Minutes of the virtual meeting held on December 8, 9 and 10, 2020

Meeting objective

A DFO committee was established to facilitate joint action and information sharing on policy initiatives related to harvesting of marine resources, their implementation and the development of guidelines to serve Quebec industry interests.

Attendees

ORGANIZATION	REPRESENTATIVES	PRESENT	ABSENT
INDUSTRY
INTERSECTORAL ASSOCIATIONS
Alliance des pêcheurs professionnels du Québec (APPQ)	O’Neil Cloutier	X
Fédération des pêcheurs semi-hauturiers du Québec (FPSHQ)	Daniel Desbois	X
Gaspé–Lower St. Lawrence Area
Regroupement des pécheurs professionnels du Sud de la Gaspésie (RPPSG)	O’Neil Cloutier	X
Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels du Nord de la Gaspésie (RPPNG)	Jean-René Boucher Mario Dupuis	X X
Association des capitaines-propriétaires de la Gaspésie (ACPG)	Claudio Bernatchez Vincent Dupuis	X X
Association des morutiers traditionnels de la Gaspésie (AMTG)	Michel Syvrais Marc Diotte	X	X
Association des crabiers gaspésiens	Daniel Desbois	X
Association des pêcheurs de crabe de la zone 17 (APCZ17)	René Landry	X
Magdalen Islands Area
Association des pêcheurs propriétaires des Îles-de-la-Madeleine (APPIM)	Mario Déraspe	X
Regroupement des palangriers et pétoncliers uniques madelinots (RPPUM)	Pierre Chevrier		X
Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels des Îles-de-la-Madeleine (RPPIM)	Marcel Cormier Jocelyn Thériault		X
Groupe de pêcheurs de la zone F inc. (GPZF)	Bruno-Pierre Bourque Merrielle Ouellet	X	X
Rassemblement des pêcheurs et pêcheuses des côtes des Îles (RPPCÎ)	Charles Poirier Jean-François Noël	X X
Association of the Inshore Fishermen of the Magdalen Islands (AIF)	David Burke		X
North Shore Area
Association des pêcheurs de la Basse Côte-Nord (APBCN)	Paul Nadeau	X
Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels de la Haute et Moyenne Côte-Nord (RPPHMCN)	Clovis Poirier Frank Dubé		X X
Comité de cogestion de la zone 16 inc. (CCZ16)	Serge Poirier Guy Vigneault	X
INDIGENOUS ORGANIZATIONS
Wolastoqiyik (Maliseet) Wahsipekuk First Nation	Guy-Pascal Weiner		X
Council of the Innu of Pakua Shipi	Gervais Mallek		X
Community of Ekuanitshit	Guy Vigneault	X
Innu Takuaikan Uashat mak Mani-Utenam	Yan Tremblay	8
Council of the Innus of Pessamit	Majoric Pinette	X
Micmacs of Gesgapegiag	Christina Burnsed	8-9
Micmac Nation of Gespeg	Johanne Basque	X
Council of the Innu of Nutashkuan	Benoit Shetush	X
Council of the Innu of Unamen Shipu	Alexi Lalo	8-9
Listuguj Mi’gmaq Government	James Metallic-Sloan Denny Isaac Emmanuel Sandt-Duguay (delegate)	X   X	X
Council of the Innu First Nation of Essipit	Pierre Léonard	X
Observers
Mi’kmaq Maliseet Aboriginal Fisheries Management Association (MMAFMA)	Catherine Lambert-Koizumi Nancy Dumont	8 X
Agence Mamu Innu Kaikusshet (AMIK)	Serge Langelier Benoît Shetush Kerry-Ann Taylor	X X	X
Mi'gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat	Tanya Barnaby		X
HARBOUR AUTHORITIES
Port Authority Representative	Pierre Léonard	X
DFO
Permanent members
Regional Director General	Sylvain Vézina	X
Regional Director, Fisheries Management Branch	Maryse Lemire	X
Area Director – Gaspé-Lower St. Lawrence	Érick Saint-Laurent	X
Area Director – North Shore	Andrew Rowsell	X
Area Director – Magdalen Islands	Cédric Arseneau	X
Casual members (as needed, depending on the items discussed)
Regional Director, Small Craft Harbours	Boussaad Akrour (replaced by Élisabeth Marceau)	9
Regional Director, Science	Jean-Yves Savaria		X
Regional Director, Ecosystems Management Branch	Nicole Bouchard		X
Presenters
	Érik Arsenault (December 8-10)	X
	Jean-Michel Poulin (December 8)	X
	Stéphane Plourde (December 8)	X
	Mireille Gingras (December 8)	X
	Antoine Rivierre (December 9)	X
	Catherine Merriman (December 9)	X
	Isabel Calderon (December 9)	X
	Jean-René Boucher – RPPNG (December 9)	X
	Éric Le Bel – APC (December 10)	X
	Virginie Galindo – MDDELCC (December 10)	X
	Alain Guitard – (December 10)	X
	Jacinthe Beauchamp – (December 10)	X
	Francis Bouchard – Director, Protected Area MELCC (December 10)	X
DFO Observers
Director, Resource Management, Aquaculture and Indigenous Affairs	Jean Picard	X
Regional Manager, Policies and Harmonization, Resource Management and Aquaculture Division (Regional Fisheries Management Branch)	Judy Doré	X
Manager, Indigenous Affairs	Sarah Larochelle	X
Manager, Statistics and Licensing	Bernard Morin	9
Director, Conservation and Protection	Yves Richard	9
Manager, Strategic Services	Evelyne Dufault	X
Senior Communications Advisor	Ariane Charette	X
Executive Assistant, Fisheries Management Regional Director	Véronic Lavoie	X
	Shannie Parent	X
	Manon Simard	8
	Thyerry Uhel-Gagnon	8
	Nathalie Forget	10
MAPAQ
Permanent member	Denis Desrosiers	X
Casual member (as needed, depending on the items discussed)	Rabia Sow	X
EXTERNAL OBSERVERS
	Paolo Gionet (RPPHMCN)	9
	Curtis Stubbert (APBCN)	X

Items

Opening remarks

Maryse Lemire presented the agenda for the three-day meeting.

Sylvain Vézina mentioned that adjustments related to the pandemic had to be made this year and mentioned some pandemic-related issues that affected the commercial fishing industry in Quebec: drop in demand for shrimp, crab and lobster, drop in landed prices, etc.

He mentioned some of the Minister’s priorities in the mandate letter:

• Implement the Fisheries Act.
• Use good scientific evidence and traditional Indigenous knowledge when making decisions affecting fish stocks and ecosystem management.
• Ensure that small craft harbours better serve the needs of the fishing industry.
• Implement the Ocean Plastics Charter and the Charlevoix Blueprint for Healthy Oceans, Seas and Resilient Coastal Communities.
• Participate in developing a comprehensive blue economy and sustainable use of aquatic resources strategy.
• Government commitment to reconciliation with First Nations remains a government priority. DFO would like to hold workshops to inform fisheries representatives about the government’s reconciliation program.
• Work and engagement sessions will be held on the Federal Aquaculture Act, Canada’s first-ever aquaculture act. Sylvain mentioned that those interested in this act can contact DFO for additional information, if necessary.

The upcoming advisory committee meetings will be held virtually via ZOOM. Comments and feedback are welcome with a view to improving ZOOM meetings.

Follow-up on action items

Jean Picard announced that most of the 2019 items have been completed or are close to completion. He mentioned that a new tool for monitoring the Liaison Committee’s actions had been developed and that comments on this new tool were welcome.

Maryse Lemire indicated that follow-up information would be updated at the end of the meeting.

Proposed changes to the terms of reference of the Liaison Committee Between Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Quebec Region Harvesting Sector

Érik Arsenault gave the presentation.

Questions and comments:

Paul Nadeau: Will there be a budget for meetings?

• Maryse Lemire: The ZOOM platform can be used for remote meetings (access for everyone, internal and external). The issue of holding in-person meetings was not addressed. DFO will take care of the logistics and associated costs (translation, room rental, etc.).

Update on the Marine Mammal Protection Act

Jean-Michel Poulin presented updates concerning the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA).

Questions and comments:

Merrielle Ouellette: Is it just a matter of compiling the work done at the various local or regional levels?

• Jean-Michel Poulin: Various types of data must be provided, mainly on "Export" fisheries, such as the description of the fishery, the number of stakeholders, types of fishing gear and their characteristics, management measures, regulatory measures in place to protect marine mammals and recorded marine mammal fatalities, if any. The data collection work has been partially completed. Updates and an extensive review of the information retrieved remain to be done. It is therefore important to ensure that all relevant commercial fisheries information has been taken into account and to add any other measures that are deemed appropriate, if applicable. Between now and the November 30, 2021 deadline for submitting Canadian fisheries information, DFO will continue its work at the regional level and with DFO Headquarters. Additional targeted meetings may be arranged with industry members as required. A final working meeting with industry representatives is expected to be held in late summer or fall 2021.

Ecosystem approach to fisheries

Stéphane Plourde presented an outline of the project to develop an ecosystem approach to fisheries management at DFO.

The national objective is to implement a national ecosystem approach to fisheries management in Canada that will integrate environmental variables into single-species stock assessments in order to improve decisions on aquatic resource management. Stéphane discussed the benefits and the reasons for implementing the ecosystem approach.

He mentioned that the objective of the current initiative is to implement an approach focused on stocks that are managed by integrating all the elements that affect it, such as the fishery and other variables affecting stock abundance and productivity. Future work will be aimed at managing stocks in an interconnected way, but we not yet reached the stage where we can link all the stocks. The current DFO initiative is therefore focused solely on one stock and its variables.

The current precautionary approach assumes that a stock’s production may vary but does not consider long-term trends. The objective is to develop a framework and approaches that allow the precautionary approach and other inventory management tools to be adjusted as stock productivity changes.

A national working group has been established to collate the data collected by regional working groups.

Stéphane presented the different levels of the ecosystem approach to stock assessments in Quebec and presented case studies in the region along with the ecosystem approach level. He mentioned that lobster would be included in the coming year.

Stéphane presented the next steps, which involve continuing the work on case studies over the next two years and gathering feedback on the case studies from scientists, managers and industry representatives.

Questions and comments:

Vincent Dupuis: Why is there unaccounted-for cod fishing?

• Stéphane: It seems that some activities, such as recreational fishing in Newfoundland, are not recorded. Resource Management will have more details.

More information:

• Unaccounted-for fishing, known as supplementary purchase slips (SPS), refers to catches (in this case of 4RS3Pn cod, for Mr. Dupuis’ question) that are not accounted for but are a result of the fishing activities, i.e. the amount of fish that escapes the normal process of collecting landing data. Some sources of unaccounted-for fishing are:
• Recreational fishing for cod and any other species caught in a recreational fishery (catches from this activity are not accounted for);
• Predation by seals or other scavengers in gillnets (seals or hagfish feeding on the gillnet catch);
• Fish that may escape from the mesh when the nets are hauled in;
• Unreported catches in the context of commercial activities (discarding at sea, unreported bait, personal consumption not reported in logbooks, sales to the public, etc.) or illegal fishing (e.g. targeting a species prohibited for fishing or fishing without a licence and not in the context of a regulated fishery).
• Recently, the Science Sector initiated a survey of fishers on the North Shore and on the west coast of Newfoundland to gather, among other things, information in addition to that officially available on the Atlantic cod fishery in NAFO 4RS3Pn. The information collected through this questionnaire will provide a better understanding of this stock and the history of this fishery as well as information needed to promote a healthy, profitable and sustainable fishery for the future. With stakeholder input, DFO Science will also be able to incorporate the best available fishery information for the assessment of this stock, not just official data.
• Furthermore, in 2018, the value of unreported catches was estimated at $11M in Quebec (3% of the total value of catches). The purpose of collecting SPS information is to have information on all landings made in Quebec so that DFO managers can make informed decisions regarding resource conservation and prevention.

Emmanuel Sandt-Duguay: How long does it take to translate the analysis into management decisions? Redfish are still assessed as endangered by COSEWIC.

• Stéphane Plourde: COSEWIC is independent of DFO. We do not know the reason why the redfish is still considered endangered. For decision making, related evidence was presented in the stock assessments. The problem is that this is an information tool that cannot be used operationally by managers. The challenge is to develop tools that managers can use to make adjustments to the parameters for managing stocks. No idea how long it will take. Some case studies could give us an answer, for example the snow crab case, and perhaps allow us to modify the tools used to determine the removal level. It all depends on the complexity of the approach and how far along tool development is.

Paul Nadeau: Interesting that the ecosystem approach is being discussed. He mentioned that information is available on cod, but that there is little or no information on capelin. There is a lot of money for lobbying in Newfoundland on this issue, but not much for research into abundance indices. He mentioned the relationship that fishers have observed between cod abundance and the quality of capelin eggs.

• Stéphane Plourde: To have an abundance index, we need temporal information over a long period to build a good index for capelin.

René Landry: For turbot, the issue of rising water temperatures was brought up. However, from the point of view of fishing gear performance, have you evaluated the effectiveness of gillnets with or without bridle lines? There are two different types of catches depending on the gillnet used. If the gear is too powerful and targets recruits, the turbot population cannot grow. A study could be done on the impact of using bridle lines (or not using bridles) with gillnets.

• Stéphane Plourde: This issue should be brought to the attention of the resource manager and the scientific evaluator. Most of our species have different phases in their life cycle. Environmental effects at different life stages may have different impacts (+ or -) on the stock.

Ghost Gear Fund

Mireille Gingras presented the Ghost Gear Program and the projects that are currently being funded in the Quebec Region.

She reiterated that reporting gear loss is now mandatory and mentioned that reports from the Quebec region represent 55% of reports in Canada.

Here are the next steps for this file:

• Continuation of projects funded in 2021 and 2022
• Awaiting decision on program renewal.

Questions and comments:

Merrielle Ouellet: Are projects awarded after a call for proposals or are projects submitted on an ongoing basis? Who is the program open to?

• Mireille Gingras: Projects are not submitted on an ongoing basis; there is a call for proposals with a fixed submission date. Currently, no funding is available for new projects. There will be another call for proposals with a fixed date if the funding is renewed. The program is open to many associations, Indigenous groups, NGOs, non-profit organizations, etc.

Right whales - 2020 season review

Antoine Rivierre presented the 2020 right whale season review and began by presenting maps indicating where right whales had been detected in Canadian waters between 2018 and 2020.

• 125 different individuals have been formally identified in Canadian waters.
• The right whale population is approximately 356 individuals living in the North Atlantic.

About one third of this population presumably comes into Canadian waters.

Antoine presented maps of the distribution of individuals observed between 2018 and 2020:

• The distribution of individuals has been similar in the last three years (mainly in snow crab fishing Area 12).
• There was an increase in reports in the northern part, near the tip of Anticosti.
• One individual was detected at the mouth of the Saguenay Fjord at the end of the 2020 season.

In 2020, individuals entered the Gulf of St. Lawrence in early spring and remained in the Shediac Valley during June and July. They then dispersed into the Gulf in the fall. On November 15, when the measures were lifted, acoustic detections were made.

Antoine pointed out that just because there is no observation point on the map does not mean that no individuals were there. Some acoustic detections are not included on the map.

Antoine then presented the monitoring data. Acoustic monitoring was used for the first time this year and made it possible to trigger the closure protocol. Sound can be used to differentiate a right whale from another species in real time. Data are available on the St. Lawrence Global Observatory website.

No mortality or entanglement incidents were documented in Canadian waters this year. Two mortalities occurred in U.S. waters, and two calves were observed for the first time. Antoine reiterated that the population is still at a critical level and that the abundance of this stock is still decreasing.

Questions and comments:

Pierre Léonard: Could we have a ball park figure for the costs related to right whale monitoring for all measures combined?

• Antoine Rivierre: Steps can be taken to share this information. There are several parallel initiatives, for example, Transport Canada has also made monitoring efforts. He will find out whether a cost estimate can be provided to the committee members.

Benoit Shetush: With regard to the right whales sighted in Tadoussac, is this the first time a whale has appeared in this area? There is some concern that several whales may use this area. There is regular vessel traffic in the estuary and this activity poses a danger to these animals.

• Antoine Rivierre: There have been sightings in the past at Forestville. This information was not documented by DFO. We know that there have been sightings of right whales in the estuary. These whales are not lost. With respect to transportation, work has been done with Transport Canada to ensure that ships are informed and constantly on alert when they pass through Tadoussac.

Émannuel Sandt-Dugay: What are the earliest dates of visual and acoustic observations in Area 12? Has it been around the same time over the past four years?

• Antoine: From memory, the first visual observation was between May 3 or 6. The first acoustic detection was made around April 25. Acoustic detections always come before visual observations. At the beginning of the season, there are likely fewer individuals and they spend less time at the surface, so it is likely easier to detect them acoustically.

Daniel Desbois: Despite the good results, high costs were incurred by fishers and 10% of quotas were not reached. Costs were associated with the closure of the fishery in some parts of the area. With acoustic detection, it is not possible to determine exactly where the whales are, is it? None of the closed areas have been reopened to the fishery. The accuracy of acoustic detections should be higher. The snow crab fishery should be opened in Area 12 when the ice cover is completely gone.

• Antoine Rivierre: DFO is aware of how the measures impact the industry. Suggestions for changes and comments on the management measures that were put in place in 2020 are welcome. He mentioned that the management measures that were implemented are aimed at conserving and protecting the species while minimizing the impact on the fishing industry, which is why the static zone was removed in 2020 and a protocol for seasonal closures was put in place. With acoustic detections, an animal is detected with a radius of 10 to 30 km around the buoy, but its latitude and longitude are not known. We know that whales move, so we assume that the whale is moving within this buffer zone. The closure protocol is based on accounting for possible movement of individuals, which is why we use acoustic detections.

O’Neil Cloutier: Nine grids were closed and not reopened even though no whales had been sighted within 15 days. How do we know that we can rely on DFO to follow the established protocol?

• Antoine Rivierre: The protocol that was put in place in 2018 has been updated based on new knowledge. Our biggest problem continues to be predicting where exactly the animals will go next year. In 2018, a static closure was implemented that was consistent with documented sightings in previous years. In 2019, the static zone was reduced, and a shallow water protocol was added. We are therefore adapting our protocol to protect the species while limiting the impact on the fishing industry. Numerous research projects are under way to better understand the dynamics of the species’ behaviour and foraging pattern and thereby better predict its movements.

Question in the conversation:

Pierre Léonard: Is the number of individuals present increasing year after year? What is the status of right whale prey studies? Does the fact that sound is emitted underwater affect location accuracy?

• Antoine Rivierre: There has been no significant increase in the number of right whales in the Gulf since 2018. The number seems to be stable at around 100-120 individuals. It should be kept in mind that this figure is an estimate and not an absolute number. Research on prey items is ongoing. Monitoring of calanus populations has been carried out for decades; modelling to predict changes and account for environmental parameters is under way.

Mario Desrasp: Are we talking about future measures for the next few years?

• Antoine Rivierre: No measures have been decided yet for next year. Industry is invited to share their comments and suggestions for management actions for the coming year.

Fishing gear modifications to reduce entanglements

Maryse Lemire mentioned that consultations regarding gear modifications are only just beginning.

Catherine Merriman presented the new requirements for gear modifications intended to reduce the risk of entanglement. She provided an update on the project and a summary of the new measures.

The primary objective of the project is to avoid situations that could result in entanglement of marine mammals by reducing the overlap between the presence of animals and the presence of fishing gear. The objective is also to reduce the risk of marine mammal entanglement by modifying fishing gear.

Catherine presented some gear modification options for reducing entanglement that have been tested. By reducing the strength of the breaking points on the fishing gear and incorporating mechanisms to sever the line, it will be easier for marine mammals to free themselves. One of the challenges of this method is taking into account the differences between regions in terms of both the fishing gear used and the characteristics of the fishing environment (currents, tides, etc.).

Catherine mentioned that the project is in the early stages, i.e. the introductory session stage. One of the objectives is to reach out to all industry players interested in participating in testing conducted under the project. Consultations are coming. The plan is to implement gear modifications in late 2021.

She outlined the modifications to currently available fishing gear. She mentioned that the effectiveness of the plastic link has yet to be demonstrated. She explained how the time tension line cutter works: it is a device that cuts the rope when a certain degree of tension is applied for a certain amount of time.

Questions remain about where these devices should be placed on the gear and how effective these methods are. The costs and time required to implement the measures will have to be taken into consideration.

Currently, only a few lobster and snow crab fisheries are testing certain gear modifications. Testing should be conducted in other fisheries and in all fishing environments to account for the specific characteristics of all fisheries.

Catherine invited fishers who want more information or are interested in trying the different devices to contact Edward Trippel. Samples of three of the four modifications tested are currently available if fishers would like to see them. Fishers who would like to request samples or are considering testing these devices can also contact Antoine Rivierre.

Questions and comments:

Daniel Desbois: Where does 5/8 come from? He mentioned that based on a report in the Magdalen Islands, DFO did not validate the limit of rope with a diameter of 5/8. According to Daniel, it is the largest vessels that will be the most affected and will have to incur significant costs to change all their ropes. The farther north you go, the heavier the traps are. These fishers are going to be at a disadvantage, because the currents are strong. A lot of traps will be lost due to the use of ropes with a lower breaking point. Do we know where these devices need to be placed and will there be financial assistance for those who are seriously impacted?

• Catherine Merriman: Comments and questions are being taken into account, consultations have really only just begun. The important thing is that the particular characteristics of each fishery are taken into account. Regarding the loss of gear, we want to test the gear in several fisheries so that the modifications can be better adapted to the activities and particularities of each fishery. The devices must be triggered only when an animal is entangled and not during normal fishing activities.

Daniel Desbois: When will there be working groups with industry?

• Antoine Rivierre: Area offices will ask to meet with fishers on this matter by the end of December, probably. In Quebec, we are working to identify dates for discussion sessions (in small committees), probably in early January, after the holidays. Invitations will probably be sent out before Christmas.

Mario Desrasp: Extremely dangerous in the lobster fishery in the Magdalen Islands. If you have to run the rope between the traps or if you have to reduce the amount of rope between traps, it is going to be a disaster. The project is inconsistent with the Ghost Gear Program. Every effort has been made to reduce the number of lost traps. Bigger ropes were used so that traps would not be lost.

• Catherine Merriman: The intention is to have local discussions. There is no intent to impose measures or modifications that are unsafe or that do not work for the specific operations of each fishery.

René Landry: When we talk about testing to reduce rope capacity, there are several factors that can work against us: sea conditions, a boat that is listing, a trap that is full of silt, the number of crabs in the trap reduces water drainage, etc. Adding a breakpoint would be a disaster in terms of trap losses. Reducing the number of vertical lines could be a solution for reducing right whale entanglement.

• Catherine Merriman: Good points. There is a hierarchy of principles to reduce the risks and impacts of entanglements. Avoiding entanglements is most important. One of the reasons for this work is to protect endangered species like right whales, but also other species. Another reason is to meet the requirements of the MMPA. Implementing these measures would help maintain access to U.S. markets for our marine products.

New national approach for implementing electronic logbooks

Isabel Calderon presented a national item on a new approach for implementing electronic logbooks (ELOG).

Two qualified developers are currently providing applications. DFO’s commitment is to make ELOG available and mandatory for all commercial fisheries in Canada by April 2023.

Isabel announced that the ELOG implementation is transitioning from a regional approach by fleet and fishing gear to a national approach where a single national data sheet will be available for a given group. For example, fishers from Quebec and the Gulf will have the same lobster data sheet.

Isabel mentioned that the first technical documents that will be reviewed based on the national approach are those for lobster and crab (all types of crab combined). These documents will be available soon. Tuna, shark and swordfish fishery documents will follow.

Licence conditions will be modified to allow the voluntary use of ELOG applications if they become available before 2023.

Questions and comments:

• Claire Canet: Expressed surprise at the new approach. Mentioned that as developers, they were not informed and that fishers were not consulted. Several questions had been asked but were not answered. Very ineffective communication between DFO and developers. This change in approach and strategy without prior discussions is unacceptable. Developers mentioned that data sheet requests should be sent in July of the previous year for urgent development.
• Isabel Calderon: Fishers are being informed today via this national briefing. Maryse Lemire confirmed that a communication had been sent to developers on November 30, 2021.

Industry item – Request to amend the June 2014 "New Vessel Replacement Rules – Inshore Fleet – Quebec Region”

Jean-René Boucher (RPPNG) gave the presentation.

Questions and comments:

Daniel Desbois: ACG had also submitted a similar request; why was our request not given to the participants? We would like existing crabbers to be able to take their smaller quota of groundfish using the same boat.

• Maryse Lemire: We believe there was a misunderstanding; we were expecting to receive confirmation from you. Your letter will be shared with Liaison Committee members.

René Landry: With regard to the crabbers in Area 17, the reason we are at 65 feet and under is that the captain/owner must be on the boat.

• Jean-René Boucher: We can put 64’11" to ensure the presence of the captain/owner.

Élizabeth Marceau (Engineer, Small Craft Harbours): Besides the size of the vessels and mooring capacity, there is also the issue of the electrical capacity of our facilities, which may not meet demand.

• Jean-René Boucher: We do not see a problem with electrical capacity. SCH will need to be contacted to further investigate the issue. Only a few docks will be affected, not all docks.
• Claudio Bernatchez: Most vessels use standard voltages. These boats would not consume more electricity.

O’Neil Cloutier: We must ensure that the Liaison Committee remains a platform for information exchange and not consultation. With regard to this request, a formal consultation should be carried out. What about fishers who want a bigger boat but have competitive licences? Will licences associated with the portfolio have to be sold to get a bigger boat? The consultation must be done properly so that fishers can provide their views.

Daniel Desbois: Clarification on captain/operator: the size has been increased to 100 feet. All captains can operate their 65-foot boat, but their license remains the same. Their licence does not automatically become cooperative even if the boat is over 65 feet and cannot be replaced. SCH will have to update all of its docks, as the new boats require more power, regardless of whether they are longer.

Marc Diotte: The request is very important, because we all have an ITQ for turbot, so the boats used for turbot fishing cannot be used to catch snow crab. This would means buying a new boat or renting one, which is a major expense.

O’Neil Cloutier: What are we doing with the competitive licences held by individuals?

• Jean-René Boucher: The request is only for Gaspé fishers with ITQs for groundfish. The intention is not to provide access to these boats for competitive pelagic fishers. Individuals with competitive pelagic licences are not the ones who want larger boats. Fishers with a competitive pelagic licence who acquire a larger boat need to know that they will not be able to carry out competitive pelagic fishing with their new boat.

O’Neil Cloutier: There is nothing to indicate that the cod will not come back. Under these conditions, fishers with access to the competitive cod fishery will no longer have access to the fishery because of their large boats.

Érik Arsenault gave a presentation on the next steps in the analysis of these requests.

Questions and comments:

Claudio Bernatchez: If we understand correctly, a consultation process will be put in place. I invite the other association representatives to meet with us on this issue.

• Maryse Lemire: This is the beginning; there will be consultations with all the people affected. Analysis work has already begun. I would like to reiterate that it is important for DFO to be informed of industry concerns so that it can address them.

O’Neil Cloutier: Regarding the boat replacement policy, it is relevant to look at boats of equivalent size (for example, lobster fishers in Anticosti) to see whether we can improve boats of this size that are available on the market.

Claudio Bernatchez: Question related to the ITQ program: is this a good time to propose that discussions be reinitiated for the coming year in relation to the harmonization of groundfish catch programs, and to evaluate the possibility of allowing competitive fleets under 45 feet to operate under an IQ regime?

• Érik Arsenault: I invite you to follow up with the species advisor.

Maryse Lemire: Current projects are within our capacity.

Updates – various files

Érik Arsenault gave a presentation on Regional Guidance for ITQ Program Management.

The following elements have been modified in current programs:

• Related licences: During the last year, one fleet has separated its licences – Program 4 – Snow Crab – Area 12A.
• Residency criteria: Discussions will be held by the Liaison Subcommittee to obtain their proposal in 2021.
• The requirement that a fisher not have previously held a certain type of licence in order to join a fleet is a criterion that has been eliminated.
• Increase in the temporary transfer limit: DFO has contacted representatives of the affected fleets, and no objections have been received regarding the increase to 50%.

The update will be posted on the DFO website in early 2021 at https://inter-l01-uat.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/infoceans/en/regional-guidelines-management-individual-transferable-quota-programs.

Érik presented the next steps:

• Three fleets are currently holding discussions about integrating new fleets.
• He reminded everyone that the same channels apply as set out in the guidance: i.e., through the Area Resource Manager or the Senior Resource Advisor.

Questions and comments:

René Landry: I agree with the 50% increase. However, in Area 17, there are fishers who are at 10% of the overall TAC, which is the maximum overall TAC that a fisher can have. Fishers who reach 10% of the overall TAC will not be entitled to a temporary transfer. This measure could be integrated into the program.

• Érik Arsenault: Discussions can be held with the species advisor.

Erik Arsenault gave a presentation on the Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Made Under the Fisheries Act.
(does not apply to licences issued under the Aboriginal Communal Fisheries Licences Regulations)

Questions and comments

O’Neil Cloutier: Further explore ownership of fish vs. transferring some of the rights, possibly to fishers’ helpers. It remains to be seen how this section will be applied. He mentioned that this is a weakness that could encourage controlling agreements.

• Érik Arsenault: Transfers to fishers’ helpers represent one of the exceptions. Basically, rights and privileges associated with a licence cannot be transferred UNLESS you have a sharing arrangement with a fisher’s helper along with a record of when the designated helper participated in the fishery. The fisher may be audited by the revenue agency or by DFO. Fishers need to keep a record of who is fishing with them if they are sharing their catch. This aspect of the regulations has been discussed with the experts working on the ELOGs.

Paul Nadeau: Catch share or percentage pay is a common practice on the North Shore. It is part of the culture, especially in terms of family fishing.

• Érik reiterated that a log must be kept.

Erik Arsenault gave a presentation on the professionalization of fishers - update.
(does not apply to licences issued under the Aboriginal Communal Fisheries Licences Regulations)

The regulations were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, on December 9, 2020. According to these regulations, all fishers in the Quebec Region will have to have EITHER a fisher registration card (FRC) or a Bureau d’accréditation des pêcheurs et des aides-pêcheurs du Québec (BAPAP) certificate. While fishers could get by without having either of these designations before, this will no longer be allowed and may result in consequences under the Fisheries Act.

The Quebec Region is currently analyzing how it will apply these regulations. Discussions will also be held with MAPAQ and BAPAP on this subject.

Questions and comments:

O’Neil Cloutier: Is the federal government considering a mechanism for issuing the FRC and what would it be?

• Érik Arsenault: We are still analyzing how to apply the regulations and we will also have discussions with MAPAQ and BAPAP. DFO will contact fishers once the conditions governing the application of these regulations have been determined.

Paul Nadeau: Does the certification aspect for the professionalization of new fishers come into effect in 2021? Will there be a transition period? Will we have time to register and get licences?

• Érik Arsenault: Regarding the question about new fishers, we are still waiting for the BAPAP regulations to be updated. New fishers currently have two options to qualify for a licence: two years of experience or demonstrating that they have a BAPAP certificate. With regard to questions about the regulatory changes, the regulations currently state that anyone over 16 years of age who is on the fishing vessel must have an FRC or a BAPAP certificate.

Paul Nadeau: FRCs have not been a thing for a long time. For certification, BAPAP requires a shorter period of training for those with experience and a longer period for new fishers. However, there has been no news about this.

Maryse Lemire: We must be careful not to mix up concepts. All crew must have an FRC or a BAPAP certificate. For newcomers, we will continue using the approach that has been in place for several years, i.e. two methods to demonstrate independent fisher status while waiting for the BAPAP regulations to be updated.

O’Neil Cloutier: With respect to the amendment to the BAPAP regulations, there were difficulties along the way due to a lack of understanding from a legislative standpoint of the BAPAP amendment proposal, which caused a delay of at least 8-9 months. BAPAP does not have the necessary resources. Staff had to be provided to draft the regulatory amendments. The regulatory amendment phase is complete and was sent to MAPAQ last week. MAPAQ therefore has the final version of the proposed regulatory amendment.

Paul Nadeau: Is it possible to obtain information on what BAPAP provided?

• O’Neil Cloutier: As long as it is in MAPAQ’s hands, we cannot pass on that information. What we want to do is reduce the number of course hours in the current regulations by recognizing fisher helpers’ experience.

Denis Desrosiers: Regulatory amendments must go through the official channels in the Quebec government. We therefore want to ensure that all the necessary consultations are carried out to ensure that regulations go through the official channels.

Update on marine conservation projects

Parks Canada, MELCC and DFO:

Jacinthe Beauchamp and Alain Guitard (Team Leader, Marine Planning and Conservation Directorate and Director, Marine Planning and Conservation and Species at Risk Management, DFO) presented the Canada-Quebec planning for the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs).

Jacinthe Beauchamp presented an update and discussed progress on the MPA projects in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence :

• The areas that are currently being studied correspond to 8 of the 11 marine refuges established in 2017. The objective is to include areas within the boundaries of the Canada–Quebec Collaborative Agreement to Establish a Network of Marine Protected Areas in Quebec in the MPA. It is not the government’s intention to turn all marine refuges in Canada into MPAs.
• The intention is not to add further restrictions on fishing activities in marine refuges to those already in place. Other activities to be regulated would include gas, oil and mining exploration and development; the installation and maintenance of structures that could affect the seabed (e.g., underwater cables); and scientific studies.

Virginie Galindo (MELCC) presented the St. Lawrence Estuary MPA project:

• Seven areas of ecological interest are being studied in the Estuary. They were established to address conservation priorities, including protecting marine mammals at risk, their prey and their habitat and protecting fish at risk and their habitat (e.g. striped bass).
• The way each identified sector is regulated will be adjusted according to the applicable conservation priority.
• An assessment of fishing activities in the various sectors is currently underway.

Ms. Galindo mentioned that the conservation priorities and areas of interest for the two projects under consideration were presented to First Nations communities and relevant stakeholders between June and December 2019. Teams are currently drawing up a profile of human activities, developing proposals for conservation measures and evaluating their socio-economic impacts. The next step is the consultation stage, where potential conservation measures will be presented to First Nations communities and then to the stakeholders concerned. Comments will be gathered and projects can be adjusted, if required. The final step is the formal consultation on the entire project.

Érik Le Bel (Parks Canada) presented the feasibility study for the Magdalen Islands marine park, a project led by Parks Canada and MELCC.

M. Le Bel provided contact information for one of the three projects. He corrected the Parks Canada contact address to Luc.Miousse@canada.ca.

The presentation then continued on government commitments. Mr. Guitard mentioned that the Government of Canada is committed to achieving a level of marine protection of 25% by 2025 and 30% by 2030. The St. Lawrence Estuary and Magdalen island projects could contribute to this new target.

Ms. Galindo mentioned that the Quebec government has committed to protecting at least 10% of marine and coastal areas by the end of 2020. The government wanted to take a quick, first step toward protection by establishing areas reserved for protected status designation (RTFAP). This administrative measure provides temporary protection of a given area until it can be given a legal status.

The identified areas were presented. In the Estuary, only the area upstream of the Saguenay was not selected at this stage. The Banc-des-Américains and marine refuges in Quebec are also targeted to become RTFAPs. The new prohibitions in these areas will not affect fishing activities.

Questions and comments:

O’Neil Cloutier: I am surprised at how much MPA files have advanced in terms of reducing fishing spaces. There should be public consultation periods.

• Alain Guitard: For the projects currently under study as MPAs, the projects were announced and information sessions were held throughout 2019. The next steps will be to meet with fishers to discuss possible conservation measures. Consultations will be held with key stakeholders initially, and then with the broader public (on a larger scale) later.
• Jacinthe Beauchamp: Fishing can be carried out in MPAs. Prohibited fishing activities are the ones that are incompatible with conservation priorities. Regarding the northern Gulf project, fishing activities are already regulated. For the Estuary project, the fishing activities that will be regulated are those that target the prey species of marine mammals at risk as well as fish species at risk.

O’Neil Cloutier: The presentation format does not meet industry expectations. For example, for the Banc-des-Américains MPA, it was stated that commercial fishing activities would be allowed but ultimately commercial fishing activities will not be allowed. Recreational fishing may still be possible, but commercial fishing is prohibited.

• Francis Bouchard: The consultation process is very important for Quebec, and the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE) is involved in the MPA decision.

Charles Poirier: During the visit to the Magdalen Islands, you talked about opening the beach on Île Brion for hunting. We are not satisfied with the measures that have been put in place.

• Francis Bouchard: There is a difference between the projects in the estuary and the Gulf of St. Lawrence and what is being done in the Magdalen Islands. Cultural aspects have been highlighted in the Magdalen Islands. Where there are similarities, collaboration and consultation must be a predominant feature of the project. We are further along in our discussions with Magdalen Island fishers for the Magdalen Islands park projects, since they are serving on the consultation committee for the feasibility study that is currently under way.
• Érik Le Bel: It was agreed that the name would be considered, but that it would be up to the people on the consultation committee to decide on the final project name. Also, we are collaborating with the community and conservation objectives will be determined collectively. Preventing fishing in this area is not an objective.

Mario Desrasp: I have considerable concerns for the marine park around the Magdalen Islands. In terms of the 25% conservation targets for 2025, it was written in the presentation that to achieve these targets, the Magdalen Islands need to get on board. Social acceptability has not been achieved in the Magdalen Islands. You should not go too fast or too far in your proposals before consultations. Do you have any other options for the Magdalen Islands if we do not reach 25%?

• Érik Le Bel: The Magdalen Islands account for a very small percentage of the total population of Canada. Local communities will be heard; we are in the process of doing a feasibility study and very far from setting up an MPA or a marine park.
• Francis Bouchard: There are still several steps to be taken before MPAs are implemented. There is no formal commitment for the Quebec government after 2020.

Paul Nadeau: We have been involved in the MPA project on the Lower North Shore, and Beaugé Bank does not appear to be active. We asked to verify the impact of gear types; the habitat seems to be doing well despite the use of fishing gear for several decades. There is a lack of transparency in the MPA project. In some places, it is not the harvesting sector that is the biggest polluter. The fishing industry is singled out as having a negative effect on the environment, but there are other aspects that affect the environment more seriously. For example, fishing activities have no effect on the concentration of metals in belugas. Establishing MPAs results in a shift and concentration of fishing effort in other areas.

• Jacinthe Beauchamp: Beaugé Bank is currently protected. There are two tools used by DFO to protect the environment: MPAs and marine refuges. Marine refuges are closed fishing areas. Beaugé Bank is one of the marine refuges whose conservation priorities are corals and sponges. Establishing an MPA would provide a framework for other human activities in these areas. When MPAs or marine refuges are established, scientific studies are conducted afterwards to evaluate the effectiveness of the measures in place. For example, there is a scientific committee for the Banc-des-Américains MPA. This scientific committee allows for accountability and reporting on the effectiveness of measures. Also, the 25% target is not just for the Quebec region, but for all of Canada. The Estuary project could contribute to the conservation targets; however, the Northern Gulf project is already accounted for.

Jean-René Boucher: Very concerned about the presentation. The project was presented to the liaison committee last year, and we were told that there would be consultations, which did not happen. Fishers’ comments were not taken into account during the last consultations. These projects seem to be killing fisheries. What form will these consultations take? When and how will industry be consulted?

• Alain Guitard: As previously discussed, we do not want to go into public consultations with conservation measures that have been prepared only internally. First, there will be a consultation phase during which we will meet with the harvesting industry to discuss needs analyses with respect to conservation measures and measures to be applied throughout the area. There will be discussions on the issues which to validate and complete our analyses. We will make adjustments as necessary with the fishing industry. Following discussions on potential measures and industry concerns, the project will be adjusted.

Jean-René Boucher: If the entire harvesting industry demonstrates that the projects presented in the Estuary have too great an impact on the fishery, it is understood that the project could be greatly modified or even abandoned.

• Alain Guitard: The consultation sessions will help guide our next steps in the project. That said, we are involved in an MPA project in the Estuary and the northern Gulf. The consultation sessions will help refine the project.
• Jacinthe Beauchamp: Once areas where corals and sponges were abundant were identified, a study was conducted on fishing activities in these areas. Areas that have been identified as marine refuges for the protection of corals and sponges account for only 1% of landings. Industry concerns were addressed after areas of interest in this project were identified. This project is a good example of a compromise between protecting habitat of great ecological value and maintaining economic activities.

Emmanuel Sandt-Dugay: What were the reference years for establishing this landed value?

• Jacinthe Beauchamp: 2008 to 2015

Merrielle Ouellet: Based on discussions and DFO’s answers, we understand that an MPA is inevitable and that it is not something that can be decided at the public and industry level. What can be changed is only the framework and the activities.

• Jacinthe Beauchamp: The objective is to find a way to adequately protect the conservation priorities set by the government.
• Francis Bouchard: Social, economic and cultural aspects must be accounted for when creating protected areas in both land and marine environments. In the next steps (the projects and potential conservation measures that would come with them), what would or would not be feasible will be presented. In the end, it is the Minister who will make the decisions based on all considerations.

O’Neil Cloutier: I would like to see a broader forum in terms of time between fishers and environmentalists. Government projects move forward without industry: there is a presentation once a year on the progress of the work and industry is sidelined. Industry is not involved enough in the file. He suggested that Ecosystem Management organize a meeting between environmentalists and fishing groups to understand where we are heading.

• Alain Guitard: The comment has been noted. Next steps include meetings with the harvesting industry to discuss conservation measures and the Estuary MPA project. This meeting will be held eventually.

Claudio Bernatchez: Can the concepts of environmental responsibility and sustainable fishing be considered compatible with MPA projects?

• Jacinthe Beauchamp: It is possible to fish in MPAs if fishing activities do not conflict with conservation objectives. For example, in areas to protect corals and sponges, fishing with gear that touches the bottom is prohibited, but pelagic fishing is allowed with gear that does not touch the bottom.

Pierre Léonard: For MPA files, we should be provided with a consultation schedule. You have already identified the ecosystems, areas and species to be protected. Please also present the proposed measures to be implemented in the proposed MPAs to fuel future consultations.

Evaluation of meeting communication tools - round table

Sylvain Vézina asked participants to provide their comments on the virtual meeting: participants generally approved of the meeting format. Spreading the meeting over three mornings is ideal; it is not too heavy and the items move along nicely. The Teams and Zoom platforms are equivalent.

Charles Poirier pointed out a problem, however, with simultaneous meetings led by DFO. There is a lack of consistency in planning meetings.

• Maryse Lemire: Cedric Arseneau will contact you regarding the scheduling conflict.

Maryse asked for feedback on whether the presentations should be sent by email or through a file sharing platform such as DropBox.

• Claudio Bernatchez: It would be relevant to use other existing tools that allow basic information to be sent to participants and stored in a cloud-based platform if available. For example, sending an email with general information including a link to the presentations.

Other business

No items added to other business.

Summary of action items

Judy Doré provided a summary of the Liaison Committee’s follow-up actions. The action tracking table will be sent to members.

Changes to fishing gear: confirm meeting dates for target groups.

O’Neil Cloutier: Industry has called for MPA working sessions to be held for the two terms of each government. A working session should be held on this alone.

• Maryse Lemire: The Ecosystem Management Directorate is responsible for this and will be informed of the follow-up action.

Question in the conversation:

Emmanuel Sandt-Duguay: Is it possible to update the 2020-2021 advisory committees schedule for the Quebec region on the DFO website?

Closing remarks

Sylvain Vézina thanked presenters and participants. There will be work to do with the different organizations on MPAs.