Tuna Fishers watch your posts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Charter Tofino]

My response is if the commercials are not even fishing/ meeting their allowable fishing days then why do we have restrictions. It further supports my point.
maybe one day we can purchase their remaining fishing days that they did not use. Lol wafj!

20 per person as mentioned is hardly a restriction. Sure in theory you might have a point but the reality is both groups are essentially open season.

 

[directmule]

Posted on 07-18-2014,*02:16 PM

"Hi, my name is Jordan Mah and I am the Tuna Resource Manager for DFO."

You joined this forum in Sept. 2012 and then you say on 07-18-2014,*03:14 PM

"I stumbled upon this thread randomly, as I have been looking for lodges/marinas that have tuna fishing so that I might be able to gather more participants in our program. I can tell you that nobody from DFO is collecting data from this forum for tuna, because I am the only person working on data collection for tuna. I can get a sense that the fishery is growing, but in terms of numbers - as long as people are within the daily limit, there's nothing to be concerned with on my end."

And then we get some replies as:

"This sounds like paranoia to me."

"When DFO gets involved it's all over....... Some idiot in Ottawa sitting at a desk will come up with some wonderful idea about west coast fishing once again."

"Paranoia maybe; but more like reality!"

"Anything DFO gets involved in is a F_ck up. Bad news indeed…"

"I have yet to catch my possession limit in this fishery; and highly doubt I ever will; I can't pack enough ice or do I have near enough room, plus it would take me days to figure out what to do with it all"

Then on 07-18-2014,*02:16 PM you post:

"Reading through the posts above, there seems to be some misconceptions about what our objectives are.

First, I can say definitively that the objective of collecting catch and effort information is NOT to make any changes to the daily or possession limit for tuna.

As mentioned, catch and effort information will enhance our data of the fishery and benefits not only the rec sector, but the entire species. One of the benefits of establishing data for the rec fishery is that it enhances Canada's position during international negotiations for the management of tuna. Currently, there is no limit on the commercial sector catch, and there is no plan to change the limit for the rec sector. However, the more catch and effort data that we can collect, the better we position ourselves for future management requirements. For example, if the international organizations who set the management rules for tuna decided to implement a TAC, it would be best for the rec sector to have catch history in order to make an argument for an appropriate share"

Then on 07-18-2014,*02:55 PM Tidal Chaos posted:

"Jordon

Nice of you to join the forum and chime in on this discussion; were you alerted to this thread?"

And at: 07-18-2014,*03:14 PM you replied with this:

"I stumbled upon this thread randomly, as I have been looking for lodges/marinas that have tuna fishing so that I might be able to gather more participants in our program. I can tell you that nobody from DFO is collecting data from this forum for tuna"

I'm just a dumb stupid mule owning ex truck diver that likes to fish on the salt water. I get a little nervous
when I see a person who joined this forum in 2012 and doesn't make his first post until 2014 and say's
"just randomly" and has an e-mail address of the (DFO)………..as I think some others do.

Personally, I really can't see a 20 per person limit for tuna, but that's my own opinion and that is probably
due to me never getting out there to get them due to the size of the boat I own, so to me you are talking to a
very few people/boats that can fish these tuna which in the rec. part of fisheries are not that many.

The other thing that get's my interest is the quota for the rec. but not for the commercial section, here
we go again just like the halibut, yes they increased them for the rec. this year (halibut) but it makes
us nervous when you talk about another species of fish…………..and the DFO is involved in
making decisions. Yes, who else would make them but the general feeling is DFO is back east who
is out here looking after our concerns ?

Jordon you have a tough battle to convince most of the people on this forum but as you can see there
are some on your side and others that are not…………I'll wait and see……….. good luck!

 

[Birdsnest]

Ill repeat myself. This isn't about the limit it is about equality between the two sectors. If you can't get past that then you promote/accept the inequality that we are currently struggling with in other fisheries. This is how it starts. IMO. Never the less the Heath of the fishery must remain the priority and adjustments must be distributed equally. What is that going to look like when the time comes for further restrictions and we have accepted an unjustified limit for so many years prior. We get the short end of the stick is what will happen. Because once again we did nothing when we accepted inequality.

20 per person as mentioned is hardly a restriction. Sure in theory you might have a point but the reality is both groups are essentially open season.

No. One group has no limits and does not use all it's fishing days and the other group has a blatant limit and is unorganized, shows no effort in posturing politically for current and future equality in the fishery at hand and has many members who refuse to look past a number and look at the reality of the differences between the two sectors. We have a limit now. And now that we get a bit used to it it becomes the status quo, then the reductions start.
Ya, watch what you post. I'm starting to agree with the title of the thread not with the numbers tho, more like with the acceptance of the inequality.

 

[Charter Tofino]

No. One group has no limits and does not use all it's fishing days and the other group has a blatant limit and is unorganized, shows no effort in posturing politically for current and future equality in the fishery at hand and has many members who refuse to look past a number and look at the reality of the differences between the two sectors. We have a limit now. And now that we get a bit used to it it becomes the status quo, then the reductions start.
Ya, watch what you post. I'm starting to agree with the title of the thread not with the numbers tho, more like with the acceptance of the inequality.

Scroll back, Jordan already explained why the limits are currently in place. I agree they likely won't backtrack to no limits but for this fishery with the current international regulations it does not sound like this will change in the near future.

"Thanks for your comments. With respect to the recreational limit, I can offer the following. The reason why the limit is 20, is because tuna falls under section 21 of Schedule IV of the sport fishing regs, whereby all fin fish not listed in the schedule have a daily limit of 20. I suppose that tuna wasn't on the radar when the regs were enacted."


As for unorganized and showing no effort maybe you should do more than post on a forum and get involved. Lots of individuals (including a number of forum members) are doing the work behind the scenes to enhance sportfishing opportunities. This includes tuna.

 

[Dennis.t]

No. One group has no limits and does not use all it's fishing days and the other group has a blatant limit and is unorganized, shows no effort in posturing politically for current and future equality in the fishery at hand and has many members who refuse to look past a number and look at the reality of the differences between the two sectors. We have a limit now. And now that we get a bit used to it it becomes the status quo, then the reductions start.
Ya, watch what you post. I'm starting to agree with the title of the thread not with the numbers tho, more like with the acceptance of the inequality.

A limit is a limit no matter what the # is ,meanwhile Commies can go out and catch unlimited amounts. That in my books is crap.

 

[Birdsnest]

"Thanks for your comments. With respect to the recreational limit, I can offer the following. The reason why the limit is 20, is because tuna falls under section 21 of Schedule IV of the sport fishing regs, whereby all fin fish not listed in the schedule have a daily limit of 20. I suppose that tuna wasn't on the radar when the regs were enacted."

this is not an explanation as to WHY the limits are in place. There is no explanation. Tuna was off the radar and it got a limit of 20. That is that. You will not find an explanation as per the number 20 for tuna. Who cares if it is in section 21 IV of the regs. It does NOT explain anything other than a brief history of the regulation and it's location in the regs.

As for unorganized and showing no effort maybe you should do more than post on a forum and get involved. Lots of individuals (including a number of forum members) are doing the work behind the scenes to enhance sportfishing opportunities. This includes tuna.

well posting on a forum is my medium of participation. You my write it off as not being involved but it seems to have your attention which suggest it's reaching those dark corners behind the scenes where the gears churn. Maybe it's not good enough for others but I'm am happy to be at this "low" level. Whether my point is valid or not.

 

[jordanmah]

If anyone is interested, here is a link to the current tuna IFMP: https://db.tt/HrBYJykM. The catch and effort data for the commercial fishery will be listed in appendix 1. A very preliminary estimate of our 2002-2004 average days would be between 8,000 and 9,000, and our average effort for the last three years has been around 7,000 days. The number of boats fishing in the Canadian zone has been increasing in the last couple of years, so we're monitoring this quite closely, both DFO and the Tuna Advisory Board.

I've received some interest in the logbook program via email, and I've had a couple of common questions. One clarification I might offer is that participants in this program will not receive additional "scrutiny" or follow-up monitoring requests from DFO. We're simply collecting all the data and compiling into a summary to get a better picture of catch and effort for the rec sector.

To address directmule's comments:
1) I joined the forum in 2012 after I was sent a link to the Bamfield Shootout thread and I eventually got in contact with Kelly.
2) My office is responsible for making all recommendations related to tuna management either to the Regional Director General in the Pacific Region, or the Minister in Ottawa, depending on the significance of the decision. All commercial management decisions are approved here in the Pacific Region. Significant changes, such as the halibut quota, are decided by the Minister in Ottawa based on the recommendations of the Pacific Region.

One final note, the 20 daily limit for un-listed fin fish includes tuna, but is not specifically for tuna. When the regs were enacted for Sportfishing in BC, it was decided that all species should be managed using a daily limit and tuna falls into that default category.

 

[Dennis.t]

If anyone is interested, here is a link to the current tuna IFMP: https://db.tt/HrBYJykM. The catch and effort data for the commercial fishery will be listed in appendix 1. A very preliminary estimate of our 2002-2004 average days would be between 8,000 and 9,000, and our average effort for the last three years has been around 7,000 days. The number of boats fishing in the Canadian zone has been increasing in the last couple of years, so we're monitoring this quite closely, both DFO and the Tuna Advisory Board.

I've received some interest in the logbook program via email, and I've had a couple of common questions. One clarification I might offer is that participants in this program will not receive additional "scrutiny" or follow-up monitoring requests from DFO. We're simply collecting all the data and compiling into a summary to get a better picture of catch and effort for the rec sector.

To address directmule's comments:
1) I joined the forum in 2012 after I was sent a link to the Bamfield Shootout thread and I eventually got in contact with Kelly.
2) My office is responsible for making all recommendations related to tuna management either to the Regional Director General in the Pacific Region, or the Minister in Ottawa, depending on the significance of the decision. All commercial management decisions are approved here in the Pacific Region. Significant changes, such as the halibut quota, are decided by the Minister in Ottawa based on the recommendations of the Pacific Region.

One final note, the 20 daily limit for un-listed fin fish includes tuna, but is not specifically for tuna. When the regs were enacted for Sportfishing in BC, it was decided that all species should be managed using a daily limit and tuna falls into that default category.

It is a refreshing change to actually have someone from DFO replying to our concerns on this forum. I appreciate the feedback. That said, to me anytime DFO gets involved with anything related to us sporties, well we all know the outcome...

 

[runamuk]

The agenda for the SFAC 23 meeting seems to have a limit for Tuna ... Are we still believing ??

 

[Derby]

Some of the SFAC area will be talking about tuna.. It is on the agenda at the SFAB main board meeting for discussion...any recommendations that or if or do come are thru the SFAC process to the SFAB... If u come to meeting then u will find out what is in the wind and u can have your input.... If u need more info or have any concerns feel free to contact me............

 

[Tidal Chaos]

Some of the SFAC area will be talking about tuna.. It is on the agenda at the SFAB main board meeting for discussion...any recommendations that or if or do come are thru the SFAC process to the SFAB... If u come to meeting then u will find out what is in the wind and u can have your input.... If u need more info or have any concerns feel free to contact me............

So I got chastised last year on this post; but now things are coming to light on what is happening on this fishery in the future.

If you are a Rec tuna fisher or are planning on taking part in this fishery; you may want to attend your local meetings; without a voice there will be changes and we need to start working with our local committees to make sure they have the info they need from the Rec fleet to stop or reduce any changes that maybe directed at us. Lets put our info into the SFAB/AC hands and then it is what it is, accounted for by group with our interests; not big business' interests.

 

[runamuk]

Ohh the catch log is a good idea , it helps us in the end... BS once again. The commercial guys want a limit imposed now and still no TAC..

 

[Sculpin]

Great post TC.

It is great to see some good folks stepping up to form a voice for us .

The Nanaimo and area meeting is this Thursday at 7:00 P.M. at the Nanaimo Fish and Game Club in the Trap shack. It is highly recommended you try to attend your local SFAC meeting to learn about and give input into this topic. I'm sure you can contact Derby or Searun if you need to know when and where for your area.

I will be attending the Nanaimo meeting and I hope to see some other rec tuna fishers there.

Cheers,
John

 

[Derby]

Ohh the catch log is a good idea , it helps us in the end... BS once again. The commercial guys want a limit imposed now and still no TAC..

you are wrong on so many levels....... 2 completely different things

 

[Charter Tofino]

Ohh the catch log is a good idea , it helps us in the end... BS once again. The commercial guys want a limit imposed now and still no TAC..

Well you don't understand then.... They are good and will help us in the end.

Just to be clear, this isn't DFO pushing for limit changes, they are aware there is not yet a conservation issue. This is them being pressured by the commercial sector for limit changes.

 

[Rum Buddies]

Well you don't understand then.... They are good and will help us in the end.

Just to be clear, this isn't DFO pushing for limit changes, they are aware there is not yet a conservation issue. This is them being pressured by the commercial sector for limit changes.

why do the commies care?

 

[Charter Tofino]

Quota.....

 

[runamuk]

Well you don't understand then.... They are good and will help us in the end.

Just to be clear, this isn't DFO pushing for limit changes, they are aware there is not yet a conservation issue. This is them being pressured by the commercial sector for limit changes.

So limit changes for sporties is a good thing?? Changes have worked out for us in the past? Kelly I have been at this a while commercially and sport. There has never been a positive outcome when this sort of thing takes place. I do understand quite well, I know you think that filling out catch logs will give a better understanding to what we need as far as a quota goes, but I can't remember a time that it ever worked out that way. I'm only 47 years old and have a lot to learn I guess.

 

[Charter Tofino]

So we pretend not to use the resource, then get mad when the pie is made and our piece is too small?

I never said limit changes were a good thing and there has been no limit change so I don't know what you mean?

 

[runamuk]

I don't think anyone is pretending we are not fishing. I highly doubt the 20 per day is going to stand if changes are made. I am only going by past history in these situations. I do not have a clear view into the future. The requests by the commercial sector I was privy to only as of this morning, is they are wanting us to have a 4 per person, per day limit, with a 2 day possession.

I'm pretty sure that would put a damper on shootouts etc. if every 2 days you have to take your 8 fish home .

I'm not trying to argue right or wrong here. I'm just a little frustrated with how all of the due processes played out in the past. I wasn't too long ago we filled out logs for Halibut.