Halibut recommendation from SFAB to DFO

[fogged in]

Quote Originally Posted by SerengetiGuide View Post
That's unlivable. , we need to get rid of upper slot completely

I think you got it right Finaddict and I agree with you.
SerengetiGuide and most other guides have different priorities than the average sport fisherman, and why wouldn't they when their personal livelihood is at stake.
For me and those I know, last years restrictions ARE LIVABLE!
Even if we do have to release a few of those large females.
I believe the SFAB are doing a good job under very difficult circumstances.
THANKS FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK

 

[SerengetiGuide]

The thing you quoted is not what I said...purple haze changed my post when he quoted it . And current regs actually restrict everyday joe more than even a 1/1 as possession limit restarts when home. So actually everyday joe is most benefited without size restrictions ...

 

[Purple Hazer]

The thing you quoted is not what I said...purple haze changed my post when he quoted it . And current regs actually restrict everyday joe more than even a 1/1 as possession limit restarts when home. So actually everyday joe is most benefited without size restrictions ...

Ha ha sorry for throwing you under the bus there Serengeti, at least I got one bite out of it

 

[fogged in]

The thing you quoted is not what I said...purple haze changed my post when he quoted it . And current regs actually restrict everyday joe more than even a 1/1 as possession limit restarts when home. So actually everyday joe is most benefited without size restrictions ...

Thanks for the clarification, but I am not sure I understand you.
Is it fair to say SerengetiGuide, you may not like, or agree with the same restrictions as last year, but you can LIVE WITH THEM?
Not that any of us have any choice.

 

[finaddict]

The thing you quoted is not what I said...purple haze changed my post when he quoted it . And current regs actually restrict everyday joe more than even a 1/1 as possession limit restarts when home. So actually everyday joe is most benefited without size restrictions ...

Sorry SG, Didn't mean to jump on this or the misquote. I am certainly not tryin to run a divide between the recreational angler and the professional angler. I am 100% behind the solidarity voice we gain from both "groups" together. I am also hoping that if we are able to actually get back to using all of our quota, we can again push for more TAC for the recreational sector. It will be interesting to see how DFO responds to this proposal by the SFAB.

 

[Last Chance]

I'm with Serengeti Guide on that one. I can live with them, I can't like them. IF it was a matter of halibut conservation, then yes, I would be all over it, but it's a matter of allocation. If the entire halibut fleet coast wide in BC let the big ones go, then fine. If 15% of all the effort (Just the rec fleet) lets the big fish go, it does little to nothing from a conservation standpoint. It just has the sector stay in the TAC. The big fish you throw back can jump on a longline and wind up in a freezer.

But those are the cards we are dealt, so I can live with them, guide within them, but do not have to like or agree with them.

I myself would have rather supported a different measure, but the anglers that participated in the SFAB vote, who were made up by a large part of sporties, opted for the option that was put forward by SFAB, and I will stand behind my SFAB which is about the only voice that has DFO's ear.

 

[trophywife]

I'm with Serengeti Guide on that one. I can live with them, I can't like them. IF it was a matter of halibut conservation, then yes, I would be all over it, but it's a matter of allocation. If the entire halibut fleet coast wide in BC let the big ones go, then fine. If 15% of all the effort (Just the rec fleet) lets the big fish go, it does little to nothing from a conservation standpoint. It just has the sector stay in the TAC. The big fish you throw back can jump on a longline and wind up in a freezer.

But those are the cards we are dealt, so I can live with them, guide within them, but do not have to like or agree with them.




I myself would have rather supported a different measure, but the anglers that participated in the SFAB vote, who were made up by a large part of sporties, opted for the option that was put forward by SFAB, and I will stand behind my SFAB which is about the only voice that has DFO's ear.

well put and agreed. i cannot stand that the same fish i release, or a friend, or a guest releases, ends up in jimmy's freezer all legal like with no regard to conservation.

 

[bigbruce]

As I see it, the conservation element in all this is considered in the combined Recreational/Commercial TAC as determined by the IHC in light of what they believe the biomass can tolerate. The recreational sector, through the SFAB, has chosen to structure the catch of its portion of the total allocation to ensure a longer season. This has been done through slot limits and the 1/2/6 limits. The Commercial sector has not chosen to enforce slot limits and will therefore catch anything and everything until their portion of the allocation is reached. Once their portion of the TAC is reached - season ends, be it June or September.
The recreational sector could just have easily done the same thing - i.e. no slot limits etc - and fish until the allocation is reached - then end of season.
I see the motivations of the two sectors are very different. No doubt it would benefit the commercial sector to get it's allocation to the processors sooner rather than later so length of season is not an issue. The Recreational side, on the other hand, is interested in structuring the thing so that the "season" lasts as long as possible - hence the proposed limits.
So the fact that we sporties have chosen to leave the big fellas in the ocean while the commercial fishers have not really isn't an us vs them conservation issue but rather a matter of how the two sectors have chosen to manage its catch vs season lengths in light of the TAC each sector must work under.

 

[kronic_fisherguy]

As I see it, the conservation element in all this is considered in the combined Recreational/Commercial TAC as determined by the IHC in light of what they believe the biomass can tolerate. The recreational sector, through the SFAB, has chosen to structure the catch of its portion of the total allocation to ensure a longer season. This has been done through slot limits and the 1/2/6 limits. The Commercial sector has not chosen to enforce slot limits and will therefore catch anything and everything until their portion of the allocation is reached. Once their portion of the TAC is reached - season ends, be it June or September.
The recreational sector could just have easily done the same thing - i.e. no slot limits etc - and fish until the allocation is reached - then end of season.
I see the motivations of the two sectors are very different. No doubt it would benefit the commercial sector to get it's allocation to the processors sooner rather than later so length of season is not an issue. The Recreational side, on the other hand, is interested in structuring the thing so that the "season" lasts as long as possible - hence the proposed limits.
So the fact that we sporties have chosen to leave the big fellas in the ocean while the commercial fishers have not really isn't an us vs them conservation issue but rather a matter of how the two sectors have chosen to manage its catch vs season lengths in light of the TAC each sector must work under.

Correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is a commercial boat has so many pounds of quota(most is leased from non participating slipper skippers)and can go and harvest it when they want. Unlike us yoyo sportfisherman.

 

[searun]

All these choices are like deciding which finger to cut off. No matter which one, it's still not exactly what you want to do. So in the end it comes down to deciding which choice best fits your values and needs. At least we have a decent fishery and season to look forward to. I also think great efforts were made to find a way to also support the desires of the South Island group which means reaching compromises to make that happen.

 

[searun]

Correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is a commercial boat has so many pounds of quota(most is leased from non participating slipper skippers)and can go and harvest it when they want. Unlike us yoyo sportfisherman.

You might want to re-read bigbruce's post. The answer is right there. We manage our fishery to ensure long season for multiple rec anglers. The commercial fleet manages to a quota system assigned to each boat. Big difference.

 

[bigbruce]

Not sure what you mean by yo-yo sport fishermen, Kronic, but I believe you're right that a commercial halibut fisherman has a set quota (doesn't really matter where he got it) and once he has reached that quota, he stops fishing....regardless of whether he catches his quota in one month or one year. The overarching factor in all of this is that the sum of all of the individual commercial quotas cannot exceed the overall commercial allocation as determined through the IHC/DFO allocation process.
As Searun has rightly pointed out, we sports fishers owe a great deal of thanks to the folks who have worked hard on our behalf to find a way to ensure that our portion of the TAC is dealt with in such a way that we are able to provide a good compromise between catching fish and length of season.

 

[kronic_fisherguy]

"No doubt it would benefit the commercial sector to get it's allocation to the processors sooner rather than later so length of season is not an issue."


I don't agree. The commercial fleet extending or managing the season based on supply and demand would maximize profit per lb of Halibut.

 

[SophiaB]

" The commercial fleet extending or managing the season based on supply and demand would maximize profit per lb of Halibut.

That's why they have freezers.

 

[searun]

The commercial guys follow and fish their quota based on market pricing. First guys back to the dock after season opening generally garner higher prices. But the significant difference between rec fleet is they fish to an individual boat quota. When it's gone they are done unless they lease extra from slipper skippers. Rec fleet depends on a long season where there is the anticipation of opportunity to have fun and catch a fish.

 

[Dave S]

Did everybody read all the motions that the SFAB main board put forward?

http://anglerscoalition.com/?page_id=1954

 

[salmonboy]

The thing you quoted is not what I said...purple haze changed my post when he quoted it . And current regs actually restrict everyday joe more than even a 1/1 as possession limit restarts when home. So actually everyday joe is most benefited without size restrictions ...

ya SG u have to explain this to me, im not getting the "no slot" how do us average joes benifit from this? the season would be over early, even with your shoulder season.....uve put up numbers on here how it would work and be fine, just tell me how it benifits me(average joe) that wants to fish all year?
u could care less if its open in oct-dec, cause u dont fish then.....guides pound the **** of the tac in 3 months, (makin a living), but that s the facts...way more than non guides..letting your clients take big fish will chew our tac up ...and thats that....not gonna fight with u , but we can not allow the big halibut to get pounded, cause once we catch them all there will be NO halibut fishing(commies too)...regardzz

 

[GLG]

Salmonboy it was me that put up the numbers. The numbers were supplied by DFO to SFAB. I took those numbers and posted them on here. One of our members, here on the forum, suggested that we look at the shoulder and substitute some of the rules to see some what if's. (cleave idea) I took those ideas and put them into tables that I posted here on this forum. Some showed that using DFO's numbers we could in fact have a full season and for at least part of the season remove the upper slot. Another goal was to keep the 2 fish possession intact. This is not about guides vers tin boater. This is about removing one of the slot limits without going over our TAC. It's all about having a full season and working with the numbers that we were given. Please don't think one of our members "could care less" because there are lot's of fellas that see the problem and are trying to find solutions. I have been in contact, thru this website, with other members and can tell you for a fact that many share this idea.

We need to find solutions and we need to be open to new ideas. It's with new ideas that can be flushed out and made into solutions that are a mark of creativity. You just happen to see only part of that and came to your own conclusion.

 

[profisher]

It has come to our attention just recently that there can be in season adjustments to daily limits by a local DFO variation order. So in the event that our adopted fishing plan is not catching the fish poundage we think it would by a certain date in the season, we can adjust it up or down to use all the quota available or ensure we don't close early. Something we didn't know until recently.

 

[Jencourt]

How could this be the first you guys heard of this?
More than one of us have been asking this question for a couple years now and wen answered were told that DFO would have to use a variation for in season changes. This is not new info. Further it gives even more validity to many of the shoulder options presented to the SFAB prior to the meetings.