Experimental Halibut Quota Fishery

[GLG]

DFO would like us to comment on their experimental halibut quota fishery.
I would suggest we all email or call them and let them know what we think.
You can tell them this is BS or you can make suggestions on what to change.
Me ... I think I will tell them that I am concerned on how easy it would be to cheat this system.
I think they need to tighten up their system by implementing these measures.

1) Hail in/out before and after fishing your commercial halibut quota each day.
2) 100% camera observation while fishing your commercial halibut quota.
3) 100% dock side monitor when landing your commercial halibut quota.
4) jaw tag on all commercial halibut quota caught fish.

Seems to me this program is more of a amateur commercial fishery then anything recreational.
It should be treated as any other commercial fishery and the same rules should be applied to them.

Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 1 of 10
Regulatory Amendment Proposal for a
Recreational Quota Transfer Licence:
Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement
Background
Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) is proposing a regulatory amendment that will create the opportunity for recreational fishers to lease commercial halibut quota in order to provide additional fishing opportunities for the recreational sector. This draft Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS) document describes the proposed regulatory amendment, the rationale for the amendment, and the objectives of the amendment. It also provides a brief summary of the consultation conducted to date and what is known about the perspectives of interested parties
regarding this proposal, and outlines key elements or features of the plan to implement the proposed regulatory amendment, if it is approved. This draft is being provided for public review to inform the development of a final draft that will be made available for future public review in the Canada Gazette, Part 1.

Issues and Objectives
Issue
The International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) sets the annual total allowable catch (TAC) of Pacific Halibut, pursuant to the Halibut Treaty of 1923 between Canada and the United States. Within the Canadian portion of that TAC, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada has the responsibility to conserve the resource and the authority to allocate the catch among First Nations, commercial, and recreational fisheries. All allocations and reallocations of halibut quota are at the absolute discretion of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. In 2003, the Minister announced an allocation policy which, after providing Pacific Halibut for First Nations Food, Social, and Ceremonial fisheries, allocated 88% of the Pacific Halibut TAC to commercial fishers and 12% of the TAC to recreational fishers. At this time the Minister also invited both parties (commercial and recreational) to develop an acceptable mechanism that would allow for adjustment of the recreational share through acquisition of additional quota from the commercial sector. In each year since 2004, the recreational fishing sector has overharvested its allocation. Recreational sector over-harvests were mitigated in 2008-2010 by transferring quota to the recreational sector from the commercial sector using funds the recreational sector had generated by choosing to lease uncaught portions of their sector’s allocation to the commercial sector in 2003 and 2004. That funding has since been depleted, which has led to further efforts to manage the recreational harvest within its allocation. Since 2008, measures have been introduced to reduce the recreational harvest, including a reduction in the daily catch limit and possession limit and a curtailed fishing season. These measures had negative effects on the recreational sector, including business such as fishing lodges and guides, as reduced daily catch and possession limits and early season closures are disincentives to potential clients. In working to develop a mechanism for quota transfer between recreational and commercial sectors, DFO introduced an experimental recreational halibut fishery in 2011. This fishery provided an opportunity for interested recreational fishers, or businesses which provide recreational fishing services, to lease quota from the commercial sector to use or make available to clients for recreational fishing. This market-based mechanism allows willing participants to apply to reallocate quota, where available, from a willing commercial quota holder to their experimental halibut licence, subject to the Minister’s discretion over all allocations and reallocations.

 

[GLG]

Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 2 of 10
This was intended to complement existing management tools by providing a mechanism for the recreational fishers to self adjust their fishing opportunities in response to changing harvest opportunities and demand. Although the Minister announced a correction to the halibut allocation formula that increased the recreational share from 12% to 15% of the Canadian TAC in February
2012, periods of low halibut abundance and corresponding potential reductions in the TAC mean recreational halibut fishing demand may still be greater than the portion of the TAC available to the recreational sector in some years. The Minister also announced that the experimental licence introduced in 2011 would continue to be available and that the Department would move forward with regulatory changes to continue this market-based transfer mechanism for the long term.
Canada’s recreational halibut overage has been highlighted as a concern at IPHC annual meetings since 2006. In recent Commission meetings, Canada has made several commitments to managing the recreational halibut fishery within its allocation. The proposed regulatory amendment is seen as a transfer mechanism that can provide additional recreational fishing opportunities while helping stabilise the Canadian harvest by the combined recreational and commercial sectors within the overall Canadian TAC.
Objectives
The proposed amendment regularizes the commercial-recreational quota transfer mechanism that has been in place as an experimental program since 2011. Inclusion of a quota transfer licence category in the British Columbia Sport Fishing Regulations, 1996, will meet the need for a dedicated licence type. This proposed regulatory amendment supports the Minister’s commitment to create a long term arrangement that allows for the transfer of halibut quota between commercial and recreational
sectors. A licence enabling transfer of quota from commercial to recreational fishers is intended to facilitate recreational fishing opportunities for interested recreational fishers and businesses who may wish to fish after the recreational sector has reached its 15% allocation and the season has closed, or who may wish to fish above and beyond the daily and possession limits outlined for the regular recreational halibut fishery.
This proposed regulatory amendment is also intended to support the broader Departmental objectives of DFO’s Fisheries Renewal policy:
· long term sustainability;
· economically prosperous fisheries;
· improved governance.
In turn, these Fisheries Renewal objectives align with DFO’s strategic outcomes for fisheries management of Sustainable Aquatic Ecosystems and Economically Prosperous Maritime Sectors and Fisheries, which provide foundational guidance for the Department’s programs.
Description
The proposed regulatory amendment will add a category of annual sport fishing licence at s.17 of the British Columbia Sport Fishing Regulations, 1996: Item Licence or Conservation Stamp Fee 13. Licence, Resident, Quota Transfer No charge
This licence will permit fishing and enable the licensee to hold a quota of pounds of fish leased from a commercial fishery licence holder willing to make quota available for transfer. As is the case for all individuals wishing to have a recreational fishing experience, licensees under the quota transfer licence will be required to also possess a Tidal Waters Sport Fishing licence. Fishing under the quota transfer licence will be subject to all provisions of the British Columbia

 

[GLG]

Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 3 of 10
Sport Fishing Regulations, 1996, except as they pertain to possession limits, daily limits, and size limits of Pacific Halibut, and closures to the regular recreational halibut fishery. Quota transfer licence holders will need to pay the existing fee to obtain the Tidal Waters Sport Fishing licence, but there will be no additional fee to obtain the quota transfer licence. DFO is aware that the Sport Fishing Advisory Board has consistently expressed an interest in increasing recreational fishing licence fees to support additional resources for initiatives such as catch monitoring, however this will be explored through a separate regulatory amendment process that examines recreational licencing fee changes more broadly. Licence holders will be required to accurately record all fish harvested under the licence in a logbook and report their catch to DFO, so that it may be counted against the quota hld. These measures, which are additional to the requirements of the regular recreational fishery, are required due to the different characteristics and risks associated with the quota transfer licence fishery compared to the regular recreational fishery. Fishers fishing under a quota transfer licence have an opportunity to catch more halibut than they are able to in the regular recreational fishery, which currently stipulates a possession limit of two halibut. The additional requirements are appropriate to support proper management and control of the fishery. Consistent with other recreational licences, trade, sale, or barter of fish will be prohibited under this licence. Fishing opportunities under this licence will be available to Canadian residents and businesses (collectively referred to hereafter as “residents”) that provide recreational fishing services. Non-residents and non-resident businesses (collectively referred to hereafter as “nonresidents”) may also be authorized by the Minister to participate in halibut fishing under the authority of this licence as additional harvesters on licences held by residents. Access for nonresidents is structured in this way due to the different characteristics and risks associated with the quota transfer licence fishery compared to the regular recreational fishery, described above, combined with the increased difficulty DFO faces in enforcing the reporting of catch data from non-residents compared to residents. Since DFO authorities only apply in Canada, when nonresidents leave Canada, DFO is less able to track them, enforce reporting or the reconciliation of quota with catch, and recoup any fine payments if offences were committed and fines were not paid. For these reasons, quota transfer licence holders must be residents, and the resident licence holders are responsible for recording and reporting catch, and for ensuring the reallocation of sufficient quota for the fish caught under the quota transfer licence. Thus, providing non-resident access to the quota transfer licence through resident quota transfer licence holders provides DFO greater means of controlling the fishery. A close time for Pacific Halibut caught and retained under the quota transfer licence will be added at s.24 of the British Columbia Sport Fishing Regulations, 1996: 24(3). No person shall fish for or catch and retain halibut under authority of a Quota Transfer Licence in any Subarea during the close time from 12:00 h December 31 to 12:00 h March 1. The close time for halibut in Schedule IV of the British Columbia Sport Fishing Regulations, 1996 will be amended to: 4. Halibut, except under authority of a Quota Transfer Licence The effect of the close time amendments is to permit the quota transfer fishery to be closed independently of the regular recreational fishery. This is because quota held under the quota transfer licence has been removed from the commercial TAC and is accounted for independently of the recreational harvest. In the event that the recreational fishery needs to be closed before the quota transfer fishery because it has met or exceeded its allotted 15% of the TAC, the quota transfer fishery licensees may continue to harvest under the portion of the commercial fleet’s 85% that has been reallocated to the recreational quota transfer fishery until the quota transfer fishery close date. Those fishing under the authority of the quota transfer licence will be required to transfer quota onto their licence in advance of fishing. The initial quota transferred onto the licence must be

 

[GLG]

Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 4 of 10
sufficient to cover the catch the licence holder anticipates applying to their quota transfer licence. Thus, the minimum amount of pounds required on the licence before fishing can commence is 20 pounds, which corresponds to the approximate average net weight (fresh, dressed, head-off) of recreationally caught halibut in BC. Recognizing the uncertainty associated with forecasting catch, the licence may allow for the harvester to catch more pounds than the harvester has quota for on his/her quota transfer licence, provided that the harvester leases additional quota to cover
any overage within a specified time period. If the licence holder has quota in excess of catch, the licence holder can apply to transfer it back to the commercial sector or can carry over up to 10% or 200 pounds (whichever is greater) of their uncaught halibut quota; this equivalent poundage will be added to the licence quota in the next fishing year should the licence holder apply (and receive a licence) to participate in the fishery in the following season. Although the minimum quota required to begin fishing is 20 pounds, the quota transfer licence is designed to allow for adjustments of quota, dependent on what the participant requires and subject to the availability of quota from the commercial sector.
Consultation
DFO has convened several processes over the last 10 to 15 years to discuss halibut allocation and management options for remaining within Canada’s TAC while allowing for self adjustment between sectoral allocations. In 2000, DFO convened commercial and recreational fishing interests to discuss a halibut allocation framework between their sectors. In 2007 and 2008, DFO supported a facilitated process focused on developing a mechanism that would enable transfers of quota between the commercial and recreational sectors. A committee was convened consisting of representatives from the Sport Fishing Advisory Board (recreational fisheries) and the Pacific Halibut Management Association (commercial fisheries), with observers from the Nuu-chah-nulth Tribal Council (First Nations group), and the BC Ministry of Environment. The parties reached agreement on a market-based transfer mechanism that would allow for the commercial sector to lease recreational quota in years when the recreational sector would not utilize their full allocation, and allow the recreational sector to later use these funds to lease commercial quota in years where it exceeded its allocation. The parties requested that the Government of Canada provide initial funding to assist the recreational sector, which did not have the structure to raise funds. The parties suggested that the Government of Canada recover the cost of its initial funding through increased recreational licence fees. DFO determined that there were legal and financial barriers to this proposal and therefore the proposal was not advanced. In 2011, Parliamentary Secretary Randy Kamp conducted a review process involving First Nations, commercial and recreational fishery sectors, and the Province of British Columbia to develop options for the future management of the fishery prior to the start of the 2012 halibut fishing season. This review process included discussion of the experimental halibut quota fishery, and served as input to the Minister’s 2012 announcement about the correction to the recreationalcommercial allocation formula and the continuation of the market-based mechanism in the experimental fishery for the long term.
Following the Minister’s 2012 announcement, DFO held six community meetings from April 16th to May 1st to present details and solicit feedback from the broader public on the experimental fishery and the Department’s plan to move forward with the regulatory change. These took place in Ucluelet, Campbell River, Port Hardy, Victoria, Queen Charlotte, and Prince Rupert. DFO also presented to the Sport Fishing Advisory Board (SFAB) in April 2012 regarding the planned regulatory change and the community meetings. Attendees at community meetings consisted primarily of recreational fishers and representatives from businesses which provide recreational
fishing services, though a number of commercial fishers, First Nations, and local government representatives also attended. DFO also provided monthly updates through the summer and fall of 2012 to the Sport Fishing Advisory Board Halibut Committee to invite questions and comments on the development of this proposal for a regulatory amendment. The majority of responses to this regulatory amendment proposal originated from the recreational sector, and in general, these responses have expressed significant opposition and concerns about this regulatory amendment proposal. This includes the SFAB, which has Draft for public review

 

[GLG]

Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 5 of 10
expressed strong opposition to the proposal to DFO staff and the Minister. The SFAB and numerous recreational fishery attendees at the community sessions expressed a belief that the proposal serves to privatize access to a public resource, to which they are strongly opposed. In light of their opposition, some of these respondents have also expressed concern about the precedent that the market-based transfer mechanism may set for managing allocation between recreational and commercial sectors in other fisheries. Some recreational fishers suggested that the quota transfer fishery will not aid typical Canadian recreational fishers to obtain greater access, as most will choose not to pay the cost of leasing halibut quota. A number of recreational sector attendees also voiced concerns that the costs to DFO of administering the quota transfer fishery would outweigh the benefits of the fishery.
Several businesses providing recreational fishing services also indicated a concern that their participation in the program would damage the reputation of their business and would reduce bookings, due to opposition to the quota transfer fishery within the recreational fishing community. Several SFAB members have suggested that allowing individuals or corporations to lease pounds of fish in advance of harvest amounts to allowing fish to become private property before they are caught, which constitutes an infringement of the Minister’s authority. While significant opposition has been expressed, perspectives within the recreational fishing community do not appear to be unanimous regarding the concerns described above. Individual recreational fishers have acquired experimental licences in 2011 and 2012, including some who have explicitly expressed support for the concept of a quota transfer fishery offering supplemental fishing opportunities while keeping Canada within its TAC. Further, a number of businesses have chosen to acquire experimental licences in 2011 and 2012. As the experimental program is voluntary, their participation suggests some anticipated interest from clients and thus, a potential benefit to their business.
DFO is responding to these concerns by confirming that Canada’s fisheries remain a common property resource, which the Minister manages, conserves, and develops on behalf of Canadians in the public interest. The quota transfer licence will be available to all Canadians. Further, the regular recreational halibut fishery will continue to provide fishing opportunities that do not require individuals or businesses to lease quota. Fishing opportunities in the regular recreational halibut fishery will continue to be available to everyone possessing a Tidal Waters Sport Fishing licence. DFO is also structuring the quota transfer fishery as optional. For those that choose to participate, it will provide the possibility of fishing beyond the daily and possession limits or season closure date associated with the regular recreational halibut fishery.
DFO is addressing concerns about administrative costs by planning to manage the quota transfers between the commercial sector and the recreational sector through the Quota Management System, which is already in place to process quota transfers within the commercial fishery. This will keep the costs of administering the quota transfer fishery minimal. A number of recreational fishery sector respondents mentioned options that their sector had put forward in the past as preferable to a recreational quota transfer fishery. These included annual individual catch limits or a halibut stamp that recreational fishers could choose to purchase with their recreational fishing licence, which would finance the transfer of commercial quota to the recreational sector. DFO is responding by working with the SFAB to explore some of the other management tools proposed which could help to extend the regular recreational halibut fishing season in future years.
Commercial sector respondents were more supportive of the approach, indicating that it may provide greater certainty to the commercial sector than changes to the allocation policy on a periodic basis.

 

[GLG]

Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 6 of 10
First Nations respondents have emphasized the importance of a meaningful consultation process on the regulatory change, ensuring the change does not affect their access to fish for Food, Social, and Ceremonial purposes, and the importance of monitoring to ensure accurate catch information for this fishery. Notably, the interest in the Department's ability to effectively monitor and enforce the quota transfer fishery was one of the most common concerns shared across multiple interest groups. Respondents from numerous sectors suggested several changes to address potential monitoring and enforcement issues, including: i) opening the quota transfer fishery only after the regular recreational fishery is closed to ease enforcement, ii) increasing the number of enforcement personnel, and iii) increasing the initial minimum amount of quota a participant must hold to commence fishing under the licence from the current minimum in the experimental fishery (1 pound), in order to mitigate the potential for fishers to exceed their quota holdings. DFO is responding to First Nations comments by confirming that there will be a public review period on the draft regulatory impact analysis statement (RIAS) and the opportunity for interested parties to discuss the RIAS with DFO. DFO is also confirming that this proposed regulatory change will not affect the priority of Food, Social and Ceremonial fisheries; the Department will continue to work with First Nations to meet their Food, Social and Ceremonial fishery needs. DFO is responding to concerns about monitoring and enforcement in several ways. First, DFO is increasing the minimum amount of quota a participant must hold to commence fishing under the quota transfer licence from the current 1 pound minimum in the experimental fishery. Participants will be required to transfer an amount of quota onto their quota transfer licence that they believe will suffice to cover their forecasted catch. Thus, the minimum amount of pounds required on the licence before fishing can commence will be 20 pounds, which corresponds to the approximate average net weight of a recreationally caught halibut in BC. Second, licence holders will be required to accurately record all fish harvested under the licence in a logbook and report their catch to DFO, so that it may be counted against the quota held. Third, DFO is confirming that resource management and enforcement personnel will continue to work together in developing the management and enforcement of this fishery.

Small Business Lens
The small business lens does not apply to this proposal, as the estimated costs to small business associated with this proposal (described below) are defined as low costs for a regulatory proposal.

Rationale
The proposed quota transfer licence will provide a mechanism for the recreational sector to lease available commercial quota. Quota transfers will be tracked through DFO’s existing Quota Management System for managing and tracking quota allocations and reallocations within the commercial fishery. This licence is designed to support fishing opportunities for recreational fishers beyond the recreational sector’s current 15% allocation, and may support more predictable access to the resource for businesses so that they can make their business plans and advertise their services in advance of the fishing season. Licence holders will be required to accurately record all fish harvested under the licence in a logbook and report their catch to DFO, so that it may be reconciled with the quota held. Subject to the availability of quota from the commercial sector, participants may apply to reallocate additional quota to the recreational quota transfer fishery throughout the season defined for the recreational quota transfer fishery. Quota that goes unused by participating recreational fishers may be offered for transfer back to commercial quota holders or other recreational quota transfer licence holders throughout the season. Quota held under the quota transfer licence will be removed from the commercial TAC and is
accounted for independently of the recreational harvest. In the event that the recreational fishery

 

[GLG]

Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 7 of 10
needs to be closed because it has met or exceeded it’s allotted 15% of the TAC, the quota transfer fishery may continue to harvest under the portion of the commercial fleet’s 85% that has been reallocated to the recreational quota transfer fishery.
These proposed regulatory amendments support DFO’s policy objectives in several ways: · long term sustainability of the Pacific halibut resource through stabilization of the Canadian harvest by the combined recreational and commercial sectors within the overall Canadian TAC; · economically prosperous fisheries by supporting supplemental recreational fishing opportunities. The transfer mechanism supports economic prosperity by providing opportunities for businesses that provide recreational fishing services when the halibut fishery would otherwise be closed, and may also provide greater certainty for business planning purposes; · improved governance through providing recreational and commercial fishers with flexibility and predictability in choosing how to meet their fishing interests.

Benefit and Cost Analysis
The baseline for the proposed regulatory change incorporates current restrictions on the recreational halibut fishery, with no option for the recreational fishery to access commercial quota. The proposed regulatory change provides for a voluntary program to allow recreational fishers or businesses that provide recreational fishing services to lease quota from the commercial sector. A cost-benefit framework is used to qualitatively assess the potential benefits and costs, and the potential distributional impacts are described.

Benefits
Participation in the proposed quota transfer licence program will be voluntary. Benefits are likely positive for participants; however, these benefits were not quantified or monetized. Businesses which provide recreational fishing services (e.g. guides, lodges, marinas) and that participate in the program, are assumed to receive neutral or positive incremental benfits beyond costs (i.e., profits). A total of 26 experimental fishery licences have been issued to businesses over 2011 and 2012. Of the businesses that participated in the experimental fishery in 2011, approximately 30% also participated in 2012. Since the program is voluntary, repeat participation suggests an anticipation of positive or neutral net benefits through participation;
those businesses that anticipate net costs are unlikely to participate a second time. Businesses may use quota to minimize late season cancellations, expand the fishing experience for guests or for other means to maintain or increase profits. If there is an increase in recreational fishing activity due to the proposed licence, there may be
indirect benefits to businesses that support the recreational fishing sector (e.g. accommodations, fuel etc). The scale of these benefits would depend on the location and type of recreational activity that occurs. Individual Canadian fishers may also voluntarily access additional halibut fishing opportunities under the program, or may do so under the licence of a participating business. Such participants are assumed to receive benefits in the form of enjoyment and fish, at least equal to the costs of
participation. These net benefits would be incremental to those achieved under the regular recreational fishery, as the participants have increased access to halibut. A total of 111 experimental fishery licences have been issued to individual fishers in 2011 and 2012. Of the individuals that participated in the experimental fishery in 2011, approximately 23% also participated in 2012. Direct economic benefits will accrue to participating fishers and businesses. The majority of these benefits are likely to accrue to BC resident fishers. Over the past five years in BC, Canadians purchased approximately 250,000 tidal water licences with about 40% fishing for

 

[GLG]

Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 8 of 10
halibut; BC residents purchased over 80% of the licences1. In addition, the majority of participants in the 2011 experimental fishery were individuals who intended to use the licence for personal fishing purposes. 2 The number of businesses that provide recreational fishing services that participated in the experimental licence program is small (<50). The total number of businesses that provide tidal water recreational fishing services in BC is unknown, with many located in rural and remote areas. There may be benefits to Canadians more generally, from improved conservation and management of the halibut fishery.

Costs
Since the proposed program is voluntary, only those individuals and businesses who anticipate positive or neutral net benefits are anticipated to participate. No costs are identified for Canadians and sectors that do not participate in the proposed program.
Payments to lease quota are considered transfers between sectors rather than economic cost; however, transaction costs associated with the leasing of quota are economic costs. Transaction costs are estimated to be about 3% of the lease cost of quota (approximately $5/lb in 2011), suggesting a cost of less than $5 per licence holder at the minimum quota holding level (i.e. 20 lbs). If increased competition for halibut quota resulted in an increase to the lease transfer value, transaction costs could also increase. Participants in the program will incur small incremental costs associated with obtaining the licence and complying with monitoring requirements. Individual or staff time will be required to complete the licence application, as well as complete and submit the logbook. Licensees will need to ensure that all additional harvesters on their licence complete the monitoring requirements. In addition, participants will need to purchase a logbook, with a cost of about $15. The commercial fishing sector as a whole, including fishers and processors, may experience very small net costs in terms of market value, due to the proposed regulation change. The commercial groundfish fleet harvests very close to 100% of the commercial TAC, so a transfer of quota from the commercial to recreational sectors would reduce halibut landed and wholesale value, and potentially profits. At the low levels of transfers that occurred under the experimental licence, the impact would be minor. For example, net transfers in 2011 may have resulted in a $2,000
reduction in landed value, translating in about a $6,500 reduction in processed value. Only small percentages of landed and wholesale value are economic profits. The commercial halibut fishery has had an average annual landed value of over $30 million and an average wholesale value of over $125 million. However, higher level of quota transfers to the recreational fishery could result in higher impacts.
The incremental government cost to manage the program (i.e. licensing and quota management) is anticipated to be low as the quota management infrastructure is already in place. Some incremental costs will be associated with the introduction of logbooks; additional staff time may be required for DFO staff to enter, submit, and process logbook data. Additional time to complete this work is anticipated to be low. Enforcement activities will occur through the application of existing enforcement programs and resources. Canadian consumers of halibut products are not expected to incur a loss in benefits (i.e. consumer surplus) due to a reduced supply of halibut. Most of the halibut caught in Canada is 1 Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Economic Analysis and Statistics. 2010 Survey of Recreational Fishing in Canada. 2012. iv+27pp. Available at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/stats/rec/can /2010/RECFISH2010_ENG.pdf Accessed September 57, 2012.
2 In 2011 DFO introduced an experimental halibut recreational fishery to allow individuals or businesses to lease quota from the commercial sector to use or make it available to clients to harvest recreationally. The majority of participants were individuals who intended to use the quota for personal fishing. A small number
of businesses also participated. Of the 4,462 pounds of quota leased from the commercial sector by the recreational sector, 220 pounds were harvested, 4,185 were transferred back to the commercial sector and 55 pounds were unused. The 2012 experimental halibut recreational fishery is still open, thus final numbers for 2012 are not yet available.

 

[GLG]

Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 9 of 10
exported so a small reduction in harvest is unlikely to impact the Canadian market. As well, the global seafood market provides numerous substitutes that limit price increases Costs may be incurred by participants (transaction costs, compliance monitoring , the commercial fishing sector (reduced profits), and government (monitoring). In addition, crew payments are linked directly to revenues in the commercial fishery, so crew income may decline by about 20-30% of any decline in landed value. At the low level of transfers under the experimental program, a decline in crew payments may be offset in other fisheries or through other employment; however, if use of the quota transfer licence grows the impact could increase.

Benefits and costs conclusions
Overall, while benefits to Canadians of the proposed regulatory change are unknown, they are likely positive. Participation is voluntary and those who participate - both fishers and businesses - likely anticipate positive or neutral net benefits. Participation in the experimental fishery in 2011 and 2012 has been limited, suggesting that the net benefits may not be large; however this could change with any increase in restrictions on the regular recreational halibut fishery and growing awareness of the quota transfer fishery over time. Reduced access to halibut by the commercial fishery could result in a small reduction in landed and wholesale value, which may lead to small losses in crew income and possibly small losses in economic profits. However, the current low levels of transfers will likely result in low costs. The incremental costs to government to operate the proposed program are small. Canadian consumers of halibut and other Canadians not participating in the program are not expected to be impacted. While the net benefits for the proposed regulation have not been quantified and are not known, the low costs identified and the voluntary nature of the proposed program suggest net benefits will be neutral or positive.

Implementation, Enforcement and Service Standards
This regulatory amendment will be implemented with notification of the public through Fishery Notices, First Nations groups, the Sport Fishing Advisory Board, the Groundfish Integrated Advisory Board (consisting of commercial, recreational, First Nations, coastal community, and Province of British Columbia representatives), the Halibut Advisory Board , the British Columbia Tidal Waters Sport Fishing Guide, and industry associations like the Sport Fishing Institute and the Pacific Halibut Management Association. Following the establishment of the new licence type in regulation, DFO will develop a management plan for the recreational halibut quota transfer fishery in collaboration with interested parties. The management plan will include monitoring, compliance, and enforcement strategies. DFO will have overall responsibility for ensuring compliance with, and enforcement of, management measures associated with the recreational quota transfer fishery licence proposed
in this regulatory amendment. This would be undertaken through the Department’s legislated enforcement mandate and responsibilities under the Fisheries Act. Current monitoring and compliance provisions in the experimental fishery (mandatory logbooks and catch reporting) will serve as the basis for strategies in the management plan for the quota transfer fishery enabled by this new licence type. The primary means of Departmental enforcement will be through the application of existing enforcement programs and resources. DFO will use the existing Quota Management System which currently processes quota transfers within commercial groundfish fisheries and the experimental quota transfer fishery to facilitate and track the transfer of quota between commercial and recreational sectors.
Draft for public review
November 7, 2012 Page 10 of 10
Contact
Neil Davis
A/ Regional Manager, Groundfish | Gestionnaire régional
Fisheries and Aquaculture Management Branch | Direction des pêches et de l'aquaculture
401 Burrard St, Vancouver, BC V6C 3S4
Fisheries and Oceans Canada | Pêches et Océans Canada
Telephone | Téléphone: (604) 666-9033
Neil.Davis@dfo-mpo.gc.ca

 

[Lipripper]

Too long didn't read... I'll take some time tomorrow.

1) Hail in/out before and after fishing your commercial halibut quota each day.
2) 100% camera observation while fishing your commercial halibut quota.
3) 100% dock side monitor when landing your commercial halibut quota.
4) jaw tag on all commercial halibut quota caught fish.

I got about this far.... And all these are already implemented to a degree..

 

[searun]

OMG, all that for 220 pounds of halibut actually harvested under the "experimental license." Seems like one hell of a lot of "management cost" directed at selling fish to a recreational sector that is already theirs. The only long term solution is the Minister has to live up to his promise not to disrupt the recreational fishing season with in-season closures. So the Minister needs to find a way to move quota from one sector to the next at no cost to either sector - the Minister made this mess, DFO can clean it up....An excellent post, thanks for sharing.

 

[sammyslabber]

If we had an extra halibut for every word in that draft we would be able to extend our season......

 

[GLG]

I would also like to remind this fella, that has been tasked to write this up, that the Malcolm Case is still ongoing and this should wait till there is a decision. If the commercial fishermen (Malcolm) loses his case it would show that there is an easy way to fix this problem and no need for an expensive, time consuming waste of process.

Can you imagine having this passed in parliament in the next omnibus budget bill....
Just for 200 pounds of halibut..... wasting government time and energy ..... epic fail....
GLG

 

[searun]

Love it..."epic fail" That is the quote of the week! Perfectly describes the snake oil sales job that document is...I can't wait to rush out and buy me some of that experimental quota to place under the tree for Christmas.

 

[GLG]

So I voiced my concerns to Neil and I cc'ed Randy Kamp.
Should be interesting if I get anything back.

I suggest others send an email and cc Randy Kemp also.
It doesn't have to be fancy, just a simple objection would be OK.
You could cut and paste "hold off until the Malcolm Case has a ruling"
or
Listen to SFAB as they share my concerns.
Tell them to pound sand if you like.

Don't care what you say but do something as we need some email's and social media push right now.
We have till December 21 for input so it's time to step up.

here are the email address

Neil.Davis@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
randy.kamp@parl.gc.ca

 

[chris73]

Done and I encourage everyone who is interested in fishing halibut next year to do so too.

 

[GLG]

Something new from SFI
http://www.sportfishing.bc.ca/lt_sfinews_issues.htm?RD=1#halibut
Halibut Regulatory Impact analysis statement (rias) regarding the Experimental licence




Details and considerations for comment below - Please provide your comments to DFO before December 21, 2012
The Fisheries Minister has instructed his officials to prepare a draft regulation to make permanent the “Experimental Licence” which currently allows recreational anglers or firms providing services to anglers to avoid possession limits by leasing commercial halibut quota.
As a result, the department has issued a draft Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS) outlining the proposal and seeking input. The full document can be found here or at the following link; www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/consultation/fisheries-peche/ground-fond/hal-fle/index-eng.htm

Individuals have until December 21 to provide comment to the Pacific Region’s Groundfish Division. E-mailed comments can be sent to Neil.Davis@dfo-mpo.gc.ca.
In formulating your views and commenting on both the proposed document and its policy objective you might wish to consider the following questions:
• Does the proposed quota transfer fishery mean that anglers become the modern equivalent of “sharecroppers”? In other words they are encouraged to go cap-in-hand to the “slipper skippers” who profit from what amounts to perpetual ownership of quota without any obligation to actually fish for a living or even to maintain a fishing vessel?
• Do you support a program in which access to a common property resource is controlled by a small group of government-endowed speculators?
• Should the proposed licence exempt users from the long established regulation of harvest through daily and total possession limits?
• Does allowing some anglers to fish when the season is otherwise closed, and to exceed established possession limits, contradict both the spirit and intent of the British Columbia Sportfishing Regulations, 1996 and the Fishery (General) Regulations?
• Does the proposed licence provide “additional fishing opportunities for the recreational sector”, as claimed, or does it only provide extra fish to wealthy individuals who can afford to pay an undeserved premium to non-fishing speculators for access to quota which they get from government each year for an average of about 10 cents a pound?
• Is the proposed quota transfer part of a true “market-based mechanism” when the halibut quota “market” is unregulated? Is there a “market” when price and quantity are set in advance by quota owners? Is there a “market” when there are no rules to ensure transparency and prevent collusion?
• Since the proposed licence regulates business transactions rather than fishing, does it fall within federal jurisdiction? Does the federal government have the constitutional authority to create such a regulation?
• Will conflicting season times and possession rules create serious enforcement problems?
• What are the potential problems for enforcement if boats come to shore with both recreational and leased fish?
• Why is the new licence free? Why is government proposing to subsidize this fishery?
• Has government calculated the administrative costs that will be incurred if the program is successful and attracts thousands of participants?
• Since one of the new licences will allow its holder to sub-let that additional access to someone else, is government not condoning the “sale, trade, or barter” of recreational fish that is prohibited under the Fishery (General) Regulations?
• Since 70% of the businesses and 77% of the individual anglers who participated in 2011 did not express interest in 2012, what is the justification for a permanent regulation?
• Since only 60 licences were issued in 2012, for a total harvest of 814 pounds, (an average of 14 pounds per licence) what is the justification for a permanent regulation?

• Most of the people who turned out for the department’s public consultation meetings last Spring opposed the continuation of the experimental licence. Why is their opinion being ignored?

 

[Cuba Libre]

Thanks for the post Gil-- e-bomb heading for Vancouver DFO and Ottawa pending..........

 

[fshnfnatic]

Thanks for that,GLG. Emails sent. All we can do is cross our fingers and hope common sense prevails!

 

[searun]

Thanks for the post GLG...also adding my e-mail to similarly express issue with this crap. Better they simply stood down pending outcome of Malcolm case as this whole thing is a waste of time until we know what the landscape will look like post judgment. Moreover, what makes them think that 220 pounds was a success!!! Total bs