Halibut Quota & Moosehead Beer :)

[Jencourt]

Just because they might disagree with some of our suggestions and predictions doesn't make them or the process "dis-honest" or "inaccurate." Rather, I think its a matter of approach to risk assessment and tolerance for risk.

.

Short on time right now, but would like to clarify something.

First off Pat I appreciate your willingness to continue coming on here and offering info and alternative ways of looking at things.

As far as the part of your post I have quoted , I think you may have miss understood and inadvertently arrived at the wrong interpretation of what I was saying. I was NOT saying I think anyone was being dishonest or incorrect. I was saying that IMO,if we are to see a regulation that both achieves the goal and provides maximum choice and opportunity, some form of the shoulder no upper limit will do a better job of that than any version of a double ended full season slot will. That is where I used the term "honestkly and truly" I actually agree fully with you that it comes down to risk assessment and tolerance. I hope this clears it up to those of you who took it as me saying they are not being honest. It was the end of a long day. I hope you next time you read something from me that you interpret to be accusing or negative you assume the best and give me an opportunity to clarify my intent.

Again I do appreciate the dialog and I think over time a few of us have come a little closer in our line of thinking because of that dialog. I do have some comments on the rest of your post but am too short on time to address them now

Ray

 

[Derby]

Just want to remind everyone to keep a open mind as we go thru this assessment of the 2014 season, there will be some sort of new wrinkles that will come to light that will impact the 2015 regulations... they're always is ...............

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Great post Ray. It is about choice. As for earlier comment about shoulder benefiting South Island most, I fish north island obviously and like it more as well. For guides and tackle shops etc has opportunity to extend season economically for areas, as well as gives locals more choice and opportunity. And mathematically is sound to ensure a long season.

 

[Jencourt]

Just want to remind everyone to keep a open mind as we go thru this assessment of the 2014 season, there will be some sort of new wrinkles that will come to light that will impact the 2015 regulations... they're always is ...............

Fair enough. all this is dialog based on the hopeful assumption that we will have similar or better TAC. Heck we could get an butt kicking TAC wise, and all this will be mute. For me personally I just want to get the talking started and the options and opinions out there sooner than later.

 

[Derby]

Of course Ray...there is some really good stuff that comes from all this...

 

[Jencourt]

ya pretty sure that was sarcasm. Ha Ha Ha.

 

[searun]

Ray, I re-read your post and clearly that was not what you intended. I'm sorry I reacted, I should have asked what you meant by the use of those words. That's the problem with this medium and one reason why I'm an advocate of people attending the SFAB meetings to hear all the perspectives and then form a view on an issue.

I have a great deal of respect and admiration for the folks involved in the process, and maybe I'm overly sensitive having seen the past SFAB bashing. Again, my sincere apologies for mis-interpreting what you meant to say. I guess I also reacted because my experience has been that the intentions of the SFAB has been grossly misunderstood at times.

On a related topic, I think we expect way more precision in the analysis than is really possible given the numerous variables that need to be considered. Even the IPHC is having considerable difficulty developing catch models that perform well against actual removals observed on the fishing grounds.

Going forward my sincere desire is that we get as many people involved in the process to help identify the best possible halibut management measures. As Derby suggested, we also have to be prepared to be flexible in our expectations because we could get a few curve balls thrown our way at the IPHC meeting in January.

Also of considerable interest (ie. you should follow this) is the IPHC is developing a strategy paper to mitigate bycatch. The current catch monitoring process and bycatch mitigation implemented by DFO in Area 2 B has significantly reduced incidental bycatch. Compare that to Alaska where 66% of the total removals are from bycatch...and these represent very large numbers of individual fish as most are under 32 and even 26 inches. If the IPHC can get coast wide control over the bycatch issue it could make a significant positive difference in your future recreational catch allocation.

I should also correct an error to my earlier post. The uncaught rec quota was 145,000 pounds not $150K I quoted. Also for interest sake, there was an 11.3% (93K pounds) increase in the rec catch between 2013/14. So the management changes did help, and if given similar TAC in 2015, we can likely make some further tweaks to ensure the rec fleet can get closer to their allocation while ensuring a full season.

 

[searun]

Heck we could get an butt kicking TAC wise, and all this will be mute. For me personally I just want to get the talking started and the options and opinions out there sooner than later.

Couldn't agree more! Hang on it could be an interesting ride TAC wise. We should know more once the preliminary staff presentations on the Blue Line model for 2015 come out from the IPHC meetings next week (Dec 2/3).

 

[The Jackel]

scheesh and alls i wanted is my case of beer from Derby on our bet that i had in regards to leaving tac in the water!!!

 

[searun]

Seeing as I'm on the BTW band wagon tonight; there is a proposal going forward at the IPHC to establish a maximum size limit to protect large spawning female fish. Here's the link (no I wasn't the proposal author) :

http://iphc.int/meetings/2014im/12_2015regulationproposalsIM2014.pdf

 

[Derby]

scheesh and alls i wanted is my case of beer from Derby on our bet that i had in regards to leaving tac in the water!!!

haa haa haaa okay okay....I thought u were coming up here to buy me lunch..I can stick the case the mail on Monday..cans or bottles?

Mind u we could go double or nothing on the Toronto Nucks game...

 

[sammyslabber]

 

[Cuba Libre]

well said Slabby

 

[The Jackel]

Hey Derby will still hook up for lunch been hammer down hair back just left the caribou at -34 without the wind chill

 

[SerengetiGuide]

Seeing as I'm on the BTW band wagon tonight; there is a proposal going forward at the IPHC to establish a maximum size limit to protect large spawning female fish. Here's the link (no I wasn't the proposal author) :

http://iphc.int/meetings/2014im/12_2015regulationproposalsIM2014.pdf

That's for Alaska only if you look at the lower submission, not area 2B.

And talked to iphc surveyor (or whatever they're called) and she had talked to one of the directors and he said catch rates were similar if not up slightly from last year for the iphc boats in area 2B. So most likely be similar or even up a bit if that Intel was correct.

 

[SpringVelocity]

Great post Ray. It is about choice. As for earlier comment about shoulder benefiting South Island most, I fish north island obviously and like it more as well. For guides and tackle shops etc has opportunity to extend season economically for areas, as well as gives locals more choice and opportunity. And mathematically is sound to ensure a long season.

I made reference to rules benefiting areas on shoulder south island. I fish there so obviously I would want something that benefit my area. What I meant is say we went that route would it benefit everyone? Probably not? I think it should be different regs. based on area. Our salmon fishery doesn't have a blanket restriction does it? No its different based on input of area.

It seems its hard to strike a balance between areas.... A lot of people have done a great job to at least strike a balance. I think last year was pretty good but its still sounds like a lot of guys in different areas aren't happy.....

Hey for SVI I like it the way it is only tweaked a little next year so we use up the rest of that quota... A Feb opening would be killer for our area. But I also have to acknowledge that there are other areas all over island mainland etc. It is not just south island. What works for one area might not work in other. Are you guys halibut fishing right now? Probably not but it does work for us in south and its nice to have that option.

All I am saying is that each area maybe needs to have a tweaked version of what the area needs that is all.. Maybe the calculation of quota on that model is not possible its just an idea.

 

[searun]

We wanted to go with a Feb opening in 2014, however couldn't because we were restricted to the 2013 regs. This year we should be able to move to Feb 01 opening unless there is a really dire TAC announcement.

I agree that it is about trying to strike a balance so we can do the best to meet the interests of the largest number of anglers in all areas. Not easy due to vastly differing fisheries by area. Also concur that if we are lucky enough to get similar TAC as 2014 next season that we find some more tweaks that uses up more of the TAC.

Thanks Serengeti for pointing out the IPHC proposal is for Alaska (I knew that). What is significant in that proposal is the IPHC is talking actively about potential changes to the size limits for commercial. Its part of the bycatch mitigation strategy. That thinking could spill over into recreational - thus the reason for flagging it.