HALIBUT CLOSURE
- Thread starter expertfisher780
- Start date
Bret
Member
I read thru a bunch of threads and then jumped to the end. The commercial guys don't have a size limitation as the FN's don't have a size limitation just the sporties so conservation by only us is fairy dust and unicorn farts. What I have suggested before is the purchase of a halibut stamp like the salmon stamp and the funds from that stamp be used to buy permanent quota. I was told DFO was approached and they said they are not in the business of buying quota only selling fishing licences I guess. It would seem the easiest solution, money talks Pattison knows that maybe he would be willing to sell some of the Canadian resource back to Canadians.
fogged in
Well-Known Member
We should not under any circumstances buy halibut quota.
However, if you like the idea, how much do you think it would cost to buy an extra 5% of quota from the commercial sector?
Funny I have heard this from others close to me lately too. I'm torn between holding fast and not buying what rightfully already belongs to us all. BUT!! Reality is 435 or so license holders own 85% of west coast halibut and FN own much of west coast salmon stocks. We are left really owning nothing and are fed the scraps and their are powers trying to take those scraps away as well by shutting down recreational fisheries. Buying not leasing quota would mean we own it and could do what we want with it. (well the Minister could still take it away...its been done before) The recreational fishery does have power in numbers if we choose to use it. A $25 halibut stamp with all proceeds going to buy halibut quota would get us what we need fairly quickly. I guess our reps making those decisions have to figure out if our present actions will ever achieve a satisfactory outcome or if we need to look at other options like this one.
T
The Jackel
Guest
Lets sit back and argue over a petty 25 bucks for a stamp, slowly we will get screwed more and more until we get jack sh*t. Funny thing is i never fish late in the season, this year as i did not get out for hally much i was going to go out and get a late fish so i would have enough for the season because us being stewarts of the water would be able to fish till the end of the year,not. Anybody take a guess when it will open next year??
the fog ducker
Well-Known Member
i will bite
until the powers at be , realize !!!
that guide outfits , lodges all up and down the coast will not be able to do this on there own ,
putting band aids on how to stretch out our seasons
this is a losing cause , it will be over in no time ,
Get the other real fisherman involved , prob %80 of the licenses sold , the Joe warriors , ( even if only %50 of the participate )
come up with a financial plan ( im all for$25 stamp ), we all chip in , and fight for getting some tac back !!
i see alot of dividing among us sporties the last few seasons , NOT good
until we all unite , fight this together , find away to attract the Joes to be interested here , and repeatedly saying " Get Involved " just aint cutting it !!
so done listening to the same guys , same bs every year !!
m2b
goin coho fishin !
fd
until the powers at be , realize !!!
that guide outfits , lodges all up and down the coast will not be able to do this on there own ,
putting band aids on how to stretch out our seasons
this is a losing cause , it will be over in no time ,
Get the other real fisherman involved , prob %80 of the licenses sold , the Joe warriors , ( even if only %50 of the participate )
come up with a financial plan ( im all for$25 stamp ), we all chip in , and fight for getting some tac back !!
i see alot of dividing among us sporties the last few seasons , NOT good
until we all unite , fight this together , find away to attract the Joes to be interested here , and repeatedly saying " Get Involved " just aint cutting it !!
so done listening to the same guys , same bs every year !!
m2b
goin coho fishin !
fd
Last edited:
I am a former computer consultant working on large projects. Paramount to success is a "Problem Statement".
Sounds to me like "we don't have enough quota" is fairly close.
It sounds like the Halibut Commercials in BC (and AK) were each given/gifted share of the Halibut TAC. It has to be a percentage for each skipper as that way the actual poundage fluctuates when the IPC sets quotas for each area.
The trouble begins when we try to justify re-portioning the BC TAC. I would not doubt that when all this happened about 1991 that the sports fishers never caught their portion of the TAC. The argument could be made that the "problem" was created by too many sports fishers & they need to be the solution.
On the flip side the argument could be made that giving/gifting to the commercial fishers was wrong (for a variety of reasons) & needs to be rectified.
I have no problem with Brett's solution (pretty cheap compared to the check I wrote him in July) & some of Ziggy's ideas in an earlier post also have merit.
If you are not currently catching your quota the fact that your family has been fishing the same waters with the same boat <substitute additional emotional BS/whining here> argument doesn't hold water.
Sounds to me like "we don't have enough quota" is fairly close.
It sounds like the Halibut Commercials in BC (and AK) were each given/gifted share of the Halibut TAC. It has to be a percentage for each skipper as that way the actual poundage fluctuates when the IPC sets quotas for each area.
The trouble begins when we try to justify re-portioning the BC TAC. I would not doubt that when all this happened about 1991 that the sports fishers never caught their portion of the TAC. The argument could be made that the "problem" was created by too many sports fishers & they need to be the solution.
On the flip side the argument could be made that giving/gifting to the commercial fishers was wrong (for a variety of reasons) & needs to be rectified.
I have no problem with Brett's solution (pretty cheap compared to the check I wrote him in July) & some of Ziggy's ideas in an earlier post also have merit.
If you are not currently catching your quota the fact that your family has been fishing the same waters with the same boat <substitute additional emotional BS/whining here> argument doesn't hold water.
Cut Plug
Well-Known Member
Some really interesting ideas and arguments presented on this thread. What a good read!
Right now we're waiting on August data to make sure that predictions for August actually reflect the catch. Anecdotal information particularly from the WCVI and Central Coast indicate that halibut fishing slowed considerably in August. Hard to say what that will do, but we should have that info some time next week. Best case scenario is we re-open. Worst case is it validates the predicted catch and we remain closed. Then, looking forward we have a couple of options we can pursue to try and maintain and hopefully even increase the economic and social benefits our fishery delivers to BC by creating a more stable management regime:
- We can go after more TAC. Its doubtful that DFO will be willing to reinstate the Halibut Allocation Transfer Committee in a formal way seeing as the last attempts ended in failure and cost them a lot of money. The only thing the commercial sector will accept willingly is a compensated transfer. The points raised regarding the use of a halibut stamp to pay for this transfer were raised back in 2010 as part of the process. Back then the User Fee Act stood in the way. The Liberals have repealed that act so the concept may have a chance to work if that's the way anglers want to go. If DFO won't deal with the idea of trying to change the allocation from within, then groups like the SFI, BCWF and others who lobby and advocate for the fishery will have to join forces once again and try to generate enough political pressure to force the gov't to increase the TAC. Just like when we did it in 2010\2011, it will require a very carefully thought out strategy, lots of money, and lots of volunteers. IMO these types of things work best during the last year of a governments mandate leading up to an election.
- We can work with DFO through the SFAB process to create a system for dealing with managing to our TAC over several years rather than on an annual basis. Defining overage\underage provisions is one way to do this. We need to be very careful in how we do this as it must be clear to everyone that if we go over by 100klbs in one year, at some point in time we need to make that up in a meaningful way through management measures over the next 2 seasons, 5 seasons or whatever time span we agree to. To be clear, seeing as pretty much the only tools we have that actually work are size limits, season length, and bag limits it would mean we'd need to adjust one or some combination of those the following years in a more restrictive direction in order pay the debt. We also need to be careful that we don't make hypocrites of ourselves by creating a system that implies we "own" the fish before they are caught. I think that's doable. IMO this option is something we need to pursue anyway regardless of whether we are successful in getting more TAC or not. The challenge we will always face is that anglers seem to consider it the "job" of the volunteers in the process to predict the catch to ridiculously accurate levels in order to catch as much of our TAC as possible. If we underestimate the catch we end up with what happened this year. If we adopt a more cautious approach then we leave "too much" fish in the water. Like all predictive things, there is risk and by spreading the impacts over time we give ourselves a better opportunity to manage that risk and minimize its negative impacts.
I too was waiting on the fall months to do most of my halibut fishing this year. I did manage to get one with a friend so we're not totally out, but it still sucks!!!
CP
Right now we're waiting on August data to make sure that predictions for August actually reflect the catch. Anecdotal information particularly from the WCVI and Central Coast indicate that halibut fishing slowed considerably in August. Hard to say what that will do, but we should have that info some time next week. Best case scenario is we re-open. Worst case is it validates the predicted catch and we remain closed. Then, looking forward we have a couple of options we can pursue to try and maintain and hopefully even increase the economic and social benefits our fishery delivers to BC by creating a more stable management regime:
- We can go after more TAC. Its doubtful that DFO will be willing to reinstate the Halibut Allocation Transfer Committee in a formal way seeing as the last attempts ended in failure and cost them a lot of money. The only thing the commercial sector will accept willingly is a compensated transfer. The points raised regarding the use of a halibut stamp to pay for this transfer were raised back in 2010 as part of the process. Back then the User Fee Act stood in the way. The Liberals have repealed that act so the concept may have a chance to work if that's the way anglers want to go. If DFO won't deal with the idea of trying to change the allocation from within, then groups like the SFI, BCWF and others who lobby and advocate for the fishery will have to join forces once again and try to generate enough political pressure to force the gov't to increase the TAC. Just like when we did it in 2010\2011, it will require a very carefully thought out strategy, lots of money, and lots of volunteers. IMO these types of things work best during the last year of a governments mandate leading up to an election.
- We can work with DFO through the SFAB process to create a system for dealing with managing to our TAC over several years rather than on an annual basis. Defining overage\underage provisions is one way to do this. We need to be very careful in how we do this as it must be clear to everyone that if we go over by 100klbs in one year, at some point in time we need to make that up in a meaningful way through management measures over the next 2 seasons, 5 seasons or whatever time span we agree to. To be clear, seeing as pretty much the only tools we have that actually work are size limits, season length, and bag limits it would mean we'd need to adjust one or some combination of those the following years in a more restrictive direction in order pay the debt. We also need to be careful that we don't make hypocrites of ourselves by creating a system that implies we "own" the fish before they are caught. I think that's doable. IMO this option is something we need to pursue anyway regardless of whether we are successful in getting more TAC or not. The challenge we will always face is that anglers seem to consider it the "job" of the volunteers in the process to predict the catch to ridiculously accurate levels in order to catch as much of our TAC as possible. If we underestimate the catch we end up with what happened this year. If we adopt a more cautious approach then we leave "too much" fish in the water. Like all predictive things, there is risk and by spreading the impacts over time we give ourselves a better opportunity to manage that risk and minimize its negative impacts.
I too was waiting on the fall months to do most of my halibut fishing this year. I did manage to get one with a friend so we're not totally out, but it still sucks!!!
CP
Im all for the Halibut Stamp. Have been in support of this idea from the beginning.
Not sure if I want the money to go to the Commies but if it means we can own more TAC then it's like buying a house instead of renting it.
The hali stamp would also give a better idea of how many anglers are targeting halibut. Right now I would think that we are being "charged" for hali catch from all licenses sold.
I usually fish hali in the spring for a few trips and then 1 trip in the fall. I don't fish them in the summer.
I like my fish fresh.
Tips
Not sure if I want the money to go to the Commies but if it means we can own more TAC then it's like buying a house instead of renting it.
The hali stamp would also give a better idea of how many anglers are targeting halibut. Right now I would think that we are being "charged" for hali catch from all licenses sold.
I usually fish hali in the spring for a few trips and then 1 trip in the fall. I don't fish them in the summer.
I like my fish fresh.
Tips
CP as you know with the Sooke Net Pen Project I'm always trying to think of ways to use problems to our advantage. The recreational anglers using their buying power of numbers to buy quota outright may be the best way to get the 435 commercial quota owners to rethink if owning quota is in their best interest longterm.
Profisher, they almost had that stamp but there was a problem with the User Fees act. Chris could fill you in.
On another note, dont worry, there are already two Sooke guides taking people out under quota.. Not good for us.
On another note, dont worry, there are already two Sooke guides taking people out under quota.. Not good for us.
fogged in
Well-Known Member
As I understand it "Quota" is purchased as follows;
You had to have applied to DFO for a Halibut Experimental Recreational Fishery license before May.
This allows you to lease quotas of from 100 to 5,000 pounds through a broker as often as you need it.
There is no cost for DFO’s license, but you pay $5 give or take per pound with no limit on the total number of pounds purchased over the course of the season.
That means a 30-pound chicken will cost you about $150 up front.
A typical guided halibut trip returns you 3 halibut averaging 40 pounds, which would ADD about $600 to the cost of the trip
How many truly SPORT FISHERS are prepared add that to their cost of fishing?
Conclusion....the whole system is unfair, unmanageable and unenforceable.
the fog ducker
Well-Known Member
Does this mean five dollars a pound whole ? Pretty sure most peoples average is probably just over 50% of actual meet once processed , so theoretically it's 10 bucks a pound ,
If I read that right , I sense total shenanigans !!
Doesn't add up , Who in their right mind would pay that plus guiding fees to do this ?
Pretty sad the guys are choosing this route it'll **** it up for everybody
FD
If I read that right , I sense total shenanigans !!
Doesn't add up , Who in their right mind would pay that plus guiding fees to do this ?
Pretty sad the guys are choosing this route it'll **** it up for everybody
FD
Care to call them out here Last Chance?
Fogged In...the idea we are talking about has nothing to do with the experimental program. This is about us using money by way of a stamp to go out as a Jimmy Pattison and buying up the quota we need from the commercial sector and owning it outright as they do. It would then bump up our percentage of the TAC as we would still get our 15% of the Canadian TAC what ever that amount is year to year...then we would add on the poundage we own on top of that. We could get to 20 or 25% of the TAC in a few years by buying what we could afford through stamp sales and in a fairly short time be back to a full season and less size restrictions.
Humpbubble
Active Member
There is no size limit correct?
Bit of a political nightmare if some out of towner has his photo taken next to a big breeder
"It's legal, he paid."
Bit of a political nightmare if some out of towner has his photo taken next to a big breeder
"It's legal, he paid."
Why could anyone justify spending $6-$7 a pound for the fish and then the charter cost on top of that. So for my 6 hour halibut trip $650.00 plus gst for the trip and a 100 pound halibut could be up to another $700.00 on top of that. Really? Maybe I should double my fees during the open season if people are willing to pay those prices.
Big Green Machine
Well-Known Member
I agree. Now, what about guides that claim they 'don't buy quota', but make it known to their clients that it is available, that they can 'help' arrange it, keep extra Halibut in their freezer, essentially condoning the program, are they not part of the problem?
Similar threads
