There is an exercise taking place inside that, as soon as the by-laws, the name change is approved, but there are internal workings going on now with other LFAs to jointly group up through electronic mail, that's the easiest way these days, and to have a voice. Are the problems in let's say 35, 36 and 37 and over here in 32 and 32B, 33, 34, all the same? Are we all having these same concerns and same questions and is the owner/operator eroding the same lobster fishery up and around maybe Grand Manan or up in Sydney? So, yes, it is starting but we do not have anything in place, no.
MR. HINES: I think it is going to be very beneficial to you when you can . . .
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: Mr. Greg Roach is a strong supporter of that and, by the way, DFO Halifax is very supportive of us getting a new identity, trying to form perhaps a management board, that must be what it might be called, and taking some responsibility in being organized.
MR. HINES: Just another question, if I might, Mr. Chairman. I had the opportunity to attend a federal/provincial policy conference that dealt with some of the issues that you brought up, one of them being the dumping of ballast water. The federal Minister, John Efford, at the time, seemed very positive toward dealing with that issue both on the East Coast and West Coast and alluded to the fact that the technology had already been developed for these ships who were dumping ballast water to put in controls and so on. I haven't heard anything since I have returned from that conference but I know there seemed to be an energy around the room in support of the other provinces who don't have offshore fisheries or, in fact, have coastal waters to support it. It was passed unanimously that they would support it. I don't know whether you have heard anything as to where it might be but a couple of species that you talked about that have been brought here through ballast waters were mentioned at that conference as well.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: We have - well not yet and let's hope we never do get it - but the Japanese crab on the Eastern Seaboard of the United States which was brought in by ballast water and usually when these foreign organisms come into foreign waters, they do go crazy for a period of time and if they don't kill, they will do something else. This organism hasn't tamed down yet and it's going on five years and it's killing the clam beds. It kills crab. It doesn't eat them, just kills them. It's in salmon aquaculture and it's into a lot of species and they are trying to find a way to put this into the - what do you call it, the after market, not the after market but when you make up fish patties or something else, can we use this as a byproduct. There's a very serious concern about it and there are many organisms that are coming into these waters that we have no idea about. The kelp beds, as we were talking over at dinnertime, especially down in Lobster Bay. Known kelp beds, there for hundreds of years, they are gone. Why?
[Page 19]
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: If I may suggest something to you, there may be an effort by people to prohibit the discharge of ballast water but there should be just the same effort to correct what has been done, the wrong that has been done.
MR. HINES: Is that part of the science that you are doing, too, looking into efforts to curb those kind of things?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Right now in our science, the major issues in the science of our industry has been the softshell of the lobster, when we have gone into the first of our season in the Fall. We have had a lot of questions come up, why and we set out last year, you know we owe a debt of gratitude to the province because of the funding that they have given. They have been there supporting us and encouraging us in that aspect.
We've set out to do some studies to try to determine what could have possibly caused it, was it water temperature, was it lack of food, the late moult, what causes this moult situation, and it's an education and it's a marketing concern too. It's an education not only to the marketer, to the dealer, to the processor, but to the fishermen. It's hard for a fisherman when he comes in and he's fished with this neighbour and with this neighbour and this neighbour's lobsters are in excellent quality and this neighbour here, his is garbage, he can't sell his, he has to go to the processor for nothing. I come in and say, your halfway, well where do you go? Well, part of them goes off with this neighbour and part goes here, and I get a different percentage of price, that's what was going on last year. It created a nightmare of learning but this year, fortunately, that's been overcome.
We're doing some interesting studies and that's where we are right now with science, there's a lot more to go. I could give you loads of questions that we have to try to answer. What's the primary diet of the lobster? We think that crab is a lot in there, we can't prove it. You can't set a trap to prove it because if you set a trap to prove it, whatever you put on the trap as bait is what's going to show up in its stomach. (Laughter) We have a lot of hurdles to overcome. It's interesting.
MR. HINES: Yes, it certainly would be. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So you say that an individual seal is eating approximately 20 pounds of lobster per day?
MR. SMITH: Not lobster, that's what the diet consists of, 20 pounds of whatever. The groundfish and I think the lance they eat on, which also the codfish eats, so one is fighting the other. As that gets shy and the populations explodes the way they think it is and we've seen evidence of this in our fishery already, you haul up a trap and it has a short lobster in it and you throw it over. We always thought that when we saw seals around they were waiting for the bait we threw over but they didn't want the bait, they were eating the short lobsters that went back to the bottom, as well as big lobsters at times of moult. They
[Page 20]
will take a lobster and they won't eat the claws because they're too hard but they'll eat the body and the tail, and it could be a three or four pound lobster. The grey seals are spreading out from Sable Island. In most of the harbours the rocks are covered and this has an impact on the lobster stocks. If there are 1,000 seals in a harbour, if they eat one lobster a day, that's a big impact on the stocks.
MR. CHAIRMAN: What dialogue have you had with DFO on the seal issue? The seal issue comes up every time we talk about the fisheries, it doesn't matter if it's groundfish, lobster, crab, or smelt, I'll tell you, the seals are an issue. For some reason we speak of it but it never seems to go away, it seems to be like something we don't want to talk about.
Would you say, without a doubt, being an experienced fisherman, that the seals are causing a problem to your industry? This is a question we have to know, without a doubt.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: Yes, without a doubt.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: No question.
MR. SMITH: My outlook is there are too many people out there who do not understand a seal. All they see is what is portrayed on television through the media of the nice, cuddly little animal with white fur that has a cry that would make any heart melt, and that's what they see. They don't see a seal in nature and the destruction they have done.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do they bother the steel trap as they used to do to the wooden trap?
MR. SMITH: Yes.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: They sure do.
MR. CHAIRMAN: People don't know that they smash a lot of traps, as well.
MR. SMITH: They do and they're also . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: And they're going in for the lobster and not necessarily the bait, do you think?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: They're going for the bait.
MR. SMITH: This has nothing to do with lobster in the Strait but the ground fishing industry at home, the groundfish are pretty well gone, but there are boats halibut trawling right now and are fishing four or five hours. One fellow was out the other day and he hauled his trawl, he lost three, they had ripped the skin right off the halibut and he lost four or five
[Page 21]
halibut right off his trawl and they're out there taking - it's in their nature - it off a fellow's trawl. If this keeps up you won't even be able to go ground fishing.
[2:15 p.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: So, sir, you've had what, 40 or 50 years - I'll be careful - of experience?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: You don't embarrass me at all.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's a good thing, I'm saying.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: In 1957 I bought my first licence.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's a fair amount of time in the business. So as well as speaking of other dilemmas you're facing in the fishery, seals are a real issue?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: It is.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And in relation to when you first started to fish with maybe your dad, or whatever, you didn't experience the same difficulty with seals as we're seeing today and maybe, in your opinion, - I don't mean to be leading you, so correct me if I'm wrong - it's because we're not harvesting the seals anymore, or at least to the extent we were, which increases their population, of course?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: No question. To answer and to help you here, when I started with my dad, there was a seal harvest. You could get the jawbone and if my memory is correct, I think, it was $5 you would get if you turned in the jawbone. They hunted seal, I'm talking back, if you went for the whole season, now listen to this, when I started if you fished the whole season and you stocked $5,000 - not taking it home here, I'm saying stock was $5,000 - for your year in the lobster industry. There has been a big change here but they went out and harvested the seals and kept the seal population down. Today, the ledges, the shorelines, the last day I went it was calm, there was one other boat came on the water about 3:00 p.m. and as far as I could see, if there wasn't a balloon it was a seal head. There was always two to five around my boat at all times and every time I shoved a trap overboard, they all disappeared and followed the line right down, they follow it right to it and they tear things apart. You put in mechanisms to try to stop them from destroying it and they'll rip and tear it apart. If the small ones are there, the small ones will go in through your opening and tear things out, rip the spikes out.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I speak to fishermen, of course, earlier I said that I represent a fishing community and they talk about the seals constantly. At first it was led to believe that they didn't eat fish and I've been out a number of times long lining and it was, I guess, the
[Page 22]
scientific opinion that the seal was not eating fish at all. I always asked the question, what do they eat and I never got that answer but as we sit and speak to you now, we're being assured that indeed they're certainly bothering the industry.
MR. SMITH: You said about the harvesting of seals. As far as I know, the only predator the seal has is a shark and as you know, the shark population is getting less and less.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And a few fishermen, I understand, still, yet, today but anyway - maybe I shouldn't say that - if the opportunity presents itself.
MR. SMITH: But I mean we're depleting the ones that prey on seals so therefore, there's nothing to stop the population explosion other than a disease.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: These seals also aren't just in shallow water. I've been fishing in 70, 80, 90 fathom of water and they're there.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We even had one in the lake in Dartmouth, in the fresh water here, not too long ago. That speaks for the population.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: To further your education on it and I'm not saying that you're not educated enough, but there was a good presentation made by the Fishermen's Science Research Society, Patricia King. I'll give you her phone number and if they can come up with it, it would be a good opportunity for you to sit in. Her number is 876-1160.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: FSRS.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I've taken up maybe too much time as chairman, so I'm going to now recognize John MacDonell. I apologize for that, John.
MR. MACDONELL: I'm watching the clock only because I do sit in this chair. I'll write my commentary later, but I'm leaving at 2:30 p.m. so I was a little worried.
I listened to the radio this morning and I heard that DFO had caught some poachers, I guess, with crab. I heard that at least one person was getting a $2,500 fine and probation and it sounded like most were getting probation. They took the crab and they took some gear
and I don't really understand all the aspects of that but I can see that as being expensive and I think the crab, if I say $50,000 that it would be worth, would that sound sensible?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Okay, it could be.
[Page 23]
MR. MACDONELL: It could be, okay, so they lose the crab, well, I'm not sure what the government does with that, if they have a barbeque or . . .
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: No, they sell it.
MR. MACDONELL: They sell it and that goes to fight, I suppose . . .
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: No, it goes into the black hole.
MR. MACDONELL: We've all wondered about that. One thing for sure, the penalty has to be such that it's a real deterrent. What would you see as a real deterrent?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Well we ask for forfeiture of all things involved.
MR. MACDONELL: Okay, all the gear.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: We have been there at the court and petitioned the court and I, myself, because of the position I hold and am put in, I have appeared in many cases for the Crown and we petition the court that there would be a forfeiture plus the monetary penalties. As we face the illegal fishing issue that we had in the last year or two, especially this last year, but we've had it since in the 1990s, I guess it really started about 1990, after Sparrow came out, that's when it really started blossoming.
Last year we asked the Minister of Fisheries, Mr. Regan, to do two things - we can ask a lot of things but if you give him two things he possibly can do, generally they will do it for you - so we said, would you seize vessels that are doing this illegal and plug the loopholes? They are working on those things. They started seizing vessels and we said this right across the board, not only in the off season but during the season because there are those violators during the season also. This industry is a 12-month thing. Yes, we are asking for huge penalties but whether the court will listen.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: We have written to the Justice Department, encouraging stiffer fines and stiffer penalties but they are nowhere near where they should be, not if you want deterrents in the industry. There is a huge area to cover yet.
MR. MACDONELL: My concern is this is not rocket science. What you are telling us is pretty easy to grasp. There's a problem and there should be a mechanism, especially when DFO has a policy around the trust agreements and owner/operator. You mention that they said they couldn't intervene in an agreement between two people. It would seem to me that if two guys pulled up in front of a bank and one guy sat in the car while it was running and the other guy ran in the bank and took the money, and they took off in the car when he came out that somebody would intervene in that agreement. (Laughter)
[Page 24]
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: I have to add to your statement because my accountant called me the other day and said you are going to be audited because you have used $458 from your company for meals to come to these meetings and all over the province and the country. Now for $458, I will be audited but if you transfer $200,000, $300,000 or $400,000 year after year, they are not audited and there is no way for them? I guess, don't get me going here. (Laughter)
MR. MACDONELL: The reason I'm worried is, this isn't new. You have been trying to get this message out for a while. We have had two ministers who are from Nova Scotia and it just seems to me that they should be doing something on this. It's a simple message, yes, we will correct that and take steps to do it. I don't really understand why not. I will say Wayne because I know if I say Mr. Spinney . . .
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: It will only confuse him.
MR. MACDONELL: In your comments, "Call to Action, Nova Scotia Provincial Government", all Atlantic Provinces and Quebec with the only exception being Nova Scotia, have written DFO, Ottawa, strongly supporting owner/operator. So Nova Scotia hasn't written?
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: If they have . . .
MR. MACDONELL: You don't know it.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: I don't know about it and neither does anybody else know about it. We have absolutely nothing in writing.
MR. MACDONELL: I'm going to talk to our committee clerk. Was there a resolution or something to that effect with the previous presenters that we had a couple of weeks ago or three weeks ago, to the government on this issue to push the federal minister to act, to push our minister and then . . .
MS. MORA STEVENS (Legislative Committee Coordinator): Exactly. The committee is writing to both Hon. Chris d'Entremont, as our Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries, and to Hon. Geoff Regan in support, all-Party committee, all signatures. That's what I am gathering today, for support of the owner/operator policy. So that's coming from this committee.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: May I ask, owner/operator and fleet separation policy?
MS. STEVENS: It was just the owner-operator policy in the 44 feet 11 inch and small boat fleet in the inshore fisheries that was passed last time.
[Page 25]
MR. THERIAULT: I made that motion.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: We don't need the fleet separation put in there.
MR. MACDONELL: You don't need it?
MR. THERIAULT: Not with 44 feet 11 inches, no.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: That one there will look after it very well.
MS. STEVENS: I need the signatures of the committee but I will make sure that both LFA 33 and 34 receive a copy of these so you will have them for your records.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: Please.
MR. CHAIRMAN: John, carry on.
MR. MACDONELL: With that, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to leave. I know the honourable member for Victoria-The Lakes just got back and hasn't had a chance. Thank you very much and thank you, gentlemen.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, John. Have a pleasant day. Charlie Parker.
MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, I guess I want to turn to something that has just been briefly mentioned here, I think Mr. Smith had it in his presentation as his third concern. That's around the whole inter-generational transfer of boats and gear and licences. It's a real problem as well. The owner/operator fleet separation policy is a major concern but it is all sort of inter-related here and when the time comes for retiring fishermen to pass along his boats and gear to his son or daughter or son-in-law, whoever, when the government comes in and grabs a big chunk of it, it's hard to do and who is going to pay the capital gain? As you know, for fishermen it's only $100,000 whereas for farmers and small business people it's $0.5 million. I'm just wondering if there is any update or are we making progress? We do know that the Province of Quebec, on the provincial side, has given a $0.5 million exemption to their fishermen and there is lobbying going on. I just read recently where MP Keddy and also MP MacAulay from Prince Edward Island is now moving this agenda forward with a Private Member's Bill in that case. So it looks like there is some more initiative for more people, which is maybe what's needed. Can you give us any update on where this is or what the likelihood is with CRA or where are we going to end up here?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: I'll just make a comment that I heard on the television and it came from Mr. Duffy and he was talking about the . . .
MR. PARKER: You watch that too, do you?
[Page 26]
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: But he made a comment summing up the things that were in the budget and one statement he made, and this is all I can say, $500,000 for the fisherperson. So, as you know, it's going to be in the future so it sounds as though it's getting through, but until we see it. It is encouraging to hear and to realize that people are starting to listen. But it is a serious thing.
MR. PARKER: No question. Any other comments, Wayne?
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: No, not on that. I have more comments, yes, but not on that.
MR. PARKER: Anyway, it is a serious concern and something that would facilitate the transfer from father to son or whoever. It would make it much easier for a community fishery to continue. It's certainly a detriment when half of it or more has to go to the government as a tax when, in fact, they bought it or inherited or whatever, 30 or 40 years ago, there was never a problem at that time but because of inflated values it's become a real problem today. Anyway, I guess it is something we all need to continue to work on and talk to our MPs and DFO.
[2:30 p.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Charlie. Junior.
MR. THERIAULT: Yes, it will be short. Go to the seals there a minute. I would like to, for the record, 383,000 grey seals at 20 pounds a day . . .
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: Just in one location. That's only . . .
MR. THERIAULT: . . . is 7,660,000 pounds of fish a day. That's probably bigger than the whole quota on the Eastern Shore and South Shore together for fishermen. It's funny how we can, if the deer down in Yarmouth area start getting in people's gardens, chewing their turnip tops, that we can cull them right down to pretty near nothing, you know, no problem. But when it comes to them seals, boy, we can't touch them.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Too much public outcry.
MR. THERIAULT: But anyway, I did move at the last meeting we had of Economic Development, to write to both ministers and I would like for you, as your panel there, to review that letter today and if there are any changes that you may see fit there, because I made the motion of 44 feet 11 inches down, maybe something could be added there to not only support the owner-operator but support the owner-operator in being corrected so it stays in full ownership by individuals of this province's coastal communities. Something like that, maybe, just to give it more because that owner-operator is there now but it just needs
[Page 27]
correcting and I think you should look at that document and make any corrections you see fit. That's all I want to say.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Not seeing any other speakers, gentlemen, if you have . . . Gerald. I'm sorry. Gerald Sampson.
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: It might be after the fact, it might already have been asked. Mr. Chairman, I put a few questions there before I left. Enforcement and illegal fishing. I have a question mark, why? I think enforcement and illegal fishing go hand in hand. I'm amazed at the lack of enforcement. I know personally of somebody in a different fishery, I've mentioned it at the last meeting, who, without regard for any enforcement, will go out with undersized rings, I guess, in the drags for scallops and they are supposed to be a certain size, something like three and a quarter or three and a half inch. Well, this person goes out with three-inch rings in their baskets and be darned with anybody else running and never has to own up to anybody for that.
I remember a time when that same person came in and had two full trays of undersized crab and Fisheries officers were on the wharf, checked that person and that person, because of political connections, walked away scot-free. Now that's very hard to handle when other people have to toe the mark. So I don't know what is going on here, whether it is politics at its worst or politics at its best or what but you can go out and jack a deer, get caught and lose your vehicle, lose your gun, lose everything that you have. Even if I borrowed your vehicle, they will seize that vehicle, everything is gone, and yet you are looking for them to do the same thing in the fishery and it's not being done. Is there any reason for that? What is the cost of the loss to the fishery from illegal fishing as compared to the cost of enforcement to protect that resource?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Okay, here is the problem as I see it and I don't want you to shut me off here but you asked an honest question and I think you deserve an answer here. If you follow the reduction in budget that has been coming to DFO, it has taken huge hits and we have experienced them in patrols. I will give you an example. We used to have two vessels in offshore patrol that went along the hag line. Remember in LFA 34 we go off to Browns, which is roughly 70 miles. That's just LFA 34. Then you have LFA 41 that is outside of that, that goes right off to Georges. These are huge areas that need to have enforcement. We had two vessels that did that. Those have been completely abolished. There is no offshore or mid-shore enforcement whatsoever.
It's only by aircraft surveillance, when it goes it does surveillance. There are a couple now, I think we had three patrol boats, there are two for sure and then the rest are small boats, in an area, like I said, 22,000 square kilometres, and the islands and all the access along the shoreline is unbelievable. If we have a summer like last summer, along our coastline there was the majority of fog, fog and fog and they could go out under the cover of fog and darkness . . .
[Page 28]
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: Hush, tourism.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Hush. It's the truth. I'm not going to sit here and mislead.
So you have the manpower that is chopped down, not that they can't do the job.
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: Can I just interject for a minute?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Yes.
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: Is it provincial, is it federal or is it a combination of both that we are talking about when we are talking about the enforcement and what is cut?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: The problem provincially is the dealer that is purchasing these illegal lobsters. We know that that is going on, okay. We know that is going on, is to plug those loopholes. It's not easy. Don't get me wrong, it's not easy but there needs to be more teeth there. There needs to be a lot more teeth there. Federally, here is the problem we got. If we only had lobster but we got tuna, swordfish, scallop, groundfish . . .
MR. SMITH: Halibut.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Halibut. Halibut ran free last year. They would get 500 pounds a week and they were landing 5,000 pounds and 10,000 pounds because the effort was on lobster. What money they had was spent toward lobster. I have to be careful here because . . .
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: That's provincial, the money they had?
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: That's federally.
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: Federally, okay, good.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: There is a lack of funding. We have gone to the minister. We went to the deputy minister. We have made these presentations to them. There is a need to have teeth and deterrence is one and the other one is to have the teeth that if I get a phone call that Junior is out poaching lobsters, I can pick up the phone and say, sir, you need to go visit Mr. Theriault. He's got some, tell where he's at and be able to go get him. Now I know that there are struggles internally but anyhow I'm going to say to you, provincially, we have to plug that loophole.
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: Mr. Chairman, I was going to make a formal comment on the breakdown in enforcement. I go back to the hunting end of it because there was a time when wardens were all over the place, they are few and far between now. Not only that but I have a fox farmer in my area, they are removing the fox lab from the Nova Scotia
[Page 29]
Agricultural College. So the expertise, the laboratory, it doesn't sound like much but when you have fox farmers around the province and they are in the minority, I suppose, on the scale of things, but one by one, we're losing these benefits, and I haven't heard a ripple from anywhere, only from the gentleman in my own area. So there are things that are being removed from the Agricultural College very quietly, nobody is making any waves about them, we're losing this effectiveness. Like I say, when you can fly a plane load of lobster out without worrying about being caught, something is drastically wrong.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: Can I address a comment to you?
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: Yes.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: We've gone around the table here and there is one thing that I noticed that never came up. You never took into consideration the loss of revenue. Here you are with a responsibility to govern our province and the huge loss of revenue that is occurring because of the illegal activity and things going on, it's just unbelievable. You know the loss of revenue from seals - as Junior brought up - you think of it, you start doing the dollars there. We're missing so much and we don't have that to spend to do things to help people. If you had the money that was lost from the destruction by the seal population to put into health or something like that. Just think of the value of the things that are there.
I'll say this to you, and I'm speaking from the heart and I'm stepping out of this chair, if I may, from where I sit. The ones you are going to have to battle - and I know you're wise - are the Green Peace people and the bleeding hearts and I fought with them for years. Yes, I love animals, no problem there, but there is a responsible place and a position to take. You're going to have to battle with those, you're going to have to take a stand for the betterment of everyone. The sooner our province takes a stand - and I know it's going to be a real battle going to Sable Island, we know. But which is better, to have an income coming in that is going to benefit the whole of the people or destruction and everyone's going to suffer? Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Gentlemen, I have to soon wrap this up. Gerald, are you finished with your comments?
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: Mr. Chairman, that's it. I'm completely satisfied with the questions and the answers that I received.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Gerald. Junior, you had one quick one, please.
MR. THERIAULT: Maybe we should add to that letter about the enforcement for this coming season. I think we should mention that maybe.
[Page 30]
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would think, Junior, that you folks could look at the letter, write your suggestions and forward them back to the committee because it was a different committee . . .
MR. THERIAULT: Sure, no problem.
MR. CHAIRMAN: . . . in which the motions were made and then we will deal with it in that appropriate committee. So thank you, Junior, for that.
Gentlemen, look, we have some other business to deal with. We thank . . .
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: Just before closing, there was one item that wasn't brought up and it is very serious. As much as we talked about trust agreements here in the lobster fishery, perhaps Bruce Osborne from the Department of Fisheries and Agriculture can tell us why trust agreements now are being used in the buyer's regulations to buy lobster licences. You can no longer transfer a buyer's licence. I'm sure, though, for the elite buyers, those licences aren't going to die when they die but right now I know a friend of mine who has been trying to get a buyer's licence. He wants to start small, just like other major companies did, with a half-ton truck on the back of the wharf, buy it from one boat and then two and then three and right now he has written up a trust agreement with a 63-year-old man.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I will tell you, sir, maybe you could address that question with Mr. Osborne outside of the committee because he is only here today as an observer and it wouldn't be appropriate for the chairman to ask him to come to the table.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: But I wanted you people to know that not only are we dealing with trust agreements on lobster and rigs and enterprises but now, because of new regulations put in by the province, trust agreements are now being used there.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for that. Gentlemen, I have to say it's been very informative. We have enjoyed, I guess, an informal conversation here today. We understand the issues that are facing the fishing industry and we will do what we can do as a committee to serve your best interest. We thank you for coming and we hope to see you in the future with a lot of positive comments toward our committee. Thank you.
MR. ASHTON SPINNEY: No problem, any time.
MR. WAYNE SPINNEY: Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, gentlemen, committee members, we have something to deal with. Our next meeting, what are we having here now, so what do we have to deal with?
[Page 31]
MS. STEVENS: DFO will be coming in in April. I'm just firming up the meeting date at the moment so we will hear from those officials. I didn't receive any suggestions for additional meeting items.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So in saying that, we would ask you to go back to your caucus and forward any suggestions of those we should have here in front of us.
MS. STEVENS: There was also the annual report, if anyone had any comments, questions, if they are ready to sign off and approve the report.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So before you leave, make sure you sign the report, if you agree with it. Mr. Gary Hines is ready. Okay, no further business? Gentlemen, I know everyone wants to say goodbye so we will adjourn the meeting. Thank you very kindly.
[The committee adjourned at 2:54 p.m.]
