halibut experimental fishery Q&A

...Heck, rather than gifting it in perpetuity, he could even do this as just this year's experimental quota leasing -- but just gift it instead of charging the quota rent.

While your overall suggestion is good, this part is Not IMHO. Regardless of "how" any "lease quota" is secured, it presents buying into "The Mechanism". No Way, not even free. As much as the allocation process is broken, we must not support the advance of privatization, something which the DFO proposed "Mechanism" very much is.

Maybe it's far fetched to expect a billionaire to give away a half million dollars, but there seems to be precedent with him. But one thing for sure, those calling for a protest against Pattison ... you'd be crazy to do so UNTIL at least giving him a chance to do the right thing first.

Then there is that. Jimmy ain't about to run from a fight, not in his nature. Dunno how "benevolent" he might feel under these circumstances, so who knows what he would respond like. Regardless, taking him on without exploring other avenues that preclude confrontation would be somewhat unwise.

Cheers,
Nog
 
Strait of georgia seine testing today found 80,000+ tons with out trying. The stocks for herring are extremly healthy and this is the first of 2 age classes that are predicted to be huge.


WELL WELL WELL if there is soooo many herring then why is there "eagles starving up there" cmon man if you knew anything you would know they have gone down 2 net sizes in the last couple of years!!! YEP lets kill off the bait that feeds the springs etc just for some ROE....
 
WELL WELL WELL if there is soooo many herring then why is there "eagles starving up there" cmon man if you knew anything you would know they have gone down 2 net sizes in the last couple of years!!! YEP lets kill off the bait that feeds the springs etc just for some ROE....



Sorry wolf you are full of crap. Walking the docks today and guys getting ready are putting nothing but 57's on. Nice try though.
 
Getting back to the halibut....The one thing that has been continueously kicked around "accountabilty" seriously need to get moving. We might be pleasantly surprised to see that we are catching less than we thought. I'm talking about real accountability, not some ****** creel survey. Takeing this step will not only benefit resourse, it will also win merrit points in the public veiw, bring us hopefully to the same level of respect earned by the commercial guys. Getting this going is going to be tough but need to start somewhere. How????? Not sure what everybody else thinks but getting some dock side validation at some of the major harbours and fish camps and even observers on the large guide boats like the ones at canadian princess might be a good place to start. It has to start somewhere....
 
I agree with you holmes, that would be more simple but it seems that in todays world if you don't have a third party doing the counting they simply don't believe you. The commercial guys proved that
 
well its gotta be more accurate than fly overs or whatever guesstimate system is currently in place, like i said, they simply dont want to know and more importantly dont want US to know, they just want to be able to control it while leaving us in the dark and having to accept what we are told, treating us all like 10 year olds, wtf...holmes*

I have not been able to find it but is there a site that shows the number of sports licencses that get turned in at the end of a season?
 
Sorry wolf you are full of crap.
NOPE had my dump for the day so no crap you know fish why dont you just go away and crawl back under what ever chair you came from....
Enough said...

Wolf
 
I have not been able to find it but is there a site that shows the number of sports licencses that get turned in at the end of a season?

On the DFO site I cannot find any requirement for sports licenses to be turned in, or even any suggestion they could or should be. Maybe I missed that requirement, but if I did, then others for sure will have too. If you can't find stats on this, it is likely because the return rate is 0%.

I am a recreational angler who tries to follow the rules, and I am also willing to do it a little extra if it helps the cause. This includes taking part in creel surveys (maybe twice over 10 years) and volunteering to keep a log book (which they didn't even respond to).

DFO could set up a voluntary online monitoring system in about 1 day of work, that would be quite a bit better than the close-to-nothing they have know. I too have come to the conclusion that they don't care about more accurate stats, and possibly prefer not to have good data.
 
I have not been able to find it but is there a site that shows the number of sports licencses that get turned in at the end of a season?
To my knowledge - NONE!
As far as I know - That is a U.S. requirement, not a DFO!

While I surely agree DFO doesn't have a clue as what halibut (or salmon) is being caught, and IMHO just a very poor guess! While I think that is surely an important issue, don't forget the 88/12 is the REAL issue here!

Has anyone ever considered if you take that sport TAC, divided by the estimated number of halibut sport anglers, how many you are allowed under the 88/12?

For those that havn't done that - Good luck, with your 1/2 halibut - PER YEAR!

BTW... as bad as MY halibut fishery is in Area 2A, I get more than that!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DFO does do a small random sampling of rec fishers by way of a mailed out questionnaire. Questions include how many times you fish, your recorded catch etc. Very poor effort in my opinion.
 
On the DFO site I cannot find any requirement for sports licenses to be turned in, or even any suggestion they could or should be. Maybe I missed that requirement, but if I did, then others for sure will have too. If you can't find stats on this, it is likely because the return rate is 0%.

I am a recreational angler who tries to follow the rules, and I am also willing to do it a little extra if it helps the cause. This includes taking part in creel surveys (maybe twice over 10 years) and volunteering to keep a log book (which they didn't even respond to).

DFO could set up a voluntary online monitoring system in about 1 day of work, that would be quite a bit better than the close-to-nothing they have know. I too have come to the conclusion that they don't care about more accurate stats, and possibly prefer not to have good data.
holmes said:
cmon lets get real here, seriously, getting real data in an accurate manner, could have and should have happened many moons ago, this aint rocket surgery or brain science, what conclusion are we supposed to come to when our govt doesnt even have common sense, its a no brainer, if they really cared and wanted to know, im SURE they would have set up a reliable system decades ago, gimme one GOOD reason why there isnt an accurate system in place....holmes*

Good points guys. DFO has not and doesn't really seem to give a **** about accurately accounting for the number of recreational anglers that are targeting specific species of fish, and how many of those fish we are catching. Case in point for the Chinook logs currently on our licenses, there is no requirement to report or turn in the completed logs to allow DFO the ability to account for the Chinook caught in BC waters. We need the same for halibut, and the ability to record all of the sport caught species in BC waters if it is necessary in the future.

It has been mentioned on this site before that it would not take a lot of effort for DFO to construct a data base that we all could voluntarily submit our catches (for whatever species that information is requested for).

We could all purchase our tags for the specific species that we would like to fish for. NOW DFO WILL KNOW HOW MANY ANGLERS ARE TARGETING EACH SPECIES OF FISH! Each of these species tags would come with a log (like the Chinook logs we use now), that log would have to be filled out at the time the specific species of fish was caught, (date, time, location, size, etc,,,). These logs are only good for fisheries officers to verify the catch that we have on hand when and if they stop us on the water or on the way home, and for us to remember what, how many, when and where we caught our fish, for (this is the part that has to change NOW!) when we enter our catch into the online data base. Make it mandatory that the data has to be entered into the data base within a set amount of time from catching the fish (3days? a week?). We would log in to our account which our license# would be attached to, and update our catch reports on a regular and current basis. NOW DFO WOULD ACTUALLY KNOW HOW MANY AND WHAT HAS BEEN CAUGHT AND COULD THEN MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON REEEEL :p NUMBERS.

The logs and Data base could be checked and balanced by Fisheries officers in the field, and at the end of the year by DFO by means of a mandatory turn in of the logs (or no license next year). This would also cut down on the possibility of people purchasing multiple licenses (due to "lost licenses") through the year or printing multiple pages of logs (each log would have to have an ident # that would be linked to our license). When you go to get a replacement license, it would automatically fill in the data that was entered into the database previously onto the new logs, so that the replacement license would be up to date (at least within the manadatory time frame that is set, to have the log data transfered to the database). This system could be made so that it would be very dificult for someone to cheat it, and if they get caught, make the penalties steep, to keep the few dishonest people more honest.

For those that do not have a computer, the log data could be transfered to the database at say marinas, tackle stores, libraries, friends, family, hell even from a smartphone. The guides and lodges could facilitate helping or entering the data for their guests.

I am sure a model similar to this could be put into a format that is easy and fast to use.

And here we are, going into another season, and do you think that we are going to have any mechanisim like this in place to accurately account for the fish that we catch??? NOT LIKELY!:mad:
One would think that the type of data that a system like this would produce, would really help in making decisions for upcoming seasons catch limits and...wait for it... to make "sensible" resource management decisions - LOL;)

Thinking out loud.
Jay.
 
Something that needs to be recognized here is that, when you sign a rec license you have accepted all the terms & conditions of the contract. You have agreed to get what you are given.
 
DFO is managing common fisheries in trust. When you sign and accept the terms and conditions of the contract you are bound at that point to be governed by acts & statutes of the fisheries act. By agreeing with the contract you are given what you get. You have a choice. There is no two way street you either agree to be bound by their contract or you do not.
 
for one i would argue that they are mismanaging, not managing, for two, i dont trust them....holmes*

I agree with you, my statement was termed for obligation of recognized fact, not for my own personal opinion.
 


Good points guys. DFO has not and doesn't really seem to give a **** about accurately accounting for the number of recreational anglers that are targeting specific species of fish, and how many of those fish we are catching. Case in point for the Chinook logs currently on our licenses, there is no requirement to report or turn in the completed logs to allow DFO the ability to account for the Chinook caught in BC waters. We need the same for halibut, and the ability to record all of the sport caught species in BC waters if it is necessary in the future.

It has been mentioned on this site before that it would not take a lot of effort for DFO to construct a data base that we all could voluntarily submit our catches (for whatever species that information is requested for).

We could all purchase our tags for the specific species that we would like to fish for. NOW DFO WILL KNOW HOW MANY ANGLERS ARE TARGETING EACH SPECIES OF FISH! Each of these species tags would come with a log (like the Chinook logs we use now), that log would have to be filled out at the time the specific species of fish was caught, (date, time, location, size, etc,,,). These logs are only good for fisheries officers to verify the catch that we have on hand when and if they stop us on the water or on the way home, and for us to remember what, how many, when and where we caught our fish, for (this is the part that has to change NOW!) when we enter our catch into the online data base. Make it mandatory that the data has to be entered into the data base within a set amount of time from catching the fish (3days? a week?). We would log in to our account which our license# would be attached to, and update our catch reports on a regular and current basis. NOW DFO WOULD ACTUALLY KNOW HOW MANY AND WHAT HAS BEEN CAUGHT AND COULD THEN MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON REEEEL :p NUMBERS.

The logs and Data base could be checked and balanced by Fisheries officers in the field, and at the end of the year by DFO by means of a mandatory turn in of the logs (or no license next year). This would also cut down on the possibility of people purchasing multiple licenses (due to "lost licenses") through the year or printing multiple pages of logs (each log would have to have an ident # that would be linked to our license). When you go to get a replacement license, it would automatically fill in the data that was entered into the database previously onto the new logs, so that the replacement license would be up to date (at least within the manadatory time frame that is set, to have the log data transfered to the database). This system could be made so that it would be very dificult for someone to cheat it, and if they get caught, make the penalties steep, to keep the few dishonest people more honest.

For those that do not have a computer, the log data could be transfered to the database at say marinas, tackle stores, libraries, friends, family, hell even from a smartphone. The guides and lodges could facilitate helping or entering the data for their guests.

I am sure a model similar to this could be put into a format that is easy and fast to use.

And here we are, going into another season, and do you think that we are going to have any mechanisim like this in place to accurately account for the fish that we catch??? NOT LIKELY!:mad:
One would think that the type of data that a system like this would produce, would really help in making decisions for upcoming seasons catch limits and...wait for it... to make "sensible" resource management decisions - LOL;)

Thinking out loud.
Jay.

It is not difficult to conclude that DFO has not wanted hard statistics for the Rec. sector. In fact not having them allows manipulative estimates/guesstimates and interpretations of the data which from time to time has proven useful to DFO in what is essentially a political game between DFO and the three sectors.

It is interesting that the slipper skipper lobbyists raised the reliability issue of Rec. sector Halibut catch stats in their lobby efforts to defend against a fairness adjustment to the 88/12 allocation. Further in the Minister’s recent announcement that she will not alter the unfair 88/12 allocation were hints of justification for her decision with reference to the reliability of halibut catch stats for recreational anglers.

Then there was the meeting we attended with DFO representatives last year in what they like to call “consultation with the rec. sector” concerning the planned expansion of the area 19 and 20 Chinook slot restriction. At that time DFO provided statistics for the year before the recently past year which showed that Recreational fishery in area 19 and 20 took only 2% of the early run Fraser Chinook and that the vast majority were taken by the first nations in the Fraser river.

At that meeting the DFO reps. were asked why they were planning to further cut back the early run recreational Chinook fishery in area 19 and 20 when their own numbers show that we essentially have virtually no impact on the early run Fraser Chinook. They had no answer and looked rather sheepish when asked that question. Since they had already decided to cut back the recreational sector further because of first nations lobbying, that 2% had become an inconvenient truth.

What a surprise when a few weeks later that 2% number was increased many times for the recently past year. This of course was absurd but at least with the new number the politically driven decision did not look like quite so ridicules. Had DFO actually had complete hard numbers of every fish caught by recreational anglers that kind of blatant politically driven manipulation of the catch numbers would be more difficult, certainly not impossible, but more difficult.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
so if we dont sign our licences then we are not bound by the fisheries act, but then we are technically breaking the law?, so then if caught fishing without a license we would have to challenge it in court, correct?...holmes*

No. Whether you sign your license or don't is not the obligation, it is that you have a license which determines your obligation to comply. You should work on it some more before you make any decisions. You have options available, but I can not direct you, so anything I say is not to be considered as a matter of fact.
 
Back
Top