Fishermen caught up in DFO halibut allocation

[Sushihunter]

http://www2.canada.com/westerly/story.html?id=835824a1-e360-4648-bf1c-4b95958f49a3

Fishermen caught up in DFO halibut allocation
Julia Prinselaar, Westerly News

Published: Friday, January 07, 2011

They came in divided on the issue but walked away better informed. Roughly 70 people representing the region's commercial and recreational halibut fishing industry came together yesterday evening at Ucluelet's Seaplane Base Rec Hall to voice their concerns over the Department of Fisheries and Oceans' current policy on the allocation of Canadian halibut stocks.

Fear of an early closure of the fishing season is something the government said wouldn't happen, according to Jay Mohl, owner and operator of the Tofino-based sport fishing business Jay's Clayoquot Ventures.

Mohl highlights issues with the DFO dating back to 2003, when DFO allocated 88 per cent of Canadian halibut stocks to commercial licensees. With just 12 per cent left to recreational fishermen, once the sport fishing sector has reached its allocation they'll have to shut down.

Members of the BC Sports Fishing Coalition arranged an information meeting Thursday evening for those interested in the DFO's policy on commercial and recreational halibut fishing. Seated from left are Martin Paish, Ted Brookman with Brian Clarkson standing.

J. Prinselaar


http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php

Mohl and other recreational anglers may see the halibut season close early for the third time since the policy was created. In terms of the commercial fishing industry, the evening's concerns were primarily "directed to those individuals who hold [halibut] quota but choose not to fish, but rather lease [their quota] out," said Martin Paish, member of the BC Sports Fishing Coalition.

He was part of the panel directed by Brian Clarkson, general manager of Canadian Princess fishing resort and Ted Brookman, regional president of the BC Wildlife Foundation. Paish is referring to the 435 commercial fishermen who, back in 1991, were gifted a share of Canada's total allowable catch (TAC) of Canadian halibut by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans at no cost. Over time these quotas increased in value, says the coalition, which eventually resulted in the 2003 Thibault Allocation Policy implemented by the DFO.

The policy, which is still in effect, allocates 88 per cent of Canada's TAC to the 435 gifted quota holders in the commercial fishing industry. The remaining 12 per cent of the share is left to the recreational sector and includes sport fishermen and charter businesses that generate local revenue through seasonal tourism.

"The allocation is unfair," said Paish. "88 to 12 is not working for the recreational fishing industry.... We need change." The recreational sector would like to see that 88/12 ratio a little more leveled out, ideally closer to 80 per cent commercial and 20 per cent recreational, said Clarkson.

The reason being is that when the allocations were created and portioned out seven years ago, the methods used to compare what each sector needed weren't as accurate as they have become, said Ted Brookman of the BC Wildlife Foundation.

In actuality, he said the 12 per cent TAC allocation of halibut isn't realistic. "We thought we were catching 'x' number of fish, but we found out we were catching 'x plus 1,'" he added, noting the actual portion is closer to 18 or 19 per cent.

According to the BC Coalition, in 2008, 78 per cent of the commercial quota was leased out, leaving 140 active fishermen of the 435 original commercial quota holders. The BC Coalition said this leaves 195 quota holders, dubbed "slipper skippers," who aren't actively fishing out on the water, but who still play in the halibut market by leasing their quotas. Given out in 1991 by the DFO, it's called an Individual Transferable Quota, but "while it may be something that works for the commercial fishery, they simply don't work for a public fishery," said Paish, citing that this quota is permitted to be inherited, sold or leased, as it has been to other fishermen.

"[The DFO are] the ones who created it, but that's our biggest challenge right now is the bureaucratic process," said Jay Mohl, when asked why the DFO isn't revoking the quota originally gifted to those who aren't actively fishing on the water.

"Really the concept of treating a resource that's uncaught as a commodity, we don't want to support that, we don't want to go down that road," he affirmed. "The government has turned [halibut] fish into a commodity and it seems very apparent tonight that it's only working for those that are sitting back somewhere warm leasing their quota out."

Dan Edwards, owner of a halibut fishing boat in Ucluelet, added his perspective. "People should learn to live within their means," he said. "The problem is that [the recreational fishermen] haven't got that mechanism [to transfer quota from one industry to the other], he explained. "So what they want to do is simply re-allocate without compensation. They want to go from 88/12 to whatever it takes."

"It's wrong," said Edwards. "These guys have a history. I have a history in the fishery. I have an allocation. If you want to take some fish and use it for your business, find a way to pay us for it."

While Paish said the discrepancy is with DFO's policy makers rather than with those working in the field, the coalition is hoping for change in the sector allocation and TAC. In the meantime, they say that because of the uncertainty of this year's season, clients may look to places like Alaska to catch their halibut instead.

"We are very cognizant of the fact that recreational fishing during the peak season is of great economic importance," said Tamee Mawani, regional resource manager - groundfish, of the DFO, who said the management measures for the 2011 recreational halibut fishing season should be announced in the next few weeks.

In a recent letter to Gail Shea, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, EcoTrust Canada supports the DFO's current commercial fishery management system, but sees need for change within the recreational sector. "The recreational fishery does not yet operate within the framework of a similiarly comprehensive monitoring system, a change in management we encourage," read the letter.

"Our work suggests that a reallocation from one sector to another is not prudent. It will not benefit conservation or economics." In the meantime, meetings across the B.C. coastal region continue to be held. The mid-Island branch of the B.C. Coalition of Salt Water Anglers will hold a meeting in Nanaimo on January 18.

reporter@westerlynews.ca



© Westerly News 2011

 

[Sushihunter]

Sport anglers aim for larger share of halibut

http://www.canada.com/Sport+anglers+larger+share+halibut/4075491/story.html

Sport anglers aim for larger share of halibut

Current system too uncertain

By Tamara Cunningham, Comox Valley Echo January 7, 2011



The North Island has been reeling in sport anglers with the lure of Pacific halibut for years, boosting business for lodges and charters.

But recreational fishermen say the industry is in jeopardy as it continues to face unpredictable season closings and limits on halibut catches.

"The whole thing is a mess," said Bryan Allen, director of sport fishing for the Courtenay Fish and Game Club.

"We're providing a huge amount of money to the B.C. economy and yet we're being trampled on by the government again and again with this allocation nonsense."

Commercial boats have the right to the majority of fish with access to 88 per cent under the current halibut treaty created by the federal government in 2003.

The recreational fishery gets 12 per cent of the allotted catch, over a season that usually spans Feb. 1 to Dec. 31. But for the last two years, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has closed the sport fishery early over conservation concerns. The commercial fishery continued to catch.

There's speculation the season could end in mid-July this year, the peak time for stock.
It would be damaging for the $650 million tidal sport fishing industry, as well as the tackle shops, restaurants and marinas that depend on it, said Evan Loveless, executive director of the Wilderness Tourism Association in Cumberland.

The unpredictable season alone makes it tough for guides and lodges to sell trips.
"People are looking to go on a fishing trip in the summer and right now lodges can't guarantee they'll be able to fish," he said.

"Certainly people in this industry are scared and nervous about what this year is going to look like."

Steve Paterson, owner of Courtenay's Island Sport Fishing Adventures, is already having trouble promoting his halibut trips. Tourists can still fish for salmon, but they want the full package deal and he can't guarantee that right now, he said.

Rob Worrall, manager for Tyee Marine in Courtenay, said limited fishing opportunities are bound to hurt retail.

"People might not make plans to go fishing if the limits are reduced or the season is chopped half way through ... and that's a negative to our business and will undoubtedly cost us money."

Those in the recreational fishery say the blame for early season closings is a policy the DFO made in 2003 that splits the total allowable catch between the 436 commercial licence holders and 100,000 recreational fishermen.

The quota for pounds of fish is too low to keep the season for sport anglers going for very long, said Paul Rickard, with the B.C. Sport Fishing Coalition.
The federal government has proposed the recreational fishery purch
ase quota off the commercial sector, but anglers refuse, considering the move a major step towards privatization.

The coalition is looking for the DFO to change their policy to give the sport sector a total fixed weight at the start of the year, rather than a percentage share. The move would give anglers a stable and full season, while the commercial sector, which includes First Nations, would see its catch fluctuate according to halibut abundance.

The commercial sector says the move would rob one industry to help another.
Dylan Hardie, 26, a local commercial fisherman, said at least a third of the 12 per cent allocation is used by independent sport anglers, the rest is fished by lodges and guiding outfits.

"These are businesses that make money selling access to a resource and if they want to grow their business then they need to buy quota - just as the rest of us do when we want to grow or enter the halibut market," he said.

Hardie estimates a 1000 pound quota would cost an outfit $3,500 to purchase. They charge fishermen $2,000 a day to take them out halibut fishing - "they'd make their money back on two or three guests and they'd be guaranteed access to fish anytime."

The coalition is gathering support for reallocation and intend on having town hall meetings across Vancouver Island this month. Campbell River expects 300 people at the public meeting, Jan. 19.

An information meeting about the same issue held at the Courtenay Fish and Game clubhouse, Monday, brought in 120 people.

It's worrisome, Hardie said.

"Commercial fishermen didn't just get this quota free; some people, like my father, had to mortgage everything to buy one at full market value. They stand to lose that and First Nations stand to lose their food fish," he said of a reallocation.

The town hall meetings are only telling half the story and "I'm not sure if people fully understand what's at stake here and what's going on."

A DFO spokesperson was also unavailable, although in a statement, the department says it continues to work with the commercial and recreational sectors to discuss options for an allocation transfer process.

It also said the total allowable catch for the recreational halibut hasn't been decided on and "discussions on what management actions will take place through the season is speculative."

Conservative MP John Duncan was unavailable for comment.

tcunningham@comoxvalleyecho.com
© Copyright (c) Postmedia News

 

[Ding Dong!]

I am finding this very interesting, but who exactly is more interested in the outcome of this season than the business interests related to sportfishing? Does Paul the sport angler really care, other than for the fact that he may may need to fish before July for his fair share or opportunity to kill and retain a public halibut. More than likely not! What is the true message here, and what are all of the other millions of Canadians thinking? Hhhhmmmm.

Ding Dong!

 

[fisher69]

I am finding this very interesting, but who exactly is more interested in the outcome of this season than the business interests related to sportfishing? Does Paul the sport angler really care, other than for the fact that he may may need to fish before July for his fair share or opportunity to kill and retain a public halibut. More than likely not! What is the true message here, and what are all of the other millions of Canadians thinking? Hhhhmmmm.

Ding Dong!

very good point there ding dong... by the way who said we need to close halibut mid season(oh yeah the sfab and sfi). If it is revolving around the commercial sports sector then delay the opening so the fat cat can pocket a few more million off of the true rec fisherman.

Unbeleivable. Below us they open for 9-50 days a year and we here no whinning, but not here 260 days and we need more.... disgusting.

 

[traveller]

Interesting to me how the commercial folk have already decided how to manage our Public Fishing opportunities....of course if you own 88% of the resource, I guess they think they can manage the rest of us too?

In fact the early season closure has been predicted by DFO if the expected TAC for the public fishery remains at 12%, no matter what the daily limit or possession limits, it will not be a full season fishery. One aspect of the early closures seems to eluded the commercial folk who are complaining the loudest...that this will create the same unsafe boating pressure that was the reason for putting commercial halibut fishing into a quota managed fishery in the first place! The original commercial halibut fishery was termed a " derby" or " goldrush" style of fishery where the moment the season opened, the fleet would rush out to the grounds no matter what the weather to bring back fish early for the best prices, and then kept going out even in poor weather because the season ended when the TAC was caught. The quota management enable the fishing to spread over the whole year from the start, and fishermen could pick better weather to venture out in.


DFO in fact is telling us there will be a shortened season,which will cause public fishing participants to head out in what are generally small boats into poor weather, because they know the season will end as soon as the TAC is reached, and of course May, June are well known for windy unsettled weather....but hey, the season may end Mid July! Then of course there are the public anglers who can only get their holidays in August or September...too bad for them, the season will be over.

I see in the thread above that " Paul, the sport angler doesn't care about the outcome of this season....." but indeed he does, the outrageous unfair and inequitable allocation of 12% has many different impacts on the public angler who wants consistent, full season access to a common property resource which the Minister keeps telling us is not owned by anyone. The "true rec fisherman" often does not own a large boat, or want to, they just want to hire someone to ferry them out to halibut ground so they, the public angler can catch a few halibut to take home for food....without guides and their boats, we wouldn't be able to get out there. Hard to understand why there is so much whining about people who offer a service to the Public so they can catch a few fish each.

The true Canadians are wondering why control of 88% of Canadian fish were put into the hands of 400 private business people to buy, sell lease, and provide only very limited public fishing access.

Traveller

 

[fisher69]

can you show me where we have not privitized canadian resources?

if weather is such a concern then why try to open in March? and after living on the coast my entire life september can be pretty ****** as well.

 

[Jencourt]

First off: Thanks to Sushi for posting all the literature over the past while.
Now, as for my question.

As I read through this post one statement stood out to me more than most.
Quote from article posted above: Tamara Cunningham, Comox Valley Echo January 7, 2011 "The commercial sector says the move would rob one industry to help another. "

Now, as for my question. Have I not read on more than one occasion that the commercial fleet has left fish in the water on multiple years? And that the quantities caught had left so much fish in the freezers by the start of the new season that the price was driven down and some said they would fish later wen the price is back up?Only to stuff the freezers again? Can anyone tell me if this is true and Fact? If it is not, then my concern is less. If it is true to fact then I have problem with that argument.Why say one would be robbing the other wen the fleet already has access to more than the market will bare.And more over a fleet that is made up of nearly half it's numbers never fishing yet still profiting from the resource.There is obviously room to re-allocate the TAC without hurting the fishermen that are actually out fishing.

I am in no way suggesting that we should always try to take the maximum. In fact,assuming the science has been good and the TAC each year has been well decided,then I am all for leaving fish in the water.I have never supported DFO'S idea of "we have the numbers we need so mop up the rest boys" I am however in support of the "Take only what we need" attitude. Thus a pre-season TAC (If based on proven information,and for the purpose of managing and protecting the resource before filling pockets) is a good system in my opinion.
The point of my posting this was to find out For Fact the answer to my questions about the amount of fish being caught and well, not caught? I am in the process of drafting my letters and more importantly telling anyone who will listen about 12/88 allocation issues and its impact on BC communities.It is important to the cause to be accurate in my presentation of the facts at all times.
Also .Is my understanding that our letters should be printed and mailed or is Email the way to go.

Thanks to anyone who can help educate me.
Cheers:Ray

 

[fishingbc]

REC license fees should increase as long as money goes to hatcheries ..they are too low...go buy one sockeye $35
salmon stamp increase to what ever as long as it goes to enhancement (PSF) and not general revenue. at this point $1 out of the approx $6 goes to "salmon conservation"...its a fraud......$20 sounds fair..x 350,000 licenses
halibut ...10 per year annual....how much can you eat....I got a family of four.....50-75 lbs works for us and we eat lots o fish

change whole license structure

-record salmon and halibut on license
-use the F^&#@ING information...as it stands now we record JUST Chinook catches but DFO refuses to use that data
-why do we need creel surveys and flyovers if we already have that F#@!*&ING information
-lifetime angler number to tidal water angler (just like fresh water)
-change annual date from March 31 to March 31 to DEC 31 to DEC 31
-make it mandatory to submit license and data on it to DFO by Jan 31 each year..free postage on licences
-no renewal of anglers license until proof that data has been submitted to DFO..tracked by angler number
-this allows DFO an accurate account of sport caught salmon (by piece) and halibut (by approx weight ????)
-this idea has been put forth many times but DFO in their wisdom refuses to move in this direction. (Bil Shaw Wilf Leudky).....too expensive....no staff....takes too long...what a load of crap
Instead the still think fly overs and dockside creel surveys (4% of boats returning to docks) combined with paper and e-logs gives them an accurate profile of the sport catch.....what a joke....it just keeps them in high paying jobs....at our last guides meeting all we heard from DFO was "we stratisfy this and use stratification on that" .....WTF.....we have and election and count 1.5 million ballots in four hours and DFO can't take 350,00-400,00 licenses and in 60 days can't "stratisfy REAL numbers into a fishing plan by March 1st so our sector can carry on our $650 million a year business unabated .....its F*&^@kin DFO that is at the root of this whole issue...whether its 88/12 or accountability of rec fishers....the answer is now political and not within either group....we all need to work, and its way to obvious to ALL the 88/12 was a bad idea and now the politicians need to get their **** together.....one way or the other this will be fixed and deigning a $650 million a year economic engine to fizzle out is out of the question....

 

[fish4all]

Ray, good questions.

1) The IPHC allows commercial harvesters in both countries to carry over 10% of their respected allocations in any one year. So if the commercial sector leaves 100,000 lbs in the water due to poor weather, break downs and yes sometimes market conditions then the 100,000lbs can be carried over the following year. This carry forward is vessel specific so that each boat is responsible for it's own catch. In 2009 the recreational sector that leased excess quota was also allowed to carry it forward to use in 2010. The flip side to this is that if any one vessel goes over their respected quota in a year then that amount of fish will be deducted from that boats quota the following year(individual accountability). If any one boat goes more than 10% over their quota in one year then they must pay back double the next year.

2)yes when the total catch for both counties exceeded 55million pounds there was fish in the freezers when the following season opened. that said the exploitable biomass(fish of legal size) has been decreasing rapidly over the last 5 years. Last year we had a combined catch of 50million and there is no amount of fish in the freezers. This year IPHC has set the total catch at 41.9million for both countries. It is anticipated at these record low catches that prices will be in excess of the record high prices paid last season.

hope this answers your questions.

 

[fish4all]

REC license fees should increase as long as money goes to hatcheries ..they are too low...go buy one sockeye $35
salmon stamp increase to what ever as long as it goes to enhancement (PSF) and not general revenue. at this point $1 out of the approx $6 goes to "salmon conservation"...its a fraud......$20 sounds fair..x 350,000 licenses
halibut ...10 per year annual....how much can you eat....I got a family of four.....50-75 lbs works for us and we eat lots o fish

change whole license structure

-record salmon and halibut on license
-use the F^&#@ING information...as it stands now we record JUST Chinook catches but DFO refuses to use that data
-why do we need creel surveys and flyovers if we already have that F#@!*&ING information
-lifetime angler number to tidal water angler (just like fresh water)
-change annual date from March 31 to March 31 to DEC 31 to DEC 31
-make it mandatory to submit license and data on it to DFO by Jan 31 each year..free postage on licences
-no renewal of anglers license until proof that data has been submitted to DFO..tracked by angler number
-this allows DFO an accurate account of sport caught salmon (by piece) and halibut (by approx weight ????)
-this idea has been put forth many times but DFO in their wisdom refuses to move in this direction. (Bil Shaw Wilf Leudky).....too expensive....no staff....takes too long...what a load of crap
Instead the still think fly overs and dockside creel surveys (4% of boats returning to docks) combined with paper and e-logs gives them an accurate profile of the sport catch.....what a joke....it just keeps them in high paying jobs....at our last guides meeting all we heard from DFO was "we stratisfy this and use stratification on that" .....WTF.....we have and election and count 1.5 million ballots in four hours and DFO can't take 350,00-400,00 licenses and in 60 days can't "stratisfy REAL numbers into a fishing plan by March 1st so our sector can carry on our $650 million a year business unabated .....its F*&^@kin DFO that is at the root of this whole issue...whether its 88/12 or accountability of rec fishers....the answer is now political and not within either group....we all need to work, and its way to obvious to ALL the 88/12 was a bad idea and now the politicians need to get their **** together.....one way or the other this will be fixed and deigning a $650 million a year economic engine to fizzle out is out of the question....

no disrespect but I would guess that if the whole $650mill is based on halibut we are **** out of luck. Good thing it is not based on salmon as we have pretty much killed off the local stocks.

 

[fishingbc]

no disrespect but I would guess that if the whole $650mill is based on halibut we are **** out of luck. Good thing it is not based on salmon as we have pretty much killed off the local stocks.

wtf that supposed to mean

 

[Jencourt]

Fish4all:
Thanks for the response.that info dose help to begin to clarify things to me. So thanks for that.
I do feel it necessary to point out( to those thinking that we just want more,no matter what the conservation issues are)that the issue before us is that of the percentages allocated to the sectors. If the TAC must go down to protect the biomass I think most of us have no problem with that.It is the fact that the split is so unjustly divided between the sectors that needs to be fixed.Sport fishing is a growing contributor to the countries economy and it is important to get fair representation and access to the Canadian resource that is our fish. If the resource is declining then those charged with the task of, and being payed well to protect it need to look at there science and make sure it is working.I think maybe fishingbc may have some good points about how things are being measured. For now I am focused on doing my small part to aid in the fight at hand.
Still wondering about the letters? Paper or electronic?

 

[Silver Streak]

Jencourt - I think paper is better. Just the shear volume of envelopes coming into Ottawa has an impact much
greater than an e-mailed letter which hides in someone's computer. They will have to reply on paper and this
takes additional staff time and effort to fold, address envelopes, seal envelopes and physically mail them. If you
are sending only one form - send paper. Consider sending both paper and e-mail. I doubt they are cross
referencing and this way they will probably reply in both forms. Again more work for someone back east and
this adds to the impact we are having on them. Perhaps they will realize they have a problem out on the west
coast.

 

[fisher69]

Fish4all:
Thanks for the response.that info dose help to begin to clarify things to me. So thanks for that.
I do feel it necessary to point out( to those thinking that we just want more,no matter what the conservation issues are)that the issue before us is that of the percentages allocated to the sectors. If the TAC must go down to protect the biomass I think most of us have no problem with that.It is the fact that the split is so unjustly divided between the sectors that needs to be fixed.Sport fishing is a growing contributor to the countries economy and it is important to get fair representation and access to the Canadian resource that is our fish. If the resource is declining then those charged with the task of, and being payed well to protect it need to look at there science and make sure it is working.I think maybe fishingbc may have some good points about how things are being measured. For now I am focused on doing my small part to aid in the fight at hand.
Still wondering about the letters? Paper or electronic?

Jencourt;
Make sure you have the facts before you jump on the band wagon. the SFAB and SFI are doing a great job on twisting the facts to try and rile up the average angler. This is not about the mom and pops but about the lodge and charter sector wanting to provide 2 fish a day to the clients instead of 1. the only way the season could end in July is if the retention numbers are increased from last year. If we remain at 1 and 1 the season will go past September, and if we delay the opening a month the season will go farther. Again this is a large push by the charter sector(who is taking 75% of the rec fish) to try and fill the void of the salmon we have all but decimated here on the south coast. We need a solutiion to this problem that we can all agree on. but if we increase the limits and increase our share then we will be right back here again when we bump up against a possible new number. The solution we need must be flexible and stand the test of time.....not something done on a whim.

 

[fishingbc]

Jencourt;
Make sure you have the facts before you jump on the band wagon. the SFAB and SFI are doing a great job on twisting the facts to try and rile up the average angler. This is not about the mom and pops but about the lodge and charter sector wanting to provide 2 fish a day to the clients instead of 1. the only way the season could end in July is if the retention numbers are increased from last year. If we remain at 1 and 1 the season will go past September, and if we delay the opening a month the season will go farther. Again this is a large push by the charter sector(who is taking 75% of the rec fish) to try and fill the void of the salmon we have all but decimated here on the south coast. We need a solutiion to this problem that we can all agree on. but if we increase the limits and increase our share then we will be right back here again when we bump up against a possible new number. The solution we need must be flexible and stand the test of time.....not something done on a whim.

Here we go with the same old crap.....rec is rec and ALWAYS WILL BE.......mom n pop.....charters....lodge.....IT'S ALL REC.....the people we take out ALL HAVE VALID TIDAL WATER ANGLING LICENSES......they eat their fish.....of course the clients want to take home as many fish as they are legally allowed to....no different than commercial boats wanting to max out their quota.....for years the limit has been 2 and 1...three in possession.....until 88/12 came along..... why would any rec angler want any less than the same 2-1 and 3 now, just because same stupid politician took the bait and in his disregard, shortsightedness for a $650 million economic engine in BC ended up capping its potential growth. By delaying the opening by another month screws the south island anglers big time. Not gonna happen......as far as salmon go, not looking at habitat loss is a joke......most rivers creeks and streams have been decimated up and down the coast.....funding to hatcheries is a joke.....DFO is a joke....

 

[traveller]

Jencourt is indeed on the right path, and not jumping on any bandwagon. Obviously she has been well informed and checked with the facts, not looked at the bandwagon the commercial folk are pushing. I think the few commercial people who are out there yelling " it's all about guides and lodges" are hanging on to the old saying...." if you say something often enough, people will believe it" In fact most of us working hard to get the public fishery back on track to fish all year for 2 and 2 for the fish that are the common property resource for all of Canadians are in fact not connected with guides and lodges at all. What you are seeing is a strong coalition of the whole recreational community, a greater number of folk than the 400 private business quota holders, and this large community are fed up with lack of opportunity they have the right to expect when they see non fishing, private quota holders controlling access to the fishing. Face the facts " fisher69" this is a united, shared push to have politicians see what the Fisheries Minister has done to our public fishing right to access our resource.

Traveller

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Traveller, good points! I do have to straighten this one out though, Jencourt is a guy LOL. (You aren't keepin somthing from us are you RAY?)Ha ha, lol.

 

[Jencourt]

Jencourt;
Make sure you have the facts before you jump on the band wagon. the SFAB and SFI are doing a great job on twisting the facts to try and rile up the average angler. This is not about the mom and pops but about the lodge and charter sector wanting to provide 2 fish a day to the clients instead of 1. the only way the season could end in July is if the retention numbers are increased from last year. If we remain at 1 and 1 the season will go past September, and if we delay the opening a month the season will go farther. Again this is a large push by the charter sector(who is taking 75% of the rec fish) to try and fill the void of the salmon we have all but decimated here on the south coast. We need a solutiion to this problem that we can all agree on. but if we increase the limits and increase our share then we will be right back here again when we bump up against a possible new number. The solution we need must be flexible and stand the test of time.....not something done on a whim.

Fisher 69
If you had read my post with an open mind you would have seen that that was the entire point of my post.To combine this website and it members with other forms of info to make sure I am educated and accurate in what I am saying.

2) as far as the 2fish 1fish issue goes. This FOR ME is more about the unfair split of the TAC. Again in my posts.Quote "I do feel it necessary to point out( to those thinking that we just want more,no matter what the conservation issues are)that the issue before us is that of the percentages allocated to the sectors. If the TAC must go down to protect the biomass I think most of us have no problem with that".If we assume for now that the science is good and the stocks are being protected then I have no issue with the TAC they arrive at each year.I say assume for now because I am not sure it is being done well at all but that is another issue all together. For now it is the split of the TAC and only that. I am asking DFO to divide the TAC in a way that properly represents the sport fishery and what it means to Canadians without compromising the welfare of the fish stocks.We all no it would be just like them to suddenly find more fish than they thought and increase the TAC to avoid having to address the real issue.There are many issues at play but this is the one I posted on and am focused on.

3) As far as jumping on the bandwagon.
I have been sport fishing all my life since I was two years old.That is just long enough(I think) to have seen the effects that corporate big business decision making has had on the sport .It was a passion passed on to me by my father and I have tried to pass it on to my children.There are few things I am more passionate about .Like most sport fishers i have spent much dollars on boats, equipment, fuel ect ect to pursue this passion.So wen I see those big money decisions affecting my right to fish it is very much about me "the moms and pops"

4)to quote you "the solution we need must be flexible and stand the test of time.....not something done on a whim". I agree 100 percent as long the flexible part puts the interest of fish stock protection first and not the interest of big dollars.that is why it is the 88/12 split that I focus my energy on.that way we are not touching the TAC being removed from the water without first examining the health and welfare of the biomass.All of which could be done without affecting anyone in the commercial sector that is actively fishing for there money.

As I find my self being drug into topics best left for another time I will leave this as is.

Please read and understand my posts before you accuse me of jumping on bandwagons and not having my facts.As said that was the entire point of my post in the first place.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Jencourt;
Make sure you have the facts before you jump on the band wagon. the SFAB and SFI are doing a great job on twisting the facts to try and rile up the average angler. This is not about the mom and pops but about the lodge and charter sector wanting to provide 2 fish a day to the clients instead of 1. the only way the season could end in July is if the retention numbers are increased from last year. If we remain at 1 and 1 the season will go past September, and if we delay the opening a month the season will go farther. Again this is a large push by the charter sector(who is taking 75% of the rec fish) to try and fill the void of the salmon we have all but decimated here on the south coast. We need a solutiion to this problem that we can all agree on. but if we increase the limits and increase our share then we will be right back here again when we bump up against a possible new number. The solution we need must be flexible and stand the test of time.....not something done on a whim.

Fisher69, which bandwagon is that we are supposed to jump on then? - The Commercial fishermans anti guide/lodge bandwagon???
I am not a guide or a lodge owner/stakeholder - lets make this clear!
Guides and Lodges (which are more of a hotel service that provide guides to take geusts out fishing) are not and will not in the near future be part of the Commercial Fishery here in Canada. No matter how much percentage of the Recreational TAC (12%) that they take is irrelevant, they are fishing as Recreational Sport Fishermen on Sport Fishing Licences on the Sport Fishing 12% of the TAC. Fact is that the 12% that is allocated to the Sport fishing sector is clearly not enough for the number of Sport fishermen that are out there fishing (with or without a guide). I have not heard anyone request that we increase the amount of the take (TAC), what I am hearing, and think needs to be done is adjust the allocation of the TAC from the current 12/88. The part of this that really rubs me raw is that the Commercial voice keeps coming up against this kind of action, because they know what a reallocation of the 12/88 means - less than 88% for them inevitably. But even more concerning is that the Commercial guys should be pissed at the "Slipper Skippers" that are abusing a free gifted CANADIAN resource.

Plain and simple; DFO needs to take a look at the Slipper Skippers and see how many still have active fishing vessels, (or a fish boat at all - not a f@&%in peice of whitewashed plywood with a number on it) and how many have actually fished their own quotas. Pick a number....3, 5, 7 years, if a Slipper Skipper has not himself fished his quota in 3, 5, 7 etc years then yank the quota - done!!! Now take that quota and reallocate it to the Commercial guys that are willing to WORK for their Paycheck, because lots of them are, but currently have to BUY quota from the Slipper Skippers, and also reallocate some of it to the Recreational Sector (this time leaving enough room for the recreational sector to grow!!!) Here is another fact, here in Canada we have a very healthy and good sized Baby Boomer population that are just now starting to retire, and as they retire in larger numbers in the coming years, there is bound to be a good percentage of them that will take up or do more fishing - this is a no brainer - so let's make sure that this resource is allocated appropriately to the Citizens of CANADA!

DFO needs to pay clear attention to this matter - pronto.

 

[profisher]

My personal view is that the "slipper skipper" is a waste of time and the 88/12 for the average rec fisher should be the focus. The minister could concede to us and say tomorrow that in light of recommendations from the SFAB we are no longer going to allow license holders to not fish and lease out quota. Hurray...those who aren't fishing now either will, or sell it to someone who is and it is still 88/12. Changing that won't help us.