May 13, 1953


Item agreed to. Field services- 136. Field services administration, $468,900.


LIB

Andrew Wesley Stuart

Liberal

Mr. Stuart (Charlotte):

If the minister has the figures, would he mind putting on the record the number of fishermen who were benefited by this bounty during the past year and the average payment?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
LIB

James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries)

Liberal

Mr. Sinclair:

The number of fishermen

was 10,640; the number of vessels, 3,718. The bounty is $9.55 in each case.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
LIB

Andrew Wesley Stuart

Liberal

Mr. Stuart (Charlotte):

In your insurance plan is there any thought of using this sum for any other purpose?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
LIB

Item agreed to. Field services- 140. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $17,050.


LIB

Andrew Wesley Stuart

Liberal

Mr. Stuart (Charlotte):

Has the minister any plan for improvement at the biological station in St. Andrews, such as in the way of a new building there which is greatly needed?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
LIB

James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries)

Liberal

Mr. Sinclair:

That matter comes under a

later item, that of the fisheries research board.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink

Item agreed to. Fish culture and development branch- Field services- 141. Operation and maintenance, $665,400'..


PC

William Joseph Browne

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Browne (St. John's West):

Items 14f and 142 deal with the same subject. One deals with operation and maintenance and the other with the construction of buildings.. In the Walsh report dealing with salmon, they say:

The presence of a salmon hatchery in the province' with a competent local fish culture unit would be of great assistance both to research and practice in building up new salmon populations in parts of rivers now blocked or newly opened up to salmon.

After having described all the enemies the salmon have to face in order to produce spawn and for the young to grow they recommend hatcheries. There is no hatchery in Newfoundland. This matter has been mooted for many years and has been recommended by me. Has any consideration been given to that question up to the present time?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
LIB

James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries)

Liberal

Mr. Sinclair:

The policy of the department on the west coast and in Newfoundland has been not to build hatcheries. Over the

Supply-Fisheries

long run we have found it better to clear the streams and to allow the salmon to find the very best natural hatcheries rather than to build artificial hatcheries. It is true that we have carried on artificial hatcheries in two of the maritime provinces; but certainly experience in British Columbia and in Newfoundland also, I think, shows that the best way to improve the salmon run is to clear the streams and to get rid of the predators which attack salmon and to put under control both commercial and sport fishing on those streams.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
PC

William Joseph Browne

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Browne (St. John's West):

While I can agree with the minister in theory, he must remember that in Newfoundland we have had experience, because I have done salmon fishing for many years. What has happened is that woodsmen have been allowed to cut trees along the banks of the rivers. The effect of that procedure is that when we have rainfall there is a quick run-off, and the rivers become nearly dry. Often there is no salmon fishing of any kind for tourists or sportsmen during the summer. Unless there is collaboration between the provincial government and the Department of Fisheries at Ottawa to prevent wood cutting along the banks of the rivers, in that way allowing the trees to grow up again, and if necessary to do reforestation along them, the situation will become worse. If nothing is done, the salmon fishery, as far as tourists and sportsmen are concerned, is going to be a thing of the past. I myself have seen rivers in my time go down badly on this account.

If I may refer to the next item, I notice that there is an expenditure of over $500,000 more. That item deals with fish culture and development branch, construction or acquisition of buildings. The amount is over $500,000 more than it was the previous year. I was just wondering about that. I refer to page 203. The amount is more than $500,000 more than the amount which was voted last year. We voted $318,190 and the estimated total for 1952-53 is $818,000. I do not know whether or not that is a misprint.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
LIB

James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries)

Liberal

Mr. Sinclair:

$286,800 is the figure shown on page 23.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
PC

William Joseph Browne

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Browne (St. John's West):

I was

referring to page 203, at the bottom of the page.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
LIB
PC

William Joseph Browne

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Browne (St. John's West):

That is the vote for last year, but the expenditure estimated for 1952-53 as given here in $818,000.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
LIB

James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries)

Liberal

Mr. Sinclair:

The difference there is for the work done in the Babine river in British

Columbia, with regard to the Babine slide. We spent about half a million dollars in moving that slide.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink

Item agreed to.


LIB

Louis-René Beaudoin (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The Chairman:

Under this item of fish culture and development branch, there are items 141, 142 and supplementary item 663.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink
PC

Winfield Chester Scott McLure

Progressive Conservative

Mr. McLure:

There is one thing I wish to mention. I should have done so a moment ago, but I guess I missed it. What I wanted to say was this. It may be all right under fish culture here but it is something that has to do with markets. I refer to the changing of the name in the marketing of canned mackerel. The name "mackerel" has been hard to get on the market as a canned food. But when it has been marketed under a new name, that of tuna chicken, it had wonderful success. The matter was brought before the federation this last year, and I am sure it will come before the Department of Fisheries. For instance, they are going to ask permission to use the name "tuna chicken" on their cans. Without getting anybody into any trouble-because they are out of it now-may I say that a couple of fishermen made a great success-in a small way, of course-of selling canned mackerel but they did not sell it under the name "mackerel". They sold it under the name "tuna chicken". Of course, tuna and mackerel belong to the same family. When this question comes before the Department of Fisheries I hope those who are making the regulations will permit people to can mackerel and put it under the name of "tuna chicken". If they do there will be a tremendous market created, because canned tuna has no comparison with canned mackerel. They could not get the word "mackerel" to take successfully as a canned fish. By changing it to "tuna chicken" the market will take a great deal of the mackerel off our coast in the form of canned fish. I know that the demand on the market for it a few years ago before the authorities caught up with the men who were running the factory was good. They had a great success in marketing it.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
Permalink

May 13, 1953