A grim story of serial depletion of fish stocks, lack of accurate information about fisheries, overfishing and poor management is documented in a new study on the state of Canada’s fisheries.

Less than one quarter of Canadian fish stocks are considered healthy and the status of 45 per cent of stocks couldn’t be determined due to an absence of basic, current information, says the report commissioned by Oceana Canada and conducted by marine biologists.

“As Canadians we perceive ourselves to be good stewards of the environment, but when it comes to our oceans, we have failed to live up to that ideal,” said University of Victoria biologist Julia Baum, lead author of the scientific report.

“We need to get serious about ocean conservation in Canada. Sound management and recovery of our fisheries must become a political priority.”

Too Many Boats, Too Few Fish

Since 1970, the biomass of Canadian marine stocks has declined by 55 per cent and, although more money is being made from the seafood industry than ever before (with $6 billion in exports in 2015), the value is concentrated in a few species — such as Atlantic shellfish, which account for 77 per cent of the country’s seafood value.

That lack of diversification is not sustainable, says the report, predicting that, with the lack of recovery strategies for failing stocks and inadequate legislation (made worse by the weakening of the Fisheries Act under the former Conservative government) stock collapses are likely unless action is taken quickly.

“Canada has fallen well short of the progress made by most developed nations in fulfilling national and international commitments to sustain marine biodiversity,” wrote Jeffrey Hutchings, chair of the Royal Society of Canada Expert Panel on Sustaining Canada’s Marine Biodiversity.

Most of the depletion has happened within the span of a single lifetime beginning with the post-Second World War increase in the number of fishing vessels combined with advances in technological killing power, said Josh Laughren, executive director of Oceana Canada.

“It’s a story of too many boats chasing too few fish, of destructive gear and enormous waste, with science too often falling by the wayside. It’s not just cod numbers that have plummeted, we’ve seen a drop in abundance of all kind of species,” he wrote in the introduction to the report.

Making matters worse is the difficulty in obtaining accurate data, researchers found.

“Partly because of a lack of transparency and partly because of the failure of government to conduct regular assessments, we don’t have a clear picture of the health of Canada’s fish populations,” says the report.

“This stands in stark contrast to the situation in the United Sates and the European Union where stock data and management plans are centrally compiled, publicly available and reported on annually.”

Baum and fellow author Susanna Fuller of Ecology Action Centre looked at 125 stocks, representing the most important commercial harvests and those of greatest conservation concern. They included 28 Atlantic and Arctic species and 18 Pacific species. Salmon were not included as their lives are not spent entirely in the ocean.

Lack of Fisheries Data Hampers Progress

Fuller wrote that fisheries data is often unavailable and there is no central location where Canadians can easily understand the state of fisheries and the reasons behind management decisions.

That lack of transparency was exacerbated by the previous federal government’s cuts to Canada’s science capacity and the policy of discouraging scientists from speaking about their work, according to the report.

For example, Environment and Climate Change Canada published a report this year that rated 48 per cent of Canada’s fish stocks as healthy, but there is no explanation of how those ratings were reached

“This lack of transparency, and therefore public scrutiny, and absence of up-to-date information, creates an environment in which it is all too easy for officials to ignore scientific advice and avoid the tough decisions required to rebuild vulnerable stocks,” says the report.

Canada has a good policy framework in place for fisheries management, but the provisions are not being used, says the report, which points out that, to date, no recovery strategies have been developed for marine fish.

The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) has assessed 28 marine species as being endangered, threatened or of special concern, but they have either been denied listing under the Species At Risk Act or have been waiting for up to 14 years for a decision.

If the species were listed under the Species At Risk Act, the government would be legally required to develop a recovery strategy and an action plan.

Also, the Fisheries Act does not require action when overfishing occurs, there is no requirement to come up with rebuilding plans once stocks are depleted and it does not require quotas to be based on scientific advice, says the report.

A glimmer of hope is offered by the federal government’s announcement that it will be reviewing the Fisheries Act with a view to restoring lost protections and looking at decisions based on science, fact and social responsibility.

The report recommends that the Act should be updated to make it compatible with UN agreements and guidelines and that all integrated fisheries management plans should be made publicly available and updated annually.

The researchers also want the rationale for DFO management decisions to be made public, a single source of information for each of Canada’s fish stocks and a promotion of a department-wide culture of transparency.

Although the report paints a dismal picture of the way Canada has managed its fish populations, there is hope for the future, provided changes are made, it says.

“The good news is the report shows that, with proper management, our oceans can recover and fisheries can be rebuilt, allowing Canadians and the world to benefit from a truly diverse ecosystem,” said Jeff Hutchings of Dalhousie University, one of the leading scientists who peer-reviewed the report.

Among the actions needed are enforcement of science-based catch limits, protection of essential fish habitat, incentives for using lower-impact fishing gear and identification of places where bottom trawling cannot occur, the report recommends.

Oceana Canada, an independent charity that works with international groups focused on ocean conservation, is calling on the federal government to be accountable to the Canadian public about the state of the fisheries and to require overfished stocks to be rebuilt.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Over the last decade Canada has fallen from its position as a leader in ocean protection and become a laggard that has failed to keep up with international commitments, say some of Canada’s top marine scientists.

Lack of support for conservation has changed Canada from a country with innovative conservation policies to one where marine species on the brink of extinction are not afforded protection until too late because of delays and inappropriate legislation, said scholars and scientists who gathered in Victoria recently for the Royal Society of Canada annual general meeting.

But, with a new government, there is refreshed hope in the scientific community and a chance to reverse direction.

Some of the country’s top academic minds looked at challenges facing Canada’s three oceans and possible ways to mitigate warming oceans, acidification, disappearing species, microplastics and watered down environmental protection legislation.

“What can we do?” asked Isabelle Cote, marine ecology professor at Simon Fraser University.

Part of the answer came on October 19 — election day — she said.

“We know that red tides are usually very bad in the marine environment, but this one was very good.”

It was a theme echoed by several speakers who are encouraged by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s mandate letter to Hunter Tootoo, his new Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard.

The mandate includes increasing marine and coastal protected areas to five per cent by 2017 and 10 per cent by 2020, acting on recommendations of the Cohen Commission on restoring sockeye salmon stocks in the Fraser River, reviewing the previous government’s changes to the Fisheries and Navigable Waters Protection Acts and using scientific evidence, the precautionary principle and taking into account climate change when making decisions affecting fish stocks and ecosystem management.

“Our new government has set out a refreshing new ocean agenda, including areas many of us have been fighting for over the last decade,” said Julia Baum, assistant professor in the University of Victoria’s biology department.

One of the disturbing trends over the Harper years has been what is seen as political tampering in appointments to boards that make vital decisions on endangered species, such as Committee of the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), a group of experts that assesses which species are in need of protection, Baum said.

Marine species are almost always denied protection, often because of conflicts with commercial fishing, said several speakers.

“We sit and let the species wait and do nothing. We know this is a really dangerous strategy,” Baum said.

“Almost 60 per cent of marine fish that have been assessed by COSEWIC as being at risk are sitting with no decision for many years. Those that are at greatest risk wait longest and are typically denied listing,” she said.

Recovery strategies, under the Species At Risk Act, are often three years late and action plans are almost never completed, she added.

Jeffrey Hutchings of Dalhousie University, who chaired the Royal Society’s pivotal expert panel 2012 report “Sustaining Canadian Marine Biodiversity,” believes the change in government will mean a greater willingness to discuss the report’s recommendations.

Those include making ocean stewardship and biodiversity conservation a top government priority, resolving conflicts of interest in legislation, more research into sustaining marine biodiversity and reducing the discretionary power of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans in fisheries management decisions.

As Trudeau decides on his priorities, Hutchings would like him to consider splitting the ministry into two parts — the department of fisheries and the department of oceans — to resolve the conflict where the ministry is seen as acting as an agent for fisheries, not for conservation.

If it was split, the fisheries department, under the Fisheries Act, could take care of the economic development side, such as fishing and aquaculture — preferably with much-needed national aquaculture legislation — and the department of oceans, under the Oceans Act, could look after conservation, protection and habitat protection, Hutchings suggested in an interview.

Government should also look at the huge discretionary powers of the Fisheries and Oceans Minister, which add to conservation uncertainties, Hutchings said.

In Canada when it is scientifically determined that a fish population is being overfished, there is no requirement for the minister to take action.

“What has inevitably happened is the minister continues (to allow) fishing on the stock and it declines further and further,” Hutchings said.

In contrast, in the U.S. when it is scientifically determined a stock is in trouble, the department must take specific actions to rebuild the stock, usually by dramatically cutting catches, he said.

David VanderZwaag, Ocean Law and Governance Canada Research Chair at Dalhousie University, believes modernizing the Fisheries Act should be high on the agenda.

“It’s a no brainer,” he said.

“I call it a ghost ship. You see the mast in the fog, but everything is underneath. It’s all at the minister’s discretion.”

The department has attempted to paper over the legislative vacuum with multiple policies, but clarity is needed, he said.

In a similar vein, the Environmental Assessment Act is a roulette system, VanderZwaag said.

“You throw the dice to see what may be covered.”

National aquaculture legislation must be developed and the new government should look at laws and policies around future ocean renewable energy projects, such as wave power, VanderZwaag said.

“The federal government is not really prepared to deal with offshore renewable energy,” he said.

Photo: Dan Cox via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.