HALIBUT CLOSURE
- Thread starter expertfisher780
- Start date
the fog ducker
Well-Known Member
i agree , expose the guides and lodges , f'n bs on there parts ,
they dont give a **** about our issues , they just want to grab the money and run , COMMERCIAL as it gets !!!
fd
they dont give a **** about our issues , they just want to grab the money and run , COMMERCIAL as it gets !!!
fd
T
The Jackel
Guest
Shouldn't be hard to figure out when you see a boat fishing for halibut now???
fogged in
Well-Known Member
Who do you figure got these three posted yesterday...first nations??
Birds were feeding on 3 fresh Halibut carcasses at James bay anglers ramp when we launched.
T
The Jackel
Guest
Posted where????
fogged in
Well-Known Member
T
The Jackel
Guest
Ah thanks for that i dont read Vic reports as i dont fish there i thought it was in Sooke
Why not, it has already happened, the precedent is set. All it took was an organized campaign by the sport sector and a Federal Government going into an election with a west coast cabinet minister who felt threatened because he had won his seat in the last election by only a few votes and was concerned he would lose. I understand Govt. candidates were getting quite worked up about seeing all the 88/12 crossed out bumper stickers and I suspect had a talk with the PM of the day. There are, after all, a great many sports fishers on this coast and a lot of us vote.
Quota is a rather strange concept. As I understand it various Federal Governments have taken the position that fish cannot be owned before they are caught. Quota gets sold and leased which suggests it has value. On the other hand legislation allows the Minister to reassign quota at will without compensation which suggests that it has no value and in my view makes purchasing it a risky undertaking. As I recall when the Minister used his authority in legislation to transfer quota from the commercial sector to the sport sector without compensation it was challenged in court by some in the commercial sector and the courts upheld the Minister's authority to do so. Granted it was only 3% and fell well short of correcting the grievous unfairness inherent in the original Halibut quota distribution and the forced inappropriate imposition of the quota system onto the sport sector.
To my way of thinking Quota is the financial equivalent of Schrodinger’s Cat in that it can be thought of as both having value and no value. Perhaps its time for the Sport Sector to again make it politically expedient for the Minister to once again, open the box.
Last edited:
fish brain
Crew Member
As a retired dairy farmer I am very familiar with the nuances of quota. As @Rockfish mentioned above you pay for it, but you dont really own it. Over the years I had my Quota increased and clawed back (Mostly increased) The problem is that those who own (have paid for) Quota feel it's their god given right to use it. I remember one year when we had huge increases, suggesting that we give the increase to new farmers, I was booed out of the room.
I do know that buying the quota will be expensive, but it will indelibly establish out TAC percentage. Where gaining the sympathy of the minister might be less likely.
What might work best is a combination, where we put our money where our mouth is by buying some quota, and asking the minister for more to make up what we feel is a realistic portion of the TAC
I do know that buying the quota will be expensive, but it will indelibly establish out TAC percentage. Where gaining the sympathy of the minister might be less likely.
What might work best is a combination, where we put our money where our mouth is by buying some quota, and asking the minister for more to make up what we feel is a realistic portion of the TAC
Cut Plug
Well-Known Member
As mentioned, the idea of using a halibut stamp to purchase, (not lease) quota is not new, and was explored pretty thoroughly as part of the Halibut Allocation Transfer Committee's work in 2010. Back then the User Fee Act made it pretty much impossible to implement. The idea is to use a stamp fee to generate the funds to permanently acquire additional quota over time to add to the 15% allocation provided to the recreational sector. I have no idea what it currently costs to acquire quota, how such a transfer could be made on a sectoral basis vs individual to individual, how much a stamp might cost and whether or not DFO or any commercial quota holders have an appetite to engage such a proposal. Those are details that would have to be worked out, but I still believe that if you take the long view, rather than whats going to make a difference next year, that if such a program has the potential to permanently (notwithstanding the ministers right to reallocate) transfer quota to our sector, depending on the cost of the stamp it could transfer a fairly meaningful amount after only a few years. Like the amount required to keep us open this year. Heck, if the stamp cost us as much as the retail value of one 15lb halibut, we could potentially be swimming in quota in 5 years assuming anyone in the commercial sector will sell it to us for less than $75.00\lb! Not suggesting that, so don't break out the flamethrowers. All I'm trying to do is put out potential realistic solutions that are different than the political route.
Don't forget the defining flexibility over time option as well. It has real potential to allow us to avoid closures in the future as long as we remain responsible in our approach to management measures vs TAC, and demonstrate our willingness to actually change things to account for an overage. It does nothing to change the requirement for size limits, annual limits etc, but could prevent the negative impacts of an early closure by allowing folks to plan vacations, and allowing businesses to manage inventory and regain trust with lodge\charter customers without forcing them to pay for the privilege of becoming quasi commercial halibut fishermen.
CP
Don't forget the defining flexibility over time option as well. It has real potential to allow us to avoid closures in the future as long as we remain responsible in our approach to management measures vs TAC, and demonstrate our willingness to actually change things to account for an overage. It does nothing to change the requirement for size limits, annual limits etc, but could prevent the negative impacts of an early closure by allowing folks to plan vacations, and allowing businesses to manage inventory and regain trust with lodge\charter customers without forcing them to pay for the privilege of becoming quasi commercial halibut fishermen.
CP
Last edited:
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
While this story is about commercial, it shows the power the Minister has.
There is no guarantee, it is all about politics.
http://www.thetelegram.com/business...erprise-to-his-son--but-with-an-uncertai.html
There is no guarantee, it is all about politics.
http://www.thetelegram.com/business...erprise-to-his-son--but-with-an-uncertai.html
Aces
Well-Known Member
Can you post a link? May be those guides from Port Hardy that are being investigated
trophywife
Crew Member
post it up !! linky!!
ziggy
Well-Known Member
If quota is being bought, as I understand it it is from the 85% the commercial boats own, not our 15%. If so,it wouldn't make a difference to us as recreational fisherman in regards to the early closing this year.
Similar threads
