Language selection

Government of Canada / Gouvernement du Canada

Search

2021 Gaspereau - Integrated fishery management plan: Maritimes Region

Foreword

Gaspereau
Gaspereau
(Alosa pseudoharengus Alosa aestivalis)

The purpose of this Integrated Fisheries Management Plan (IFMP) is to identify the main objectives and requirements for the gaspereau fishery in Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s (DFO) Maritimes Region, as well as the management measures used to achieve these objectives. This document also serves to communicate basic information about the fishery and its management to DFO staff, legislated co-management boards, and other stakeholders. This IFMP provides a common understanding of the basic ‘rules’ for the sustainable management of the fisheries resource.

Through IFMPs, DFO intends to implement an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM) across all marine fisheries. The approach considers impacts extending beyond those affecting the target species and, in this respect, is consistent with the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Implementation will take place in a step-by-step, evolutionary way, building on existing management processes. Advances will be made incrementally, beginning with the highest priorities and issues that offer the greatest scope for progress. A summary of the Regional EAM Framework is included as Appendix 1.

This IFMP is not a legally binding instrument which can form the basis of a legal challenge. The IFMP can be modified at any time and does not fetter the Minister's discretionary powers set out in the Fisheries Act. The Minister can, for reasons of conservation or for any other valid reason, modify any provision of the IFMP in accordance with the powers granted pursuant to the Fisheries Act.

Where DFO is responsible for implementing obligations under land claims agreements, the IFMP will be implemented in a manner consistent with these obligations. In the event that an IFMP is inconsistent with obligations under land claims agreements, the provisions of the land claims agreements will prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

Jacinta Berthier
Regional Director, Fisheries Management

Table of Contents

List of tables

  • Table 1: Number of Maritimes Region gaspereau licences issued by licence type, 2021
  • Table 2: Number of Maritimes Region commercial and communal commercial gaspereau licence holders by county and licence type, 2021
  • Table 3: Maritimes Region Gaspereau Advisory Committees
  • Table 4: Summary of catch data, estimated escapement, estimated run size, and exploitation rate for alewife on the Gaspereau River, NS.
  • Table 5: Estimates of the number of gaspereau that ascended the fish ladder at the Lake Vaughan Dam in the Tusket River in 2014, 2015, 2018, and 2019.
  • Table 6: Reference levels against which the assessment results for alewife can be compared for status determination. Removal reference points are exploitation rates (the proportion of the mature stock being removed). (Gibson et al. 2017).
  • Table 7: Species within gaspereau fishing areas that are SARA listed or COSEWIC assessed
  • Table 8: Management strategies and tactics for the gaspereau fishery
  • Table 9: Compliance risks and mitigating strategies in the gaspereau fishery
  • Table 10: Evaluation, monitoring, and plan enhancement for the gaspereau fishery

List of figures

  • Figure 1: Rivers With Major Gaspereau Fisheries in the Maritimes Region
  • Figure 2: Number of Active Commercial Gaspereau Licence Holder by Management Area, 2021
  • Figure 3: Maritimes Region Gaspereau Reported Landed Weight and Landed Value, 2010-2019
  • Figure 4: Maritimes Region Gaspereau Average Landed Price, 2010-2019 ($/Kg)
  • Figure 5: Maritimes Region Gaspereau Landed Weight by Management Area, 2019
  • Figure 6: Maritimes Region Gaspereau Average Landed Weight per Active Licence Holder, 2019
  • Figure 7: Atlantic Canada Gaspereau Export Value by Market Destination, 2005-2016
  • Figure 8: Atlantic Canada Gaspereau Export Value by Market Destination, 2016
  • Figure 9: Atlantic Canada Export Value for Fish nes, Salted or in Brine, 2017-2020

1. Overview of the fishery

1.1. Historical context

The alewife or gaspereau (Alosa pseudoharengus) and the blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis) are collectively known as ‘gaspereau’, and also known under various other names, such as sawbelly, kiack, and river herring. Harvesters tend to make no distinction between the two species on the Atlantic coast of Canada. The gaspereau fishery has been an important contributor to the economies of the Maritime Provinces since colonial times. As the Maritime Provinces developed in the late 1800’s, gaspereau were heavily exploited, resulting in a marked decline in their abundance.

Pre-confederation circa 1857, rules required that no less than one third of the breadth of a river be left open from the placing of nets or fishing apparatus of any kind. In 1868, one year post-Confederation, the Fisheries Act prohibition was further expanded and required two thirds of the main channel at low tide in every tidal stream also be left open. Fishing in fishways, which are bottlenecks where fish congregate and become extremely vulnerable, was formally recognized as an unsavory practice as far back as 1868 and was also prohibited. At the same time, the Fisheries Act prohibited any action that hindered fish from entering or ascending fishways.

The requirements to leave open and free from fishing gear one third of the width of rivers and two thirds of the main channel at low tide in tidal streams were not sufficient to ensure the sustainability of gaspereau stocks. As a result, additional controls and regulatory measures have been established in the fishery over the last 50 years. Fishery control mechanisms such as the creation of sanctuary areas, fishing seasons, weekly close times, fishing gear regulations, and licensing policies have helped sustain gaspereau stocks. The provision and enforcement of the requirement for adequate fish passage at obstructions to fish migration, such as mills and hydroelectric dams, have further aided in the restoration of depleted gaspereau stocks. The recent attention paid to reducing the level of agricultural, municipal, and industrial water pollution has also been beneficial in providing support for gaspereau populations.

Development of the gaspereau fishery has been shaped by many decisions and events, the most central of which include the following:

  • Construction of Mactaquac dam was completed in 1968 and resulted in a headpond with approximately 842 km of surface area. DFO entered into an agreement with NB Power (NBP) in 1967, which committed the Department to assume responsibility for the operation of the fish ‘trap and truck’ system, transportation of the fish, operation and maintenance of the Mactaquac Biodiversity Facility (MBF), and to provide the operating personnel and equipment for both. This agreement was to be in affect from 1967 and continue during the life of the Mactaquac project. In 1989, DFO was trapping and trucking 500,000 gaspereau above the dam. There was pressure from several sources for DFO to increase that amount to 1 million fish. DFO held a workshop in 1994 to address, among other matters, an escapement plan for gaspereau at Mactaquac Dam. The end result was DFO agreeing to annually truck 1 million gaspereau (800,000 alewives and 200,000 blueback herring) over the dam to the headpond. The 1 million fish-per-year escapement plan remained in place through 2019. From 1995 to 2019, gaspereau returning to Mactaquac Dam in excess of the 1 million fish were declared ‘surplus’ and a contract to remove the fish for market was awarded to the highest bidder by Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC). Commencing in 2020, taking into account plans by NBP to improve fish passage infrastructure at Mactaquac Dam (tentative date of 2025), DFO ended the surplus contact process and commenced trucking as many gaspereau over the dam to the headpond as possible. In 2020, approximately 2.4 million gaspereau were trucked and released into the headpond. In 2021, the number of gaspereau trucked over the dam into the headpond was approximately 2 million.
  • In 1989, DFO was in the process of rewriting the federal Nova Scotia Fishery Regulations, New Brunswick Fishery Regulations and Prince Edward Island Fishery Regulations with the objective, among other things, to reduce duplication, eliminate antiquated provisions, and to expand the number of close times for species and gear types. The culmination of this rewrite was the coming into force of both the Maritime Provinces Fishery Regulations (MPFRs) and the Fishery (General) Regulations (FGRs) in 1993.
  • Also in 1989, in consultation with the Southwest New Brunswick Shad and Gaspereau Advisory Committee (AC), DFO proposed a 12 trap net gear cap for licensed fishers with provisions for a one-time split of trap net licences for those fishers licensed to use more than 12 traps. Although the 12 trap limit was never formally implemented in policy until 2002, DFO and the fishers have acted in a manner consistent with that limit since 1989.
  • In 1990, the Supreme Court of Canada released a decision in R. v. Sparrow, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1075. In this landmark decision, the Court provided meaning and context to the Constitution Act, 1982, subsection 35(1) and held that, after conservation and other “valid legislative objectives”, Indigenous rights to fish for food, social and ceremonial (FSC) purposes have priority over all other uses of the fishery. Through the Aboriginal Fisheries Strategy, DFO provides a framework for the management of FSC fishing by Indigenous peoples. Agreements are negotiated, and the Minister or delegate issues a communal licence to reflect the agreement reached. Where an agreement is not reached, the Minister may issue a communal fishing licence consistent with the provisions of Sparrow and subsequent Supreme Court of Canada decisions.
  • A limited entry licence policy was in place in 1993 for the commercial gaspereau fishery. However, there was no licence requirement for gaspereau dip nets prior to implementation of the MPFRs. This change in regulations prompted a wide range of consultations with fishers to identify those who were commercially fishing with dip nets, identifying them in the licensing system, and expanding the limited entry licence policy to include them.
  • In 2002, DFO stopped the practice of issuing ‘pelagic bait’ licences which authorized licence holders to fish for and retain herring, mackerel, and gaspereau for their own bait purposes. The issuance of pelagic bait licences did not conform with regulations and had the unintended consequence of a 7-day per week, 24-hour per day, gaspereau fishery. Pelagic bait licence holders were formally advised in 2001 that they would be required to apply for a gaspereau-specific bait licence commencing in 2002 if they wished to continue fishing gaspereau for bait for personal use. The following restrictions apply to gaspereau bait licences:
    • non-transferrable;
    • can only be maintained while the person has another licence requiring bait;
    • are valid for 90 fathoms of gill net (3 nets); and
    • all yearly and weekly close times that apply to commercial gaspereau fishing also apply when fishing under the gaspereau bait licence.

1.2. Type of fishery

Gaspereau is harvested in the Maritimes Region largely for the purpose of local sale, export, and use as bait. Currently, DFO manages four distinct types of gaspereau fishing activities: FSC, commercial (including communal commercial), bait (including communal bait), and recreational. These fisheries are managed by input controls such as the number of issued licences, the number and types of gear authorized, and yearly and weekly close times.

DFO seeks to negotiate agreements for fishing for FSC purposes. Through these agreements, licences are issued outlining the conditions for the FSC fishery, including locations, gear types, seasons, and other conditions. The resources harvested under an FSC licence are used communally to provide food for members of the Indigenous community and to support their traditional social and ceremonial activities. Where an agreement is not reached with an Indigenous community, the Minister may issue a communal fishing licence consistent with the provisions of R. v. Sparrow and subsequent Supreme Court of Canada decisions.

1.3. Location of fishery

Gaspereau fisheries exist in the Maritime Provinces of Canada and most of the Atlantic coastal regions of the United States. The Maritimes Region gaspereau fishery takes place in the inland and tidal waters of New Brunswick flowing into the Bay of Fundy, in the inland and tidal waters of Nova Scotia flowing into the Bay of Fundy, and along the Atlantic Coast of Nova Scotia to Cape North, Cape Breton. Harvesting is permitted in different areas along the river system in these waters, including river mouths, lake areas, and estuaries.

Gaspereau fisheries are generally small (<100 t annually). However, larger fisheries (>1000 t) also exist. Within the Bay of Fundy (southwest New Brunswick (SWNB) and southwest Nova Scotia (SWNS)), the largest gaspereau fishery occurs on New Brunswick’s Saint John River, followed by fisheries in Nova Scotia’s Shubenacadie River and Gaspereau River. Along the Atlantic coast of Nova Scotia (eastern Nova Scotia (ENS)), the major gaspereau fisheries are situated in rivers south of Halifax, such as the LaHave, Medway, and Tusket rivers, while smaller fisheries are found along the eastern shore. With respect to commercial harvests, SWNB rivers account for the majority of the Region’s commercial gaspereau landings (by weight), followed by harvests in southwestern Nova Scotia. Only a small proportion of commercial gaspereau landings are harvested in ENS rivers. More information on gaspereau landings by area can be found in Section 3.2.

The major rivers (listed above) central to harvesting gaspereau are identified on the map below (Figure 1). Section 1.4.4. outlines further information on the harvesting areas licensed forthe commercial, bait, and recreational gaspereau fisheries.

Map displaying rivers with major gaspereau fisheries in the Maritimes Region
Figure 1: Map displaying rivers with major gaspereau fisheries in the Maritimes Region. These major rivers include the Saint John River, Gaspereau River, Shubenacadie River, LaHave River, Medway River, and the Tusket River. NAFO Divisions.

1.4. Fishery characteristics

DFO has established various management measures and controls for the gaspereau fishery to ensure harvesting is done responsibly and fishing mortality is sustainable. Input controls used by the commercial (including communal commercial), recreational, bait, and FSC fisheries, which are discussed in sections 1.4.1 - 1.4.6, include various restrictions to:

  • the number and conditions of licences;
  • gear type, quantity, and size;
  • daily bag limits;
  • harvesting areas;
  • fishing seasons; and
  • reporting requirements.

The input controls enforced for gaspereau harvesting in the Maritimes Region vary spatially. While certain management measures are consistent across the region or a particular county, others may vary on a river-by-river basis. There is no single management unit scale used for the fishery; as such, input controls and management measures are organized at various spatial scales.

Some input controls for the fishery have been enshrined in the regulations governing the fishery, while others have evolved through licence conditions or policy. Area-specific management plans and policies also have been developed for the management of different gaspereau fisheries. In particular, the following documents are appended to this IFMP:

  • Management Plan for the Commercial Gaspereau Dip Net Fishery – Tusket River, Yarmouth County, NS (Appendix 2);
  • Gaspereau Licensing Policy – Lunenburg and Queens County, NS (Appendix 3);
  • Gaspereau Dip Net Licensing Policy for the Tusket River, Yarmouth County, NS (Appendix 4);
  • Gaspereau Dip Net Licensing Policy for the Annis River, Yarmouth County, NS (Appendix 5); and
  • Commercial Gaspereau Dip Net Licensing Policy – Porcupine Brook, Yarmouth County, NS (Appendix 6).

1.4.1. Participants and licensing

Access to the Maritimes Region gaspereau fishery is permitted through commercial, bait, recreational, and FSC licences. Descriptions of these licences and their requirements are provided below.

Commercial licences

The commercial gaspereau fishery involves the harvesting activities done by individuals under commercial and communal commercial (CC) licenses, which are collectively referred to as ‘commercial licenses’ in this IFMP unless otherwise specified. The commercial gaspereau fishery is a limited entry fishery, meaning that the total number of licences is limited to the current number. Furthermore, any new entrants must acquire a licence from an existing licence holder, as no new licences are available.

Information on licensing for the Region’s commercial gaspereau fishery is provided in the Maritimes Region Commercial Fisheries Licensing Policy. The licensing policy includes a general policy for gaspereau, which includes information such as commercial licence eligibility and fees, as well as area-specific policies for gaspereau harvesting in SWNB, Lunenburg and Queens counties, and Yarmouth and Shelburne counties. Licensing policies that provide further details have also been developed for Lunenburg and Queens counties (Appendix 3) and areas within Yarmouth County (Appendices 4-6).

Bait licences

A bait or communal bait licence (collectively referred to in this IFMP as ‘bait licences’, unless otherwise specified) is required for a licence holder to harvest gaspereau for the purpose of using it as bait when the licence holder also holds certain commercial licences. A bait licence may only be issued to the head of an enterprise who also holds a commercial or communal commercial licence to fish by a method traditionally involving the use of bait. Fish caught under the authority of a bait licence cannot be sold, as the fish is to be used exclusively by the licence holder as bait for their commercial licence.

Gaspereau caught under bait licences is typically used in Atlantic lobster and crab fisheries, although it was previously used in other fisheries such as cod, haddock, pollock, and mackerel. Gaspereau bait licence holders must hold one of the following licences:

  • Crab, including Green Crab;
  • Eel pots;
  • Groundfish (longline, handline);
  • Hagfish;
  • Lobster;
  • Swordfish (longline);
  • Tuna; or
  • Whelk.

The gaspereau bait fishery is a terminal, closed entry fishery, meaning no new licences will be issued and the licences are not transferrable. These licences will therefore cease to exist upon the death of the licence holder or upon the failure to renew annually.

Recreational licences

Recreational harvest of gaspereau is authorized under different types of licences depending on gear type and harvesting area. Angling in the tidal waters of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick does not require a licence. Angling gaspereau in inland waters requires a general provincial angling licence. Recreational harvest of gaspereau using a dip net does not require a licence when harvesting in inland or tidal waters. However, a recreational gaspereau licence issued by DFO is required for dip netting in the inland waters of the Saint John River. The recreational gaspereau licence issued by DFO is also required for fishing using methods other than dip netting and angling (gill nets, trap nets, etc.). Recreational gaspereau licences are terminal and non-transferrable. During the 2021 fishing season, 21 such licences remained.

FSC licences

Priority access for Indigenous FSC fishing is established through communal licences, which are issued pursuant to the Aboriginal Communal Fishing Licences Regulations (ACFLRs). FSC licence conditions are negotiated between DFO and the communities holding the licences. In 2021, there were 11 FSC licences held by Indigenous communities in the Maritimes Region authorizing the harvesting of gaspereau.

Spatial distribution of gaspereau licence holders in Maritimes Region

The number of gaspereau licences issued by licence type in 2021 in the Maritimes Region are as follows:

  • Commercial: 589
  •  Communal commercial: 24
  •  Bait: 344
  •  Communal bait: 5
  •  Recreational: 21
  •  FSC: 11
  • Total: 994

The following caveats must be noted for the total number of gaspereau licences issued by licence type in 2021 in the Maritimes Region:

  • The number of licences issued is smaller than the actual total number of gaspereau licences held in the region, as some licences were not renewed in 2021.
  • Data is not readily available on the total number of recreational licences issued. The number of recreational gaspereau licences listed above only reflects those issued by DFO, and does not include the number of Nova Scotia or New Brunswick provincial angling licences that can be used for the recreational harvest of gaspereau, among other species.
  • The data presented on the number of licences issued by DFO in 2021 and does not reflect the number of licences that were active (reported landings) that year.

Table 1 and 2 breaks down the number of Maritimes Region commercial and communal commercial gaspereau licence holders in 2021 according to their home county and licence type. The following caveats must be noted for the information in Table 2:

  • The information in Table 1 and 2 is based on the county the licence holder resides in or is based out of, rather than the county the licence is authorized to harvest in. This information is used because the spatial scale commercial gaspereau licences are authorized for varies by licence (for example, some commercial licences are authorized for the inland waters of a county while others are authorized to harvest on a specific river).Authorized areas in commercial licences are not assigned at a singular spatial scale, data on the counties the licences are valid for cannot be provided. As such, this IFMP assumes that licence holders’ residing county reflects the county that their licence is valid for, and uses the numbers of licence holders by their home county as a proxy for this information. Further information on authorized harvesting areas in licences is provided in Section 1.4.4.
  • Numbers of bait, recreational, and FSC licences by county are not provided in Table 1 and 2, as these licences are authorized for areas at a broader scale (for example, bait harvesters are authorized for the tidal waters of NAFO zones 4VWX).
  • The number of commercial licences issued is smaller than the actual total number of gaspereau licences held in the region, as some licences were not renewed in 2021.
  • Table 1 and 2 presents data on commercial licences issued by DFO in 2021 and does not reflect the number of licences that were active (reporting landings) that year.
Table 1. Number of commercial and communal commercial gaspereau licence holders in Nova Scotia by county and licence type authorized for 2021
Nova Scotia County Commercial Communal commercial
Victoria 9 -
Cape Breton 75 3
Richmond 9 1
Guysborough 15 -
Halifax 34 3
Lunenburg 26 -
Queens 27 -
Shelburne 33 -
Yarmouth 190 1
Digby 7 -
Annapolis - 1
Kings 16 -
Hants 24 -
Colchester 14 12
Cumberland 2 -
Nova Scotia Total 481 21
Table 2. Number of commercial and communal commercial gaspereau licence holders in New Brunswick by county and licence type authorized for 2021
New Brunswick County Commercial Communal commercial
Westmorland 4 -
Albert 4 -
Saint John 30 -
Charlotte 24 3
Kings 5 -
Queens 17 -
Sunbury 24 -
York - -
Carleton - -
New Brunswick Total 108 3

1.4.2. Gear types

Gaspereau are only permitted to be harvested by angling and/or using dip nets, gill nets, square nets, trap nets, or weirs. The gear type permitted for use varies according to the licence type. Further, the gear type chosen for use by harvesters is often dependent on the river and location within the river system. Typically, gill nets are used in the river mouth and quiet stretches of river; dip nets are used in the lower river and at the foot of rapids or other obstructions; and trap nets are used in lake areas and estuaries. Square nets (a large pole-mounted dip net braced on a pivot) are also used on the Gaspereau River.

Gear provisions specific to Nova Scotia are outlined in Section 43 to 48 of the MPFRs. Furthermore, Schedule V of the MPFRs identifies additional general and province-specific gear restrictions.

Commercial gear types

For the commercial gaspereau fishery, licence holders are restricted to the type and quantity of gear set out in their licence. The gear types authorized under commercial licences are limited to dip nets, gill nets, square nets, trap nets, and/or weirs. Gaspereau-specific permissions for commercial gear types and quantities are outlined in the Maritimes Region Commercial Fisheries Licensing Policy, which includes a general policy for gear use in commercial gaspereau fisheries as well as policies for specific areas (SWNB, Lunenburg and Queens counties, and Yarmouth and Shelburne counties).

Bait gear types

For the gaspereau bait fishery, up to three gill nets (set or fixed) may be used.

Recreational gear types

No licence is required for dip netting in inland waters, except for the inland waters of the Saint John River, or in tidal waters. A general provincial fishing licence is required to angle in the inland waters of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. No licence is required to angle in tidal waters. Harvesters are permitted to use gill nets under the recreational gaspereau licenses authorized by DFO, and one harvester is authorized to use a trap net.

FSC gear types

Harvesters fishing for gaspereau under FSC licences are authorized to use a variety of gears, including angling, dip nets, gill nets, square nets, trap nets, and weirs. Conditions for gear types, sizes, and quantities in FSC licences vary according to the needs of the community.

1.4.3. Harvest quota

No quota has been set for commercial and bait gaspereau licences. Some FSC licences are subject to a maximum allocation of gaspereau per day, while other FSC licences in the region have no harvest restriction. Other input controls are established in licence conditions for gaspereau fisheries to sustainably manage harvests in the absence of a quota.

A daily bag limit was established for the recreational gaspereau fishery in 1993. This occurred in response to the harvesting of gaspereau in commercial quantities by persons claiming only to be fishing for pleasure or for personal use. Section 41.1 of the MPFRs restricts persons recreationally fishing to a maximum of 20 gaspereau per day, which is also the maximum possession limit for gaspereau.

1.4.4. Harvesting areas

Commercial, bait, recreational, and FSC gaspereau harvesters are subject to varying authorizations for harvesting areas. Gaspereau harvesting areas and area restrictions are outlined in licence conditions, Section 26 and Schedule III of the MPFRs, as well as variation orders. Commercial licences differ from bait, recreational, and FSC licences, as the commercial licences are assigned licence conditions prescribing a specific fishing area to the licence holder.

Commercial harvesting areas

Each commercial gaspereau licence holder is only permitted to fish within a particular area designated in licence conditions. The type and scale of the area assigned to each licence varies, based on the nuances of the area’s geography as well as the gear the licence is authorized for. The area assigned to a licence may be:

  • the inland or tidal waters of a county (for example—the inland and tidal waters of Richmond county);
  • a single waterbody or set of waterbodies (for example—the tidal waters of Saint John River);
  • a designated portion of a waterbody (for example—the portion of the tidal waters of Saint John River south of a particular landmark); or
  • a specific site in a waterbody (for example—stand number 5 on a particular river).

The degree to which commercial harvesters must share their fishing area with other commercial harvesters varies according to the type of assigned fishing area—while some licences may be authorized to fish in shared county waters, others may be authorized to fish at a particular fishing stand that cannot be shared.

Bait harvesting areas

Bait harvesters are permitted to harvest bait in all tidal waters of NAFO zones 4VWX, with the exception of area restrictions established in licence conditions, the MPFRs, and variation orders.

Recreational harvesting areas

No areas are assigned to recreational gaspereau harvesters; however, recreational harvesters are subject to area restrictions in the MPFRs and variation orders. A summary of area restrictions for recreational gaspereau fishing is found on DFO’s Maritimes Region Recreational Gaspereau Fishery webpage and in provincial recreational fishing guides.

FSC harvesting areas

The areas authorized for harvesting gaspereau under FSC licences are established in licence conditions and vary according to the location of the community and other considerations of access.

1.4.5. Harvesting season

Yearly and weekly close seasons are established for the commercial, recreational, bait, and FSC gaspereau fisheries in the Maritimes Region. The season closures, in conjunction with other effort controls, are key to ensuring sufficient gaspereau reach their spawning grounds each year in order to sustain the resource and hedge against serious declines.

Yearly and weekly close times for commercial and recreational gaspereau fisheries in various areas are set out in Schedule V of the MPFRs. A summary of seasonal and weekly close times for the recreational fishery is also found in provincial recreational fishing guides and on DFO’s Maritimes Region Recreational Gaspereau Fishery webpage. For conservation reasons and for proper management and control of the fishery, many of those close seasons are adjusted through variation orders.

Licence conditions for the gaspereau bait fishery require that harvesting under a bait licence follows the yearly and weekly close times established under the MPFRs, as well as any associated variation orders.

The harvesting season and weekly close times for gaspereau harvesting under an FSC licence vary according to the needs of the community holding the FSC licence.

1.4.6. Dockside monitoring and reporting requirements

Pursuant to Section 61 of the Fisheries Act, commercial and bait gaspereau licence holders/operators are required to provide information regarding their fishing activities in a freshwater fishery logbook report (logbook), made available by DFO. The licence holder/operator is also required to provide a copy of the logbook within 30 days of the closure of the gaspereau fishing season to a Dockside Monitoring Company (DMC) designated by DFO. Any costs associated with the services of the approved DMC are the responsibility of the licence holder.

The licence holder/operator is required to complete the logbook in accordance with the instructions contained therein, along with any other instructions contained in their licence conditions. Logbooks must be completed on a daily basis with the catch (recorded in pounds), the number of hours fished, and the number, type, and location of gear fished. The licence holder shall provide a nil report if they fished and did not catch fish. Similarly, the licence holder must indicate “did not fish” in the appropriate section of the logbook if they did not fish during the season. Failure to comply with reporting requirements is considered in DFO’s decision of whether or not a licence and condition of licence for gaspereau will be issued for the following gaspereau licensing period.

Historically, commercial logbook reporting has been characterized by inconsistent or incomplete records being submitted to DFO. This creates gaps in data used to effectively manage the fishery. DFO has, in recent years, highlighted the need for reliable and complete data when making fisheries management decisions. Reporting of gaspereau catches under FSC licences has often been sporadic. DFO continues to study additional monitoring methods to logbooks, including but not limited to third-party monitoring programs and other improvements to the reporting mechanisms. Enforcement of reporting provisions of licences remains a priority. 

Dockside monitoring and reporting requirements are not established for the recreational gaspereau fishery. Regulations require holders of recreational licence to abide by close time and possession limits in the MPFRs or variation orders. No licence is required to recreationally dip net gaspereau either inland or in tidal waters, nor is there a licence requirement for angling in tidal waters. While there is a daily bag and possession limit of 20, there is no current mechanism requiring reporting, which has been identified as a catch monitoring gap. A key initiative to close this gap is issuing a tidal licence which would require reporting of catch and provide DFO with the number of active recreational harvesters.

1.5. Governance

DFO oversees Canada’s scientific, ecological, social, and economic interests in oceans and fresh waters. That responsibility is guided by the Fisheries Act, which confers responsibility to the Minister for the management of fisheries, habitat, and aquaculture, as well as the Oceans Act, which charges the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada with leading oceans management. The Department is also one of three responsible authorities under the Species at Risk Act. All three Acts contain provisions relevant to fisheries management and conservation. However, the Fisheries Act is the Act from which the principal set of regulations affecting the licensing and management of fisheries flow. For the Maritimes Region, these include the FGRs and the ACFLRs. Gaspereau fishing in the Maritimes Region is also governed under the MPFRs. The MPFRs establish close times, gear restrictions, and recreational bag limits for gaspereau fisheries.

This management plan has been developed according to a framework for an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM), developed by DFO in the Maritimes Region (Appendix 1). The framework requires that fisheries management decisions reflect the impact of the fishery not only on the target species but also on non-target species, habitats, and the ecosystems of which these species are a part.

There are four gaspereau advisory committees (ACs) that provide advice for DFO in order to support decision-making regarding management of the fishery:

  • Southwest New Brunswick Shad and Gaspereau Advisory Committee (est. 1997)
  • Yarmouth/Shelburne County Gaspereau Advisory Committee (est. 1997)
  • Lunenburg/Queens County Gaspereau Advisory Committee (est. 1998)
  • Gaspereau River Advisory Committee (est. 2002)

The committees are chaired by DFO’s Resource Management Division via the DFO Area offices. ACs for the gaspereau fishery include representatives of Indigenous communities involved in the FSC, communal commercial, and/or communal bait fisheries. The gaspereau ACs also include representatives from DFO, harvester groups, provincial governments, hydroelectric facilities, and other interested stakeholders or partners. All ACs agree upon a Terms of Reference for that committee, which dictates how the committee operates. The Terms of Reference for the four ACs are provided in Appendices 7, 8, 9, and 10. Further information on the functions of the ACs is provided in Section 8.

Additionally, DFO’s Canadian Science Advice Secretariat (CSAS) – Maritimes, located in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, coordinates the development and peer-review of science advice on major stocks and fisheries in the Maritimes Region, including the gaspereau fishery. Regional CSAS publications are available on DFO’s National CSAS website. CSAS provides science advice on the status of the gaspereau fishery by examining the alewife and blueback herring stocks that make up the fishery. Members of the public with expert knowledge of the stocks and fisheries, including members from the fishing industry, Indigenous communities, academia and provincial governments, are also invited to participate in the peer-review meetings of the stock advice. Science analysis and advice on the status of the stock for the Maritimes Region gaspereau fishery has been presented in the form of a Science Advisory Report (SAR), Stock Status Reports, Research Documents, and a Science Response (published on the CSAS website. These documents are a primary input for the consultations on the management of the fishery at AC meetings.

1.6. Approvals process

The four Maritimes Region gaspereau ACs listed in Table 3 are the main consultative bodies for the fishery. Representatives are encouraged to provide advice and consensus-based recommendations to DFO on the management of the fishery. While operational decisions are made within the Maritimes Region Fisheries Management Branch, more complex issues are raised to the Regional Director General for final decision.

This IFMP is evergreen, and has been developed by DFO in collaboration with AC members, Indigenous communities, and other interested stakeholders. The Regional Director, Fisheries Management for the Maritimes Region is responsible for the final approval of the IFMP before it is made publicly available.

2. Stock assessment, science, and traditional knowledge

2.1. Biological synopsis

Gibson et al. (2017) summarize of the life history for alewife and blueback herring as follows:

Alewives and blueback herring are sympatric throughout much of their range (Loesch 1987), although blueback herring have a larger and more southerly range (Nova Scotia to Florida) than alewife (Labrador to South Carolina). The species have similar life cycles. Adult river herring migrate up coastal rivers in the spring (late-March to late-June) for spawning, with the majority of the combined runs returning in May to rivers in Nova Scotia and southwest New Brunswick. Adults spawn in fresh water during the spring, after which they return to the ocean. Young-of-the-year river herring move downstream in the late summer and early fall to winter at sea. The fish mature at two to seven years of age at which time they return to the rivers to spawn. Alewife and blueback herring are iteroparous (multiple reproductive cycles) and in nonimpacted populations may spawn as many as four to six times throughout their lives.

Although their spawning periods overlap, alewives may begin their spawning run 2 to 4 weeks earlier than blueback herring. Spawning runs are thought to be highly structured, with older and larger individuals returning first, and smaller first-time spawners coming later in the run. In rivers in the Maritimes Region, alewives typically begin spawning in May, and may continue to do so over two months (Scott and Scott 1988), utilizing ponds, lakes or slow-flowing portions of streams and rivers as spawning habitat. In areas where spawning seasons overlap, the two species are isolated by the use of different spawning sites (Loesch and Lund 1977), with blueback herring spawning in areas with faster moving water (Loesch 1987). Less is known about the habitat preferences or distribution patterns of adults in the marine environment, but it is thought that there is broad mixing among species as well as populations originating in Canada and those in the United States.

River herring juvenile ecology appears highly variable. When spawned in moving water, the eggs and larvae of both species are transported downstream. In Lake Ainslie, NS, a non-tidal freshwater lake, juvenile alewives and small numbers of blueback herring are present in the lake until late August when they begin to move downstream to the estuary (O'Neill 1980). Young-of-the-year alewives and blueback herring are present in the non-tidal freshwater headpond above the Mactaquac Dam during July through September and at least to late October (Jessop and Anderson 1989). Migration from this headpond probably begins in late August, and increases rapidly through early September (Jessop 1990). In the Chesapeake Bay area, juveniles are distributed throughout tidal fresh water during spring and early summer, and may move upstream in the summer with the encroachment of saline water (Warinner et al., in Loesch 1987). In the Annapolis River, NS, a river without lakes or impoundments, alewife are present in the estuary at salinities of about 30 ppt in July (Gibson 1996).

2.2. Ecosystem interactions

River herring are important species from an ecological perspective. Gibson et al. (2017) summarize their ecological role as follows:

In addition to their importance economically, river herring are important species ecologically. They are prey species at sea and in fresh water, and are important predators that can alter zooplankton community composition within lakes (Mills et al. 1992, Gibson and Daborn 1998). They can also serve as a vector for nutrient transport from the oceans to inland waters (Durbin et al. 1979, Garman 1992, Garman and Macko 1998). As a result, human activities such as fishing and the construction of dams that impact upon river herring population size may indirectly alter the productivity and community structure within their natal watersheds (Freeman et al. 2003).

2.3. Indigenous traditional knowledge and Traditional Ecological Knowledge

The Mi’kmaq, Wolastoqiyik, and Peskotomuhkati peoples of present day Nova Scotia and New Brunswick have been harvesting gaspereau from the waters of their traditional territories for thousands of years. The Mi’kmaq, Wolastoqiyik, and Peskotomuhkati peoples have an intimate understanding of natural life, their local land and waters, and the relationships between them. Broadly, this knowledge held by Indigenous peoples is often identified as Indigenous traditional knowledge (ITK). In light of the unique perspective that ITK offers, DFO aims to understand and respectfully incorporate this insight into assessment and management processes for the region’s gaspereau fisheries. DFO staff incorporate ITK and traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) by working with Indigenous partners and stakeholders in gaspereau AC processes, peer reviews of stock assessments and reports, and other collaborative initiatives.

2.4. Stock assessment

Gibson et al. (2017) provided the following overview of distribution and status of river herring populations in the Maritimes Region:

Both the species-specific distribution and status of river herring populations in the Maritimes Region are not well known. Rulifson (1994) surveyed fisheries biologists to determine the distribution and status of anadromous Alosa in eastern North America. Within the Maritimes Region, 129 of 131 rivers identified in the survey were reported to contain alewife and 105 rivers were reported to contain blueback herring. The majority of the alewife populations were reported to be “in decline”, whereas the majority of blueback herring populations were reported to be “stable” or “status unknown”. The basis for these evaluations is unclear, given that relatively little data exists for most of these populations.

River herring populations and fisheries have not been regularly assessed in the Maritimes Region. In the Maritimes Region, recent published stock assessments have focused on the Gaspereau River (McIntyre et al. 2007) and Tusket River (Bowlby and Gibson 2016) in Nova Scotia. The last region-wide assessment was carried out in 2001 (DFO 2001), with an emphasis on the Gaspereau River, NS, and the Saint John River, NB, at the Mactaquac Dam. Trends at other locations (e.g. LaHave River, Mersey River, and Medway River) were inferred from catch-per-unit-effort data. In 2001, some stocks in the Maritime Provinces exhibited characteristics of overexploited stocks (Robichaud-LeBlanc and Amiro 2001). Data collection for the assessment of Maritimes Region river herring stocks since that time has been sporadic. Commercial landings data are the only source of information for the majority of stocks in the Maritimes Region (Gibson et al. 2017).

The majority of assessment work has been conducted on the Gaspereau River, although there has been periodic assessment work conduced on the Tusket River. In the late 1990’s, the status of the alewife population in the Gaspereau River was characterized as over-exploited with a low spawner abundance (Table 3). Changes were made to reduce the exploitation rate and to improve fish passage at dams in the early 2000’s. While population rebuilding was slow, spawning escapements in the 2017-2019 time period (unpublished) were more than five times greater than in the late 1990’s and recent exploitation rates have been within the appropriate range.

Table 3. Summary of catch data, estimated escapement, estimated run size, and exploitation rate for alewife on the Gaspereau River, NS
Year Catch estimate
(number of fish)		 Escapement estimate
(number of fish)		 Estimated run size
(number of fish)		 Exploitation rate (%)
2019 NA 1,021,186 ± 41,881 NA NA
2018 903,655 1,061,688 ± 43,546 1,965,343 46.0
2017 605,900 1,114,450 ± 40,127 1,720,350 35.2
2016 769,133 454,800 ± 25,221 1,223,933 62.8
2015 705,500 438,874 ± 24,070 1,144,374 61.7
2014 439,000 NA NA NA
2013 387,333 149,682 537,015 72.1
2012 394,803 NA NA NA
2006 282,589 209,064 ± 35,540 491,653 57.5
2005 219,173 265,705 ± 39,855 484,878 45.2
2004 268,820 175,046 ± 17,504 443,866 60.6
2003 416,335 435,832 852,167 48.9
2002 391,278 310,746 702,024 55.7
2001 119,348 238,842 358,190 33.3
2000 754,585 98,883 852,468 88.4
1999 698,600 81,236 779,926 89.6
1998 372,400 171,639 544,039 68.5
1997 611,520 95,443 706,953 86.5
1995 954,960 126,933 >1,081,892 >88.3
1984 212,966 111,100 324,066 65.7
1983 150,408 114,800 265,208 56.7
1982 254,068 50,400 304,468 83.4
1970 480,000 60,527 540,527 88.8

Notes: Data from 1970 through 2006 are from McIntyre et al. (2007). Other data are unpublished. Escapement estimates from 2003 to 2017 were obtained by sub-sampling video. In 2013, the escapement estimate is number of fish estimated between 0600h and 2000h adjusted by the proportion of fish that moved between 0000h and 0600h and between 2000h and 2400h from 2015-2017. Total counts were used in other years. The catch estimates for 2012 to 2017 were provided by the buyer initially as the number of pounds purchased. These are converted to the number of fish by dividing the number of pounds purchased by the weight per pail (30 lbs), and multiplying by the estimated number of fish per pail (83 fish/pail). The 2012 to 2017 values are not adjusted for landings that were sold as bait or for local consumption. The count in 1995 is a partial count but is considered mostly complete. Values may change as further information about the fishery is obtained.

NA = not available

The Tusket River supports populations of both blueback herring and alewife. In contrast with the Gaspereau River population, abundance of both species has trendeddownwards during the last five years (Table 4). Assessments in 2014 and 2015 placed the abundance of alewife around the critical-cautious boundary zone, approximately 2 million fish (Bowlby and Gibson 2016). Results from the 2018 and 2019 seasons (unpublished) suggest alewife spawning escapement has decreased since the 2014/2015 assessments and is well down into the critical zone. Although there are no reference points developed for blueback herring, numbers of blueback herring moving up the Lake Vaughan fish ladder in 2019 were reduced to approximately 5% of the numbers observed in 2014. Water levels were atypically high in 2019 and large amounts of spilling occurred at the Lake Vaughan Dam. Escapement estimates for 2019 reflect the number of fish that moved through the fishway, but this number is likely not representative of the number of fish that attempted to move up the river above the areas where fishing occurs.

Table 4. Estimates of the number of gaspereau that ascended the fish ladder at the Lake Vaughan Dam in the Tusket River in 2014, 2015, 2018, and 2019
Year Total number of gaspereau ascending the ladder Number of alewife Number of blueback herring Exploitation rate estimate for alewife Exploitation rate estimate for blueback herring
2019 397,246 367,435 29,628 NA NA
2018a 712,509 NA NA NA NA
2015 2,517,215 2,325,787 191,428 0.52c 0.35c
2014b 2,358,125 1,767,745 590,380 0.60c 0.38c
  1. Regional bait licences include multiple species (e,g., herring, mackerel, Winter flounder)
  2. Quebec Region 14 licence holders also have access to area 14
  3. This number represents the count of unique license numbers across all gear types. Some licenses are associated with multiple gear types.

Based on the available reference points, the Gaspereau River alewife population in 2018 falls within the healthy zone and is considered fully exploited. Results from the 2019 assessment (unpublished) suggest the population remains in the healthy zone. Species information and exploitation rates were unavailable for the Tusket River in 2018 but the very low count numbers indicate that the alewife population is likely in the critical zone.

As of 2019, the majority of gaspereau stocks in the Maritimes Region remain unassessed. The 2017 framework document (Gibson et al. 2017) provides an outline for building the assessment program for alewife in the DFO Maritimes region and its implementation is ongoing.

2.5. Precautionary approach

Both fishing mortality and biomass reference points have been developed for alewife but are not available for blueback herring (Table 6). Development of reference points for blueback herring is a current research recommendation. An excerpt from the 2017 framework document (Gibson et al. 2017) is provided below, which summarizes the reference points for alewife. For a more detailed description on the development of the reference points, please refer to Gibson et al. (2017) directly.

The reference points provided for evaluating status of alewife are laid out in a way that allows determination of whether overfishing is occurring, and whether a population is in an overfished state. This approach is useful because the effects of management actions such as increasing or decreasing fishing effort, can be immediately evaluated in terms of the fishing mortality rate, whereas the population-level effects in terms of abundance might not be evident for several years. The limit reference point proposed here, of 10% of the unfished equilibrium biomass is low relative to the limit reference points proposed for at least some other fisheries (DFO 2012), but reflects the idea that alewife populations can be quite productive. It is not clear that the limit reference point would be consistent with ecosystem objectives (e.g. nutrient transport; provision of prey), if such objectives were developed. Yield curves for river herring are relatively flat topped, and the reference points are skewed to the left of this curve. This approach allows a bit of a buffer for unaccounted removals and estimation uncertainty. Similar yields can be obtained over a wide range of exploitation rates, and being slightly to the left on the curve is expected to maintain higher biomasses for the same level of yield as compared to obtaining the same yield from an exploitation rate on right of the curve. A lower exploitation rate producing the same yield while maintaining a higher biomass would likely be more consistent with the precautionary framework with respect to ecosystem objectives. Reference points for blueback herring fisheries remain to be developed.

Table 5. Reference levels against which the assessment results for alewife can be compared for status determination
Reference point Acronym Value Description
Upper Stock Reference Point USR 𝑆𝑆𝐵𝑚𝑠𝑦, or an equivalent proxy, when a population specific estimate is available; 14.85% of the unfished spawner biomass otherwise Spawning stock biomass or number of spawners above which stock is healthy; if below but still above the LRP, the stock is in the cautious zone. Can be SSBMSY or similar value.
Lower Stock Reference Point LRP 10% of the estimated unfished spawner biomass, based on population specific estimate if available, or the meta-analysis of carrying capacity otherwise Spawning stock biomass or numbers of spawners below which the stock is in the critical zone.
Exploitation Rate Removal Reference Level URR 0.53 Exploitation rate above which the stock is over exploited
Exploitation Rate Lower Removal Reference Level ULRR 0.35 Exploitation rate above which stock is fully exploited, below which stock is under exploited

Notes: Removal reference points are exploitation rates (the proportion of the mature stock being removed). (Gibson et al. 2017).

While reference points are available for, and applied to, the Gaspereau River and Tusket River populations, there is insufficient data to establish the stock status of a broader range of populations. In the absence of this information, estimates of stock status and decisions on fisheries management are made using best available information and consultations with Indigenous communities, industry, and stakeholders.

2.6. Reseach

The excerpt below from the Gibson et al. (2017) framework document outlines research recommendations for the continued development of the gaspereau assessment program. The recommendations are a synopsis of the available information and data gaps presented in the main body of Gibson et al. 2017. The framework document should be consulted directly for further information.

Reference points

  1. Alewife carrying capacity: The Gibson and Myers meta-analyses [Gibson 2004] were done using the stock recruitment data available for alewife in North America in the early 2000s. As a result of the status review in the USA by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), more data may now be available that could be used to update this analysis, and also potentially to investigate covariates (e.g. location of habitat within a watershed, natural habitat versus reservoirs, effect of watershed size) that would lead to improved estimates of carrying capacity. This is not a small undertaking, and may require modelling the data for many watersheds in order to derive the required stock recruitment time series.
  2. Blueback herring carrying capacity: Gibson and Myers did not undertake an analysis of blueback herring carrying capacity due to the limited data availability at that time. It may be possible to undertake the analysis now, as described above. Alternately, some other method may need to be explored.
  3. Derive blueback herring fishing mortality reference points.

Assigning landings to stocks

As outlined above, monitoring would occur in places that could be considered to support discrete stocks of one or both species.

  1. Sampling of the commercial landings for species identification would improve the ability to correctly apportion landings to species-specific stocks.
  2. Tagging studies: In areas where fisheries harvest from more than one stock, tagging studies could be used to correctly apportion landings to species and to river-specific stocks.

Assessment methods

  1. The simulation results presented in Section 4 [of Gibson et al. 2017] illustrate the biases that can result from routine application of some methods. Research to identify methods that lead to improved catch-curve analyses for estimating total mortality rates would improve advice provided in the short term (prior to having sufficient data for a full assessment model).
  2. Statistical catch-at-age models are well-established in fisheries assessment science. Simulation testing of the models would lead to a better understanding of sampling considerations (e.g. sample size), the number of years and nature of the data required to provide robust status assessments from fisheries dependent data only, the need for tuning indices, etc.

Effects of human activities other than fishing

DFO’s framework for fisheries management consistent with the precautionary approach (DFO 2006) clearly states that, in addition to fishing, other activities impacting populations need to be included in the assessment and management framework. As described in Section 3 [of Gibson et al. 2017], fish passage efficiency at dams, the creation of reservoirs, and downstream passage survival at dams, all directly affect the dynamics (productivity and abundance) of river herring populations. There are other activities that would be expected to have effects as well. While the methods exist to integrate these effects into this framework, there is a paucity of information (estimates of efficiency and passage survival) to feed into the models and advice. Advice would be significantly improved with data on other activities. Additionally, this information would help in selecting appropriate management actions in situations where the status is poor.

Commercial landings

  1. In the context of stock assessment, the commercial landings data are presently difficult to work with, primarily due to issues in determining where individuals are fishing. At least for stocks selected for monitoring and assessment within this framework, work that helps to better quantify the stock-specific removals is required to ensure that advice is accurate.
  2. There are river herring landings in other fishery sectors (e.g. marine licenses for bait, marine by-catch, Indigenous fisheries) that are not well quantified. Research and improved reporting leading to better quantification of the fishery removals for other sectors would lead to better advice under this framework.

3. Economic, social, and cultural considerations

The harvest of gaspereau (also known as ‘alewives’) in Maritimes Region provides important socio-economic benefits to licence holders and their respective communities, including Indigenous licence holders and communities. Gaspereau generates landed values of up to $2.6 million in recent years, and provides additional economic benefits through processing, export, and as a source of bait to other important fisheries in the region. As well, the gaspereau fishery is socially and culturally important in its continuation of traditional fishing methods along various rivers throughout the Region.

3.1. Participation and active licenses

Of the gaspereau licences issued in Maritimes Region, between one-fifth and one-quarter reported landings activity in recent years. In 2019, the regional harvest of gaspereau was reported by 139 active licences, with the majority – 84 licences, or 61% of the regional total – located in SWNS. ENS had 28 active licences (20%) and SWNB had 27 active licences (19%).

3.2. Landed weight by area and licence

Since 2010, the reported landed weight for gaspereau in Maritimes Region increased from a period low of just over 1,100 tonnes in 2012 to a high of 2,425 tonnes in 2017 before declining to 1,530 tonnes in 2019 (data is preliminary). Landed value increased during the period from $0.9 million in 2012 to a high of $2.6 million in 2017 and 2018 before declining to $1.8 million in 2019 (see Figure 2).

Compliance in reporting of landings by gaspereau licence holders has improved in recent years. The number of licences reporting increased from 247 in 2012 (133 with catch, 114 with no catch) to 447 in 2017 (179 with catch, 268 with no catch). In 2019, the preliminary number of licences reporting was 329 (139 with catch, 190 with no catch).

Diagram displaying Maritimes Region gaspereau reported landed weight and landed value between 2010 through 2019
Figure 2: Maritimes Region gaspereau reported landed weight and landed value between 2010 through 2019. Sourced from DFO Maritimes Region.

3.3. Average landed price

From 2010 to 2019, the reported price for gaspereau averaged $0.91 per kilogram, but increased substantially during the period, rising from $0.62 per kilogram ($0.28 per pound) in 2010 to a high of $1.21 per kilogram ($0.55 per pound) in 2019. Increased demand for gaspereau as bait contributed to the recent price increase (see Figure 3).

Diagram displaying Maritimes Region gaspereau average landed price between 2010 through 2019.
Figure 3: Maritimes Region gaspereau average landed price between 2010 through 2019. Units represent $/kg. Data sourced from DFO Maritimes Region.

3.4. Harvest by area

The majority of the gaspereau catch in Maritimes Region is harvested in SWNB which accounted for 1,168 tonnes in 2019 or 76% of the Regional harvest. Gaspereau harvesters in SWNS reported 316 tonnes or 21% of the Regional harvest, while Eastern Nova Scotia (ENS) harvesters accounted for 47 tonnes or 3%.

3.5. Average landings per active licence

Average landed weight per active licence for Maritimes Region was about 11 tonnes in 2019. However, the average landings in SWNB exceed that for ENS and SWNS by more than 10 times. In 2017, the average landed weight per licence in SWNB was 43.3 tonnes, while the average in ENS and SWNS were 1.7 tonnes and 3.8 tonnes, respectively (see Figure 4).

Diagram displaying Maritimes Region gaspereau average landed weight per active licence holder in 2019.
Figure 4: Maritimes Region gaspereau average landed weight per active licence holder in 2019. Data sourced from DFO Maritimes Region.

3.6. Gaspereau exports

Although the majority of gaspereau catch is thought to be sold domestically to the bait market, there are significant exports as well. The export of gaspereau from Atlantic Canada rose from $1.8 million in 2005 to a high of about $4.4 million in 2014 before declining to $3.8 million in 2016. New Brunswick accounted for 97% of Atlantic Canadian gaspereau export value in 2016.

The main export product form category for gaspereau is salted. Haiti is the main market, accounting for 94% of Atlantic gaspereau export value in 2016, and an average of 91% over the 2005 to 2016 time period. In 2016, gaspereau was also exported to Suriname (2.5%), Dominican Republic (1.4%), Belgium (1.2%), Denmark (1.0%), and Antigua and Barbuda (less than 1.0%) (see Figure 5 and Table 6).

Diagram displaying Atlantic Canada gaspereau export value by market destination between 2005 through 2016.
Figure 5: Atlantic Canada gaspereau export value by market destination between 2005 through 2016.
Table 6. Atlantic Canada gaspereau export value by market destination between 2005 through 2016
Export Market Destination Value (CAD) Percentage (%)
Haiti $3611529 93.9%
Suriname $9649 2.5%
Dominican Republic $53757 1.4%
Belgium $44550 1.2%
Denmark $38651 1.0%
Antigua & Barbuda $1602 <0.1%

Notes: Sourced from DFO Economic Analysis & Statistics.

After 2016, gaspereau trade data is included in a broader category of fish, not elsewhere stated (nes), salted or in brine but not dried or smoked’ (HS Code 03056990); that is, the category includes gaspereau and other species. Exports in this category are dominated by those to the United States, averaging $7 million annually from 2017 to 2020. Figure 6 shows the export value for this category by state. The importing states represented within Figure 6 is the United States and Haiti, while the remainder of the states are lumped into their own grouping. Considering the large share of export value for this category of gaspereau, it should be highlighted that the United States did not have a market for gaspereau prior to 2017.

Atlantic Canada export value for nes fish, salted or in brine between 2017 through 2020.
Figure 6: Atlantic Canada export value for nes fish, salted or in brine between 2017 through 2020. Not elsewhere stated (nes) fish is type of fish aggregate that includes gaspereau, thus not all value figures necessarily relate to gaspereau. Data sourced from DFO Economic Analysis & Statistic.

4. Management issues

For the purpose of this IFMP, management issues and considerations have been organized into five categories:

  • 4.1 Fisheries issues and considerations;
  • 4.2 Depleted species concerns;
  • 4.3 Oceans and habitat considerations;
  • 4.4 Gear impacts; and
  • 4.5 International considerations.

4.1. Fisheries issues and considerations

4.1.1. Reference points

Reference points have been developed for the alewife component of gaspereau stocks for some rivers. However, reference points for the blueback herring component of gaspereau stocks have not yet been established.

Therefore, a top management priority is to develop reference points for gaspereau populations that do not have them. This work will support the completion of assessments that use reference points to identify the status of a given gaspereau population (i.e. in the healthy, cautious, or critical zone), and consequently the development of appropriate management measures for that population.

4.1.2. Gear conflicts

Given the total number of licence holders, it is not unexpected that occasional gear conflicts arise. These conflicts can develop between fishers using the same gear type in areas where fishing space is limited. Similarly, conflicts can arise between fishers using different gear types (gill net versus trap net, for example). If a conflict cannot be resolved through discussion and compromise, there are several legal resolution mechanisms available under the Fisheries Act and regulations. The Fisheries Act provides authority for Fishery Officers to settle disputes and to prescribe distances between fishers. The MPFRs set out minimum distances that must be maintained between fishing gear, and licence conditions can also be used to specify the location at which fishing gear is permitted to be set. Season closures by one or more gear type is also an option available under regulations for resolving conflicts.

4.1.3. Reports of illegal fishing

The past several years have seen an increase in the price and demand for gaspereau as bait. Declines in both mackerel and herring stocks and their respective quotas have resulted in increased demand and price paid for gaspereau as bait. In some areas, the result has been a significant increase in reports of illegal harvesting of gaspereau during the weekly close times and fishing in fishways. This has been noted in the compliance section of this IFMP.

Increased demand and value has also resulted in an increased number of reports received by DFO regarding individuals claiming to be fishing for FSC purposes in large quantities during weekly close times. FSC licenses issued under the ACFLRs are not subject to weekly close times outlined in the MPFRs, however, there is support among Indigenous communities for close times and the conservation benefits they provide. Of the eleven FSC licenses issued in 2021 permitting gaspereau harvest, ten included some form of close times provision and all included reporting provisions. DFO will continue to educate individuals on the distinctions between FSC and other gaspereau fisheries and will work with Indigenous communities to implement their fishing rights with conservation as the priority.

4.1.4. Harvest reporting concerns

Historically, the gaspereau fishery has been characterized by a concerning number of harvesters failing to submit logbooks, submitting incomplete logbooks, and/or submitting logbooks late. Timely and accurate reporting is essential for proper fisheries management. DFO has taken steps to ensure proper reporting practices through education at ACs and through enforcement by Fishery Officers. Additionally, a failure to report landings may result in a decision to not re-issue the licence until reporting is complete.

It is important that all removals are accounted for to ensure the stock assessment process and subsequent fishery management decisions are valid and will not lead to a detrimental outcome for the species.

4.2. Depleted species concerns

A number of Canada’s diadromous fish species are considered to be at risk. Ensuring protection and promoting recovery of at risk species is a national priority. To that end, in 2002 Canada passed into law the Species at Risk Act (SARA) and a number of complementary programs to promote recovery and protection of species considered to be extirpated, endangered, threatened or of special concern under SARA or identified as such by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). Table 7 identifies the SARA listed species assessed species found within gaspereau fishing areas. Table 8 identifies the COSEWIC assessed species found within gaspereau fishing areas. Further information on SARA can be obtained through the Species at Risk Public Registry.

Table 7. Species within gaspereau fishing areas that are listed under the Species at Risk Act (SARA). The acronym DU stands for designatable unit.
Species Population/Range SARA Status
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) Inner Bay of Fundy DU Endangered
Atlantic whitefish
(Coregonus huntsmani)		 Nova Scotia Endangered
Shortnose sturgeon
(Acipenser brevirostrum)		 New Brunswick and Nova Scotia Special Concern
Table 8. Species within gaspereau fishing areas that are assessed by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). The acronym DU stands for designatable unit.
Species Population/Range COSEWIC Assessment
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) Outer Bay of Fundy DU Endangered
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) Southern Upland DU Endangered
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) Eastern Cape Breton DU Endangered
Atlantic sturgeon
(Acipenser oxyrhynchus)		 Maritimes DU Threatened
Striped bass (Morone saxatilis) Bay of Fundy DU Endangered
American eel (Anguilla rostrata) Eastern Canada Threatened

The following information summarizes the level of risk posed by fisheries, including gaspereau fisheries, to the species listed in Table 7. In some cases, the threat analysis was not exclusive to the gaspereau fishery, but were included in the broader “bycatch” context. This information is provided to highlight some considerations, including gaspereau fishery specific mitigation measures where available. Information on additional threats is outlined in relevant reports via species specific links. Mitigation measures within gaspereau fisheries such as season, area and gear restrictions are designed to reduce incidences of interactions with SARA listed species.

  • For Inner Bay of Fundy Atlantic salmon, gaspereau square net fisheries have been identified as having a moderate to high potential for incidental capture of salmon; however, live release is required and negligible harm is expected in this fishery. Gaspereau square nets remove adult salmon from the water for a very brief period of time without physical damage to the fish. For the most part, parr and smolt fall though the mesh used in these nets.
  • For Outer Bay of Fundy Atlantic salmon, bycatch in the FSC, commercial and recreational fisheries including the gaspereau fishery (marine and freshwater) was determined to be a low threat.
  • For Southern Upland Atlantic salmon, bycatch in the FSC, commercial and recreational fisheries including the gaspereau fishery (marine and freshwater) was determined to be a low threat.
  • For Eastern Cape Breton Atlantic salmon, bycatch in commercial fisheries including the gaspereau fishery in freshwater was determined to be a low threat. Bycatch in commercial fisheries in estuaries was determined to be a moderate threat.
  • For Atlantic whitefish, bycatch in both commercial and recreational fisheries was determined to be a low threat. Nevertheless, proactive measures have previously been enforced in the gaspereau fishery to reduce the risk of Atlantic whitefish bycatch. For example showing licence specific measures taken, a commercial gaspereau fisher was required to relocate their gill nets away from the estuary of the Petite Rivière, as Atlantic whitefish are thought to be restricted to the Petite Rivière watershed. 
  • For Atlantic sturgeon, it is prohibited to retain Atlantic sturgeon captured as bycatch in gaspereau fisheries, but rates of incidental capture and total mortality are not well known and may warrant assessment.
  • For Shortnose sturgeon, bycatch in commercial fisheries, including gaspereau fisheries, was determined to be a high threat in the Saint John River and throughout the DU but have low to high incidences of mortality depending on the fishery.
  • For Bay of Fundy Striped bass, the primary threats facing the extant spawning population in the Shubenacadie River system are direct mortality through directed recreational angling and FSC fisheries and, to a lesser extent, illegal fishing (poaching) and bycatch in commercial fisheries. Bycatch in commercial fisheries was determined to be low-to-high threat depending on the fishery location and gear type. Of relevance to gaspereau fisheries is the high threat presented by the gillnet, intertidal weir, and trap net gear types. 
  • For American eel, no threats for bycatches in commercial fisheries directed for other species were identified.

Should any of these COSEWIC assessed or additional species be listed under SARA, DFO recognizes there will be a need to address potential impacts from gaspereau fisheries on these species. Stakeholders will be consulted as required to develop the strategies necessary to mitigate these impacts. Strategies may include, but may not be limited to, restrictions on gear types, seasons, and SARA permits or exemptions. 

4.3. Ocean and habitat considerations

4.3.1. Hydroelectric facilities

Significant areas of gaspereau habitat in the Maritimes Region lie upstream from hydro generation facilities. Examples include the Saint John River upstream from Mactaquac Dam, St. Croix River and Magaguadavic River in New Brunswick, and the Gaspereau River, Annapolis River, Tusket River, Mersey River, and Indian River in Nova Scotia.

Hydroelectric facilities and their operations can negatively impact gaspereau populations, including through impeding upstream and downstream fish passage, water management, turbine mortality, and during construction and maintenance activities. DFO’s Fish and Fish Habitat Protection Program (FFHPP) reviews works, undertakings or activities that may result in harmful impacts on fish or fish habitat, including hydroelectric operations and construction/maintenance projects, for compliance with the fish and fish habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act, and the Species at Risk Act. DFO assesses potential impacts on fish or fish habitat and includes measures to avoid, mitigate, or offset those impacts. Examples of mitigation measures used for hydroelectric facilities include the construction and operation of fishways, downstream fish passage bypass facilities and diversion structures, water level management and ecological maintenance flow requirements.

For example, the Tusket and Gaspereau Rivers are focal points for impacts related to hydroelectric facilities. In the case of the Gaspereau River, recent years’ performance relative to the fish run indicates that adjustments made to hydroelectric facilities and harvesting have led to a more sustainable population.  In the Tusket River, it is important that efforts to mitigate impacts related to hydroelectric facilities and fishing activity continue in order to bring the population into the healthy zone.

DFO has recently initiated engagement with external partners and stakeholders to continue modernizing and/or developing policies, frameworks, instruments, and guidance to further implement the fish and fish habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act. Draft position statements for the Death of Fish and Existing Facilities and Structures are currently open for external engagement (talkfishhabitat.ca). These draft position statements provide an overview of how DFO will interpret the fish and fish habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act as it relates to managing the death of fish, and existing facilities and structures.

In collaboration with hydroelectric facilities and provincial partners, DFO works to minimize impacts on gaspereau populations and habitat from the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities. To minimize impacts on gaspereau populations, hydroelectric facilities in the Maritimes region have utilized tactics such as:

  • installation of structures such as fishways, pumps, diversion screens, spillways, and control gates (DFO 2007);
  • maintenance and repair of existing structures;
  • adjusting water levels and minimum flows;
  • shutting down generators during migration periods.

DFO’s FFHPP will continue to implement regulatory tools available under the Fisheries Act for existing hydroelectric facilities on a priority basis to conserve and protect gaspereau populations in the Maritimes Region.

4.3.2. Marine protected areas

The Government of Canada committed to protect 5% of Canada’s marine and coastal areas by 2017 and 10% by 2020. The 2020 target is both a domestic target (Canada’s Biodiversity Target 1) and an international target as reflected in the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Aichi Target 11 and the United Nations General Assembly’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development under Goal 14. The Government of Canada has further committed to developing a plan to conserve 25% of Canada’s oceans by 2025. The 2017 and 2020 targets are collectively referred to as Canada’s marine conservation targets. More information on the background and drivers for Canada’s marine conservation targets is available here.

To meet these targets, Canada has established Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and “other effective area-based conservation measures” (other measures) in consultation with industry, non-governmental organizations, and other interested parties. An overview of these tools, including a description of the role of fisheries management measures that qualify as other measures, is available here.

Specific management measures established for gaspereau have been identified to contribute to Canada’s marine conservation targets. The Musquash Estuary MPA is located 20 km southwest of Saint John, New Brunswick and protects the intertidal area within the estuary. Musquash is unique among Bay of Fundy estuaries due to its size, expansive salt marshes, and natural condition. It is the largest ecologically-intact estuary in the Bay of Fundy. Exceptions are outlined in the Musquash Estuary Marine Protected Area Regulations for fishing by means of angling or dip netting. Therefore, any commercial (commercial and CC), bait (bait and communal bait), and recreational gaspereau fisheries that angle or use dip nets are permitted within the MPA boundaries. More information on the Musquash Estuary MPA can be found here.

4.4. Gear impacts

Aside from recreational fishing by angling (which has virtually no habitat impacts) the predominant gear types used in fishing gaspereau are dip nets, gill nets, trap nets, and square nets. There are virtually no impacts on habitat from dip nets, minimal impacts from trap nets suspended from a series of poles driven into soft substrate, and minimal impacts from set gill nets or drift gill nets held in place by one or two small anchors or no anchors if drifted from a vessel. Where dip nets are licensed to be used at ‘dip stands’ and where square nets are authorized, there is some annual instream reconfiguration of rock walls. However, this reconfiguration is considered a minimal impact. The movement of rocks instream is a permitted activity under provincial legislation with input from DFO. This activity occurs on a limited number of rivers, includes only a small geographical space on those rivers, and is limited to locations where that type of gear and structure have been used in fishing for over a century.

4.5. International considerations

The 185 km long St. Croix River forms part of the boundary between the Canadian province of New Brunswick and the American state of Maine. There are 3 major dams on the St. Croix River in the first 30 kilometers upstream from St. Stephen, New Brunswick: Milltown Dam (Canadian-owned), Woodland Dam (US-owned, upstream from Milltown), and Grand Falls Dam (US-owned, upstream from Woodland). Alewife management in the St. Croix River was shaped by the following international events:

  • Through a series of unilateral actions starting in 1987, the state of Maine, primarily in response to complaints by recreational smallmouth bass anglers, effectively blocked alewife passage at both the Woodland and Grand Falls dam. Consequently, these actions obstructed access to about 98% of available alewife spawning habitat;
  • In 2008, Maine amended its legislation to provide for alewife passage past Woodland Dam, but passage remained blocked at Grand Falls;
  • In late 2009, the United States-Canada International Joint Commission (IJC) asked fisheries agencies on both sides of the border to draft a science-based management plan for St. Croix River alewives to address a 15-year stalemate created by the state of Maine’s blockage of its fishways to spawning alewives;
  • In the spring of 2010, the inter-agency St. Croix Fisheries Steering Committee completed the ‘Adaptive Management Plan for Managing Alewife in the St. Croix River Watershed’ (Dill et al., 2010) . From June to September 2010, the United States/Canada International Joint Commission took the proposed plan to public consultation, both online and in a public meeting, and on February 24, 2011 completed a consultation with Passamaquoddy tribal governments on both sides of the border; and
  • In 2013, the State of Maine revoked the legislation that blocked alewife passage at Grand Falls essentially opening the river to free passage. That decision remains controversial and was challenged in 2015 by a number of fishing guides and sporting camp owners. That challenge was not successful and Canada remains committed to free passage of alewives to waters upstream of all three (3) dams.

5. Objectives

There are five overarching objectives guiding fisheries management planning in the Maritimes Region. Objectives are guided by the principle declaring the fishery as a common property resource to be managed for the benefit of all Canadians, consistent with conservation objectives, the constitutional protection afforded to Indigenous and treaty rights, and the relative contributions that various uses of the resource make to Canadian society, including socio-economic benefits to communities.

Conservation objectives

  1. Productivity: Do not cause unacceptable reduction in productivity so that components can play their role in the functioning of the ecosystem.
  2. Biodiversity: Do not cause unacceptable reduction in biodiversity in order to preserve the structure and natural resilience of the ecosystem.
  3. Habitat: Do not cause unacceptable modification to habitat in order to safeguard both physical and chemical properties of the ecosystem.

Social, cultural and economic objectives

  1. Culture and Sustenance: Respect Indigenous and treaty rights to fish.
  2. Prosperity:Create the circumstances for economically prosperous fisheries.

The conservation objectives are from the Maritimes Region’s framework for an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM). They require consideration of the impact of the fishery not only on the target species, but also on non-target species and habitat (See Appendix 1 for a summary of the Regional EAM framework).

The social, cultural, and economic objectives reflect the Indigenous right to fish for FSC purposes. They also recognize the economic contribution the fishing industry makes to Canadian businesses and many coastal communities. Ultimately, the economic viability of fisheries depends on the industry itself. However, DFO is committed to managing the fisheries in a manner that helps its participants be economically successful while using the ocean’s resources in an environmentally sustainable manner.

The overarching social, cultural, and economic objective is to help create the circumstances for economically prosperous fisheries wherein fishing enterprises are more self-reliant, self-adjusting, and internationally competitive.

6. Management measures

Table 8 presents the management measures applied in the gaspereau fishery to achieve the objectives outlined in Section 5. This table is a summary to the more extensive management and evaluation plan in Table 10. A general description of management strategies used in the context of the Regional EAM framework is included in Appendix 1.

6.1. Management strategies and tactics for the gaspereau fishery

6.1.1. Objective: Productivity

Strategy 1: Employ management measures

Employ management measures that will maintain populations in the healthy zone, and for populations known to be in the cautious or critical zone, reduce mortality rates and rebuild populations.

Tactics for strategy 1:

  • Maintain or reduce current gear types and quantities; maintain the limited entry licence policy, maintain or reduce bag limits in the recreational fishery, fishing seasons, and sanctuary areas.
  • Continue efforts to ensure proper reporting of harvest information and research additional mechanisms to ensure timely and accurate reporting including increased enforcement of reporting provisions and applicability of third party verification.
Strategy 2: Maintain and enhance free upstream and downstream fish passage

Maintain and enhance free upstream and downstream fish passage at hydroelectric facilities to minimize impacts on gaspereau populations.

Tactics for strategy 2:

  • Collaborate with hydroelectric operators as per the Terms of Reference (TORs) contained in the Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with NBP and NSPI.
  • Review all applications for hydroelectric licence renewals for compliance with the Fisheries Act provisions respecting free passage of fish. Tactics may include installing structures such as fishways and diversion screens, maintaining and repairing existing structures, adjusting water levels and minimum flows, and shutting down generators during migration periods.

6.1.2. Objective: Biodiversity

Strategy 1: Manage bycatch of other species

Examples of other bycatch species that would be managed would include species such as trout, perch, lake/round whitefish, and suckers.

Tactics for strategy 1:

  • Maintain existing weekly and daily time and area closures, gear restrictions, mandatory reporting of lost gill nets and retrieval, and bycatch limits.
  • Ensure accurate reporting of bycatch species by review of current reporting mechanisms for enhancement annually.
Strategy 2: Manage bycatch of other at-risk species

Examples of other at-risk species that would be managed would include species such as Atlantic salmon, striped bass, sturgeon and Atlantic whitefish. At-risk species will be determined through SARA and COSEWIC assessments.

Tactics for strategy 2:

  • Maintain existing time and area closures, gear restrictions, mandatory reporting of lost gill nets and retrieval, and bycatch limits.
  • Maintain existing requirements to release certain bycatch species with the least harm.

6.1.3. Objective: Habitat

Strategy 1: Manage areas of disturbed habitat due to fishing activities
Strategy 2: Support protection efforts for regional MPAs, specifically the intertidal Musquash MPA

Tactics for strategies 1 and 2: 

  • Participate and provide advice in departmental and provincial review processes related to requests for habitat disturbance.
  • Annual review of requests for changes to fishing locations to minimize habitat disturbance. Maintain limited entry licence policy.
  • Include MPA restrictions in licence conditions (as appropriate).
Strategy 3: Work with NBP and NSPI to manage potential impacts on habitat from hydroelectric facilities

Ensuring minimum flows from hydroelectric facilities and to collaborate with their owners (NBP and NSPI) to ensure all facilities are operating within line with all regulations.

Tactics for strategy 3:

  • Continue to collaborate with hydroelectric operators as per the Terms of Reference (TORs) contained in the Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with NBP and NSPI.
  • Review and provide advice in applications for any new hydroelectric facilities or changes to existing facilities (including fishways).

6.1.4. Objective: Culture and sustenance

Strategy 1: Provide priority access for Indigenous FSC purposes

Indigenous FSC fisheries will be provided with priority access to fishing consistent with Indigenous and treaty rights.

Tactics for strategy 1:

  • Continue to provide FSC licences for gaspereau. Ensure FSC priority access is maintained.
  • Continue to provide communal commercial licences for gaspereau.
Strategy 2: Support and manage participation in recreational gaspereau fisheries

Increased attentiveness will be placed on the current recreational gaspereau fisheries to support and manage its participation.

Tactic for strategy 2:

  • Currently, open access to the gaspereau fishery is available subject to time and area closures, gear restrictions, and bag limits established under the MPFRs.

6.1.5. Objective: Prosperity

Strategy 1: Ensure sustainability of the gaspereau fishery
Strategy 2: Maintain sanctuary areas where no fishing is permitted
Strategy 3: Manage gear conflicts between harvesters

Tactics for strategies 1, 2, and 3:

  • Maintain limited entry nature of gaspereau fisheries to manage potential overcapacity.
  • Use licence conditions to effectively manage the fishery.
  • Use existing policy to manage requests and ensure consistency of decisions related to licence harvest area and gear quantities and types.
  • Increase the number of sanctuary areas as part of broader marine conservation targets.
  • Under existing legislation, adjust and enforce gear spacing to ensure equitable access and optimum opportunities to harvest.
Strategy 4: Minimize illegal fishing driven by higher demand for gaspereau as bait

Tactics for strategy 4:

  • Increase enforcement efforts, particularly in areas where there are population concerns and/or considered high-risk (e.g. high demand for lobster bait during lobster season).
  • Encourage reporting of illegal fishing activities to Fishery Officers and through Crime Stoppers, etc.
Strategy 5: Maintain bycatch of gaspereau in other fisheries at acceptable levels

Tactics for strategy 5:

  • Monitor bycatch of gaspereau in other commercial fisheries (particularly the silver hake otter trawl fishery).
  • Make modifications in those fisheries if necessary and examine adequacy of observer coverage.

7. Access and allocation

7.1. Sharing arrangements

The commercial gaspereau fishery is competitive in nature with no formal quota-sharing arrangements led by DFO or industry.

Licence transfers may be permitted in the commercial gaspereau fishery, but not in the bait or recreational fisheries. Commercial gaspereau licences may be reissued subject to the eligibility requirements outlined in the Maritimes Region Licensing Policy. Generally, to be eligible, licences must be issued in the name of a Canadian citizen or permanent resident who is registered as a commercial fisher. The individual must also personally fish the licence and have only one licence per species issued to them. A commercial licence must be held for 12 months by a fisher before it can be reissued to another qualified fisher.

7.2. Quotas and allocations

There is a daily bag limit and possession limit of 20 gaspereau in the recreational fishery. There are no quotas for the commercial fishery or the bait fishery. These fisheries are managed under the regulatory provisions in the MPFRs in combination with a series of licence conditions. Regulations and licence conditions jointly establish effort controls which form the fundamental basis for operation of these fisheries.

DFO manages fisheries in a manner consistent with the constitutional protection given to Indigenous and treaty rights. Once DFO decides a harvestable surplus of a given species or stock is available, Indigenous rights to fish for FSC purposes take precedence over other resource uses. Moreover, the fisheries must be managed in a manner that is consistent with the provisions of treaties and land claims agreements.

The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans can, for reasons of conservation or for any other valid reasons, modify access, allocations, and sharing arrangements as outlined in this IFMP in accordance with the powers granted pursuant to the Fisheries Act. In circumstances where changes to access, allocations, and sharing arrangements are required during the life of the IFMP (i.e. new legal obligations, revised conservation objectives), the updated information will be included in the IFMP.

8. Shared stewardship arrangements

The gaspereau fishery is managed under a collaborative approach between DFO, Indigenous communities, stakeholders, and industry through the AC process. This approach utilizes both knowledge of and experience with the resource to ensure the most responsible management strategy is developed. The approach involves engagement through an AC process that operates on a consensus model, where committee members make consensus-based recommendations to DFO on the fishery’s management and any related issues. ACs can also act as a forum to bring forward specific issues and concerns for discussion. Working groups may be established by the ACs to focus on a particular issue. DFO also collaborates with NSPI to do assessment work on the Gaspereau and Tusket rivers. During this work, NSPI installs and maintains the cameras used to enumerate the number of fish ascending fish ladders, and provides technical and logistical support when DFO staff work around their facilities on these rivers.

9. Compliance plan

Conservation and Protection program description

The management of Canadian fisheries requires an integrated approach to monitoring, control and surveillance that involves the deployment of Fishery Officers to conduct: land patrols, dockside monitoring program (DMP) audits, as well as plant and harvester inspections.

Conservation and Protection (C&P) activities are designed to ensure compliance with the legislation, policies and fishing plans as they relate to conservation and the sustainable use of the resource. The C&P National Compliance Framework describes a three-pillar approach to the monitoring and enforcement in fisheries. The pillars are Education/Shared Stewardship: Monitoring, Control and Surveillance; and Major Case Management.

Regional compliance program delivery

Compliance in the gaspereau fishery is achieved through the application of the Fisheries Act, the FGRs, the Atlantic Fishery Regulations, the MPFRs, and the ACFLRs.

The following offers a general description of compliance activities carried out by C&P in the gaspereau fishery:

  • Fishery Officers conduct inspections to check location, gear, catch, licenses, logbooks, and compliance with bycatch release requirements;
  • Fishery Officers utilize a number of investigative techniques when dealing with reports of fraud and collusion. This often involves a cooperative approach along with interactions and communication with other federal, provincial, and municipal agencies;
  • The Regional Director-General designates dockside observers (DOs). These designations for third party service providers are subject to individuals meeting background checks and eligibility criteria and require the successful completion of exams. DOs are able to monitor offloads and verify harvest information and are third party individuals;
  • C&P monitors program standards for the DMP through audits and may initiate corrective actions if a DO is found to be deficient in the performance of their duties; and
  • Routine vessel, vehicle, and foot patrols are conducted in the fisheries.

Consultation

Shared stewardship and education are achieved in the gaspereau fishery through a renewed emphasis on the importance of communication with the community at large, including:

  • presentations to Indigenous, industry and stakeholder groups;
  • informal interaction with all parties involved in the fishery on the wharf, during patrols, or in the community to promote conservation;
  • C&P supervisors participate in AC meetings with industry to provide information regarding compliance concerns and to solicit input from Indigenous groups and stakeholders in relation to monitoring, control, and surveillance activities;
  • internal consultation with Resource Management and other DFO branches to assess the effectiveness of enforcement activities and to develop recommendations for the upcoming season; and approximately 1,300 hours per year (across all fisheries) for compliance promotion through meetings, public relations, and school visits.

Compliance program performance

In recent years, C&P has been building its intelligence and major case management capability for all fisheries. The program is moving toward increased intelligence gathering, specialized investigations, retroactive review of suspected illegal activity, and broadening the scope of its inspections to include buyers, plants, and transporters. Some of this work has focused on gaspereau and the gaspereau fishery. A summary of officer time and number of checks (on vehicles, vessels, persons, gear, and sites) for the gaspereau fishery is included in Appendix 11.

Current compliance issues

A review of violations for the period 2018-2020 suggests that non-compliance in the gaspereau fishery is largely related to reporting. Examples include misreporting, illegal sale of fish, and improper logbook completion. See Appendix 12 for a list of gaspereau violations by issue and Appendix 13 for a list of Violations by Action Taken.

The illegal or unreported sale of gaspereau is the main enforcement concern for this fishery. The scarcity and increased cost of traditional lobster bait such as herring and mackerel has resulted in an increase in the price and the demand for gaspereau. This provides an incentive for illegal harvesting which results in cash sales and illegal gear being used. The illegal harvest of gaspereau negatively impacts future management goals that are set by DFO along with partners and stakeholders regarding the fishery. Other enforcement concerns include harvesters being inconsistent as to when they must enter their catch and effort information in their log book. This is a concern for C&P, as Fishery Officers currently are unable to verify accurate catch and location information while conducting inspections in the field. The alteration of watercourses without proper approval to increase the effectiveness of fishing activity is also a concern.

Recreational fishery concerns include: fishing during closed times, exceeding bag limits, the illegal sale of recreationally caught fish, and fishing in or too close to fish ladders. These issues are further aggravated by the higher prices being paid for gaspereau and will remain an issue to monitor.

To be effective in deterring non-compliance, efforts taken by C&P must demonstrate the likelihood of violations being detected is high, and that serious violations will result in penalties being imposed. The response to non-compliance may include warnings, tickets, or prosecution. Targeted efforts are taken to determine the level of compliance in this fishery and build towards an acceptable level of compliance, depending on the availability of resources to the program.

Compliance strategy

Based on established regional compliance priorities, C&P detachment supervisors prepare annual work plans and allocate human, operational and management resources based on an assessment of compliance risks in each fishery. Table 9 summarizes the challenges in the fishery and outlines strategies to address them as described by C&P Detachment Supervisors.

Compliance risks in the gaspereau fishery

  1. Illegal use of gear
    • Marked gear
    • Unauthorized gear use
  2. Closed area and time issues
    • Unlicensed fishing
    • Fishing in closed area/time
    • Fishing non-designated rivers
  3. Catch and reporting issues
    • Fraud and collusion
    • Misreporting
    • Bypass DMP
    • Effectiveness of DMP
    • Unreported sales
    • Improper completion of logbooks

Mitigating strategies in the gaspereau fishery

  • Engagement with industry regarding the importance of reliable data in decision-making
  • Conduct patrols and checks using a risk assessment and available intelligence
  • Conduct routine inspections
  • DMP checks
  • Promote intelligence gathering, sharing and analysis
  • Traceability of legal sales
  • Use major case investigations when appropriate
  • Compliance activities in collaboration with other federal, provincial and municipal agencies and departments.

10. Performance review

To ensure that information in this IFMP remains up to date, it will be reviewed annually and updated as required as a living document. In addition to internal review processes conducted by DFO, there will be opportunities for external stakeholders to comment on the IFMP at annual gaspereau AC meetings.

Periodic reviews of the management measures detailed in this IFMP are completed to ensure that the fishery is being managed effectively. Through consultation with Indigenous communities, industry and stakeholders, potential improvements are explored and priorities are established for the fishery. Additionally, annual negotiations of Aboriginal Fisheries Strategy agreements are pursued to ensure that FSC licences and conditions are improved regularly. Information gathered through other evaluation processes, such as the department’s Sustainability Survey for Fisheries, is also used to help identify areas for improvement in the management of the fishery.

Table 10 below outlines the approaches to evaluation, monitoring, and plan enhancement taken under each objective in Section 5 and the associated strategies and tactics in Section 6. The table reflects the Maritimes Region Ecosystem Approach to Management framework, presented in Appendix 1.

10.1. Performance review of management strategies, and their tactics through evaluation, monitoring, and enhancement plans for the gaspereau fishery.

10.1.1. Objective: Productivity

Strategy 1: Employ management measures

Employ management measures that will maintain populations in the healthy zone, and for populations known to be in the cautious or critical zone, reduce mortality rates and rebuild populations.

Tactics for strategy 1:

  • Maintain or reduce current gear types and quantities; maintain the limited entry licence policy, maintain or reduce bag limits in the recreational fishery, fishing seasons, and sanctuary areas.
  • Continue efforts to ensure proper reporting of harvest information and research additional mechanisms to ensure timely and accurate reporting including increased enforcement of reporting provisions and applicability of third party verification.

Evaluation for strategy 1:

  • Annual review through the formal AC process, additional consultations with Indigenous groups where required, annual DFO Science advice/updates.

Monitoring for strategy 1:

  • Catch and effort data from mandatory log book reports and annual fishway counts where available.

Plan enhancements for strategy 1:

  • Expand implementation of the precautionary approach framework to an increased number of river populations with reference points for both gaspereau and blueback herring (LaHave River, Mersey River, Medway River, Shubenacadie and Stewiacke Rivers, Saint John River, and others as identified). Priority efforts for the next two years include assessing the removal reference model, maintaining the model on the Gaspereau and Tusket Rivers and expanding to the Saint John River.
  • Maintain annual counting activities at the Tusket and Gaspereau Rivers and expand to other rivers where possible including the Mersey and LaHave Rivers.
Strategy 2: Maintain and enhance free upstream and downstream fish passage

Maintain and enhance free upstream and downstream fish passage at hydroelectric facilities to minimize impacts on gaspereau populations.

Tactics for strategy 2:

  • Collaborate with hydroelectric operators as per the Terms of Reference (TORs) contained in the Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with NBP and NSPI.
  • Review all applications for hydroelectric licence renewals for compliance with the Fisheries Act provisions respecting free passage of fish. Tactics may include installing structures such as fishways and diversion screens, maintaining and repairing existing structures, adjusting water levels and minimum flows, and shutting down generators during migration periods.

Evaluations for strategy 2:

  • Regular meetings with hydroelectric operators as per the MOU TORs.
  • Annual review through the formal AC process, additional consultations with Indigenous groups where required, annual DFO Science advice/updates.

Monitoring for strategy 2:

  • Evaluation of efficiencies through fish counts at hydroelectric facilities.
  • Review information provided by Fishery Officers in the course of routine or dedicated patrols.

Plan enhancements for strategy 2:

  • Increase evaluations of upstream and downstream fish passage at additional facilities by working with Conservation & Protection, Fish and Fish Habitat Protection Program, power utilities including during re-licensing and other initiatives, per the Nova Scotia schedule of facilities.
  • Continue to contribute as part of DFO’s participation in the Mactaquac Life Achievement Project.
  • Short-term activities include annual in-season assessments/mitigation measures of fish passage on the Tusket and Gaspereau Rivers through information gathering from fishers, C&P,FFHPP, Science.

10.1.2. Objective: Biodiversity

Strategy 1: Manage bycatch of other species

Examples of other bycatch species that would be managed would include species such as trout, perch, lake/round whitefish, and suckers.

Tactics for strategy 1:

  • Maintain existing weekly and daily time and area closures, gear restrictions, mandatory reporting of lost gill nets and retrieval, and bycatch limits.
  • Ensure accurate reporting of bycatch species by review of current reporting mechanisms for enhancement annually.

Evaluation for strategy 1:

  • Annual review through the formal AC process, additional consultations with Indigenous groups where required, and annual DFO Science advice/updates.

Monitoring for strategy 1:

  • Maintain mandatory logbook reporting, including non-issue of licence conditions in the subsequent year for failure to comply.
  • Review of information provided by Fishery Officers in the course of routine or dedicated patrols.

Plan enhancement for strategy 1:

  • If required, impose additional time, area and gear restrictions, and reduce bycatch limits.
  • Subject to resource constraints, increase Fishery Officer patrols.
Strategy 2: Manage bycatch of other at-risk species

Examples of other at-risk species that would be managed would include species such as Atlantic salmon, striped bass, sturgeon and Atlantic whitefish. At-risk species will be determined through SARA and COSEWIC assessments.

Tactics for strategy 2:

  • Maintain existing time and area closures, gear restrictions, mandatory reporting of lost gill nets and retrieval, and bycatch limits.
  • Maintain existing requirements to release certain bycatch species with the least harm.

Evaluation for strategy 2:

  • Annual review through the formal AC process, additional consultations with Indigenous groups where required, annual DFO Science advice/updates.

Monitoring for strategy 2:

  • Maintain mandatory logbook reporting, including non-issue of licence conditions in the subsequent year for failure to comply.
  • Review information provided by Fishery Officers in the course of routine or dedicated patrols.

Plan enhancement for strategy 2:

  • If required, impose additional time, area and gear restrictions and reduce bycatch limits.
  • Subject to resource constraints, increase Fishery Officer patrols.

10.1.3. Objective: Habitat

Strategy 1: Manage areas of disturbed habitat due to fishing activities
Strategy 2: Support protection efforts for regional MPAs, specifically the intertidal Musquash MPA

Tactics for strategies 1 and 2:

  • Participate and provide advice in departmental and provincial review processes related to requests for habitat disturbance.
  • Annual review of requests for changes to fishing locations to minimize habitat disturbance. Maintain limited entry licence policy.
  • Include MPA restrictions in licence conditions (as appropriate).

Evaluations for strategy 1 and 2:

  • Annual review through the formal AC process, additional consultations with Indigenous groups where required, annual DFO Science advice/updates.
  • Provide input and follow-up with provincial agencies responsible for water rights/ alterations applications and permitting.

Monitoring for strategy 1 and 2:

  • Review information provided by Fishery Officers in the course of routine or dedicated patrols.

Plan enhancement for strategy 1 and 2:

  • Increase coordination efforts with groups and agencies involved in habitat protection by incorporating a solicitation of information as part of the advisory committee process.
Strategy 3: Work with NBP and NSPI to manage potential impacts on habitat from hydroelectric facilities

Ensuring minimum flows from hydroelectric facilities and to collaborate with their owners (NBP and NSPI) to ensure all facilities are operating within line with all regulations.

Tactics for strategy 3:

  • Continue to collaborate with hydroelectric operators as per the Terms of Reference (TORs) contained in the Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with NBP and NSPI.
  • Review and provide advice in applications for any new hydroelectric facilities or changes to existing facilities (including fishways).

Evaluation for strategy 3:

  • Annual review through the formal AC process, which includes representatives from NBP and NSPI.

Monitoring for strategy 3:

  • Work with facilities and provincial licensing agencies to ensure compliance with the conditions of operation.

Plan enhancement for strategy 3:

  • Post season review of all applicable river systems annually to determine best practices and lessons learned.

10.1.4. Objective: Culture and sustenance

Strategy 1: Provide priority access for Indigenous FSC purposes

Indigenous FSC fisheries will be provided with priority access to fishing consistent with Indigenous and treaty rights.

Tactics for strategy 1:

  • Continue to provide FSC licences for gaspereau. Ensure FSC priority access is maintained.
  • Continue to provide communal commercial licences for gaspereau.

Evaluation for strategy 1:

  • Annual negotiations with Indigenous groups.

Monitoring for strategy 1:

  • Annual negotiations with Indigenous groups.

Plan enhancement for strategy 1:

  • Within the 2022 calendar year, work to improve catch reporting under current harvest agreements and licences in consultation with Indigenous communities and Indigenous Fisheries Management.
Strategy 2: Support and manage participation in recreational gaspereau fisheries

Increased attentiveness will be placed on the current recreational gaspereau fisheries to support and manage its participation.

Tactic for strategy 2:

  • Currently, open access to the gaspereau fishery is available subject to time and area closures, gear restrictions, and bag limits established under the MPFRs.

Evaluation plan for strategy 2:

  • Review the management if the fishery as required.

Monitoring plan for strategy 2:

  • Annually review information provided by Fishery Officers in the course of routine or dedicated patrols.

Plan enhancement for strategy 2:

  • Depending on which zone a population belongs to under the Precautionary Approach (healthy, cautious, critical zone) make appropriate adjustments. May include reduced bag limits, shorter seasons, etc.

10.1.5. Objective: Prosperity

Strategy 1: Ensure sustainability of the gaspereau fishery
Strategy 2: Maintain sanctuary areas where no fishing is permitted
Strategy 3: Manage gear conflicts between harvesters

Tactics for strategies 1, 2, and 3:

  • Maintain limited entry nature of gaspereau fisheries to manage potential overcapacity.
  • Use licence conditions to effectively manage the fishery.
  • Use existing policy to manage requests and ensure consistency of decisions related to licence harvest area and gear quantities and types.
  • Increase the number of sanctuary areas as part of broader marine conservation targets.
  • Under existing legislation, adjust and enforce gear spacing to ensure equitable access and optimum opportunities to harvest.

Evaluation for strategies 1, 2, and 3:

  • Annual review through the formal AC process, additional consultations with Indigenous groups where required, annual DFO Science advice/updates.

Monitoring for strategies 1, 2, and 3:

  • Identify issues through use of C&P reports and input received at ACs

Plan enhancement strategies 1, 2, and 3:

  • Within the 2022 calendar year, assess number and locations of total licences to identify any issues in areas where stocks are not healthy.
Strategy 4: Minimize illegal fishing driven by higher demand for gaspereau as bait

Tactics for strategy 4:

  • Increase enforcement efforts, particularly in areas where there are population concerns and/or considered high-risk (e.g. high demand for lobster bait during lobster season).
  • Encourage reporting of illegal fishing activities to Fishery Officers and through Crime Stoppers, etc.

Evaluation for strategy 4:

  • Annual review of information, through the ACs that C&P regularly tracks related to reports of illegal fishing and numbers of violations.

Monitoring for strategy 4:

  • Review of C&P reports regarding changes in number and severity of violations and determination of any actions required.

Plan enhancement for strategy 4:

  • Subject to resource availability, increase frequency of patrols and adjust management measures as required.
Strategy 5: Maintain bycatch of gaspereau in other fisheries at acceptable levels

Tactics for strategy 5:

  • Monitor bycatch of gaspereau in other commercial fisheries (particularly the silver hake otter trawl fishery).
  • Make modifications in those fisheries if necessary and examine adequacy of observer coverage.

Evaluation for strategy 5:

  • Annual review.

Monitoring for strategy 5:

  • Bycatch data collected and reviewed.

Plan enhancement for strategy 5:

  • Increase frequency of review as required.

11. Glossary

Abundance:
Number of individuals in a stock or a population.
Biomass:
Total weight of all individuals in a stock or a population.
Bycatch:
The unintentional catch of 1 species when the target is another.
Communal commercial licence:
Licence issued to Indigenous organizations pursuant to the Aboriginal Communal Fishing Licences Regulations for participation in the general commercial fishery.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC):
Committee of experts that assess and designate which wild species are in some danger of disappearing from Canada.
Depleted species:
A generic term which includes populations listed under the Species at Risk Act as special concern, threatened, or endangered, as well as populations which have been recommended for listing by COSEWIC, but for which no decision regarding listing has been made. This term also incorporates stocks in the Critical zone.
Dockside Monitoring Program (DMP):
A monitoring program that is conducted by a company that has been designated by the department, which verifies the species composition and landed weight of all fish landed from a commercial fishing vessel.
Ecosystem:
The whole of a system with all the interactions between parts, living and non-living.
Fishing effort:
Quantity of effort using a given fishing gear over a given period of time.
Fishing mortality:
Death caused by fishing, often symbolized by the mathematical symbol F.
Food, social, and ceremonial (FSC):
A fishery conducted by Indigenous groups for food, social and ceremonial purposes.
Landings:
Quantity of a species caught and landed.
Population:
Group of individuals of the same species, forming a breeding unit, and sharing a habitat.
Precautionary approach:
Set of agreed cost-effective measures and actions, including future courses of action, which ensures prudent foresight, reduces or avoids risk to the resource, the environment, and the people, to the extent possible, taking explicitly into account existing uncertainties and the potential consequences of being wrong.
Quota:
Portion of the total allowable catch that a unit such as vessel class, country, etc. is permitted to take from a stock in a given period of time.
Recruitment:
Amount of individuals becoming part of the exploitable stock e.g. that can be caught in a fishery.
Spawn:
Release or deposit eggs or larvae.
Species at Risk Act (SARA):
The Act is a federal government commitment to prevent wildlife species from becoming extinct and secure the necessary actions for their recovery. It provides for the legal protection of wildlife species and the conservation of biological diversity.
Stock:
Describes a population of individuals of one species found in a particular area, and is used as a unit for fisheries management.
Stock assessment:
Scientific evaluation of the status of a species belonging to a same stock within a particular area in a given time period.
Tonne:
Metric tonne, which is 1000kg or 2204.6lbs.
Total allowable catch (TAC):
The amount of catch that may be taken from a stock.

12. References

  • Bowlby, H.D., and Gibson, A.J.F. 2016. River Herring Assessment for the Tusket River, Nova Scotia. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2016/106. v + 45 p.
  • DFO. 2001. Gaspereau Maritime Provinces Overview. DFO Science Stock Status Report D3-17 (2001).
  • DFO. 2007. Assessment of Gaspereau River Alewife. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Adv. Rep. 2007/030
  • DFO. 2009. Recovery Potential Assessment for Atlantic Whitefish (Coregonus huntsmani). DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Advis. Rep. 2009/051.
  • Dill, R., Trial, J., Atkinson, E., Gibson, J., Jordan, R., Lary, S., Saunders, R., and Seymour, P. 2010. An Adaptive Plan for Managing Alewife in the St. Croix River Watershed, Maine and New Brunswick. Accessed November 2019.
  • Gibson, A.J.F., Bowlby, H.D., and Keyser, F.M. 2017. A Framework for the Assessment of the Status of River Herring Populations and Fisheries in DFO’s Maritimes Region. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2016/105. vi + 69 p.
  • Jessop, B.M. 2001. Stock Status of Alewives and Blueback Herring Returning to the Mactaquac Dam, Saint John River, N.B. Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2001/059.
  • McIntyre, T.M, Bradford, R.G., Davies, T.D., and Gibson, A.J.F. 2007. Gaspereau River Alewife Stock Status Report. Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2007/032.
  • Robichaud-LeBlanc, K.A., and P.G. Amiro (editors) 2001. Assessments of Gaspereau and Striped Bass Stocks of the Maritime Provinces, 2000. DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Proceedings Series. 2001/11.

Appendix 1: Summary of Maritimes Region EAM framework

This appendix summarizes the framework adopted by DFO Maritimes Region for implementing an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM) in all activities for which the department has management responsibility. It also discusses application of the framework more specifically to fisheries management.

Introduction to EAM

An ecosystem approach to managing human activity requires consideration of an activity’s impact on all components of the ecosystem – including its structure, function and overall quality – and not just on the resource being used. It also means accounting for the cumulative effects of multiple uses, and accounting for how environmental forces, such as climate change, might be affecting how we should manage.

Fully implementing EAM will be a large undertaking. Progress will happen in a step-by-step, evolutionary way. In the short-term, the department will work on implementing EAM in the context of discrete activities, such as fishing. In the long-term, a diversity of ocean users and regulators will need to come together to draw up plans for the integrated management of all ocean activities. First attention will be given to impacts of the highest importance and offering the greatest scope for improvement.

EAM in the context of fisheries management

Consensus is growing within Canada and internationally that the sustainability of fish stocks and fisheries requires an ecosystem approach to management. Traditionally, fisheries management has focused on regulating the impact of fishing on the targeted species. Under an ecosystem approach, managers consider impacts not only on the target species but also on non-target species and habitat. Some of these impacts will be direct, such as impacts on the populations of non‑target species that suffer mortality incidentally because of interactions with fishing gear. Other impacts may be indirect, such as the effects of mortality on predator-prey relationships. IFMPs will document the main impacts on the ecosystem from fishing activities and outline how these pressures will be managed.

Main elements of the framework

EAM is a management planning framework. Management planning requires the specification of objectives (what you want to achieve), of strategies (what you will do to manage human‑induced pressures so that you can achieve your objectives), and tactics (how you will implement your strategies). These elements are presented in the table overleaf. They are the foundation of the Region’s EAM framework and have been developed to cover the full range of potential impacts on the ecosystem resulting from the various activities managed by the department. (Not all strategies will be relevant to all activities.)

Framework for an Ecosystem Approach to Management (Resource Management, Maritimes Region)

  1. Attributes (listed below):
    • air quality
    • biomass
    • breeding behavior
    • community assemblage
    • genetic structure
    • habitat structure
    • organism health
    • population richness
    • forage predators
    • primary production
    • recruitment
    • sediment quality
    • size spectrum
    • size/age structure
    • spatial extent
    • spatial occupancy
    • “special places”
    • “special species”
    • trophic structure
    • water quality
    • yield
    • traditional Indigenous use
    • efficiency
    • market access
  2. Objectives and their strategies with associated pressures:
    1. Productivity – As to not cause unacceptable reduction in productivity so that components can play their role in the functioning of the ecosystem. Examples include:
      • Keep fishing mortality moderate
      • Allow sufficient escapement from exploitation for spawning
      • Limit disturbing activity in important reproductive areas/seasons
      • Control alteration of nutrient concentrations affecting primary production
    2. Biodiversity – As to not cause unacceptable reduction in biodiversity in order to preserve the structure and natural resilience of the ecosystem. Examples include:
      • Control unintended incidental mortality for all species
      • Distribute population component mortality in relation to component biomass
      • Minimize unintended introduction and transmission of invasive species
      • Control introduction and proliferation of disease/pathogens
      • Minimize aquaculture escapes
    3. Habitat – As to not cause unacceptable modification to habitat in order to safeguard both physical and chemical properties of the ecosystem. Examples include:
      • Manage area disturbed of habitat
      • Limit introduction of pollutants
      • Minimize introduction of debris
      • Control noise disturbance
      • Control light disturbance
    4. Culture and sustenance – Respect Indigenous and treaty rights to fish
      • Provide access for FSC purposes
    5. Prosperity – Create the circumstances for economically prosperous fisheries. Examples include:
      • Limit inflexibility in policy & licensing among individual enterprises/licence holders
      • Minimize instability in access to resources and allocations
      • Limit inability for self-adjustment to overcapacity relative to resource availability
      • Support certification for sustainability
  3. Managed activities (for example, in the groundfish and herring fisheries, and salmon aquaculture activities):
    • Expansion of pressures considered
    • Cumulative effects of pressures on other managed activities considered
  4. Tactics (listed below):
    • catch control
    • effort control
    • gear specification
    • size-based release
    • area/season closure
    • ballast water control
    • recreational fisheries awards
    • FSC licences
    • community quota management
    • transferable quotas
    • licence combining
    • exempted licences
    • multi-licensing
    • certification data
    • stabilized fisheries
    • transparency in ministerial decisions

Objectives

Under EAM, management planning within the region will be guided by three ecosystem objectives:

  • Productivity: Do not cause unacceptable reduction in productivity so that components can play their role in the functioning of the ecosystem.
  • Biodiversity: Do not cause unacceptable reduction in biodiversity in order to preserve the structure and natural resilience of the ecosystem.
  • Habitat: Do not cause unacceptable modification to habitat in order to safeguard both physical and chemical properties of the ecosystem.

It is impractical to pursue conservation in isolation from the economic, social and cultural aspirations of users, and these must be recognized in any plan if it is to be successful. The region intends to develop a set of economic, social and cultural objectives in the near future that will be common to all activities managed by the Department. In the meantime, Resource Management has developed the following, provisional objectives for application in fisheries management:

  • Culture and Sustenance: Respect Indigenous and treaty rights to fish.
  • Prosperity: Create the circumstances for economically prosperous fisheries.

Attributes

Attributes are traits of the ecosystem that we value. They are the means by which the broadly stated objectives are given specificity. We might be interested in the condition of many ecosystem attributes. Those listed in the first column of Table 1A are ones that respond to human induced pressures. Examples of attributes of fish populations are yield, breeding behaviour, biomass and genetic structure. Examples of ecosystem attributes are population richness, spatial occupancy and trophic structure. There are initiatives also by DFO to identify ecologically or biologically sensitive areas, ecologically or biologically sensitive species, Depleted Species and Degraded Areas. These too can be viewed as attributes of an ecosystem.

Strategies and references

As stated, objectives are very general statements that are translated into practical terms through the definition of strategies. Strategies state “what” will be done to manage pressures from human activities. Common pressures from fishing activities are fishing mortality, incidental mortality, and disturbance of bottom habitat. The strategies aim to control the impact of these pressures on the valued ecosystem attributes.

Strategies define how the pressures imposed by human activities will be managed. For example, what level of fishing mortality is viewed as acceptable? How much bottom habitat disturbance is too much? This is done by using references that define pressure levels that cause unacceptable or undesirable impacts on the attributes. The basis for determining references will vary depending on the state of knowledge. Some may be chosen fairly arbitrarily when knowledge is weak, perhaps based on historical trends. When more is known, their determination may involve evaluation of alternative population/ecosystem dynamics models, ranging from 'single species' to 'full ecosystem' models. There are many gaps in scientific knowledge of ecosystem structure and function, and, no matter how references are determined, they will need revision as the human and environmental factors affecting ecosystems become better understood.

Tactics

Tactics are sometimes referred to as tactical management measures. They are “how” the strategies will be implemented to manage the pressures imposed by fishery activities. Examples of tactics used in fisheries management can be found above within the Maritime Region’s Framework for an Ecosystem Approach to Management in a list under Section IV.

Monitoring and evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation are necessary for ensuring management plans are working as intended. Monitoring involves collecting data that will provide information on how well or badly the various features of the plan are performing. Evaluation involves determining whether strategies are being implemented adequately and whether they are doing their job in meeting the plan objectives. Evaluation also involves assessing whether the plan identifies and addresses all the important impacts on the ecosystem.

In fisheries management plans, strategies and references for pressures are likely to remain unchanged for the duration of the plan. However, as new understanding is gained, or when prevailing conditions alter the productivity of the resource, review and evaluation of strategies and references may be warranted. Tactics may be specified for the duration of the plan, or they may require regular intervention to set appropriate levels.

Plan enhancement

Developing a robust plan that addresses the full range of ecosystem impacts of a given activity will take time and resources, and it is unlikely that data to support all elements will be available at the outset. In recognition of this, management plans should identify the main weaknesses of the plan, including weaknesses in the data needed for setting references for strategies, evaluating pressures relative to the references, and checking compliance with tactics.

Management plans should also outline any data collection that is underway and the research required to make advances, noting the risks if not done.

Appendix 2: Management plan for the commercial gaspereau dip net fishery – Tusket River, Yarmouth County, NS (updated 2020)

Interpretation

For the purposes of this Management Plan:

  • “gaspereau” means both alewives (Alosa pseudoharengus) and bluebacks (Alosa aestivalis);
  • “dip stand” means a location specified in a commercial fishing licence where the licence holder is permitted to take gaspereau with a dip net.

Application

This management plan applies to the commercial gaspereau dip net fishery on the Tusket River between the southern extremity of Lake Vaughn at a line drawn between grid reference 613 634 and grid reference 614 634 and Black Point at a line drawn between grid reference 608 616 and grid reference 609 616.

Objective

To maintain the gaspereau stock at a level that will support an economically and environmentally sustainable fishery and undertake the necessary steps to rebuild stock levels.

Entry controls

  1. Dip net fishing on the Tusket River will only be permitted at the existing 18 commercial dip stands.
  2. The Tusket River Gaspereau Dip Netters Association (TRGDNA) will provide an annual list to DFO of those fishermen who are recommended for annual re-licensing for dip stands on the Tusket River.

Gear restrictions

Any requests for changes to gear type, quantities or restrictions that are inconsistent with the conditions on the previous year’s license will be vetted by DFO through the TRGDNA Advisory Committee for a recommendation.

License conditions

  1. Every person who fishes commercially for gaspereau with a dip net in the Tusket River must hold a commercial gaspereau fishing licence and be registered with DFO.
  2. License renewals will be carried out each year in accordance with DFO licensing policy and after DFO considers the recommendations of the TRGDNA.
  3. Licenses and conditions must be made available to a Fishery Officer upon request by the officer.

License transfers

  1. Commercial gaspereau dip net licenses may be transferred to a person who was registered as a commercial fisher in the preceding calendar year and engaged in a commercial gaspereau fishery in the preceding calendar year.
  2. Dip net licenses valid for the Tusket River may be transferred to eligible persons without the consent of other dip stand licence holders provided the transfers are in accordance with DFO licensing policy.

Conservation measures

  1. There is currently 4 day closure in place to gaspereau fishing from 8:00 am Monday to 8:00 am Friday throughout the fishing season unless otherwise varied by DFO pursuant to the Fishery (General) Regulations.
  2. One third of the width of the Tusket River must always be left open with no obstructions or fishing gear placed therein.
  3. Any breach of the above mentioned conservation measures will be reported to DFO.

New entrants

The TRGDNA, in consultation with DFO, have developed criteria for new entrants as follows:

  1. New licenses may only be issued at the discretion of Minister
  2. Must be registered the previous year
  3. Must have engaged in the gaspereau fishery in the previous year
  4. Knowledge of river and fish passage
  5. Has knowledge of dipnet management plan and DFO regulations
  6. Understands the importance of fish quality
  7. Has knowledge of equipment cleanliness ie: boats etc.
  8. Understanding of general equipment maintenance

Appendix 3: Gaspereau Licensing Policy – Lunenburg and Queens County, NS (updated 2020)

Application

This policy applies to the commercial and non-commercial (recreational and bait) harvesting of gaspereau in Lunenburg County and Queens County, NS.

Entry controls

  1. No additional non-commercial gill net, square net, trap net or weir licences shall be issued.
  2. All licensed commercial fishers must be registered with the department.
  3. No additional commercial dip net (see note below), gill net, square net, trap net or weir licences shall be issued.

Note: For the four (4) “grandfathered” site-specific dip stands identified in Appendix I to this policy, non-renewable licenses may be issued to helpers on a seasonal basis up to the maximum number identified for those sites. (Also, see section on Change of Licence Holders in the event of a licence transfer)

Gear restrictions

Gear types and gear quantities will be limited to those that appeared on the previous years’ licence.

License condition

  1. Gear type and quantity shall be annotated on the licence.
  2. Licenses will be issued in the name of the fisher holding the license and not in the name of a company.
  3. Each license is to be annotated "TO BE OPERATED BY” (name of license holder).
  4. Site-specific dip stands are identified in Appendix I to this policy. Only those identified in that Appendix are permitted to fish at the site specific dip stand.
  5. For gill net licences, each licence will be annotated for the tidal waters of the respective county only.
  6. Only those fishers listed in Appendix II to this policy qualified for new gaspereau bait licences and remain eligible for the Lunenburg County Gaspereau Bait License Condition.

Special employment criteria

Not applicable.

Vessel replacement rules

Not applicable.

Change of licence holders

  • Commmercial: Commercial gaspereau licences may be reissued to an individual who:
    1. was registered as a commercial fisher in Scotia-Fundy Sector of the Maritimes Region in the preceding calendar year; and
    2. actively engaged in a commercial fishery in the preceding calendar year.
  • Non-Commercial: Licences may not be reissued to another person.
  • Site-Specific Dip Stand Licenses with “grandfather” provisions:

    Upon transfer, the licences for the four (4) “grandfathered” site-specific dip stands identified in Appendix I to this policy will revert to owner/ operator licences.

  • Lunenburg County Gaspereau Bait License:

    Bait licences are not transferrable. The Lunenburg County Gaspereau Bait Licence Condition terminates for each licence holder identified in Appendix II when that person exits the fishery.

Residency

Not applicable.

Recreational fishery

For recreational licensing policy see non-commercial fisheries above.

Appendix I: Lunenburg/ Queens County gaspereau site specific dip stands

LaHave River
Name Stand No. Location Grandfather Provision
Redacted Dip Stand
No. 1 		West side of Cooks Falls, LaHave River Yes
May use 8 helpers with non-renewable licences
Redacted Dip Stand
No. 2 		West Branch LaHave River Yes
May use same 8 helpers as above with non-renewable licences
Redacted Dip Stand
No. 3 		East Side of Cooks Falls, LaHave River, 80 feet South of Stand No. 1 No
Redacted Dip Stand
No. 4 		Upstream from Indian Falls No
Medway River
Name Stand No. Location Grandfather Provision
Redacted Dip Stand
No. 1 		Glode Falls Yes
May use 5 helpers with non-renewable licences
Redacted Dip Stand
No. 2 		Bear Falls Yes
May use 5 helpers with non-renewable licences
Redacted Dip Stand
No. 3 		Buggy Hole No
Redacted Dip Stand
No. 4 		Rocky Falls No
Redacted Dip Stand
No. 5 		Salter’s Falls No

Appendix II: Lunenburg County gaspereau bait licence holders (updated 2020)

Name

Redacted

Appendix 4: Gaspereau dip net licensing policy for the Tusket River, Yarmouth County, NS (2005)

Application

This policy applies to the commercial harvesting of gaspereau in the Tusket and Carleton Rivers, Yarmouth County, Nova Scotia, by use of dip nets.

Entry controls:

  1. Commercial gaspereau dip net licences will be issued only to registered fishermen whose names are provided to DFO at the beginning of each fishing season through the Tusket River Gaspereau Dip Netters Association. Additional licences may be issued throughout the season on the request of the Association.
  2. No commercial gaspereau dip net licences will be issued that are valid for any place other than a dipping stand.
  3. No commercial gaspereau dipping stands will be operated except between Blacks Point and the southern extremity of Lake Vaughn.
  4. No more than 18 existing commercial gaspereau dipping stands will be operated at any time.
  5. All licensed commercial gaspereau dip net fishermen must be registered with the department.

Licence conditions:

  1. The type of gear (dip net) will be annotated on the licence and each licence will be valid only for the dipping stand(s) specified in it.
  2. Licences will be issued in the name of the fisherman holding the licence and not to a company.
  3. Each licence is to be annotated "To be operated by… (name of licence holder …)".

Appendix 5: Gaspereau dip net licensing policy for the Annis River, Yarmouth County, NS (n.d.)

Application

This policy applies to the commercial harvesting of gaspereau in the Annis River, Yarmouth county, Nova Scotia, by use of dip nets.

Entry controls:

  1. Commercial gaspereau dip net licences will be issued only to registered fishermen whose names are provided to DFO at the beginning of each fishing season through the Annis River Gaspereau Dip Netters Associations. Additional licences may be issued throughout the season on the request of the Association
  2. No commercial gaspereau dip net licences will be issued that are valid for any place other than a dipping stand.
  3. No commercial gaspereau dipping stands will be operated except below Deerfield, Yarmouth County, on the Annis River.
  4. No more than 16 existing commercial gaspereau dipping stands will be operated at any time.
  5. All licensed commercial gaspereau dip net fishermen must be registered with the department.

Licence conditions:

  1. The type of gear (dip net) will be annotated on the licence and each licence will be valid only for the dipping stand(s) specified in it.
  2. Licences will be issued in the name of the fisherman holding the licence and not to a company.
  3. Each licence is to be annotated “To be operated by… (name of licence holder…)”.

Appendix 6: Commercial gaspereau dip net licensing policy – Porcupine Brook, Yarmouth County, NS (2009)

Application

This policy applies to the commercial dip net harvesting of gaspereau on the Porcupine Brook dip stand at 43 51.464N 66 01.891W to the following individuals:

  • Redacted
  • Redacted
  • Redacted
  • Redacted
  • Redacted
  • Redacted

Note: The addresses and contact information of licence holders harvesting at this stand have been redacted for privacy purposes.

Entry controls

  1. Dip net fishing on the Porcupine Brook will only be permitted at the 1 existing commercial dip stand.
  2. The Porcupine Brook will be fished by those harvesters who are licensed for the dip stand on the Porcupine Brook.
  3. No additional commercial dip net, gill net, square net, trap net or weir licences shall be issued.
  4. All licensed commercial gaspereau dip net harvesters must be registered with the department.

Gear restrictions

Gear types and gear quantities will be limited to those that appeared on the previous years’ licence.

Licence conditions

  1. Gear type and quantity shall be annotated on the licence.
  2. Licenses will be issued in the name of the fisher holding the license and not in the name of a company.
  3. Individuals are permitted to fish on a site-specific dip stand.
  4. License is non-renewable. The Area Resource branch and RHQ (Greg Stevens) will review annually prior to re-issuance.
  5. Licenses and conditions must be made available to a Fishery Officer upon request by the officer.

Special employment criteria

Not applicable.

Vessel replacement rules

Not applicable.

Change of licence holders

Licence is non-transferable. Should a licensed harvester no longer be able / want to participate in the fishery, the Greenville Community will make a recommendation to the DFO for a replacement harvester.

Residency

Must be a Greenville Community resident.

Recreational Fishery

Not applicable.

Appendix 7: Southwest New Brunswick Shad and Gaspereau Advisory Committee – terms of reference (Draft, 2020)

  1. Purpose - The Southwest New Brunswick Shad / Gaspereau Advisory Committee will provide advice to Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) on the management of the shad and gaspereau resources in inland and tidal waters of New Brunswick tributary to the Bay of Fundy or adjacent to the province in the Bay of Fundy. That advice, although not strictly limited, will focus primarily on sustainability of the resource and responsible fishing practices. The committee will serve as the pre-eminent consultative forum for the development of management measures for shad and gaspereau in this area.

  2. Scope - The committee will provide advice on annual fishing plans, regulatory measures, fishing seasons, licensing policies, size limitations and gear restrictions. It will make recommendations on the introduction of new fishing technologies into the fishery that may affect the existing management measures.

    The committee, after being provided available and pertinent information fromthe stakeholders and DFO, will give consideration to science, economic, enforcement and other information as it affects the management of the resource.

  3. Administration
    1. Structure – Any change to the structure and administration of the committee shall be decided by the committee.
    2. Subcommittees – The committee may establish subcommittees/working groups to review and assess specific policy options and management measures.
    3. Meetings – Meetings can be held throughout Southwest New Brunswick. Meetings will be held at times and places convenient to the members.
    4. Expenses – Committee members will not be reimbursed for expenses incurred for attending Advisory Committee meetings.
    5.  Decision making – No formal voting procedures will be established. The committee will seek to arrive at a consensus on issues before it. For the purposes of this committee, consensus means:
      1. an opinion held by all or most
      2. general agreement.
    6. Minutes of meetings – Minutes of the committee’s meetings will be prepared and distributed by DFO unless otherwise directed by the committee.
    7. Public access – All advisory committee meetings held by DFO are open to the public. The committee may decide to exclude the media.
    8. Numbers of meetings – The committee will meet at least once a year,no later than February. When possible a second meeting will be held in September/October. Additional meetings can be held if requiredat the request of the committee.
    9. Attendance – If a member cannot attend, an alternateshall be nominated and the Chairperson(s) notified as far in advance of the meeting as possible.
    10. Membership : Chairpersons – The committee will be co-chaired by the Area Director for Southwest New Brunswick, or the Area Director’s representative, and a non-government, industry chosen representative.
      Membership on the committee shall be made up of those industry sectors having a vested interest in the conservation and harvest of the resource, as well as Indigenous representatives and representatives of the provincial government and DFO.

Appendix 8: Yarmouth/Shelburne County Gaspereau Advisory Committee – terms of reference (Updated 2020)

  1. Purpose – The purpose of the Yarmouth/Shelburne Gaspereau Advisory Committee is to provide advice to Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) on the management of the gaspereau resources in inland and tidal waters of Yarmouth and Shelburne Counties. That advice, although not strictly limited to, will focus primarily on sustainability of the resource and responsible fishing practices. The committee will serve as the pre-eminent consultative forum for the development of management measures for gaspereau in this area.
  2. Scope – The committee will be the focal point for government/industry/public consultations on matters relating to the gaspereau fishery within Yarmouth County and Shelburne County, including but not limited to annual fishing plans and resource management issues; licensing and other policies; and regulatory measures such as seasonal closures, size limitations, and gear restrictions.
  3. Administration
    1. Structure – Any changes to the structure and administration of the committee will be decided by the committee membership.
    2. Meetings – Meetings will be held in a location within the Yarmouth/Shelburne area. When feasible, meetings will be held at times and places convenient to the members. Meetings may be held face-to-face or may be by conference call or web based.
    3. Subcommittees – The committee may establish sub-committees or working groups to review and access specific policy options and management measures.
    4. Expenses – Committee members will not be reimbursed for expense incurred while attending committee meetings.
    5. Decision making – The committees will seek to operate on a consensus basis. Where consensus is not reached, harvester representatives shall be polled for advice. All views shall be reported in the minutes.
    6. Minutes of meetings – Minutes of the committee’s meetings will be prepared and distributed by DFO.
    7. Public access – Unless a majority of committee members say otherwise before a meeting starts, the proceedings will be open to the public and to media representatives.
    8. Numbers of meetings – The Advisory Committee shall meet a minimum of once a year. Additional meetings or subcommittee meetings may be held if required.
    9. Attendance – If a member cannot attend, an alternate may be nominated and the Chair notified as far in advance of the meeting date as possible.

    10. Membership : Chairspersons – The committee may be co-chaired by the Area Director for Southwest Nova Scotia (or representative) and a non-government, industry-chosen representative if the committee so chooses.

      Membership on the committee shall be made up of those industry sectors having a vested interest in the conservation and harvest of the resource, as well as Indigenous representatives, representatives of the provincial government, DFO, Nova Scotia Power Inc., and recreational fishers. Additional members may be appointed by the Chair following consideration by the committee membership.

Appendix 9: Lunenburg/Queens County Gaspereau Advisory Committee – terms of reference (Updated 2020)

  1. Purpose – The purpose of the Lunenburg/Queens Gaspereau Advisory Committee is to provide advice to Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) on the management of the gaspereau resources in inland and tidal waters of Lunenburg and Queens Counties. That advice, although not strictly limited to, will focus primarily on sustainability of the resource and responsible fishing practices. The committee will serve as the pre-eminent consultative forum for the development of management measures for gaspereau in this area.
  2. Scope – The committee will be the focal point for government/industry/public consultations on matters relating to the gaspereau fishery within Lunenburg County and Queens County, including but not limited to annual fishing plans and resource management issues, licensing and other policies, and regulatory measures such as seasonal closures, size limitations, and gear restrictions.
  3. Administration
    1.  Structure – Any changes to the structure and administration of the committee will be decided by the committee membership.
    2. Meetings – Meetings will be held in a location within the Lunenburg/Queens area. Meetings may be held face-to-face or may be by conference call or web based. Normally, an annual meeting is held in February or March and the location should alternate between Liverpool and Bridgewater.
    3. Subcommittees – The committee may establish sub-committees or working groups to review and access specific policy options and management measures.
    4. Expenses – Committee members will not be reimbursed for expense incurred while attending committee meetings.
    5. Decision making – The committee will seek to operate on a consensus basis. When consensus is not reached, harvester representatives shall be polled for advice. All views shall be reported in the minutes.
    6. Minutes of meetings – Minutes of the committee’s meetings will be prepared and distributed by DFO.
    7. Public access – Unless a majority of committee members say otherwise before a meeting starts, the proceedings will be open to the public and to media representatives.
    8. Numbers of meetings – The Advisory Committee shall meet a minimum of once a year. Additional meetings or sub-committee meetings may be held if required.
    9. Attendance – If a member cannot attend, an alternate may be nominated and the Chair notified as far in advance of the meeting date as possible.
    10. Membership – The committee may be co-chaired by the Area Director for South West Nova Scotia (or representative) and an industry representative if the committee so chooses. Membership on the committee shall be made up of those industry sectors having a vested interest in the conservation and harvest of the resource, as well as Indigenous representatives, representatives of the provincial government, DFO, Nova Scotia Power Inc., and recreational fishers. Additional members may be appointed by the Chair following consideration by the committee membership.

Appendix 10: Gaspereau River Advisory Committee – terms of reference (Updated 2020)

  1. Purpose – The Gaspereau River Advisory Committee will provide advice to Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) on the management of the gaspereau resources in the Gaspereau River and area. That advice, although not strictly limited to, will focus primarily on sustainability of the resource and responsible fishing practices. The committee will serve as the pre-eminent consultative forum for the development of management measures for gaspereau in this area.

  2. Scope - The committee will provide advice on annual fishing plans, regulatory measures, fishing seasons, licensing policies, size limitations, and gear restrictions. It will make recommendations on the introduction of new fishing technologies into the fishery that may affect the existing management measures.

    The committee, after being provided available and pertinent information from the stakeholders and DFO, will give consideration to science, economic, enforcement, and other information as to how it affects the management of the resource.

  3. Administration
    1. Structure – Any changes to the structure and administration of the committee shall be decided by the committee as a whole.
    2. Subcommittees – The committee as a whole may establish subcommittees/working groups to review and access specific policy options and management measures.
    3. Meetings – Meetings will be held at times and places convenient to the members.
    4. Expenses – Committee members will not be reimbursed for expenses incurred for attending Advisory Committee meetings.
    5. Decision making – No formal voting procedures will be established. The committee will seek to arrive at a consensus on issues before it. For the purposes of this committee, consensus means: (1) an opinion held by all or most; (2) general agreement.
    6. Minutes of meetings – Minutes of the committee’s meetings will be prepared and distributed by DFO unless otherwise directed by the Committee as a whole.
    7. Public access – All advisory committee meetings held by DFO are open to the public. The Committee as a whole may decide to exclude the media.
    8. Numbers of meetings – The committee will meet at least once a year. Additional meetings can be held if required at the request of the committee as a whole.
    9. Attendance – If a member cannot attend, an alternate shall be nominated and the Co-chair(s) notified as far in advance of the meeting as possible.
    10. Membership

      Co-chairs : The committee will be co-chaired by the Area Director for Southwest Nova Scotia, or their representative, and a non-government, industry chosen representative.

      Membership on the committee shall be made up of those industry sectors having a vested interest in the conservation and harvest of the resource, as well as Indigenous representatives, representatives of the provincial government, DFO, and recreational fishers.

      Membership of this committee should include:

      • Drift net fishers
      • Indigenous representatives (Glooscap, Annapolis, Native Council)
      • NS Department of Agriculture and Fisheries
      • NS Power Corporation
      • Gaspereau River Square Net Fishermen’s Association
      • NS Federation of Anglers and Hunters
      • NS Department of Environment
      • Atlantic Salmon Federation

Appendix 11: Conservation & Protection statistical summary for 2018-2020

Total hours dedicated to gaspereau
2018 2019 2020
2212.75 2390 2716

Note: The above totals are for the entire Maritimes Region C&P Area

Number of checks
Year 2018 2019 2020
Vehicles 36 10 29
Vessels 51 15 17
Persons 161 154 207
Gear 217 137 444
Site checks 745 676 1110

Appendix 12: Gaspereau violations by issue and calendar year, 2018 to 2020

Note: This index is derived from the Fishery Officer time tracking system. This includes all violations observed by Fishery Officers and not just those that resulted in an apprehension, charge or conviction. This index does not consider severity.

Gaspereau violations by issue and calendar year – 2018 to 2020
Issue 2018 2019 2020 Total
Area/time
Fish for gaspereau during a close time 12 13 23 48
Illegal gear/ gear used illegally
Gear used illegally 5 11 8 24
Gear conflict 1 - - 1
Illegal buy/ sell/ possess
Illegal buy sell possess 1 3 2 6
Quota/ bag limit 2 3 - 5
Registration/ license
Registration license 3 2 10 15
Reporting - 2 129 131
Other
Assault/ obstruct 1 1 - 2
Habitat 1 - - 1
Other legislation - 1 - 1
Total 26 36 172 234

Appendix 13: Gaspereau violations by action taken, 2015 to 2017

Gaspereau violations by action taken – 2018 to 2020
Action 2018 2019 2020 Total
Charges laid 2 11 1 14
Charges not approved 1 1 1 3
Charges pending/under review 6 1 1 8
Seizure(s) - persons unknown 2 4 1 7
Ticket issued 3 5 11 19
Warning issued 12 14 157 183
Total 26 36 172 234
Date modified: