Future Halibut Possession Regs

[Gear'n'beer!]

So I'm not very tech savvy here but I'm wondering about something. I can purchase a house signing electronic documents but I can't enter a fish on my license electronically? Really?

Ok another observation. Washingtonians absolutely despise their halibut regs.....like don't bring it up around them or get a knuckle sandwich despise it, and they mostly despise it because people get injured or worse every year pushing weather because of their season. It's basically commonplace to just go out in any weather to fish your days. Perfectly normal rational people will risk their lives to fish. Unbelievable? Well go fishing with some of them and listen to the horror stories. The ones who have access just buy their Canadian licenses online and fish our regs running over from the peninsula.

Lastly I don't think there is any one solution. Every one on here has their distinct fishery and I suppose we hope to get enough opinion that sfac/sfab can put forth the most palatable recommendations for us as a whole. I don't halibut fish in the summer at all but do a fair amount spring/fall so that would be my recommendation but that obviously is just my one sided view.....good luck representatives and thanks for doing this, it's a thankless pursuit.

Darin

 

[ziggy]

Not trying to argue so please don't take this the wrong way, but who amoung us keeps their old license by the time we need to buy another? Average Joe Tourist certainly doesn't, and if they don't come back we would not get their data as no requirement to turn it in and no incentive (can't get a new one without turning in your old one etc). Many paper licenses are lost every year too...another challenge.

I do a guide log book every day, and believe me its very hard some days to recall what we caught....and that is before beer o' clock time. That's why I think we need to eventually find a replacement to paper licenses. So many other jurisdictions are already way ahead of us on that front.

The solutions always sound simple until you dive into the details.

Halibut numbers - we should end up under TAC - don't know the exact number yet. No ability to amend the size regulations as they are stated as a condition of your license, and that can't be changed unfortunately.

I think if DFO were to tell license holders that they would have to fill out a survey as part of the process in re licensing you’d have a pretty good compliance rate. As an annual license holder, I,and I’m sure many others, reapply prior to our license expiring, or pretty soon thereafter. Certainly if I knew I’d need to report my catch I’d make sure I kept it just for that. I agree you’ll never get a 100% solution, it might take time for people to embrace the process, but how good is the current process, not 100% I bet. Spot internet surveys could be replaced with an annual reporting system. Even if only all the annual license holders and all the guides logs were submitted, we would have a lot more data and it would be a lot more accurate.

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Was thinking about it, why not do a hybrid? Add one line to license where it says OR 1/1 with max size of ____ (whatever it becomes, 133, or 138 or whatever).

As in anglers can take two in possession with similar regs to this year, OR can take 1/1 with a larger max size. Both would likely model out to a similar poundage so would work well and give options and realistically please more people.

 

[searun]

The “in ink” requirement for anglers to record their catch on a paper license is something that cannot be changed unless the current Fisheries Act amendment goes thru allowing or enabling DFO to have catch recorded electronically.

Fortunately the amendment is running thru the Senate and should become law shortly.

Currently our only tool is to use conditions of your license to spell out the rules. They cannot be made in a flexible format. Meaning we can’t put in 2 slot size limits that have a dependency upon certain TAC being available at a fixed point in the season. However we could work with DFO to brainstorm some alternatives that might work in a fixed format like a one time declaration of the license conditions.

Similarly we currently do not have the ability to list a series of gear choices in a table for use in Variation Orders. Again with some luck that changes once the new Fisheries Act passes into law. The leader length issue is one good example of a gear regulation that we could place into a table to use if the Act is passed enabling the Minister to use variation orders to vary gear choices.

Very cumbersome currently but about to change I hope!

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Don’t mean to have it vary depending on TAC. Just angler has option. Why couldn’t you have that option considering both would be close in TAC calculations? Have to write in ink length anyway so same enforcements.

 

[searun]

Can you explain how an angler option using various slot sizes would be enforceable and also how it would not shift the use of available TAC? I don’t follow the logic there so need some clarification to help me understand how you can achieve both in very practical ways.

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Both options for anglers would be approximately the same TAC anyway. For example, 120cm/83cm OR 1/1 138cm (ignore actual sizes not here to debate that yet). Don't know exact numbers but say former is approx 910,000 lbs and latter is 920,000 lbs Either way it would not shift TAC. And we have to write down lengths on our license, therefore if someone gets a 130cm halibut, that's there one, they are done. But if they get and write down a 80cm well, they can get one more under 120cm. Very enforceable, just as enforceable as what we have now.

In my opinion would reduce released mortality as well as if only 1/1 people will release for ages to get one close to slot, but if they have that one smally one medium option and get a 110cm for example, would probably keep it and do 2 fish option.

 

[GLG]

Both options for anglers would be approximately the same TAC anyway. For example, 120cm/83cm OR 1/1 138cm (ignore actual sizes not here to debate that yet). Don't know exact numbers but say former is approx 910,000 lbs and latter is 920,000 lbs Either way it would not shift TAC. And we have to write down lengths on our license, therefore if someone gets a 130cm halibut, that's there one, they are done. But if they get and write down a 80cm well, they can get one more under 120cm. Very enforceable, just as enforceable as what we have now.

In my opinion would reduce released mortality as well as if only 1/1 people will release for ages to get one close to slot, but if they have that one smally one medium option and get a 110cm for example, would probably keep it and do 2 fish option.

This would work in theroy but not sure you would get that much of a spread on the pounds when working with the models.
Here is my best guess using last year's model.

115 / 83 cm for the 1 and 2
or
120 cm for 1 and your done.
These numbers include the 10% bio-risk and based on a TAC of 928,787 lbs.

 

[ziggy]

sorry misread!

 

[SerengetiGuide]

This would work in theroy but not sure you would get that much of a spread on the pounds when working with the models.
Here is my best guess using last year's model.

115 / 83 cm for the 1 and 2
or
120 cm for 1 and your done.
These numbers include the 10% bio-risk and based on a TAC of 928,787 lbs.

Like I said not here to debate numbers, but I"ll say for sure bigger spread, if not then that's dumb. How many fish between 115 and 120 would be caught coastwide compared to fish under 83cm...makes no sense.

 

[GLG]

Here is an attachment with last year's model so anyone can check to see how that works.

 

[SerengetiGuide]

As from that and history dfo catch estimate over estimates, even with no chinook and limited chinook fishery in areas 1-4 this season they did...and looking into past it is obvious they do.

With that said 126cm 1/1 is only 880,000 lbs, so 133 or so OR option is very doable. Like I said didn't want to get into size debate but just wanted to open that option up as SHOULD be. Still think should be using chinook restrictions as negotiating tool for more halibut...only makes sense, but hopefully our reps see the opportunity too (been restricted south island for so long, and now rupert, need more halibut or ghost towns occur i.e Terrace)...watch with crazy halibut restrictions and chinook tourism PLUMMET!

 

[GLG]

With that said 126cm 1/1 is only 880,000 lbs, so 133 or so OR option is very doable. Like I said didn't want to get into size debate but just wanted to open that option up as SHOULD be.

No that's not what the table says. 2018 TAC was 928,787
Full season based on 126cm 1/1 is 905,978 lbs add 10% bio-risk (90,597) lbs = 996,575 lbs
delayed opening till April 1 is 896,129 lbs add 10% bio-risk (90,597) lbs = 986,726 lbs
delayed opening till June 1 is 862,109 lbs add 10% bio-risk (90,597) lbs = 961,766 lbs

So the question is what is our TAC for 2019 and what will the new model look like. Clearly we will have some hard decision to make so we need to keep our expectations reasonable. It does us little good if we setup SFAB for a fail in the eyes of the average angler. They need to work with these tools and can't just throw caution to the wind as I want this or that and to hell with the tables.

 

[wildmanyeah]

Say we are looking at 15% reduction in total tac next year. What would that look like under the current 1/2 model VS the 1/1 option

Does there come a point where the 1/2 option with a full season producese to small of a fish size to the average angler to accept?

"Canada anticipates that further reductions of the catch limit will be required across all Regulatory Areas in 2019"

 

[GLG]

Say we are looking at 15% reduction in total tac next year. What would that look like under the current 1/2 model VS the 1/1 option

Does there come a point where the 1/2 option with a full season producese to small of a fish size to the average angler to accept?

"Canada anticipates that further reductions of the catch limit will be required across all Regulatory Areas in 2019"

Using the current table and some of the math that I have done over the years of working with this I would say that a reduction to a season that is June, July and August would get us around a 15% reduction. So current 115/83 cm 1 and 2 or 120 cm 1 and your done would keep us under our TAC (including 10% bio-risk) if it were to reduce to that. Now that's just based on what the 2108 model is telling me and I make no assumption that the model will change for next year or how well the model performed this year.

There does come a point that people go, that's not worth it, as we have seen in the past and where that tipping point is I don't know. For me I passed that point already and left my TAC to others.

 

[wildmanyeah]

Using the current table and some of the math that I have done over the years of working with this I would say that a reduction to a season that is June, July and August would get us around a 15% reduction. So current 115/83 cm 1 and 2 or 120 cm 1 and your done would keep us under our TAC (including 10% bio-risk) if it were to reduce to that. Now that's just based on what the 2108 model is telling me and I make no assumption that the model will change for next year or how well the model performed this year.

ah jeez going to be tough one this year if were faced with a 15% tac reduction. 1 50 pound fish or 1 43 pound and 15 pound fish. A rough one for the SFAB. the second option will probably be preferable to guide operations that have access to chicken farms. I don't no if 7 pound is worth given up a second fish possession option.

For me I passed that point already and left my TAC to others.

I got my a lot of Halibut gear this year from a retired FO that has done just that. He was hardcore into it even had a seat mounted on the bow of his DE.

 

[Jencourt]

How much TAC was left at the end of Aug.

 

[Derby]

Category(s):
RECREATIONAL - Fin Fish (Other than Salmon)
Fishery Notice - Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Subject: FN1128-Coastwide Recreational Pacific Halibut Fishery Update
The Recreational Halibut Committee met on 27 September 2018 to review 2018
recreational Halibut catch estimates to 31 August 2018. Based on estimated
catch to August 31, combined with catch prediction scenarios for September
through December, the 2018 recreational Halibut fishery remains open until
further notice.
Please note that Variation Orders 2018-RCT-0124 (Close time) and 2018-RFQ-0125
(Quota) remain in effect.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Shane Petersen
Halibut / Hook & Line Coordinator
Groundfish Management Unit
Phone: (604) 666-3279
Fax: (604) 666-8525
Fisheries and Oceans Canada Operations Center - FN1128
Sent October 11, 2018 at 10:25
Visit us on the Web at http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca
If you would like to unsubscribe, please submit your request at: http://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fns-sap/index-eng.cfm?pg=manage_subscription
If you have any questions, please contact us via e-mail to: DFO.OpsCentreFisheryPacific-CentreOpsPechePacifique.MPO@canada.ca

 

[searun]

Glad to see a few folks on here starting to see the challenge we face in 2019. Not trying to speculate on our TAC for 2019, but it was fairly clear from the way we left the IPHC table in 2018, that the US side is pissed and wants Canada to take a big hit.

Given a likely reduction over the 2018 TAC, I'm not seeing a lot of options that allow for a "full season" - so we will need to get a little creative going forward to identify what values we want to protect or build into the choices made for length of season, size, daily limits etc.

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Do you know the set line data? As that’s the most important factor in regards to 2019.