Hahahaha. Good post from the oak bay rep. You seriously want to try and blame the overfishing in Alaska on the bc Longliners. Surveys in 2b up 30% commercial wpu up 8%. Every fish accounted . Yes by far the bc ground fish fishery is the most regulated and monitored fishery there is. So sad the rec fishery drags us down in the eyes of the iphc. Probably wouldn't be so tuff to defend our fishery here in Canada if you guys would start to count. Especially you rich lodge owners that are taking 65% of the rec allocation. If you are so worried about the statis of the stock then stop overfishing.
Quote from iphc when asked what the best managed and reliable numbers they get are "the bc commercial long liners". Quote when asked what's the worst numbers you get "the bc recreational fishery".
You obviously know jack about the msc process. Any fishery that goes down the road to be certified pays. Wonder why the commercial halibut fishery in bc was the first fishery to pass and the only one to pass with no conditions.
As for the chinooks, I was speaking of our local rivers not the American fish you are now targeting as there is little left here.
Fish4 all, thanks for personalizing the debate. A sure sign of a strong desire to avoid a reasonable discussion on the internet. I removed that post because I agree with the idea that the BC Longliners are not responsible for the coastwide decline in Halibut. The way the post was written may have implied that and it was not my intent. That being said, neither is the recreational fishery responsible.
FYI - The status of Chinook in BC hasn't suffered as a result of the Salmon Allocation policy. Check out the numbers since 1998. Commercial fisheries still take a larger share of Chinook, and as many "local" stocks are returning at greater numbers than they were in 1998 as have declined.
Accounting of catch in BC is based on risk assessment. Commercial fishermen catch 85% of the fish and recreational fishermen catch 15%. Of course the commercial sector is require to have 100% video monitoring (albeit with only a 10% audit of those videos), because the risk is far greater. Makes sense, and to imply that both fisheries need the same level of monitoring doesn't make sense. My understanding is that the IPHC has accepted the rec numbers for decades. I wasn't under the impression we are "dragging us all down" - that is not true and you know it. You are well aware of the efforts put forward by the recreational sector to ensure catch monitoring continues to meet the needs of the IPHC. If you want to make it better, help us by leaning on DFO to get thier act together and provide us with a standard we can meet- don't lean on us for political purposes. I have not seen the quote where the BC recreational fishery has the "worst" numbers on the coast. My understanding is that we are quite a lot better than Alaska. Can you please provide a reference in the blue book as to where you found that quote?
My issue with MSC is simple. It is not a non-profit organization, it is a business. Groups like yours pay a lot of money to essentially get the MSC to help you market your product. Even though it has a farily rigourous set of parameters around it, it is advertizing, pure and simple. I see a potential conflict there. I would feel better if the MSC folks weren't motivated by profit to keep fisheries certified. I also believe that as the status of fisheries change, and social\economic situations change with regards to the "best use" of a fishery (like they have here in BC with regards to the halibut fishery) that perhaps the social component of the MSC certification needs to be revisited. The fact that our federal government felt it was appropriate to invest tens of thousands of tax payers dollars in terms of staff time to assist you slipper skippers in building your market, yet refusses to invest one penny in building the market for recreational fishing businesses adds insult to injury.
I am more than happy to continue, but perhaps you can state your name and who you work for before we do - just to level the playing field. If so, we should start a different thread or go to email - this is supposed to be about the slipper skippers plan to further line thier pockets by getting rec fishermen to lease thier quota. Nice try, but it won't work. Maybe they'll all have to go back to earning a living like the rest of us?
I've got nothing to hide, do you?
CP
