First Nation Opposes Changes To Halibut Quota

[fishingbc]

simple answer...the SFAB WAS NOT ORGANIZED or taken seriously enough back then...since then DFO and the commercial sector has always counted on our sector being that way.....fragmented, disorganized, satisfied with the status-quo.....well those days are gone.....new day...new beginning.... no more lying down taking it on the chin....that's just the way its gonna be from now on....

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.

 

[Charlie]

Well, actually I have looked back! J

If you do look back the biggest issue is both sides could not come to the agreement of granting the commercial sector an increase to 95% of the total TAC. Which the commercial sector refused to move from! I like “Derby’s” answer and the term, “commercials slamming the door” on sports comes to mind.

My opinion… putting a “user fee” on halibut is nothing more than Canada using sport money collected, from MOSTLY British Columbia tax payers to pay private individuals for the right to fish the COMMON fishery resource! The “shared resource” is between U.S. and Canada, by treaty. I believe, Canadian Laws do describe “common resource” legally owned by ALL citizens of Canada, not just a few individuals! I think the term that comes to mind there – would be, that is “illegal” by Canadian Law.

Curious about what I am missing concerning the “US fleet remarks that keep be referred? If not mistaken… those sectors can’t demand anything concerning the U.S. fleet, as Canada put that to rest in 1978. Why is that even being mentioned? Unless I am reading this completely wrong, the U.S. halibut fleet has not been allowed to fish British Columbia waters since 1978? Even pior to that the U.S. fleet had been reduced to 7% in 1976? Halibut catch from British Columbia, 1930-1976. Shows in 1976 Canada harvested (in thousands) 6,655, the U.S. harvested 474, for a total of 7,129. That represents 93% and 7% U.S. So, what am I missing there?
http://www.iphc.washington.edu/publications/annual/ar1976.pdf

The 1978 Annual report: “The United States Fisheries Conservation and Management Act of 1976 required renegotiation of all international fisheries treaties. Negotiations took place this past winter and a new west coast fisheries agreement between Canada and the United States was reached on March 29, 1979. As part of the agreement, the International Pacific Halibut Commission is to be continued in its traditional form. Had an agreement not been reached, the Commission would have been dissolved on April 1, 1979. Although this is a report on 1978 activities, it seems timely that I discuss the new settlement and its implications regarding the management of the Pacific halibut.”

“The most significant change caused by the new agreement is that reciprocal fishing privileges will end. United States fishermen will no longer be allowed to fish in Canadian waters, and Canadian fishermen will be phased out of United States waters over two years beginning with the 1979 season. Canadian fishermen will be allowed 2 million pounds from U.S. waters in 1979 and 1 million pounds in 1980. This restriction will cause a hardship on some fishermen and alter the distribution of fishing effort on certain components of the stock. The new protocol also requires that 60070 of the catch limit in Area 2 be taken in Canadian waters and 40% in U.S. waters. The division is based on the catches by the two countries over the past several years. The Commission does not recognize separate stocks within Area 2 and will continue to set a quota for the area as a whole with a subdivision to satisfy the agreement.
http://www.iphc.washington.edu/publications/annual/ar1978.pdf

Here’s a thought! In 2010 there was 292,024 TOTAL licenses issued. I personally believe most were actually for salmon. Has anyone considered people who go and use lodge and guide services, only buy the license needed? Meaning unless they are a “local resident” they aren’t buying an annual license to go fishing with a guide or lodge, they are only going to buy a 1-5 day permit. Out of those total licenses has even noticed 97,905 of those permits issued,60,682 residents, with 37,223 non-residents. Now consider all those don’t even halibut fish, throw-in those mythical numbers and percentages. Even if, all those mythical numbers are even close, the license information indicates – the large majority of halibut is not only going to Canadians, but is going to resident Canadian! That really skews all those beliefs about those halibut going either Americans or non-residents? What percentage of who, is catching what percentage of what, and where are those halibut really are ending up, you think?

I really must be missing something? J

 

[Fish-Hunter]

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.

YES we do all have to work this out together so that it is fair for all who are actively participating in the halibut fishery, and a fair and trusted level of accountability has got to be put in place for all sectors ( i do believe that the Comms. are there now from the research that I have done, the FN - ???, the Sporties - very little to nada, none!).

So now that we have all sat around, solved our apportionment issues and sang coombaya, WE ALL still have to get the heads of DFO to get off of their goddamned asses and actually DO SOMETHING!!!!! That will be the biggest mountain to climb no doubt.

It would be far more effective for sure if we were all pulling together to MAKE DFO do something. Instead of trying to do it from three different fronts and then try to get DFO to put it in a package and wrap it up for us the way we all would individually like to see it wrapped up - that is never going to happen. So let's all get our heads together and make some changes that benefit those who are ACTIVELY involved in the halibut fishery and take it to DFO. Because right now we are all doing exactly what DFO wants us to do, go at each other and not at them. Divide and Conquer, they have played it very well.

The ones that I (if I look at it skeptically for a moment) do not see proactively participating are the non-active quota holders (Slipper Skippers) as they are not going to want to let go of their either free gifted or purchased cash-cow. Their involvement in the Halibut fishery is not fair to all of the rest of us, for they are like LORDS and have the say as to who gets to buy "their" quota and how much it is going to cost. If they were not in the picture, then the quota that they hold would now be available to support the fishing needs of the FN, the ACTIVE Commercials, and Sport fishers, and I believe at a great reduction in costs to the ACTIVE Commercial fishermen, this would make them far more profitable than they are today.

 

[IronNoggin]

Fish Hunter - KUDOS for one of the BEST posts I've read on the issue since it all began.

Bang-ON in fact!

Cheers,
Nog

 

[Bassblaster]

I second NOG's evaluation. I've been saying the same thing through numerous threads on the site. We all have to work together and hold the DFO accountable. Yes it's a big mountain to climb, but we would get to the top faster pulling each other up, rather than kicking each other down.

 

[Ding Dong!]

Myself and many other individuals have been stating this all along, each has said it in their own particular way. I will continue to maintain the effort that I have started with from the beginning. Working together makes the most sense to me, and I will stick with that ember. Anyone who hasn't seen the opportunity to progress, eventually will.

 

[Ding Dong!]

I think if everybody came to the table, and supported the idea of pushing back on the LORDS it would work better. FN will always voice there opinion on the resource they just don't want to lose it.... They are in the same boat just like us. Right now they are lucky that at least the SF sector is saying something.... I really wish people would stop thinking of themselves, and push back on Ottawa to get this resolved. If the quota gets freed up there will be more for all in all sectors. The SF sector is not attacking anyone except those that get a public resource for free because they are buddies with guys in Ottawa. Can you imagine how many other parts of our resources are traded in backdoor deals just to get votes??

Smiley66

Great post, one other thing that I will continue to maintain, is that the vision of enemies must diminish in order to progress. There are people waiting and working beyond the sport sectors current vision and direction. There will be change, and it will come with or without you. Building relationships today is what is necessary in order to create success for everyone tomorrow. Some of what I have touched on previously relates to your post, I have hinted this for some time now.

 

[Derby]

Myself and many other individuals have been stating this all along, each has said it in their own particular way. I will continue to maintain the effort that I have started with from the beginning. Working together makes the most sense to me, and I will stick with that ember. Anyone who hasn't seen the opportunity to progress, eventually will.

Okay-seem that you have said this all along- I'm in full agreement .Please let us know in which forum we can do this?- Where can all the sectors meet and get down to it? I'm In

 

[fish4all]

fish hunter, best reply I have seen yet.

Charlie, the american fleet is the boats that mostly come out of neah bay and catch halibut in canadian waters then return to neah bay with zero benifit to canada|(don't have the numbers at my finger tips but it was in excess of 100k). Also there are a number of american boats that work on the west coast and around hardy that have "friends" coming in and out on a regular basis. These are the people that should be severly restricted to a canadian resource. There is also a group of boats around hardy that spend the summer there and get the fish processed at a local shop and shipped home so that they never reach their possession limits..not acceptable. These are the people we should all be fighting against to try and free up fish for the local angler.

If you add reasonable seasonal limits to the above then we may not find ourselves in the problem we are facing right now.

 

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers Fish4all,

Definately agreeable points you raise and have my support. I would go one step further and advocate that any American who wishes to fish in Canada for halibut must have a Guide.

Curious if you would find 20 fish/year an acceptable seasonal limit for halibut?

In anticipation...

 

[Charlie]

Charlie, the american fleet is the boats that mostly come out of neah bay and catch halibut in canadian waters then return to neah bay with zero benifit to canada|(don't have the numbers at my finger tips but it was in excess of 100k). Also there are a number of american boats that work on the west coast and around hardy that have "friends" coming in and out on a regular basis. These are the people that should be severly restricted to a canadian resource. There is also a group of boats around hardy that spend the summer there and get the fish processed at a local shop and shipped home so that they never reach their possession limits..not acceptable. These are the people we should all be fighting against to try and free up fish for the local angler.

If you add reasonable seasonal limits to the above then we may not find ourselves in the problem we are facing right now.

Thanks for clarifying… That certainly does explain the comments! Those aren't considered commercial though... they would be considered sport.

All valid issues issues from a Canadian "sport" view! Did you know, if I own a condo in BC with a Canadian address and drivers license, I could probably get a "resident" fishing license with little or no questions asked. Then having a "permanent" residence in Canada, once those fish are there - I have NO two day possession limit. Then, I can "legally process" those sport fish and once done, is not subect to that two day limit - only annual limits! If the fish are cleaned, packaged, and frozen it is considered processed! That is a huge whole in your (and both) regulations!

Concerning Neah Bay...
There appears to be a huge drop starting in 2008. Past average weights have been estimated at 19 pounds, so the 2008 number should fall around 90,782. Prior to 2009 the numbers came directly from WDFG records of landed fish. Now they appear to be using DFO estimates? I would have to question that! Then for such a large drop in 2009? It makes it hard for me to believe? They really should be using WDFW actual numbers, even if DFO had to pay for them! Not DFO “estimates” 2010, it wasn’t even addressed? I don’t know why but it might be simply be too much of a “hot potato.” The past years information can be found here, and up until 2009 they stated the numbers came from WA? That my friend, is a very valid issue, and it certainly does go against Canada sport TAC! http://www.iphc.washington.edu/library/raras.html

Here’s a recap on those numbers:
2007, WDF&W reported that Washington anglers caught 9,977 halibut in Canadian waters and landed them in Neah Bay, almost 25 percent lower than the 13,045 halibut landed in 2006. The estimated harvest was 140,676 pounds.

Decline in 2008 as area-closures by DFO were partially responsible for the catch dropping considerably, to only 4,778 halibut. Some US anglers reported fishing in Canadian waters off Neah Bay to be slower than in previous years.

2009 sport harvest (thousands of pounds, net weight) by DFO management in Neah Bay was 33,000 pounds.

 

[fish4all]

Cheers Fish4all,

Definately agreeable points you raise and have my support. I would go one step further and advocate that any American who wishes to fish in Canada for halibut must have a Guide.

Curious if you would find 20 fish/year an acceptable seasonal limit for halibut?

In anticipation...

I would be closer to 10 or as low as 5 on years of low abundance. 10 fish 20lb average(maybe thats high on the south but not on the north) would be 200lbs per person.

 

[fish4all]

Thanks for clarifying… That certainly does explain the comments! Those aren't considered commercial though... they would be considered sport.

All valid issues issues from a Canadian "sport" view! Did you know, if I own a condo in BC with a Canadian address and drivers license, I could probably get a "resident" fishing license with little or no questions asked. Then having a "permanent" residence in Canada, once those fish are there - I have NO two day possession limit. Then, I can "legally process" those sport fish and once done, is not subect to that two day limit - only annual limits! If the fish are cleaned, packaged, and frozen it is considered processed! That is a huge whole in your (and both) regulations!

Concerning Neah Bay...
There appears to be a huge drop starting in 2008. Past average weights have been estimated at 19 pounds, so the 2008 number should fall around 90,782. Prior to 2009 the numbers came directly from WDFG records of landed fish. Now they appear to be using DFO estimates? I would have to question that! Then for such a large drop in 2009? It makes it hard for me to believe? They really should be using WDFW actual numbers, even if DFO had to pay for them! Not DFO “estimates” 2010, it wasn’t even addressed? I don’t know why but it might be simply be too much of a “hot potato.” The past years information can be found here, and up until 2009 they stated the numbers came from WA? That my friend, is a very valid issue, and it certainly does go against Canada sport TAC! http://www.iphc.washington.edu/library/raras.html

Here’s a recap on those numbers:
2007, WDF&W reported that Washington anglers caught 9,977 halibut in Canadian waters and landed them in Neah Bay, almost 25 percent lower than the 13,045 halibut landed in 2006. The estimated harvest was 140,676 pounds.

Decline in 2008 as area-closures by DFO were partially responsible for the catch dropping considerably, to only 4,778 halibut. Some US anglers reported fishing in Canadian waters off Neah Bay to be slower than in previous years.

2009 sport harvest (thousands of pounds, net weight) by DFO management in Neah Bay was 33,000 pounds.

no disrespect buy i have no use for the dfo average weights. I had the privledge of reviewing the raw data and after working years around langara I was surprised that there were basically no large fish recorded.

 

[fish4all]

Cheers Fish4all,

Definately agreeable points you raise and have my support. I would go one step further and advocate that any American who wishes to fish in Canada for halibut must have a Guide.

Curious if you would find 20 fish/year an acceptable seasonal limit for halibut?

In anticipation...

There ya go progress we found some common ground. I will guarantee you that we would have 100% support from all sectors. I would also give 100% support to usa visitors having to use a bc guide.

 

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers Fish4all,

We are in agreement on the USA visitors requiring a BC Guide. As for the seasonal limits for halibut I would accept 20/year in years of high abundance and am willing to reduce in years of low abundance. I am sure a grid could be established for the decrease/or increase in consideration of TAC. However...since I fish mostly in the south (where the average weight is demonstrably smaller than in the north, I would hold to the 20 fish/year. While virtually nobody I know would need this much I wish the right to retain up to and including this amount. I cannot speak for others but I do share a lot of my catch with family and I have 5 brothers and sisters as well as other immediate family who enjoy a couple of halibut a year. It is surprising how fast a person can go through that many. Most of my guests wish to take home 2 or 3 per person and it definately impacts my business in a negative fashion when they are restricted below that threshold.

 

[SpringFever552]

Cheers Fish4all,

We are in agreement on the USA visitors requiring a BC Guide. As for the seasonal limits for halibut I would accept 20/year in years of high abundance and am willing to reduce in years of low abundance. I am sure a grid could be established for the decrease/or increase in consideration of TAC. However...since I fish mostly in the south (where the average weight is demonstrably smaller than in the north, I would hold to the 20 fish/year. While virtually nobody I know would need this much I wish the right to retain up to and including this amount. I cannot speak for others but I do share a lot of my catch with family and I have 5 brothers and sisters as well as other immediate family who enjoy a couple of halibut a year. It is surprising how fast a person can go through that many. Most of my guests wish to take home 2 or 3 per person and it definately impacts my business in a negative fashion when they are restricted below that threshold.

I'm sure you would...20 per year?? per sport-licence WTF???...what are you smoking??you have got to be kidding....do the math on that one pal.....
now(last year) there is no limit, but its coming.....one day

you will surely be pissed when it comes to "maybe" 4-5 hali per year per sportie licence.....


IMO, its this kind of thinking(quote above) that will screw you guys(guides)in the end....

 

[h-core]

I tend to agree that 20 is too many. If your extended familly likes to eat halibut too, get them licensed and take them fishing! I`m usually lucky to harvest 3 or 4 chickens and I ration it and get through the year. A couple more would be welcome but I can`t find the time, espcially at 1 per day. 10 might be within reason, but still more than most people need or actually ever harvest.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

The last time that I did my math the average sized fish in the 2010 IPHC Survey fishery worked out to be around 15 lbs.

http://www.iphc.washington.edu/data/survey/2010/2010ssa2b.pdf

20 fish per year @ 15lbs = 300lbs per angler x 100,000 anglers (for Halibut) = 30,000,000lbs (don't think that leaves much for anyone else.

5 fish per year @15lbs = 75lbs per angler x 100,000 anglers (for Halibut) = 7,500,000lbs (now this actually leaves something for everyone else to catch, but now I don't think that is "fair" for the other intrests in the Halibut Fishery). I Believe that Area 2B has a forcasted catch of aprox. 7,650,000lbs???

So unless the fish are actually a lot smaller than the surveys suggest, or unless the number of Sport anglers (100,000) participating in the Halibut Fishery is a lot smaller than has been suggested, we have a real problem with the numbers that we would "like" to catch.

Don't get too hot and bothered with me here, all I am trying to do is look at this from a "Common or Middle Ground" here so we ALL can move forward. We can start to see that this process will not be a comfortable one for everyone involved. We are all going to have to give and take here. Let's keep it going!

Jay

 

[profisher]

Annual limit of 10 per. This is only to limit the overfishing by some individuals who we all hear about bragging of 50 to 75 in a season. A 10 fish annual limit won't impact the regular weekend guy at all as most don't catch even half of that now.

 

[h-core]

The bulk of the TAC is caught in peak season by guys doing their 1 or 2 trips per year. Most likely by guys who take home 1 possesion limit total. A punch card won`t have a huge impact on lowering our TAC but will help stop the greedy and will make us all feel better. However, the greedy pricks will likely just print off an extra couple licenses and DFO will offer little to no enforcement or monitoring. Perhaps we would need to get tags like we had for chinook years ago. X amount per person, a halibut without a tag would be illigal.