Halibut quota ideas?

[scott craven]

Aside from the 85/15 split which pisses us all off, the IPHC
are stating we have been in a 10 year decline in stocks which is leveling off now.

"Including this year’s data, the results of the 2012 stock assessment indicate that the Pacific halibut stock biomass has been declining continuously over much of the last decade as a result of decreasing size at age as well as below average recruitment. Based on the reductions in recent harvest levels, evidence from the survey index of abundance, as well as the age-composition data, the stock assessment estimates that the population decline has now slowed and the stock trajectory is relatively flat, with spawning biomass about 5% higher than a level which would require a reduction in harvest rate."

Since we have to work with the numbers IPHC have set out for us, I believe the best we could ask for is a 1/1 limit, no slot size until they deem the season is over.
There is simply no point in releasing a badly hooked,damaged fish because it's over the slot size.

 

[profisher]

How can the amount they waste not have an effect on what is available for in all halibut fisheries in Can or the US?

 

[GDW]

It's easy ProFisher Canada has a share the USA has a share. Take the # of pounds wasted by the American by-catch and subtract that off the American share. Why would Canada share their waste? We are responsible for our own waste not what happens outside our borders. The Americans should deal with that and we should deal with the issues in our fishery.

The IPHC is failing if they make Canadians share the American waste. But if that's how it works then open rec fishing feb-dec @ 2/3 and the Americans can share our overage if we share their by catch.

 

[chris73]

The degree of halibut migration within the north pacific is still little understood. It seems unlikely though that halis from south BC however would travel that far north to be effected by the Alaskan draggers. Because the IPHC realizes that, the canadian TAC remained equal to 2012 despite the incredible bycatch waste up north. Alaska TAC however took a significant hit in certain areas.

 

[GDW]

So if that's the case why would the Alaska by-catch be our priority (as suggested above) over say dealing with our own issues and lobbying DFO?

If we can't even make a change in our own country how are we going to change any thinking in the USA?

 

[chris73]

Yeah, I would not suggest getting into this Alaska issue. We all should have a firm stand that we are disgusted with this current practice and demand change to address this bycatch waste but this should NOT be our immediate focus. This is the American's to fight foremost. The pollock fishery has a huge lobby and immense political influence not only in Alaska but I suspect right to Washington - we would be wasting our (still) little and precious efforts for no chance of gain. But of course if asked and where suitable we should support any effort to address this issue. But we have to deal with our Canadian issues first.

 

[profisher]

If we support the Alaska guys in there fight to make their draggers accountable for their catch so they will have a more normal fishery...hmm maybe they will support us when we try to get them to reduce their interception of BC bound Chinook and Coho stocks. I goes both ways or not at all.

 

[profisher]

BTW i do believe there is migration of halibut between US and Canadian waters. A larger biomass means more Tac.

 

[bcboy]

1/1 no slot is far better in my opinion, I would rather be able to take what ever comes up and take only 1 instead of trying to select 2 fish that fit into these slots. Releasing mortally wounded fish sucks, especially when they are 1 inch over the legal size limit.

 

[Jencourt]

To my understanding. There is a percentage of fish that the IPHC uses to calculate loss to biomass that would migrate into Area 2b. One thing to consider is that when speaking of female Hali There is a portion of witch that it is calculated that 6lbs of biomass is lost to every pound of those female fish killed. this 6lb ratio changes wen talking about males and also depending on age class of fish and other aspects that I have no understanding of.

I will try to find the percentage of biomass that is calculated as fish that would migrate to our 2b area. If anyone can help with that, it would be great.

Again this is my understanding on this and I welcome some correction or additions to this from one of the many that have much more knowledge pertaining to this than I.

So as I understand it, yes 10 million pounds killed and not deducted from the Alaskan TAC dose have a substantial affect on the biomass as a whole . Therefor when calculating the % that would migrate into 2b it has a negative affect on our TAC which we all must share

Cheers

 

[fisher69]

Yeah, I would not suggest getting into this Alaska issue. We all should have a firm stand that we are disgusted with this current practice and demand change to address this bycatch waste but this should NOT be our immediate focus. This is the American's to fight foremost. The pollock fishery has a huge lobby and immense political influence not only in Alaska but I suspect right to Washington - we would be wasting our (still) little and precious efforts for no chance of gain. But of course if asked and where suitable we should support any effort to address this issue. But we have to deal with our Canadian issues first.

I disagree. if we could help fight the bycatch in Alaska then we would have more than enough fish here to have full seasons again. The impact from the north is what is pitting us against each other in a lose lose battle.

 

[wstcoaster]

the really bad thing about trawl bycatch is that the bulk of it is very small fish tiny ones so the numbers of fish in 10,million lbs is a staggering amount, if grown to a adult size maybe 30 or 40 million lbs

 

[Islandgirl]

I have to play devils advocate here...
If there was no slot and 1/1
How many badly hooked 15, 20, 30 etc size fish will be released hoping for a trophy when you can only keep one fish?

Just food for thought.

 

[Jencourt]

the really bad thing about trawl bycatch is that the bulk of it is very small fish tiny ones so the numbers of fish in 10,million lbs is a staggering amount, if grown to a adult size maybe 30 or 40 million lbs

This is true as I understand it as well. Good point, I should have included that in my post as well.

Wen you say small that dose not mean chicken ranch size. this means actual ping pong paddle size as it was put to me.

 

[scott craven]

"How many badly hooked 15, 20, 30 etc size fish will be released hoping for a trophy when you can only keep one fish?"​


I know what you mean but a 60lb'er is not really a trophy either.
seems we'll be shaking off over's and under's this year.
what a pain in the arse.

 

[calmsea]

The really small ones I tend to release when possible (unharmed) are typically not deep hooked because I use large bait and hooks so they just can't swallow deep that easy. Also, it is a LOT easier playing with plyers in a 12 lbers nose than in a 100 lbers when the thing is alive beside your boat.

 

[steel_dreamin]

I have to play devils advocate here...
If there was no slot and 1/1
How many badly hooked 15, 20, 30 etc size fish will be released hoping for a trophy when you can only keep one fish?

Just food for thought.

there will be more killed in the quest to get as close to 60 as possible.

 

[Dave S]

I would never allow anyone on my boat to "toss back" a critically wounded legal fish in hopes of getting a bigger one. That is irresponsible and just plain wrong. If it is hooked light and can be released to live another day, then fair enough.

 

[ziggy]

I would never allow anyone on my boat to "toss back" a critically wounded legal fish in hopes of getting a bigger one. That is irresponsible and just plain wrong. If it is hooked light and can be released to live another day, then fair enough.

Well said.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

What about a critically wounded not legal fish?

You are not allowed to keep a "not legal fish" critically wounded or not.