Int'l Pacific Halibut Commission Annual Meeting - Victoria, Mon thru Fri

[UkeeDreamin]

Thought folks would be interested in this paper presented by DFO at this week's Int'l Pacific Halibut Commission Annual Meeting:

http://www.iphc.int/meetings/2013am/documents/5.1DFOsummaryFL.pdf

Regarding Rec Halibut Fishing in 2012, the DFO report says we harvested 1,157,879 lbs, which is about 6.5% over the Rec TAC of 1,084,65 lbs for 2012. Though, as has been stated many times on this forum, the accuracy of the creel survey/overflight methodology of estimating the Rec catch is far from great and would have error greater than the 6.5% overage. (Interesting, though, that all of Canada's TAC wasn't harvested in 2012 - i.e. Rec fishery was shut down despite harvestable TAC being left this season!)

More concerning is the fact that a revised biomass estimation model being promoted this year would see biomass estimates and harvest recommendations reduced by some 30%. The Commissions info submitted on the first day proposes Area 2B's rec harvest between 0.65 and 0.7 million lbs, depending on the scenario, which is more than a 30% reduction from our TAC last year and is only 60% of our estimated harvest last year!!

Numbers I've posted on this forum before show that our season length and total harvest were virtually identical in 2011 and 2012, meaning the slot limit did nothing to reduce harvest last season. Regardless, if BC's Rec TAC is reduced even close to what is proposed there will be some serious changes to this year's season and/or regs.

Also very disturbing is the fact the Commission has endorsed DFO's 85:15% split between the commercial and rec sectors. I've seen nothing in the way of submissions from any Canadian or BC Rec fishing organizations promoting our position, despite the open call by the IPHC for any and all submissions regarding management actions prior to this meeting. The meeting is open to the public and is available via live webcast as well. After each day the day's presentations and support materials are also posted for the public to view. Just go to the IPHC's website and go to the 2013 Annual Meeting link:

http://www.iphc.int

Interested to know if any members here have attended or plan on attending any of this year's meeting sessions?

Ukee

PS - one last thing, the lease quota harvested by the Rec sector in 2012 was just 1,266 lbs.

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Aren't the splits in Alaska and Washington state vastly more in favor of the recreational fishery?? From my understanding the vast majority of Alaska has already decided that limits for sportsfishers will be the same as last year...with a 30% reduction how could they do this?

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Also just emailed Fin Donnelly about the issue...

 

[searun]

Here's the summary of what was recommended for rec TAC in 2013 compared to 2012:

Area 2a is 37.9% reduction
Area 2b is 29.6%
Area 2c is 14.8%
Area 3a is 23.5%
Area 3b is 36.7%

If the Alaskans decide to stay the course any sport allocation will have to come out of the commercial sector, and I can't see that happening considering those reductions in TAC. So they can propose all they want, they will have to find that quota from somewhere within their overall TAC which is reduced.

Don't be too surprised by the IPHC confirming the 85/15 split - they are only re-stating the regulatory process each area set up to manage their fishery. DFO determines how that allocation will be divided, and 85/15 is the decision reached and that isn't about to change.

The rec catch in 2011 was 1.220 million lbs, compared to 2012 at 1.157 million lbs. Difference between both seasons was the rec tac was increased by 3% with the adjustment from 88/12 to 85/15 split. The difference was 63,000 lbs. You may recall that the intent of the slot was to try to spread out the catch to help extend the season. The problem with that was our assumption was that the catch rate would be similar from one year to the next. That was not what happened in the 2012 fishery, and the rec fleet was far more efficient at catching the TAC by weight of landed fish (not actual numbers of fish landed). Any change in the fishing effort say for example towards targeting larger fish would impact the speed at which the rec fleet fills its quota. You can't measure the effectiveness of the slot limit on the number of days you got to fish. There are too many variables at play.

So, if our TAC is reduced by 29% over last year, and our catch efficiency remains similar or beter than 2012, you can expect we will catch our TAC quickly. I'm guessing that unless our TAC, or split between rec and commercial changes, or unused TAC from hold backs DFO manages for FN fisheries that even doing a slot limit such as we did last season will be a difficult task. 1 and 1 might be a consideration, shorter season, or pirating TAC from an unsuspecting slipper skipper.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Actually, Searun, there aren't that many factors to consider - you only need to consider how many lbs of fish were caught and how long it took to catch them. Comparing 2011, without the slot, and 2012 with the slot, is very simple as both seasons had the same start dates, both seasons were closed on the same weekend - the weekend following the Labour Day weekend and the two TACs were within 5% of each other, which we all know is within the large error with a creel survey/overflight methodology of estimation. DFO knew this thus the identical seasons. Same number of days fishing and same poundage caught equals absolutely no difference between having a slot and not having a slot. The only other variable that could be added is reliable data showing the average number of folks targetting halibut on a daily basis was increased significantly and there is no data that I've seen anywhere that would suggest that. A focussed assessment, with a defensible methodology, would have to be completed to provide any reliable numbers in that regard and that definitely has not occurred.

Searun, you keep defending the slot as being effective despite the data that clearly suggests otherwise, so, my question to you is - What's your vested interest in the ridiculous slot reg that has you defending it endlessly despite evidence it did nothing?

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Rather have the one over one under than just one....

 

[Theb55]

Over and under was solely to appease guides and lodges. The rest of us can go home after a days catch and start the counter again

 

[UkeeDreamin]

You're missing the point Serengetti - there is absolutely no difference in harvest rate between having one per day/two in possession with no slot and the "one under one over" regulation. As such, why would any of us accept it let alone promote it? Defies logic/common sense.

 

[GDW]

So where us the south island anglers coalition or whatever they call themselves in all of this? Come on boys your not going to get a better time to show yourselves.

 

[chris73]

SVIAC does have at least one representative at the conference at all times, sometimes two (they have one official vote). I went there Mon evening for the Canadian Delegation Strategy Session. The rec sector is well represented at the conference and will not roll over without a fight. Promise.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

GDW - my thoughts exactly! This thing is being hosted in their backyard and the halibut fishery allocation and management issues have gotta be in the top 3 issues on the Island. Very surprised not to see any formal submissions from the group in advance of the meetings or any indication that they'd have a strong presence at this Annual Meeting. I'm hoping they are there and it just hasn't been publicized yet.

 

[chris73]

Please see my post before you Ukee...

 

[GDW]

Thanks for the info Chris I'm glad you guys are there fighting for us. I was a little worried having not heard of the groups involvement that the focus might only be on salmon.

I can't believe a proposed 30% reduction after years and years of reductions. There are so many halibut out there for everyone - it just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[chris73]

No, GDW, not at all only salmon. In fact all fish, fresh and salt we represent. I have not attended yesterday and have not touched base with our onsite rep at the conference about where we are at right now but I assume this is still all posturing and positioning for a final showdown. I do not want to spill any beans but the common Canadian position was pretty firm and didn't not involve major cuts. I will update as soon as I hear something worthwhile. Maybe the governor will weigh in himself soon.

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Well, time shall tell. After doing some math I estimated that putting max size on 2nd fish would only reduce our catch by approx 3-4%, not nearly enough, yet the 1/1 would reduce it by 35-40% which seems a lil overkill...

 

[Governor]

Okay folks, I am here and writing this from the IPHC meeting down at the Empress Hotel and am a bit surprised to hear there is concern SVIAC might not be looking after our South Vanc Island interests! We definitely are and on our website (anglerscoalition.com) there's a news blog post about us being involved too. Truth is I, on behalf of SVIAC, am duking it out in the trenches for ALL your best interests. Yes, as Chris 73 wrote earlier we're involved and have been given voting status at the Conference Board. For the record, the rec sector is being represented well this year at the IPHC, we have SFAB (3) , SFI (1), BCWF (1) and us SVIAC (1) as voting members for you at the Conference Board table. And SFI has 2 observers in the Processor Advisor Board mtgs.

Here's a realtime update for you .... The position Canada is pressing for in Area 2B (Cdn waters) is to get the same poundage as Canada's 2012 TAC as last year (7.04 million lbs), not the Commissions proposed reduction. This position is unanimous amongst the Canadian delegtion. The new "ultra-conservative" science model is being looked upon with skepticism as indefensible by all in the room. The feeling here is their model is too new (3 months old), not enough time to test its results against fishing results (need a 2 - 3 year run) and certainly doesn't match or reflect the reality of what happened on the fishing grounds in 2012. For that reason ALL fishermen want more catch poundage in 2013 across the whole of Alaska to Oregon fishing waters. There's also lots of talk about the massive halibut bycatch in Alaska, especially the Bering Sea (10 million pounds last year) having to be address by the US gov't, especially Alaska's gov't too. It may indeed be affecting recruitment of halibut juveniles negatively thus impacting the whole halibut fishery. Frustration rules though as the folks see the lobbying power of the Pollock draggers who are the big bycatch impacters being so strong it will be tough to break the way they fish.


No votes taken on the major issues yet. The commercial fleet have voted in favour of fishing opening Mar 16 and closing Nov 15 in 2013 but the Commission has not accepted that yet.

I'll update as I get good info to share. I really hope this is helpful for all our friends on the Sportfishingbc.com forum, and I know clearly how important the amount of TAC Canada gets from the IPHC Commissioners in 2013 will impact many of those businesses who rely on the resource for a living. Have faith brothers, we understand, we are there for you! However, how we divvy up what we get as Canada's TAC won't be decided here, that discussion will happen after we have got our firm 2013 TAC number from the Commissioners.


Hope this is helpful


Gov

 

[Governor]

Regarding the effectveness of the 2nd fish slot size used in 2012 to extend the fishery, it did actually work, but in truth something else impacted the outcome leading to a Sept 9 closure. The problem was the halibut all being up in size on average. That was not calculated as a likely hood when designing the 2012 season. So to say the season still closed early is true, but to blame the slot is not fair.

Gov

 

[seadna]

Gov - You state " For the record, the rec sector is being represented well this year at the IPHC, we have SFAB (3) , SFI (1), BCWF (1) and us SVIAC (1) as voting members for you at the Conference Board table. And SFI has 2 observers in the Processor Advisor Board mtgs. " - but without an understanding of the total size of the vote it's hard to determine the potential influence the rec sector has. How many total votes will be cast? What's the percentage split of votes between rec, commie, gov and other? Also who are the other (if any)

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Great to hear Chris and Gov!

Regarding the slot though, Gov, I once again have to call BS - a slot size's sole purpose is to reduce the average size of fish harvested, the fact that the exact opposite happened is further proof that the slot size didn't work. A number of us pointed out that the model used was faulty and overestimated the amount of time folks would be fishing for their second "slot fish". The model I saw assumed 50% of harvest would be slot fish which is ludicrous as the vast majority of effort would be folks only fishing one day whether as locals or one day trippers, there'd be many who failed to catch a first fish and a number who don't target hali directly and just get the odd by catch. Given that in actual practice the slot would only apply to a very small proportion of fish harvested a number of us predicted it'd have no effect on total harvest amount and that's exactly what happened. As the slot defined a max size, it shouldn't have mattered if average size went up because fish larger than the 12 lb slot fish had to be released for a portion of the catch. Again, in the actual fishery, this clearly didn't happen to the degree some predicted and thus was not effective.

In any case, Gov, if you have access to robust data that suggests otherwise regarding the slots effectiveness, I would love to see it, as I'm sure many others would as well.

Despite my disagreement regarding the slot issue, I do want to make it clear I appreciate the effort that you, your group and the other groups listed expend on behalf of all BC Rec anglers. Thank you.

Ukee

 

[Labman2]

"Despite my disagreement regarding the slot issue, I do want to make it clear I appreciate the effort that you, your group and the other groups listed expend on behalf of all BC Rec anglers. Thank you."

Thanks from the other Canadian owners of the resource as well!!