Just got off the phone with Chuck Ascroft SFAB regarding Halibut

[GLG]

Hot Rods ... You can count on me to be there again if called.
I will carry a sign or what ever you ask for.

Guys, we need to get past this and start working on our true foe.
These guy's know this did not go over well and yes it's effed up.
Time to move on to the real problem .... the unfair allocation of the Canadain TAC
GLG

 

[UkeeDreamin]

100,000 x 10 x 16 .... please tell me you're joking Hot Rods?!!!! If this is an example of the math and modelling, or the critical thinking, the SFAB employs to come up with their proposals it's no wonder we're stuck in the mess we are! Just like everyone doesn't catch a halibut every day out or their possession limit on every trip, the same applies to an annual possession limit. Of the approximate 100,000 estimated who target halibut annually only a very small fraction would max out there 10 fish, the majority would take one or two, facilitated by guides, lodges, friends or family. That's why models and historical data are used - the more robust the data, in this case regarding a stratification of expected annual catch, the better the model.

You then state that even a 1 fish annual limit puts the rec group over our TAC. That strong statement applies not only to an annual limit proposal but any proposal involving retention of halibut, even the dreaded 1/1 scenario. If this statement is grounded in any truth whatsoever it begs the question why SFAB or any other group wasted any time on any proposals as no approach works if a single fish caught and retained by each angler dooms the TAC! It certainly contradicts the need for a slot limit on the possession fish as this statement indicates that the TAC is exceeded before anyone ever gets to their first possession fish!!

It is frustrating as hell to have those of you who didn't put on the breaks and take the time to do some critical thinking, weigh the options and do a risk analysis of what engaging will mean for the future of halibut management to now continually contradict yourselves and shoot holes in your own proposals and arguments as you scramble to defend what was clearly a very, very poor decision.

I realize that it goes against human nature to simply admit one made a mistake and is wrong and thus the members of this board may never see that. However, these contradictory and hypocritical rationalizations are getting more and more ridiculous.

In any case, Hot Rods, I believe it was you who committed to providing the model and data on which the slot limit was based. I won't prejudice myself against what it may entail based on this response regarding a proposed annual limit and I'll remain optimistic that a robust, defensible model was utilized that produces meaningful results.

 

[Sculpin]

In any case, Hot Rods, I believe it was you who committed to providing the model and data on which the slot limit was based.

WTF? You have no idea what your talking about do you. Keep dreamin.

 

[Pursuit 648]

YES great post HR

just let me know what you I will be there to help

Sculpin dont even try its not worth your time

 

[hali hunter]

If you ban anchoring you might as well ban longlining. That to me is a form of anchoring as well.

 

[finaddict]

Love is in the air ladies and gents..... or is that Cedar pollen????? Guys and Gals, please stop the petty bickering and focus on the problem, not the inner squabbling. This is EXACTLY what DFO and the Commies want to see happen. It's clear no one is happy with the outcome for this year, but its done. Let's get over it, learn from it and go forward UNITED to tackle the real issue which is TAC allocation between the commies and the sporties. Let's not lose focus at this critical time. The TAC door has been cracked open. Let's wedge a foot in it, get a crowbar and break the F-ing door down. We won't be able to do that if we spend all our time kicking each other instead.

 

[Fisher Down]

Love is in the air ladies and gents..... or is that Cedar pollen????? Guys and Gals, please stop the petty bickering and focus on the problem, not the inner squabbling. This is EXACTLY what DFO and the Commies want to see happen. It's clear no one is happy with the outcome for this year, but its done. Let's get over it, learn from it and go forward UNITED to tackle the real issue which is TAC allocation between the commies and the sporties. Let's not lose focus at this critical time. The TAC door has been cracked open. Let's wedge a foot in it, get a crowbar and break the F-ing door down. We won't be able to do that if we spend all our time kicking each other instead.

X2 - Let's cut out the bickering amongst ourselves. We're not the enemy. DFO with their ridiculous TAC allocation is the enemy. Let's stay united and fight the enemy.

F D

 

[Sculpin]

X2 - Let's cut out the bickering amongst ourselves. We're not the enemy. DFO with their ridiculous TAC allocation is the enemy. Let's stay united and fight the enemy.

F D

X3. Let's get off this negative roller coaster and move forward.

 

[Tips Up]

Good point.
We are bickering about the consessions we are willing to make.
We need to get back to the big picture.
WE HAVE BEEN SOLD OUT. OUR PUBLIC RESOURCE HAS BEEN GIVEN AWAY AND A FEW LUCKY COMMIES OWN IT. THE ALLOCATION IS NOT RIGHT. OUR SEASON AND LIMITS HAVE BEEN CUT SHORT DUE TO MISMANAGEMENT AND VOODOO MATH, NOT CONSERVATION.

Hope to see all you south island guys at the meeting March 21.

Tips

 

[Jockey]

I'll ask it again. Why is everyone so caught up in the division of the TAC and not the TAC itself.

The TAC is going down and down every year. Why? It's got to be a conservation issue and it IS the main problem.

Lets say next year we get what your all asking for 20% of the TAC.... but the TAC has also decreased again. Guess what we still get a short season, so now your all going to be asking for 25% of the TAC and again the TAC will go down and again we will have a short season.

I don't really care how much of the TAC we get as long as that TAC starts to increase in the next few years. That should be everyones primary focus because all sectors would benefit from an increased TAC no matter what % of it they get.

I would like to see solutions that are going to help increase the overall TAC not increase our % of a declining number. Everyone seems so bent on gaining more of the TAC but nobody is trying to find a solution that will help increase the TAC. Think about it if we can get the overall TAC to increase by 7% that is way better than getting another 5% off the commercial fisherman.

 

[Theb55]

X4. But I think sports fishermen really need to do some sole searching as to who should represent our interests at the table I spent years working for an organization that was dual purpose and frankly, it did not work. Totally schizophrenic , at best. I see our best case scenario is to put our strongest position on the table, not one vetted and merged. Our closest alley are guides but their goals and ours diverge at points.

 

[Whole in the Water]

I'll ask it again. Why is everyone so caught up in the division of the TAC and not the TAC itself.

The TAC is going down and down every year. Why? It's got to be a conservation issue and it IS the main problem.

Lets say next year we get what your all asking for 20% of the TAC.... but the TAC has also decreased again. Guess what we still get a short season, so now your all going to be asking for 25% of the TAC and again the TAC will go down and again we will have a short season.

I don't really care how much of the TAC we get as long as that TAC starts to increase in the next few years. That should be everyones primary focus because all sectors would benefit from an increased TAC no matter what % of it they get.

I would like to see solutions that are going to help increase the overall TAC not increase our % of a declining number. Everyone seems so bent on gaining more of the TAC but nobody is trying to find a solution that will help increase the TAC. Think about it if we can get the overall TAC to increase by 7% that is way better than getting another 5% off the commercial fisherman.

You have a good point Jockey. From what I undersand the TAC is decided by the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC). From what I have heard they have done a good job overall managing hailbut stocks ove many years. However, there are 2 separate but related issues that concern the recreation allotment of the TAC.

First, halibut populations regularily go through high and low cycles in their numbers - right now we are in a low cycle and this is a big part of why TAC's have gone down. If the normal population cycle continues halibut numbers will increase and so should the TAC's (not sure of the time frame on these cycles) over time.

Second, and most importantly. The IPHC gets is sport halibut catch estimates from none other then good ol' DFO! Which we all know does a very bad job and providing hali catch estimates. It uses data from spotty creel surveys, fly overs and some lodge/guide log books then does a lot of questionable extrapolating to get its final figures it gives to the IPHC.

SO, IMO one of the key solutions to this whole mess is for the sport sector to develop more accurate ways to estimate of annual sport halibut catch numbers. This can be done through guidance by the SFAB, BCWF and the BC SFI, and DFO, etc., to work out all the details. Until we do this the sport TAC will not reflect reality, wont help in conservation and continue provide misguided and controversial TAC levels. Your right until this is fixed, all the arguing over how much TAC vs. the Commercial sector is very much a secondary issue.

 

[Fishmyster]

There is a lot discrimination between guides and regular sport anglers expressed on all these threads. I do not have any formal numbers but my experience leads me to believe: There are more resident canadian anglers retaining halibut via charter boats than not. These resident Canadian angler do deserve representation at the SFAB and are represented by the guiding industry along with guiding intrests. In a typical day off Ucluelet July there will be aproximately 200 anglers leaving the harbour in a wide assortment of boats. Only about 25 of them, on average, would be B.C resident non guided anglers. The rest are American guided and non guided or guided Canadian sportfishermen. The ratios of guided and non guided Canadian anglers would change by area but I believe that the total outcome would eventualy be that there is more guided Canadian halibut anglers than not. My personal charter service represents at least 70% Canadian anglers which would equal about 130 individual canadian tidal anglers annualy. I'm assuming that the average sucessfull guide would represent atleast 80 resident Canadian angler. I am questioning notion that SFAB is representing mainly guides and not the average Joe angler when more average Joes fish halibut with guides than not.
Based on my personal observations the guiding industry does represent a majortity of rec anglers via SFAB. Like it or not we are all in this together. Not looking to squable with anybody, just bring forward some more input. Hopefully we all as sportfishermen can apreciate each others intrests and enjoy a future larger cut of TAC that we deserve.

 

[Gunsmith]

Having read that I tend to agree with the statement. That is how I got hooked on this drug. Now that I know who is responsible can I sue him?

 

[finaddict]

There is a lot discrimination between guides and regular sport anglers expressed on all these threads. I do not have any formal numbers but my experience leads me to believe: There are more resident canadian anglers retaining halibut via charter boats than not. These resident Canadian angler do deserve representation at the SFAB and are represented by the guiding industry along with guiding intrests. In a typical day off Ucluelet July there will be aproximately 200 anglers leaving the harbour in a wide assortment of boats. Only about 25 of them, on average, would be B.C resident non guided anglers. The rest are American guided and non guided or guided Canadian sportfishermen. The ratios of guided and non guided Canadian anglers would change by area but I believe that the total outcome would eventualy be that there is more guided Canadian halibut anglers than not. My personal charter service represents at least 70% Canadian anglers which would equal about 130 individual canadian tidal anglers annualy. I'm assuming that the average sucessfull guide would represent atleast 80 resident Canadian angler. I am questioning notion that SFAB is representing mainly guides and not the average Joe angler when more average Joes fish halibut with guides than not.
Based on my personal observations the guiding industry does represent a majortity of rec anglers via SFAB. Like it or not we are all in this together. Not looking to squable with anybody, just bring forward some more input. Hopefully we all as sportfishermen can apreciate each others intrests and enjoy a future larger cut of TAC that we deserve.

Thanks for the input, but you open a topic that we have not explored too much. To date every one talks about the 100,000 sport fishers who chase flatties every year. IS this all private boats/ guided boats or both? what is the division between one an dthe other? To me the only way to resolve this is a 100% reporting process and lets get to the REAL facts, not extrapolation, and conjecture. .

 

[Gunsmith]

Very well said Holmes.

finaddict, who exactly is going to stand up for the rites of ppl in downtown toronto stuck in their cubicle world?, well obviously us average joe rec anglers out here, but also the guides who guide them i believe, lots of these guides clients are repeats year after year for many years and have become more than just customers, they have become friends, so im pretty confident that the guides have a good handle on what their guests and friends want, some guides i know have even been on the phone with them or sending emails informing them of the situation and the happenings....just sayin'....holmes*

 

[phishbonk]

As i understand it there is less people going out sport fishing over the last 10 years,why is ther so much preassure on halibut?GPS?less salmon?A guide friend up in central coast tells me on a 4 day trip with 4 guests he brings in 500 to 700 lbs of fish n it is a mix of everything.I will warn you not to go down the road of monitoring, as bycatch can bight us in the butt.

 

[Last Chance]

What about a different solution that involves a size limit but instead of an upper slot limit make a minimum size limit. Most fisheries have a minimum size limit not an upper size limit.

It sounds really silly to me that the average fish off of WCVI is under 15 pounds. Why are people targetting those small fish? I guess because they are easly to catch and provide lots of action.

Maybe if they said keep nothing under 30 pounds all those small fish we are taking would have time to grow, spawn and make millions of babies, and then get caught. I don't know how big a halibut needs to be to spawn once but all fish that are able should be given a chance to spawn before they are taken.

I bet if all the chickens taken last year were able to grow and spawn in 5-10 years our TAC would be going up instead of going down each year. I understand halibut are slow growers so it would probably take quite a while before the results were realized but something has to be done to turn around the TAC so it increases each year instead of decreases.

The 85/15 split sucks but lets be real if the TAC was as high as it was 10 years ago we wouldn't care about the 15% split because we probably would not reach it. People like to say there is no conservation issue but that is dead wrong. The TAC is going down becaues the avaliable halibut is also decreasing. It's true the 85/15 split is not a conservation issue but the overall TAC canada gets IS a conservation issue. Get that TAC increasing and like I said we won't care if it's 12, 15 or 20% because it will be more than enough. Likewise the commercial fisherman won't care if we have as much as 20% of the TAC because their share will have grown too. The annual decrease of the TAC is causing stress on both sides and it appears it is only going to get worse.

There would be no point. Rec fishers exploit only %15 of the biomass. There is no point in throwing anything back that could end up on a longline as we have such limited catching power.

 

[Islandgirl]

There would be no point. Rec fishers exploit only %15 of the biomass. There is no point in throwing anything back that could end up on a longline as we have such limited catching power.

Totally agree.

No point in throwing 20+ pound fish back, until you get one under 15lbs to fit into the slot limit proposed by the SFAB.

They are all coming over the side of a longliner no matter what the size.

 

[Fishmyster]

Jackel, Your statement says that guides take 70% of the tac? Well the guides don't take anything. It is the client that are dominately Canadian taxpayers are using charter services to access the resource. Do you think that the fellow Canadians should pay extra for employing a guide to get thier halibut or should the guide pay more for helping the fellow canadian get at the halibut? I think now that you have pulled the plug on your charter efforts you might be bitter to the charter industry. Please explain why you think there needs to be a surcharge for guided Canadians over regular Canadians because my Canadian customers want to know?

Totally disagree with this statement. You are a guide period and are blinded by this. I guided for many years pulled the plug 3 years ago as I could see this coming and salmon is soon to follow. Come out to renfrew, there are about 40 guides working there and probably 5 times that number of rec fishers. So you are telling me that the guides take out more canadians please spare me the insult. A guide is a commericial fisher, I classed myself as a small commercial operation when I guided, why do you think you have a commercial number on your boat, kinda self explanatory. So the guides and lodges take say what 70% of the rec TAC, so that leaves approximatley 4.5% of the TAC to rec fishers. Sooner or later the industry will recognize that you are a small commercial operation and will have to pay accordingly. I have a free miners cert. it does not allow me to go and take from the resource with out staking and paying for a claim, I have to pay for access to the resourse and soon so will you. There is no way in hell that some group with a knee jerk reaction is going to control what I can do as an individual. Everybody has a right to run a business in whatever they choose but it should not take away from a resourse with out some sort of fee. You mine you stake a claim,you drill for oil you stake a claim, you log you buy a TFL. On a closing note I believe a 15 lb halibut is not even in the calculated exploitable biomass so we just screwed ourselfs royally And yes I do agree we are all getting screwed on our overall TAC and should not have to be in this position period. Maybe we should all protect the resourse and close it down for a couple of years let the stocks rebound then there would be more for all.