There is no way to get the data to the level of detail you ask for. They do not track how XRQ is used with sufficient controls to break out who the final end user is. Due to Covid, there was no XRQ program in 2020, and likely not again in 2021. Hopefully the patient, now on life support, is declared deceased.
Actually that is not the data I am asking for. What I am trying to get my hands on is any and all info specifically on how much TAC is used by non resident anglers. You get no argument from me on disliking the XRQ. I think I have been pretty clear on how I feel about it over the years.
. In case I was unclear,I am not suggesting the XRQ be used to accomplish what I suggested about non residents having to get commercial quota. I am just saying some version of it could provide the portal needed to complete the transamction forThanks for answering. It appears there is still confusion as to what I am asking for. I am NOT looking for info on who uses the XRQ, or how much of the XRQ used is to non residents.
Tradex: Pacific halibut quota set to be lifted to highest level in three years
Prices for Pacific halibut are set to rise as well this year, with US foodservice demand expected to recover while there is potential for a shortfall of raw material from Russiawww.undercurrentnews.com
anyone following the meetings? have they announced canada's allocation yet or is that typically saved for the last day.
Better than the other direction. Hopefully they will allow some carry overy, and combined with another (unfortunately) covid season we will see a rise on the sizes this year.
Sorry, I'm not at all confused as to what you are asking for nor am I trying to dodge the question. The answer is simply they do not track whom is using the TAC. Therefore, it is impossible to track with any certainty how much is actually used by resident or non-resident anglers. Tracking is pretty loose which is a problem flagged from the outset of this program. You could put in an ATIP asking for all the sales slips and try to figure it out, but again, I highly doubt you would be able to resolve who the actual end-user of the TAC really was.Actually that is not the data I am asking for. What I am trying to get my hands on is any and all info specifically on how much TAC is used by non resident anglers. You get no argument from me on disliking the XRQ. I think I have been pretty clear on how I feel about it over the years.
Thanks for answering. It appears there is still confusion as to what I am asking for. I am NOT looking for info on who uses the XRQ, or how much of the XRQ used is to non residents.
All I want to know is how much recreational tac is being used up by non residents. Do they track that? I feel they should. It feels to me like an important stat that appears to have a profound affect on our TAC.
Even if there is not exact data on that number I would think there would be an assumed/ estimated amount based on what information is available . Wouldn’t there be?
Roger that.
Does this include the carry over, did we get that? Or are we going to get it?
IPHC did not really address carry over, or if it did, I missed it during the meetings. The Commissioners may have discussed it while we were in the Conference Board meetings, and quite honestly I was more focused on all the non-sense the US side was advancing for re-opening the apportionment agreement. I really doubt we are going to make much traction on carry-over - not that we give up.
Ya, wish we could get more details but the early rules didn't look to me at the time to provide full transparency around how the catch was actually accounted for and by whom etc. If someone wanted to go through all the documents perhaps they could figure it out, but I'm not sure how. We have all heard differing reports on just how easy it is to avoid actually processing XRQ fish via the program.
