Halibut for 2012........ready for less?

[rln]

check out the press release for the IHPC and how they want to cut back Canada another million pounds (area 2b) while areas 2a and 2c get more, go figure that one out

http://www.iphc.int/news-releases/250-nr20111202b.html

 

[Hali killer]

We are 2b in canada

 

[richmake]

Its all going to rest with the powers high in government to re-allocate the whole process....bottom line is that the rec sector was never given enough of the overall TAC right from the start!

 

[River Rat]

Its all going to rest with the powers high in government to re-allocate the whole process....bottom line is that the rec sector was never given enough of the overall TAC right from the start!

what he said!

 

[Derby]

Its all going to rest with the powers high in government to re-allocate the whole process....bottom line is that the rec sector was never given enough of the overall TAC right from the start!

Yup.. we will see

 

[Whole in the Water]

I predict no change to the 2012 TAC for area 2b and more BS mis-management from the DFO if we don't continue to:
- pressure the DFO/Fed Govt. to increase the measely 12% TAC for rec fishers to at least 20%
- start some real halibut catch data through more creel surveys, guide & lodge and even maybe rec. fishing log log books,
- ask for a annual total halibut catch limit (like we have for springs) & send if our licences & the actually use the data for management decisions for a change.
- get better rec. sector reps. at the Intl. Pacific Halibut Commission meetings

 

[Cuba Libre]

get better rec. sector reps. at the Intl. Pacific Halibut Commission meetings

Can you explain who you mean?? Who do you want to replace and who will you replace them with.

Thanks

 

[Whole in the Water]

I must admit I don't know a lot about the IPHC process Cuba Libre. Do you know something about it?

I am assuming the rec. sector has reps on the IPHC and that we can investigate ways on how to enhance our representative in the IPHC deliberations. One way would be for the rec. sector to self collect more/better data and submit this into the process so we get less 'guesstimates' as to what we really catch on an annual basis. Extrapolating from commercial catch numbers, guides/lodges log books and by the number of saltwater licenses doesn't seem to be working well for the rec. sector IMHO. What are your thoughts?

 

[Derby]

SFI will be sending reps this year and has been part of the process for the last 4 years at least I believe... maybe longer...

 

[Dave S]

I don't know about you guys but I plan on making my 2012 halibut catch numbers better than my 2011 numbers. Considering I caught no Hali this year, I hope I can do it. Bring on the halibut learning seminar. Boy do I need it!

Side note.....I think we should all keep track of our numbers privately and send them to one guy to add up to see if they seem off from what Dfo says we are at. I guess it might be hard to access lodge and guide numbers though. Maybe that won't work.

 

[Cuba Libre]

Whole in the Water.. etc. Look at this news release from the Halibut Commission. It contains a lot of info as to how things work and what is (was)planned for 2011.....
http://www.iphc.washington.edu/news-releases/159-nr20110131.html

Also , you misunderstand the role the DFO staff, First nations reps and sport fish reps at these meetings. We (Canada) go to represent NATIONAL interests. It is not the place to continue a pissing match between our sectors. Last year all the Canadian reps spoke with one voice, I have been told that by doing that we managed to keep the catch reductions to Canada within "acceptable levels". Why the reductions??? Read the above new release.

The pissing match for Canadian allocation does not take place at the Commission Meetings-- they could care less how DFO divides up the catch .

So what do our reps do-- they are there to oversee the science and to keep the Commission on top of issues like the horrendous bycatch in commercial fisheries. At the Commission level, we seem to be well represented... its what happens when DFO gets the figures after the meetings that is screwed up.

PM incoming...............

 

[fish4all]

Whole in the Water.. etc. Look at this news release from the Halibut Commission. It contains a lot of info as to how things work and what is (was)planned for 2011.....
http://www.iphc.washington.edu/news-releases/159-nr20110131.html

Also , you misunderstand the role the DFO staff, First nations reps and sport fish reps at these meetings. We (Canada) go to represent NATIONAL interests. It is not the place to continue a pissing match between our sectors. Last year all the Canadian reps spoke with one voice, I have been told that by doing that we managed to keep the catch reductions to Canada within "acceptable levels". Why the reductions??? Read the above new release.

The pissing match for Canadian allocation does not take place at the Commission Meetings-- they could care less how DFO divides up the catch .

So what do our reps do-- they are there to oversee the science and to keep the Commission on top of issues like the horrendous bycatch in commercial fisheries. At the Commission level, we seem to be well represented.

Well put Cuba. The iphc meetings is where we put the differences aside and try to get the best number for Canada. Looks like it may be a tough road this year.

 

[Derby]

Well put Cuba. The iphc meetings is where we put the differences aside and try to get the best number for Canada. Looks like it may be a tough road this year.

X2 with that Fish4all ...let's hope we can make a strong case like we did a couple years ago and get more not less

 

[Whole in the Water]

Whole in the Water.. etc. Look at this news release from the Halibut Commission. It contains a lot of info as to how things work and what is (was)planned for 2011.....
http://www.iphc.washington.edu/news-releases/159-nr20110131.html

Also , you misunderstand the role the DFO staff, First nations reps and sport fish reps at these meetings. We (Canada) go to represent NATIONAL interests. It is not the place to continue a pissing match between our sectors. Last year all the Canadian reps spoke with one voice, I have been told that by doing that we managed to keep the catch reductions to Canada within "acceptable levels". Why the reductions??? Read the above new release.

The pissing match for Canadian allocation does not take place at the Commission Meetings-- they could care less how DFO divides up the catch .

So what do our reps do-- they are there to oversee the science and to keep the Commission on top of issues like the horrendous bycatch in commercial fisheries. At the Commission level, we seem to be well represented... its what happens when DFO gets the figures after the meetings that is screwed up.

PM incoming...............

Thanks for the clarification and info CL. So once again it is ol' DFO that we get to thank for our rec. spector mis-management. My earlier comments about improving our sectors catch data info still stand. Unless we provide better annual rec. sector catch data (cause DFO aint going to do it for lack of $ and will) we will be at the mercy of DFO's mystery voodo math and wild butt guesstimates and over exptrapolations.

We should form some sort of working group to figure out how we could best solve this issue and get the SFAB to put it forward to DFO for consideration. I would be willing to help out in such an exercise.

 

[GLG]

Well put Cuba. The iphc meetings is where we put the differences aside and try to get the best number for Canada. Looks like it may be a tough road this year.

What do you mean by the comment "best number for Canada" is it not a fact that 80% of the Commercial Canadian TAC gets shipped to the US to supply the market there. How is this a good for Canadians when our needs are not meet.

 

[fish4all]

What do you mean by the comment "best number for Canada" is it not a fact that 80% of the Commercial Canadian TAC gets shipped to the US to supply the market there. How is this a good for Canadians when our needs are not meet.

The highest scientifically defensible number we can get so that all sectors may benefit.

 

[DHA]

...it's time for all sectors to start working together!



DHA.

 

[Derby]

The highest scientifically defensible number we can get so that all sectors may benefit.[/QUOTE


Yup

 

[GLG]

Just found this on the web today and wish I came across this a lot sooner.
Would have like to submit some question to them on their fairness to our sector.

MSC EVALUATION OF THE
Canada Pacific Halibut Fishery (British Columbia)
ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE 2nd ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE AUDIT
The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) process for independently evaluating the Canada halibut fishery in British Columbia is moving forward in the Assessment Process. The fishery was MSC certified in 2009. The current audit will take into account recent developments and monitor progress on the conditions placed on the fishery in the Assessment.
The assessment team from Scientific Certification Systems (SCS) will be conducting a meeting in Vancouver, British Columbia Canada. The dates are confirmed to be the 13th and 14th of December, 2011. SCS invites all stakeholders to meet with the team and bring forth any issues or concerns about the certification of this fishery. The meeting will include participants such as fishermen, fishery managers, scientists and stakeholders to gain a full understanding of the current state of the fishery.
http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/..._SurveillanceAuditAnnouncement_BC_Halibut.pdf

Questions like......
If this stock is owned by the Canadian public why is it closed to the Canadian public for fishing?
Why has DFO asked the Canadian public to lease quota from the Commercial sector if we would like to fish, don't they know that we already own the resourse?
If this is such a well managed fishery why is the TAC falling like a lead balloon.
If this is such a well managed fishery why are there protests from the public in many towns and cities in BC?
If this is such a well managed fishery why has the current allocation not been increased for the Canadian public?
Why is 80% of the Canadian TAC exported when clearly not all Canadian needs are being meet?

GLG

 

[GLG]

The highest scientifically defensible number we can get so that all sectors may benefit.

Fish4all what sector has the most benefit from the Canadian TAC?