First Nation Opposes Changes To Halibut Quota

[fish4all]

Am I Missing something here? Is the FN volume of catch not allotted First - right after the TAC is set and then removed out of the Commercial % of TAC? That is the way that I understood it. So would it not be that the only thing that has bearing on the FN allottment is the TAC set by the IPHC if it fluctuates from year to year based upon conservation, nothing to do with what % is alloted to the Sport Fishing Sector?

So why "would" you feel uneasy also if your catch was based on a fixed % of the TAC total for the year?

Any Insight here DD (or anyone else for that matter)???? Please share.

After the 500k for food and cerimonial the FN own(or for those that struggle with that word) are granted access to 17% of the commercial quota. Larry's band on top of being able to apply for a portion of the 17% (that was just bought by dfo under the picfi program) have a guarantee in their treaty that says they will get a percentage(.39%) of the commercial TAC. So if there was a change in the allocation you could be impacting their share(.39%) of the commercial tac

 

[Ding Dong!]

Really-duck and weave

Honestly, are you truly doing anyone any favors by conversing in the manor to which you are? Imagine, just for one second. If no one from the coalition takes the time to contact this gentleman and arrange some time to sit with him and listen to his concerns, imagine, one week, two, four, six weeks forward where you all will be with this. Why wouldn't you work at the opportunity and simply take the time to genuinely listen to him, and then share with him yours. Maybe you will start to see some change, eventually do this with others.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

After the 500k for food and cerimonial the FN own 17% of the commercial quota. Larry's band also has a guarantee in their treaty that says they will get a percentage of the commercial TAC. So if there was a change in the percentages you are taking fish from the band.

If that is true, why the hell would anyone negotiate for a treaty, a supply of fish for their band, based on a % of a % of the TAC? Why not get a % based upon the whole TAC, then the amount of fish that you get only fluctuates based upon the conservation of the resource, not based upon a flawed and corrupt allocation system that is given out by quotas to people that impress(ed) the minister of the day. It just strikes me odd that one would negotiate something for themselves and risk loosing out when the system collapses. If the treaty negotiation stick is such a big one, then why not move your position right to the front of the line???

 

[fish4all]

If that is true, why the hell would anyone negotiate for a treaty, a supply of fish for their band, based on a % of a % of the TAC? Why not get a % based upon the whole TAC, then the amount of fish that you get only fluctuates based upon the conservation of the resource, not based upon a flawed and corrupt allocation system that is given out by quotas to people that impress(ed) the minister of the day. It just strikes me odd that one would negotiate something for themselves and risk loosing out when the system collapses. If the treaty negotiation stick is such a big one, then why not move your position right to the front of the line???

This part of the treaty was done to improve employment in the band. It is done on the commercial tac as it will be fished commercially. The way commercial quota is cut up is by % not by lbs. Pretty much all fisheries (salmon, halibut, black cod, rockfish,herring) are a quota fishery and have been for years. I don't know if I would hang my hat on the system collapsing.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

This part of the treaty was done to improve employment in the band. It is done on the commercial tac as it will be fished commercially.

Even still they should have negotiated a higher postion in the line up for fish and could have still run it as an employment opportunity commercial fishery for the band members (under the same rules as the commercial fishery of course). If this had been done, then they would have had a much better opportuity to forcast business stability, with a more stable allottment of fish per year.

I sure as hell hope that someone with the Commercial Fisheries "intrest" in mind didn't "dupe" them out of this position, or that could come back to hurt the treaty process also.

 

[Ding Dong!]

Even still they should have negotiated a higher postion in the line up for fish and could have still run it as an employment opportunity commercial fishery for the band members (under the same rules as the commercial fishery of course). If this had been done, then they would have had a much better opportuity to forcast business stability, with a more stable allottment of fish per year.

I sure as hell hope that someone with the Commercial Fisheries "intrest" in mind didn't "dupe" them out of this position, or that could come back to hurt the treaty process also.

FN is exercising their constitutional fishing right for food and ceremonial and then under license in a shared fishery, in helping to develop employment opportunities. Two independent areas of operation.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Ding Dong! I would really like to hear your insight on this one, I am sure that you have something to add to this.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

FN is exercising their constitutional fishing right for food and ceremonial and then under license in a shared fishery, in helping to develop employment opportunities. Two independent areas of operation.

There you are!

We know that these are two independant areas of operation. The issue that I have is would they have not been in a better position to negotiate an allottment ahead of the Commercial Fishery and the Sport Fishery?

The sit down conversation that you refer to above, to hear all sides concerns should have taken place before this letter was sent out, it definately has a bias to the Commercial sector, as they do have a commercial intrest involved here as fish4all has laid out for us above, and that is fine, and just as the FN are concerned about the quantity of fish available to them, so are the Sport fishermen, only we the sport fishermen do not have the Treaty card to hold over the powers that be.

This just goes to prove that the current system is a mess and the further down the road that we carry this system on, the more strapped and confined the DFO is going to be to make any adjustments for things like treaties, and growth in the Sport Fishing sector. This system needs to be dismantled now and set up with input from all parties involved in the halibut fishery. For sure the Government should maintain complete control of the "yearly" apportionment of the TAC with complete flexibility to make changes as needed from year to year.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

FN is exercising their constitutional fishing right for food

Do you have any info at your disposal that lays out my constitutional fishing right for food, as a Canadian Citizen? What if I want to fish for food, without having to buy a lisence and be bound by the rules that apply to that lisence?

 

[Ding Dong!]

My insight at this time, is that we need to drop the old school war tactics, and seriously consider building relationships amongst all sectors. For instance there is one hell of a lot going on right now, that is being worked way outside of the sport sector, and the sport sector could easily participate, and help in developing many aspects of things to come, all sectors can do this together. Unfortunately many of the drivers who are currently directing "your fight" in the sport sector only see the war and enemies in front of them. There are many opportunities to build upon bettering your relations with each and every sector. I know how much effort people have put in over the years, the dedication is staggering, the best part is that none of you have given up. The bad part is that we all need to recognize when it is time to let go of something that in not working and that has your passion engulfed. There are changes coming, just not today, and not everyone will be happy. I will say this, don't assume that you know what I am saying, or think that you know where I am coming from, who's side or anything. Just sip on the ideas that I have been putting out. They don't necessarily mean exactly what you think. It is good for some, and not so for others. Just remember sip on the words, take them kindly.

 

[Rockfish]

After the 500k for food and cerimonial the FN own(or for those that struggle with that word) are granted access to 17% of the commercial quota. Larry's band on top of being able to apply for a portion of the 17% (that was just bought by dfo under the picfi program) have a guarantee in their treaty that says they will get a percentage(.39%) of the commercial TAC. So if there was a change in the allocation you could be impacting their share(.39%) of the commercial tac

Larry’s Bands additional treaty allocation is only .39%; that is less than one half of one percent. That can easily be accommodated out of the huge commercial sector allocation even with a reallocation of 88%/12% to address the huge inequity which exists in BC, unlike Alaska and Washington State where the commercial/recreational allocation of halibut is much more balanced and fair and also provide for First Nation requirements.

 

[Charlie]

After the 500k for food and cerimonial the FN own(or for those that struggle with that word) are granted access to 17% of the commercial quota. Larry's band on top of being able to apply for a portion of the 17% (that was just bought by dfo under the picfi program) have a guarantee in their treaty that says they will get a percentage(.39%) of the commercial TAC. So if there was a change in the allocation you could be impacting their share(.39%) of the commercial tac

Unless things changed I believe that would be 26,000 pounds, plus .39% of the total Canadian TAC - not commercial? Then if correct they have their commercial quota on top of that? If I am reading right?

“On December 09, 2006 the Maa-nulth Final Agreement was Initialled signifying the end of Negotiations and the start of the next step Ratification by membership.”

4. Each year, the Maa-nulth Fish Allocation for halibut is 26,000 pounds plus 0.39% of the Halibut Canadian Total Allowable Catch.

Then if not mistaken, it appears there is another .3506476 percent additional commercial allowed?
4. One Category L licence issued under the Pacific Fishery Regulations, 1993 with a maximum vessel length of 21.23 metres and a quota of 0.147686 percent of the Canadian Commercial Total Allowable Catch for Pacific halibut.

5. One Category L licence issued under the Pacific Fishery Regulations, 1993 with a maximum vessel length of 20.35 metres and a quota of 0.097124 percent of the Canadian Commercial Total Allowable Catch for Pacific halibut.

6. One Category L licence issued under the Pacific Fishery Regulations, 1993 with a maximum vessel length of 20.48 metres and a quota of 0.1058376 percent of the Canadian Commercial Total Allowable Catch for Pacific halibut.

 

[Lipripper]

This is getting silly.............

BTW Thats interesting Charlie

He stands to lose nothin?

 

[Lipripper]

Amen.............................

 

[fish4all]

yep ,this is what im workin towards, more and more everyday, gonna push the envelope and see what happens, had enough of being regulated and ruled to the nuts....simply just had enough...holmes*

yup and if we all have that attitude there will be nothing left. Why do you think we don't all get to hunt deer or cut xmas trees. Effort is starting to outweigh availability. like it or not that is a fact. Sports fishing is a "privledge" not a right and unfortunatly now with 300,000 anglers puttting in 2.2million rod days a year there is going to be change, there has to be.

DD you are 100% correct. The sectors need to be sat down and forced to work this out. The rec sector stamping their feet and demanding 1.7-2.4 mill pounds(25-35%) when the tac is declinig is not going to make things progress.

 

[Osama Bin Hopper]

yup and if we all have that attitude there will be nothing left. Why do you think we don't all get to hunt deer or cut xmas trees. Effort is starting to outweigh availability. like it or not that is a fact. Sports fishing is a "privledge" not a right and unfortunatly now with 300,000 anglers puttting in 2.2million rod days a year there is going to be change, there has to be.

DD you are 100% correct. The sectors need to be sat down and forced to work this out. The rec sector stamping their feet and demanding 1.7-2.4 mill pounds(25-35%) when the tac is declinig is not going to make things progress.

Good god are you for real?

We actually can all hunt deer if we are so licenced. In fact, despite hunting and natural predation, abundancy in most management levels has been growing and more liberal bag limits including harvest of does has been the trend of late. Now I suspect that if 88% of those deer were allotted to commercial hunting interests we'd likely be in a somewhat different trend...

Christmas trees!? Well again Santa, I suspect it has more to do with commercial interests controlling access to timber blocks and harvest of potentially valuable specimans by a lowly citizen! It hasn't been ordinary folk cutting xmas trees that has led to the holocosts on our hillsides...

I do agree however that this many anglers will require change to regulation. Equitable access!!!

Anyhow, this is a classic case of positioning, lobbying and sector playing. There is only one interest in mind and it aint the conservation of halibut I'll tell you that. Do think that at the end of goddamned day ANY of those hocus pocus percentages and poundages meen ***** all on the dock in Port Desire??


I wish you would dissapear.

 

[Optimist]

Nobody is saying that the Fn are not entitled to cerimonal fish? The problem is they want more and more fish because they see a commercial value to these fish the bs about providing job oppurtunities for band members is Bs there are very few that actually participate in the fishery, they are no better then these Slipper Skippers who lease there quotas not only in halibut but for every other speices as well as shellfish.In the recreational sport sector in the last 4 yrs were i fish it is becoming a joke ,any native wherever they may live can come to this area with a permitt inhand and fish as much as he or she wants ,they can fish in any restricted area even if it is protected for conservation,they don't even have to be on the boat they can get a letter stating who they want to fish it for them,the biggest problem with all this that i'am seeing is there is no reporting of the amount (total lbs) caught in a trip,we got the same guys going out twice a week all summer long taking on average 1000-2000 lbs of hali ,yellow eye ,lingcod a day,other guys doing this as well ,driving brand new trucks by the end of summer,there is no watch dog for this, i've talked to fisheries there hands are tied on this they are as equally frustrated,this is one small example on the coast you can be dam sure this is happening allover.WHo's exploiting the resourse now!!!

 

[fish4all]

my mistake i meant elk and moose. limited entry species..

I respect that you may disagree with my position.

And i agree the FN fishery needs to be cleaned up as well.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Optimist; the same groups that have been exploiting the resource to sell (mostly abroad) have always been doing it and unless something changes, will always be doing it. These groups worked hand in hand with DFO to develop the currrent system, and funny how when they developed that said system they also developed a large grey area so that if push came to shove they would have somewhere to point the finger and say "those Sporties are the problem, there are too many of them and they don't even accurately count their fish caught". This whole thing is BS and the upper levels of DFO must make dramatic changes - NOW!!!!

 

[fish4all]

Optimist; the same groups that have been exploiting the resource to sell (mostly abroad) have always been doing it and unless something changes, will always be doing it. These groups worked hand in hand with DFO to develop the currrent system, and funny how when they developed that said system they also developed a large grey area so that if push came to shove they would have somewhere to point the finger and say "those Sporties are the problem, there are too many of them and they don't even accurately count their fish caught". This whole thing is BS and the upper levels of DFO must make dramatic changes - NOW!!!!

Correction. Commercial fishermen blame DFO for where we are today. What did not happen between 2003 and today is the problem. The RDG stuck his head in the sand long enough to get a great big pension instead of working on this issue. Like it or not there was a postion made in 2003 from the Minister of the day and because there was enough fish around nobody worked on a solution for the future until we ended up in the present day situation. Pretty sure if someone looked back at the HAB minutes for 2004-2006 the SFAB couldn't bother to attend. Had we started working on this problem after the announcement we could have been in front of the user fee act that now stands in the way of much of what we are trying to accomplish.

I still think there is a way to make this all work if we can get some level headed, progressive thinking people in a room and find some solutions. Question; why have the SFAB PHMA and FN not demanded that the US fleet be severly limited in our waters. DD, whom ever he/she is, is bang on that we need to work this out together.