A little overboard

[salty-dog]

So one of our retailers in Washinton state called today about getting more gear for the upcoming season and we were talking about all the restrictions being brought in across North America and he said something that seemed a bit overboard: The Washington halibut season is 12 days this year.

Can you imagine that?? While commercial fishers have a very long season, the ones that do less damage to the populations only get a whopping 12 days. If the DFO came at you with that crap, would you use or forego those 12 days? Would you raise a ruckus or let it slide?

I guess what I am getting at is that with the DFO working with Alaska, Washington, Oregon and California in matters regarding fish populations, is it possible that such a short season will be thrown at Canadian anglers in the future?

What impact would this really make in the population when commies can pretty much do as they please while the less impacting sport anglers take the brunt.

Aside from this one, I am a member of many other fishing/hunting forums and it appears that the same degenerative gov't thining is running wild in many states, too. For example, the US feds have enacted very strict "hands-off" approach towards black sea bass in many southern states and the Gulf. They claim declining fish populations. Meanwhile,anglers are complaining that when they catch other specis, the overpopulated black sea bass are ripping the fish off the lines.

In the Gulf, the feds have declared a slew of fish as "concerned species" {example red snapper} and forbid the retention of those species. Most are found around old oil platforms they use as artificial reefs. Now, the feds have given the go-ahead to use explosives to blow up those platforms and the resulting impact waves are killing the very fish no one is allowed to keep because they are "concerned species".

Where do the "officials" get their information? Are they using special interest groups such as those that are concerned about every living thing or are the using real, irrefuttable science, or are they just throwing numbers in the are and using what they can catch?

I cannot say with any degree of certainty, but it sounds to me that they must be personally profitting from degenerative science or lobbying by commies.

Considering the halibut fisherie in BC, did Washington throw their weight around too much or is there a genuine reasoning behind it?

 

[seadna]

I cannot only imagine those short halibut seasons, I live them. In WA state last year in area 4 (the area around Neah Bay and including the WA portion of Swiftsure bank), the halibut "season" started on May 10th (a Thursday) and was open on Thurs and Sat. through May 19th! It then was closed on May 24 and 26 (pre-planned) and opened for 1 or 2 days more (I don't remember which) on May 31st or June 2nd (only open when quota was available). Thats 6 days MAX in area 4. Possession was 1 fish any size. The WDFW intentionally sets the season for Thur and Sat (with no fishing allowed on Fri) to force recreational fishers who are visiting the coast to spend Wed-Fri night there to fish 2 days. E.g. the reason for Thur and Sat with no fishing on Friday is so that we'll spend more money in economically struggling areas than we would if the days were consecutive. We'd LOVE a 12 day halibut season down here relative to what we have now. Also, the season is in May to drive people to the coast during what is otherwise an off-season for those with businesses on the coast. Mid May-early June can be pretty nasty weather on the ocean and the only time we get to fish those "extra" days beyond the initial 4 or so is when the weather is so crappy the quota isn't caught in the first 4 days. I'd love to be able to fish for halibut during the nice calm weather days in August in WA state but I can't. Hence I drive to Canada in spring, buy a license there and fish for a hali or two on the Canadian side of the line in July/August. I only took one Canadian hali last year (35lbs).

 

[Finished Business]

....Ya, most Washingtonians I know don't have the time of day to hear our bitching about the regs that are imposed on us. Cuz they have it WAY worse. Isn't shrimping regulated in much the same way? 6 days over a few weekends or something? Yikes...

curious how retention works with a Canadian caught halibut when you are coming through the border?? No problems with the appropriate paperwork or does US Customs have some special protocol? Are you travelling via road or water

 

[seadna]

Yes - most of the areas in which we can shrimp are open for around 4-6 days total. Drop your pots no earlier than 7AM and pull them no later than 1PM. I haven't shrimped much since the openings got so rare and so short. On the other hand, when I do go out, nearly every pull is 100+ spot prawns. As the population of VI increases, you guys might start facing similar circumstances.

 

[pescador]

Why do you think half the boats on the West Coast of Vancouver Island are WA boats? Their reg restrictions just push serious WA fisherman north to BC.

 

[outback]

Why do you think half the boats on the West Coast of Vancouver Island are WA boats? Their reg restrictions just push serious WA fisherman north to BC.

usually i find im out numbered by American boats. shows how well that day on day off closure is working for them

 

[seadna]

usually i find im out numbered by American boats. shows how well that day on day off closure is working for them

Just out of interest - has it always been this way or is it an ever increasing trend? Also, I have to ask, what fraction of the BC rec hali quota do you guys think is caught by non Canadians? While I may not like the answer, perhaps part of the dwindling hali season problem in BC is increased pressure from guys like me who have little opportunity in our own "back yard". I do know that the electronic license a non-Canadian purchases is not legal for hali fishing in Areas 23, 121 and 123. I believe the rationale behind that regulation was to limit the number of Americans (and particularly those on guided trips out of Neah Bay) fishing in those waters. So clearly DFO thought it was enough of a problem to make it harder for us to fish for hali in those areas (e.g. we have to physically drive to Canada to get a license).

As opportunity goes down in one area, pressure shifts to another and BC may be seeing that as part of the problem. If so, and it's not in my best interests to suggest this, perhaps the regs need to be further adjusted to limit non-Canadian impact on the fishery to better benefit Canadians. Obviously, that will have some impact on tourism related to rec fishing so I'm not sure that's best for all Canadians. But that's a tradeoff one can make.

 

[pescador]

I'm talking areas 25,125 where I spend a week in Aug each year. I'd guess that as much as 30% of the halibut are taken by WA or OR boats. I have no scientific proof other than what I see at the cleaning tables. What I find is those guys fish hard with 4 plus guys in the boat, and, spend serious time on the water meaning their kill rate is high. They come back when they've got their catch limit. I come back when I want lunch or a beer. Not complaining at all as the US is a great friend to have and does plenty on the salmon enhancement front. Just my view of how people can get around regs....

 

[xavier]

This thread got me thinking. As a rec angler who does not benefit financially from sport fishing, I must admit that I was a tad cynical of the "for profit" sportfishing sector and their influence on the new halibut regs to ensure things are open during lodge and guiding season. However, upon reflection I certainly realize that the shortened season to our south could be largely attributed not only to conservation concerns, but perhaps more significantly to the limited impact that such a shortened season has on their "for profit" sportfishing sector. Sportfishing in the context of lodges and guides is not as big a business in Washington on a per capita basis.

It is easier to impose significant closures when money and livelihood is not 'as' involved. The associated desperation that comes with the fear of losing ones source of income is what fuels the most desperate passion. So before us amateur sport fishermen bash the professional sport fishermen (other threads), we should realize that without them, we would only have a shorter season. Perhaps days, not months.

All that being said, I just hope that decisions in the future are made with conservation in mind. But I am no Pollyanna; I understand they are not. Politics are not objective.

 

[outback]

Just out of interest - has it always been this way or is it an ever increasing trend? Also, I have to ask, what fraction of the BC rec hali quota do you guys think is caught by non Canadians?

As opportunity goes down in one area, pressure shifts to another and BC may be seeing that as part of the problem. If so, and it's not in my best interests to suggest this, perhaps the regs need to be further adjusted to limit non-Canadian impact on the fishery to better benefit Canadians. Obviously, that will have some impact on tourism related to rec fishing so I'm not sure that's best for all Canadians. But that's a tradeoff one can make.

definatley more American boats in the last couple of years, but a lot of the guys make a yearly trip.(and have been for dozens of years) In all honesty if the Americans didn't show up year after year, i bet you a lot of lodges in Nootka and other places would shut down. THEY PAY A BIG PRICE FOR THERE LICENSE. makes our annual license look like chump change. and since they can only bring back two halibut with them each, that's it for each trip.

i wouldn't be surprised with the updated regs that more Americans through in the towel and give up coming up here. The sad part is that there lisences all go to "General revenue"... Not to the fishery itself.

 

[firelight]

Lots if Americans in my favorite prawn spot, even more this year with the mild weather last few months.

 

[seadna]

This thread got me thinking. As a rec angler who does not benefit financially from sport fishing, I must admit that I was a tad cynical of the "for profit" sportfishing sector and their influence on the new halibut regs to ensure things are open during lodge and guiding season. However, upon reflection I certainly realize that the shortened season to our south could be largely attributed not only to conservation concerns, but perhaps more significantly to the limited impact that such a shortened season has on their "for profit" sportfishing sector. Sportfishing in the context of lodges and guides is not as big a business in Washington on a per capita basis.

It is easier to impose significant closures when money and livelihood is not 'as' involved. The associated desperation that comes with the fear of losing ones source of income is what fuels the most desperate passion. So before us amateur sport fishermen bash the professional sport fishermen (other threads), we should realize that without them, we would only have a shorter season. Perhaps days, not months.

All that being said, I just hope that decisions in the future are made with conservation in mind. But I am no Pollyanna; I understand they are not. Politics are not objective.

One thing to remember is that sport fishing is an industry that creates jobs and revenue in the local economy. As the report linked to here - http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/AboutU...umbia_s_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture_Sector.aspx - shows, the economic impact of recreational fishing in BC was about $325.7M dollars out of an annual $667.4M total (including commercial fishing AND aquaculture). That's 48.8% of the total economic impact of all fishing related industry. If you look at the GDP generated from the capture fishery, the commercial side generates only $102.3M or $102.3/325.7 = 0.314x the GDP generated by the recreational fishing. That right, commercial capture fishing contributes only 0.314 as much to BC GPD but does that with about 85% of the total harvest allocation (more in many cases). Hence 1lb of fish allocated to recreational fishing generates AT LEAST 85/(15*0.314) =18x as many $'s of economic impact as the same pound allocated to the commercial fishing industry. So before you start splitting the guide services and big lodges into a separate bin, you might want to consider that they are one of the best reasons to argue for a bigger allocation to the recreational crowd. E.g. not only does a bigger allocation generate for more fun for us recreational guys, one could easily argue that for every job lost on the commercial fishing side by shifting allocation, 18 more will get created on the recreation side. That economic argument is far more likely to sway politicians than an argument about the "non-for profit" rec guys wanting more fish. It's also worth noting that the recreational side generates more GDP than aquaculture. So one could also argue that the jobs created by that industry might be replaced by more jobs in the recreational industry if one could undo the damage caused to fish runs by shutting down fish farms in terminal area. That's a harder argument to make since the amount of run decline than can be attributed to disease transferred from aquaculture to wild fish is difficult to estimate accurately.

 

[xavier]

On the same page Seadna. Your evidence supports my point as to why we have the season we do. Without such evidence us rec anglers might be looking at an opening of days, not months. You just got to follow the money...

 

[steel_dreamin]

One thing to remember is that sport fishing is an industry that creates jobs and revenue in the local economy. As the report linked to here - http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/AboutU...umbia_s_Fisheries_and_Aquaculture_Sector.aspx - shows, the economic impact of recreational fishing in BC was about $325.7M dollars out of an annual $667.4M total (including commercial fishing AND aquaculture). That's 48.8% of the total economic impact of all fishing related industry. If you look at the GDP generated from the capture fishery, the commercial side generates only $102.3M or $102.3/325.7 = 0.314x the GDP generated by the recreational fishing. That right, commercial capture fishing contributes only 0.314 as much to BC GPD but does that with about 85% of the total harvest allocation (more in many cases). Hence 1lb of fish allocated to recreational fishing generates AT LEAST 85/(15*0.314) =18x as many $'s of economic impact as the same pound allocated to the commercial fishing industry. So before you start splitting the guide services and big lodges into a separate bin, you might want to consider that they are one of the best reasons to argue for a bigger allocation to the recreational crowd. E.g. not only does a bigger allocation generate for more fun for us recreational guys, one could easily argue that for every job lost on the commercial fishing side by shifting allocation, 18 more will get created on the recreation side. That economic argument is far more likely to sway politicians than an argument about the "non-for profit" rec guys wanting more fish. It's also worth noting that the recreational side generates more GDP than aquaculture. So one could also argue that the jobs created by that industry might be replaced by more jobs in the recreational industry if one could undo the damage caused to fish runs by shutting down fish farms in terminal area. That's a harder argument to make since the amount of run decline than can be attributed to disease transferred from aquaculture to wild fish is difficult to estimate accurately.

This is a compelling depiction.

For comparision sake - considering that the lodge/guide folks catch ~85% of the 15% TAC. It would be interesting to evaluate a scenario that reallocates some of the Commercial and Rec sector TAC given to the guides/lodges which would leave us with say 10%. I assume this would have a profound impact on the current restrictions we are facing.

Lets say we result in 75% Commie, 15% guides/lodges, 10% Sport. The two economic revenue sides are increased and the overall impact to the Commercial side is not significantly altered. i.e. $10.2M (10% of $102.3M) dollars based on financials above.

Those dollar values don't do much to strenghten the Commercial sectors TAC; in fact, they do nothing. I understand that there needs to be a balance but the model is not representing the economic drivers.

 

[pescador]

I agree with Holmes, that the number of Americans coming up may have dropped because of the US exchange rates, but, the ones that come are serious fisherman with good kill rates...

 

[steel_dreamin]

I agree with Holmes, that the number of Americans coming up may has dropped because of the US exchange rates, but, the ones that come are serious fisherman with good kill rates...

Who cares what their kill rates are? - they generate more revenue in one trip then we do in multiple.

They are only allowed to take home their possession limit, which, in todays regulatory framework, doesn't amount to much.

One element that should be considered is "gifting" I'm uncertain if a US citizen can gift a fish to a BC Resident while fishing? If so, this should not be allowed.

We should be happy they are still spending money in BC.

 

[spring time]

the couple americans that I know that fish the islands don't bring much. other than the cast of the ferry, they bring a tidy tank of gas ( 25 cents cheaper a litre) for there truck and boat. that's not helping our economy much

 

[seadna]

I did one trip to the island last year. I took the ferry across with my boat, trailer and truck (60' overall) and two other families joined me. We rented two very nice cabins in Tofino for 7 nights at a total cost of $630/night ($290 for one $340 for the other - Crystal Cove Resort) - it took a nice place to get the wives to go along. I paid for 8 days of moorage at Weight West ($40/day = $320). We bought several $100 of food to cook and spent >$600 in restaurants. We bought a new grill for the boat in Nanaimo on the way there (can't get Jackson grills easily in the states). I probably spent another $200 in bait and tackle and another $200 in alcohol. I know the women rented bikes, did a guided kayak trip out of Uclulet, took a yoga class or two, visited a spa and spent God knows how much on souvenirs. We also wound up having to flush the hydraulic steering system on the boat and buy some parts for that when it failed. So my estimated total for that 8 day trip was approximately:

$586 in ferry for my boat and truck round trip
$188 in ferry for the vehicles of the other two families
$4410 in cabin rentals
$400 in food and alcohol in the cabin
$600 in restaurants and bars
$200 in bait and tackle
$200 in hydraulic fluids, parts and equipment to flush the steering system
$500+ in whatever the women spent while we were out fishing (it could have been much more)
______
$7082 + spent between 3 families in 8 days! So I think it's trips like this that Steel_dreeming was referring to when he said "they generate more revenue in one trip then we do in multiple".

The "best" part of all was that the ocean conditions were terrible for 3 out of the 8 days and the boat was in repair for one of the others. That combined with my lack of experience in that area led to a net catch of <6 salmon, a few lings and some bottom fish.

The week after, I took the boat to Neah Bay. I left if there through the first week of Sept. My 2.5 months of moorage there cost me around $800 total. My gas and ferry to get there is about $250 round trip. I bring food from home or pick it up on the way. My fuel bill for the whole summer was probably around $2500 but that included 5 tuna trips at around $350/ea. I caught 2 salmon each day I fished and so did everyone on board (I know how and where to fish there). I used my Canadian license to take two hali at Swiftsure and we landed 31 albacore on the boat total (two days were awful tuna fishing). I'd guess me and my buddies spent about as 2/3 as much on 8, 3-day weekends at Neah Bay as we spent on one 8 day trip in Tofino. That coupled with my low overall success rate at Tofino means I'm not highly motivated to go back. But if I had 6-8 weeks to kill, I'd probably learn enough about the area to get my catch rate up and enjoy the trip.

 

[pescador]

Seadna, your costs are exactly what I usually pay on a per diem average in Nootka Sound. I travel over from Vancouver. If you wanna go in style, thats the cost. We appreciate your US $. Keep em coming. Believe me, a few of us BC'ers drop the odd dollar across the border as well. Only suggestion I have is try Nootka Sound. Lots of protective water on bad days, and great off shore fishing when weather is good. A little more remote than Tofino, but, great facilities and usually its very productive.

 

[FishBear]

I am a US citizen living in WA and I make a week long fishing trip to west coast Van Is. every year. I bring my own boat and usually bring 2 people with me and we typically stay at a lodge. Between us we spend several thousand bucks each trip and it is well worth it to me. And the reason I go there is the relative peace and quiet. My primary objective is getting away from it all, staying at a place that's off the grid, spending long days with friends and family.

Sure there are other boats around but I can easily get away from it all if I want. I like the relative lack of people, the scenery, the wildlife and the variety of water to fish... things that are in short supply where I live. Plus, it seems that I need to go out on the west coast Van Is. in order to catch a few WA chinook ;-)