V
vic-tory
Guest
Have already done both of those. This forum reaches out to many other anglers as well so always good to voice opinion on here as well.
2014 IPHC Interim Meeting
- Thread starter SerengetiGuide
- Start date
searun
Well-Known Member
SO to clarify (in english) my post...we will have more time than in prior years due to electronic licenses, but it is still a very compressed time frame. Likely 6 weeks from TAC announcement to when we need to reach a decision. Outlined this only because there was so much acrimony over why the process moves along swiftly post IPHC TAC announcement. Don't want to catch guys off guard. Still lots of opportunity for folks to get involved with their local SFAC. This is an open process, and everyone involved wants you to make your views known, please.
Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
All is good--- as long as members dont stop here. Its necessary to take the next step and pass your opinions on to your SFAC.
searun
Well-Known Member
absolutely x 10...please review the options paper and let your SFAC know your preferences.
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Can you post their email addresses, not personal of course? I apologize if I've missed the his info, but it might be handy for those that can't attend local meetings.
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
After looking over the document, my first suggestion would be 1/2 with 126cm and 83cm Shoulder Season and 1/1 July and August. Should TAC go down however, my suggestion would be 1/1 (my actual preference but willing to compromise). If TAC goes down to around 770k, the closest to that number is 1/1, and to get down to 770 it would either have to be max size of 40lbs (yeah ****ing right, or 1/1 with max size, once again, yeah ****ing right). I"ll explain, and hopefully you follow my logic and reasoning.
This combines those that want a large fish, 2 fish, and long season. This option has almost the same cushion (safety net for long season) of poundage as current regs, and double the cushion of one fish under 83cm and one fish under 133cm (70lbs) according to DFO numbers.
The argument against 1/1 has always been, well there will be a change in angler behaviour that would cause us to go over. Of all the options presented, 1/1 has the smallest TAC that would be taken. Looking back at 2012, when you could have one of any size and one under 15lbs, angler behaviour was almost certainly targeting the LARGEST possible fish for their 2nd fish. 10-15lb halibut is a ping pong paddle, I know after we got that out of the way our guests wanted the largest possible to make up for the tiny little halibut that made up their possession limit. Certainly most likely the same for most fishermen. Because of this, 1/1 would be similar to 2012 BUT no 2nd fish...so the amount taken would drastically be reduced. Would definitely NOT go over with 1/1, I'll guarantee and be willing to bet anyone on that. I just don't understand how some can say we would catch the same amount of TAC as 2012 with 1/1, minus a whole 2nd fish for every fisherman.
Also, in the document it says SFAB halibut committee wants to ensure the best economic benefits that halibut can bring. Well, on a charter, lodge, and hotel/accommodations side of things, I think the 1/2 shoulder and 1/1 july and aug would help increase economic benefits. Allows bookings on shoulder season to increase from those that want 2 halibut, and maintains fishermen who want the shot at a once in a lifetime fish (instead of going to Alaska). Speaking of which, in SE Alaska when they put a max size limit on halibut charter bookings went down 40%. If we keep this max size limit up you'll see a continued decline in bookings I"m sure, probably not 40%, but even a 10-20% reduction is very hard on every day charter operators trying to make a living for their family.
There is not too much risk involved in 1/1 despite some saying the contrary (see bit about 2012 vs 1/1), and the option of current regs shoulder and 1/1 prime combines options that will appease everyone, and allows the possibility for extra activity created on shoulder season as well as giving anglers a chance at once in a lifetime fish and keeping those that want that chance fishing in BC. It also benefits the everyday BC angler significantly more than any other single option. Like I said I prefer 1/1 all season but I know the board is worried about this option (worry I feel is unsubstantiated). Look forward to hearing thoughts on this.
Also confused about how the document says if 1 of 6 is any size we would catch MORE than if it was 1/2 with 1 any size period...that is mathematically impossible. Have also heard some board members pushing for 133cm and 83cm, although if TAC goes down that would go against "main" objective of board for long season, as that option has half the cushion of same regs shoulder 1/1 primetime, and A QUARTER of cushion (safety net) of 1/1. IF we somehow get a rollover of our underage this year, and 950k or more for tac, and we don't go back to 1/2 with one any size, or at least one of 6 any size, I'll be mind boggled.
This combines those that want a large fish, 2 fish, and long season. This option has almost the same cushion (safety net for long season) of poundage as current regs, and double the cushion of one fish under 83cm and one fish under 133cm (70lbs) according to DFO numbers.
The argument against 1/1 has always been, well there will be a change in angler behaviour that would cause us to go over. Of all the options presented, 1/1 has the smallest TAC that would be taken. Looking back at 2012, when you could have one of any size and one under 15lbs, angler behaviour was almost certainly targeting the LARGEST possible fish for their 2nd fish. 10-15lb halibut is a ping pong paddle, I know after we got that out of the way our guests wanted the largest possible to make up for the tiny little halibut that made up their possession limit. Certainly most likely the same for most fishermen. Because of this, 1/1 would be similar to 2012 BUT no 2nd fish...so the amount taken would drastically be reduced. Would definitely NOT go over with 1/1, I'll guarantee and be willing to bet anyone on that. I just don't understand how some can say we would catch the same amount of TAC as 2012 with 1/1, minus a whole 2nd fish for every fisherman.
Also, in the document it says SFAB halibut committee wants to ensure the best economic benefits that halibut can bring. Well, on a charter, lodge, and hotel/accommodations side of things, I think the 1/2 shoulder and 1/1 july and aug would help increase economic benefits. Allows bookings on shoulder season to increase from those that want 2 halibut, and maintains fishermen who want the shot at a once in a lifetime fish (instead of going to Alaska). Speaking of which, in SE Alaska when they put a max size limit on halibut charter bookings went down 40%. If we keep this max size limit up you'll see a continued decline in bookings I"m sure, probably not 40%, but even a 10-20% reduction is very hard on every day charter operators trying to make a living for their family.
There is not too much risk involved in 1/1 despite some saying the contrary (see bit about 2012 vs 1/1), and the option of current regs shoulder and 1/1 prime combines options that will appease everyone, and allows the possibility for extra activity created on shoulder season as well as giving anglers a chance at once in a lifetime fish and keeping those that want that chance fishing in BC. It also benefits the everyday BC angler significantly more than any other single option. Like I said I prefer 1/1 all season but I know the board is worried about this option (worry I feel is unsubstantiated). Look forward to hearing thoughts on this.
Also confused about how the document says if 1 of 6 is any size we would catch MORE than if it was 1/2 with 1 any size period...that is mathematically impossible. Have also heard some board members pushing for 133cm and 83cm, although if TAC goes down that would go against "main" objective of board for long season, as that option has half the cushion of same regs shoulder 1/1 primetime, and A QUARTER of cushion (safety net) of 1/1. IF we somehow get a rollover of our underage this year, and 950k or more for tac, and we don't go back to 1/2 with one any size, or at least one of 6 any size, I'll be mind boggled.
Last edited by a moderator:
GLG
Well-Known Member
Just like to point out that 1/2 shoulder is no limit on first fish and 83cm on second fish. Not sure where you got the 126cm but it's not in there.
As for the rest I have no problem with that and tend to agree with you.
This slot thing while clearly having an effect on the TAC we catch is not working for me.
Lets keep it simple and enforceable.
Lets not make poachers out of anglers that have trouble measuring a large halibut.
GLG
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
That's what I thought originally too Gil but read over again and believe there is a slot. Either way , it's a great way to go. The best actually. Especially if there's no side limit on 1st fish on shoulder...how could you not say that's better? I'm actually curious... Lol
GLG
Well-Known Member
well umm... I may need glasses but It' right here in front of me and I stand by what I said.....
I'm looking at both tables and it's clear to me.... LOL
Perhaps have another look.... or is it else where in the document?
J-GLOBAL
Well-Known Member
Seriously, is there a website, a list, or some way to find out who/what/where the SFAC's are? Google hasn't been a help at all. I asked this question I believe on another thread and was met with silence as well. How secretive are the SFACs?
GLG
Well-Known Member
That got me wondering also.... best to look at it like this.
option "e 2012 Management" 1/2 with no limit on the first fish and 83cm on second fish had us close in September.
Option "h" 2013 rules with one fish per year over is calculated for a full season.
That's about the only way you can make it add up, if you think about it might just be true.
If the pressure is all in July & August and the avg angler only gets 2 fish. 1st large and 2nd small.
GLG
GLG
Well-Known Member
PM sent with the details.
ziggy
Well-Known Member
I agree, if the idea is to get as much feedback from as many fishers as possible why not make email addresses readily available and the options being discussed? Seems like a no brainer in the electronic age if you really want to solicit comments from the broadest base. Guess though we can always email dfo directly, but that seems like it might undermine the process? Heck if the organization is worried about being spammed, ask for the anglers number in the email. That way even those few who are worried about privacy are covered as are those worried about being spammed by special interests . Just a thought.
Last edited by a moderator:
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
That with a poll thread would be interesting
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Even better would be for DFO to ask a few question online when the vast if not all fishers renew their licenses. Something along the lines of
Do you plan on fishing halibut this year?
What area will you be fishing?
If you had to choose an option for future fishing regs ,what is most important factor to you.
I'm not suggesting DFO can't hire someone else to draft better questions. Not suggesting they can formulate a plan for the immediate year either, but they will have info for long range planning. As it stands now it is up to volunteers to try and compile info DFO has a better means to solicit, and mandate to do so. The current system let's DFO off the hook.
I'm not by any means dissing the hardworking volunteer reps, but DFO has the tools in place with electronic licensing to gather information and is doing nothing with them IMO
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds good but do you really think the average guy knows the real issues and ramifications now and in the future by what he or she suggests. I would rather have knowledgable people dealing with these decisions, not people who just own a boat and want to fish every day.
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
That's like saying not everyone should be allowed to vote in an election. It's more likely that these people who fish for fun in the summer wouldn't care too much about a September closure therefore going against what you want is more like it profisher. Every angler is allowed a voice
