First Nation Opposes Changes To Halibut Quota

IronNoggin

Well-Known Member
Far to many smokescreens and downright misinformation in this piece to even know where to begin. Even with all of its' erroneous content, you gotta know the Feds will be downright leaping all over this...

"First Nation Opposes Changes To Halibut Quota - Calls Canada's Integrity Into Question
ANACLA, B.C. - The Huu-ay-aht First Nation is strongly opposing possible changes to the halibut quota as proposed by the BC Sports Fishing Coalition.

"In 50 days our treaty becomes officially implemented, and our negotiated fishing rights are already under threat," said Huu-ay-aht Chief Councillor Robert Dennis. "Shifting additional halibut quota to wealthy anglers at expensive fishing resorts takes food out of our mouths of our people, and we will not allow them to affect the health of our communities."

DFO is considering more than doubling the recreational halibut quota from 12% of the Total Allowable Catch to 31%. That would have a negative impact on the Huu-ay-aht First Nation who have agreed through treaty to take their 0.39% share from the commercial allocation.

“We negotiated a commercial fishing agreement to coincide with our treaty to ensure Maa-nulth First Nations can establish an economic foundation,” said Charlie Cootes, President of the Maa-nulth Treaty Society. “Any reallocation of halibut quota would undermine the intentions of the Maa-nulth Final Agreement and could have legal repurcussions.”

Last year, the recreational sector exceeded their quota by about 51,000 kilograms (112,000 lbs.) while halibut stocks are believed to be in decline.

"The Sport Fishing industry is getting away with overfishing and endangering the stock," said Huu-ay-aht Director of Lands and Resources Larry Johnson, who was also a Canadian Commissioner on the International Pacific Halibut Commission (2009-10). "After 14 years of treaty negotiations and relationship-building with the Government of Canada, for them to change the quota right before our final agreement comes into effect really brings their integrity into question."

The Huu-ay-aht First Nation is calling on the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to maintain the existing halibut quota system and not reward the recreational sector for exceeding their quota and endangering halibut stocks in 2009.

For more information please contact:
Huu-ay-aht Chief Councillor Robert Dennis or Huu-ay-aht Lands and Resources Director Larry Johnson
250.723.0100"
 
Brutal.

Honest Johnson's really let me down here.

I'm gonna bite my tongue really hard on this one. But I'm calling him myself.
 
I will be on the phone right after you Jeff. Not cool at all.. He is trying to turn this in to a conservation issue, instead of the reality of the halibut stocks being a "Common resource" that are being monopolised by one user group that forms a small percentage of the population..
 
It sounds like he has just been misinformed and being used. A reallocation of 88/12 does not in any way effects or would decrease the amount of allocation firsts nations will receive under treaty. It sounds like someone got to him and scared/misinformed him. It is interesting that in Washington State that after First Nations Allocation is prioritized the remainder of the allocation is divided 50% to the commercial fishery and 50% to the recreational fishery . This is a fair allocation issue, not a conservation issue and no amount of spin is going to change that.
First nations people have as much to lose as anyone if the unfair allocation is not fixed. Many Bands operate campgrounds, marinas and gas stations etc. which benefit from the recreational fishery.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It sounds like he has just been misinformed and being used. A reallocation of 88/12 does not in any way effects or would decrease the amount of allocation firsts nations will receive under treaty. It sounds like someone got to him and scared/misinformed him. It is interesting that in Washington State that after First Nations Allocation is prioritized the remainder of the allocation is divided 50% to the commercial fishery and 50% to the recreational fishery . This is a fair allocation issue, not a conservation issue and no amount of spin is going to change that.
First nations people have as much to lose as anyone if the unfair allocation is not fixed. Many Bands operate campgrounds, marinas and gas stations etc. which benefit from the recreational fishery.

Larry was a commissioner for Canada at IPHC, he sat at the gordon process for FN, and I believe he runs a small charter business... can't get much more informed than that.
 
Larry was a commissioner for Canada at IPHC, he sat at the gordon process for FN, and I believe he runs a small charter business... can't get much more informed than that.

Now it appears he is paid to defend questionable news releases by one band.
 
It is perfectly conscionable for FN members to show concern, just as any group would do the same. Here inlays an issue which has not been addressed in a manor to which all parties share or have insight. Quite frankly I would feel uneasy also.
 
It is perfectly conscionable for FN members to show concern, just as any group would do the same. Here inlays an issue which has not been addressed in a manor to which all parties share or have insight. Quite frankly I would feel uneasy also.

Please let us know what you feel uneasy about?

Please go thru the orginal statement and tell us what is truth and what are the facts?

You seem to have all the answer?
 
It looks like this First Nations gentleman has his facts messed up. He needs an update of the situation!
 
Please let us know what you feel uneasy about?

Please go thru the orginal statement and tell us what is truth and what are the facts?

You seem to have all the answer?

There is a different meaning between "I would feel" and "I feel", perhaps, you can read through and digest his concerns that are built around the longstanding negotiations that the FN have been engulfed in and are coming to a resolve. Imagine the work and effort that they have gone through to get to where they are. Talk with him graciously, listen first.
 
There is a different meaning between "I would feel" and "I feel", perhaps, you can read through and digest his concerns that are built around the longstanding negotiations that the FN have been engulfed in and are coming to a resolve. Imagine the work and effort that they have gone through to get to where they are. Talk with him graciously, listen first.

I'm talking to you not what has been written-I understand what are friend has written and feeling- another spin of the actual facts- Perhaps if you had a better understanding what really is going on here you would also see this- as you say " listen first "but more importantly understand all sides before you speak-
 
I'm talking to you not what has been written-I understand what are friend has written and feeling- another spin of the actual facts- Perhaps if you had a better understanding what really is going on here you would also see this- as you say " listen first "but more importantly understand all sides before you speak-

Speak for yourself. Don't assume too deeply. I just gave you a starting point.
 
Speak for yourself. Don't assume too deeply. I just gave you a starting point.

Starting point or Stirring Sh$$T? Man you are hard to take. I have been hesitating to respond to any of your obscure rhetoric, but man are you ever nauseating.
Your dialogue is as constructive and progressive as your avatar looks....
 
It is perfectly conscionable for FN members to show concern, just as any group would do the same. Here inlays an issue which has not been addressed in a manor to which all parties share or have insight. Quite frankly I would feel uneasy also.

Am I Missing something here? Is the FN volume of catch not allotted First - right after the TAC is set and then removed out of the Commercial % of TAC? That is the way that I understood it. So would it not be that the only thing that has bearing on the FN allottment is the TAC set by the IPHC if it fluctuates from year to year based upon conservation, nothing to do with what % is alloted to the Sport Fishing Sector?

So why "would" you feel uneasy also if your catch was based on a fixed % of the TAC total for the year?

Any Insight here DD (or anyone else for that matter)???? Please share.
 
It looks like this First Nations gentleman has his facts messed up. He needs an update of the situation!

I think he has the facts pretty close. I would be a littel nervous about FN taking a position on the matter. Especially when there is a treaty that is about to be signed off on..
 
Back
Top