Int'l Pacific Halibut Commission Annual Meeting - Victoria, Mon thru Fri

[UkeeDreamin]

You're making my argument for me Searun, sadly you just don't understand it. Numbers don't lie - the seasons and harvest in 2011 and 2012 were identical.

The sole intent of a slot limit is to reduce the average size harvested. The fact that in 2012 the average size harvested increased, whether that was due to natural variation, angler adaptation or other, is yet further proof that the slot limit, and I emphasize AS APPLIED, didn't do it's intended job. (I say as applied because it wasn't a true slot because it only applied to one fish, not all fish harvested, which was it's fatal flaw. And by saying that I'm not advocating that a true slot should have been implemented in 2012).

Since the slot size is fixed you know all slot fish can't be more than 12lbs and are likely to average closer to 10 due to conservatism and angler's natural tendency to overestimate size. So that portion of the harvest not only should have been fixed it should have had the effect of bringing down the average size harvested. However, as I've pointed out umpteen times, since the model made very bad assumptions on the proportion of the harvest that would be slot fish and the reality that the majority of fish weren't slot fish was proven. Further, the minimal number of slot fish were not significant enough to impact the average size harvested. Actually, it was so ineffectual not only did the avg size harvest not decrease, it supposedly increased. You don't need any proof beyond that one fact that the slot didn't work because we're not talking about average size in the population we're talking average size harvested, which was supposed to decrease.

Having said all that, there haven't been any numbers provided yet to support the rumour that average size harvested increased significantly. In fact, until such time as I see some defensible numbers I'm VERY skeptical for a couple of reasons. First, in a single season the actual size of fish, when averaged out doesn't change that rapidly, it takes a number of years for regime shifts in feed availability, fitness increase, etc to be seen in populations and the changes are gradual. With the exception of major advances such as the use of sonar or down riggers, same goes for harvest efficacy. Add to all that the fact there was a slot and at least a very small portion of the harvest was fixed at a below historical average weight and, most importantly, the fact that the data collected would be non-randomized sampling via the creel survey and it gets pretty fishy pretty quickly. In fact, without a true random sample of harvested fish across the entire harvest area there'd be no validity to the numbers and I can assure you that a creel survey does not meet the test of a random sample.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Not sure if you're referring to me or not, Derby, and/or whether there's any aspect of fisheries management, effectiveness of slot regulations, estimation of stocks and/or harvest or the particulars of the 2011 and 2012 halibut seasons you feel I don't fully understand? I can assure you I'm pretty confident I understand them all quite well and would be more than happy to discuss any of them or all of them with you at length.

We are all on the same team. I just want the Rec sector to get it's act together and to adopt real solutions that are defensible and effective.

Ukee

 

[Jencourt]

Hi Ukee Dreamin,

It seems you make a lot of very good points, that are not nessecarily what some want to hear, therefore they are maybe trying to change the subject? I would hope you will ignore those pleas and continue with your views. I for one appreacite your input and please continue to add your thoughts to this thread..

In regards to my comment on the topic of the thread. It had nothing to do with what I would like to hear. I am simply stating that the title of the thread indicates its purpose is to discuss the IPHC meeting and information coming from that.

If and I say if ,you were including me in the above quote, I would suggest you should do some reading and familiarize yourself with my views and my willingness to dedicate my time to this subject before making useless allocations based on opinion.

Governor: thanks for the updates from the meeting.

 

[Jencourt]

Hi jencourt,

That was not directed at you. Please accept my apologies if you felt it was. It is amusing watching this unfold. It reminds me of one of my colleagues shows where even after all of the evidence is shown, and it is pronounced "you are the father!' One will still deny it.

No worries.

Cheers: Ray

 

[searun]

I have to concede defeat, you caught me. Muddled up the math.

The IHPC science data clearly demonstrates the 2012 catch trends show evidence of increasing size at age. Fishery landing data for Area 2b demonstrates increases in average size. Survey samples in Area 2b show +30% increase in WPUE. The NPUE data shows +28% increase in size. Logbooks from the fleet show 8% increase in average landed fish. My personal observation of fish landed on my boat concurs with this data also. Those single fish not part of the slot must have been exactly the same size as in 2011...how foolish to assume the data suggests those non slot fish were larger, and to have the audacity to believe that in a 1 and 2 no slot world that same trend might not hold true for that second fish. Foolish assumption.

More importantly than all that...what about benefit of choice and anticipation/expectation of a catch. This is at the essence of the angling experience. If we were to go with a 1 and 1 as you appear to be supporting, that removes choice and anticipation that if you wish to take a smaller fish on day 2 you can. Take that away and for some anglers it changes the angling experience. For others, it wouldn't matter as they only want the hogs. Dumb idea to try to have a fishery that gives more choices and benefits for anglers. Having said that, personally I could live with 1 and 1, but many others could not, and I respect their interests in having more choice...so maybe the slot isn't so bad.

So in a year like 2012, where a lot of the fish on the grounds were larger than in 2011, I think I now understand how we would have arrived at the exact same season length with a 1 and 2 limit with no slot. I guess I muddled the math, and those larger fish would not have tallied up to our TAC faster.

 

[searun]

Jerry you are onto what I meant by changing angler behaviors. The slot doesn't work for everyone, nor did it take into account changes to how guys were angling (ie targeting large fish). Nor did it anticipate that the average Weight Per Unit Effort and Numbers Per Unit Effort would increase (those are commercially caught IHPC sampled fish), changing some of the predictions and assumptions they were based on. Its hard to have a crystal ball and see all the unanticipated outcomes. All the slot represents is one choice in different ways to try to manage the sport TAC. Its certainly not the be all - in fact there are other viable options that are just as good but like the slot also come with other trade offs that might be less desirable.

I agree, those 15 pound paddles certainly aren't for everyone, but some guys that is all they catch and they are happy for it. So I guess if you have a choice of setting up a fishery that is 1 and 1 or you can go with 1 and 2 with slot...you might consider which offers the widest overall choices for anglers.

To illustrate how complicated the choices and unanticipated undesirable outcomes can be, lets consider 1 and 1. One outcome could be changes in angling effort. Another could be their impacts to how quickly the TAC is caught as the fleet gears up to chase those larger fish. Yet another could be do we really want those large spawning fish targeted?? Personally I do not think so. I would rather see regulations that encourage a mixed size being removed from the fishery. Maybe to make a 1 and 1 work you would also need to look at maximum size limits. Not so easy to figure out what to do...and easy to play monday morning quarter back after decisions are made.

The fun will certainly begin once we know the final TAC.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Searun, as I'm sure you are aware, the data you try to represent as Rec catch data is in fact commercial harvest data, which is a completely different animal than the rec fishery, particularly here in BC where folks have not yet taken to using electric reels and targeting fish in 800-1200 ft depths. You also realize that this data that you are quoting is from exactly the same new modelling that states biomass has reduced drastically and quota's should be dropped? The same model that Gov reported was rejected with a near unanimous vote?

I'm sure even you realize the huge difference between the modelled 30% size increase and the logbook 8% increase?

I hope you also realize that a management model that fails to recognize, predict and accommodate changed behaviour is flawed and one of the many reasons the slot failed?

Oversimplifying the choices to be made in 2012 to a slot or shortened season or 1/1 is dishonest. There are a myriad of management choices available to effect harvest rate, many a lot more effective than an ill-thought out 1 under/1 over slot, which is why I'm being so relentless. I know it's human nature not to admit mistakes and once folks are vested in something it's awful hard for them to see it through a neutral lens. Unfortunately another human trait is repeating the same mistakes over and over again. I know that's a likely scenario but I'll be damned if I don't give my best effort to help avoid it.

Ukee

 

[Aces]

Ukee

How do you predict changed behavior? Doesn't seem possible to me.

Also, what are these myriad of management choices? Maybe enlighten us.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Just finished some further checking on the numbers that Searun references above and can provide the following (all of which can be confirmed by going to the IPHC home page, PM me if you want me to direct you specifically):

WPUE - Is Weight per Unit Effort, which is measured by total weight harvested per "skate". A "skate" is 100 fathoms of ground line, not sure how many hooks per skate.
Suffice it to say that WPUE is NOT a measure of fish size but of harvest success, which is a function of size and numbers caught. Interesting that the retrospective model estimates the 30% increase in WPUE but commercial log books only record an 8% increase, a pretty significant difference.

Actual Average Weight Data - the same report does supply data on the average size of halibut by Area over the past decade or so. In Area 2B, Canada, average weight of halibut harvested in the commercial fishery was approximately 22lbs in 2010, 23lbs in 2011 and 23.5lbs in 2012. I say approximately because of the imprecise scale on the line graph used to display this data but it's clear that the avg commercial weight harvested has not changed dramatically in the last year or two and in fact has fluctuated up and down between 22 and 24 pounds for the period of record, about 15-years. Similarly, Average Weight at Age is given for the past decade, though this data is a coast wide average not Area-specific. Average weight at age has decreased for all age classes from 2002 to 2012 with a very slight increase (again, scale is too coarse to be precise but less than a pound) from 2010 to 2012.

So, the IPHC data clearly shows there has been no significant change in average size of halibut in the last decade, let alone the last year or two.

Season length and TAC were virtually identical we all know that. IPHC data confirms there's been no change in average size of halibut in the population. All results in the same conclusion I've been communicating for some time - the 2012 one over one under slot regulation didn't have any effect on average weight harvested or rate of harvest.

Searun, I'm assuming you were using the data in "The 2012 Stock Assessment" by Stewart, Leaman, Martell, Webster and the IPHC staff, as it has the same WPUE data you reference above. If you go to slides 28 and 29 you'll find the size data I reference. Also of interest is slide 27, which shows the coast wide average weight as determined by both the commercial fishery data and the IPHC survey data. The commercial data average weight is consistently 8-10lbs higher than the survey data (e.g. avg commercial harvest weight in 2012 was 22.1lbs, avg surveyed weight in 2012 was 13.7lbs), which of course is a function of the fact the commercial fishery is geared to not harvest the smaller, younger fish, whereas the survey samples the entire population. In that graph, the average size halibut, again as a coast wide average not specific to Area 2B, has dropped significantly from 28 lbs in 96 to 22lbs in 2012 for the commercial fishery and from 21.2 lbs in 96 down to 13.7lbs in 2012 for the survey.

I think it's safe to say the new IPHC model which estimates a 30% increase in commercial catch efficacy and an ongoing decrease in avg size and biomass is what led to their initial proposal for a 30% reduction in TAC. Not surprising with log book data showing only an 8% efficacy increase and other disputed data that the new model has met with resistance.

Ukee

 

[wstcoaster]

ukee check again the lenght of a skate is it not 1800 ft or 200 fathoms

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Great questions Fishtofino, I'll address your first question first.

In general the easy answer is that you can't fully address it so most management models build in safety margins so if they miss the mark badly due to the changed behaviour there's some buffer room and they also are designed to be adaptive so they can respond to the changes as they develop. Typically, though, there are subject matter experts and interested parties who can be relied on to forecast anticipated changes and provide insight into what impact those changes may have.

Specific to the one over, one under reg, anyone with any knowledge of the halibut rec fishery would have been able to tell the powers that be that a model that assumed that 50% of harvested fish would be slot fish was way off the mark. A group of subject matter experts working with reps from the user groups should have been able to scope out a much more reasonable target and then reduced it further for the safety margin I refer to above. Then there's a question of whether or not charter clients are going to spend the extra cash to target a slot fish offshore, if a do-it-yourselfer is going to make the effort/run/xtra gas for a slot fish, is a luxury lodge guess going to spend an extra half day away from salmon fishing to get a chicken, etc, etc. Highgrading also becomes a potential issue. Are whole trips cancelled or alternate locations chosen because of the reg change? This is just a short list, I'm sure the experts could come up with quite a bit more comprehensive list but that's not the key point.

The key point is that each of these things and more are routes to undercut the one over, one under reg because of it's openness, which is atypical for slot regs as they usually apply to all fish harvested. As soon as the number of slot fish harvested diminishes, its effectiveness diminishes. As behaviour changes to avoid the harvest of slot fish even further, the effectiveness is reduced even further.

The other, and maybe bigger, fatal flaw with the slot limit as proposed was the fact that if you looked at the historical data for fish harvested in the BC rec halibut fishery, the average size harvested was already at or below the max slot size of 12lbs in all but three of the reporting areas. If you look at the size and age distribution of halibut in the data I reference in previous posts, you'll see that most fish are between 5 and 15 years old (approx 90% of the population) but they can be as old as 30+ years, similarly where avg size for the whole population is 15-25 lbs, halibut get to over 300lbs. What that means to the average size harvested is that the average is increased significantly by a few old, huge fish, but not reduced significantly by a few small fish (i.e. because the small fish are closer in size to the average than the large fish are to the average). If you were to take off the top 5% biggest fish caught and bottom 5% smallest fish caught in such populations, the avg size would decrease significantly. Sorry, that's a long way of saying that while the avg size harvested is say 12lbs for most areas, it also means the most commonly caught fish is actually smaller than that. Using that data, it isn't hard to forecast that a regulation that doesn't limit the big fish from being harvested and has a slot size for the smaller fish that is as big or bigger than the majority of fish harvested, it isn't hard to predict it isn't going to change anything. Those average rec harvest size numbers by area were provided by Charlie on this site a couple of years ago.

Ukee

 

[UkeeDreamin]

wstcoater, my post says a skate is 100 fathoms, not 200 fathoms as you state, but I'll be honest that I simply googled that info and if it's wrong and you have the correct info, please correct me. In any case, the point was that WPUE is a total harvest poundage by a standard amount of gear, it is not a measure of the average size fish harvested.

Sorry if I got that unit wrong.

Ukee

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Fishtofino, second question:

On various other threads I've seen literally dozens suggested. In fact one person even had folks listing their top ten wants for a halibut season. Personally, when I say "myriad of options" I mean that the season can be looked at not only in total length but in its orientation (e.g. early season, summer season, fall season), regs can be constant over the whole season or specific to parts of the season, depending on trends and needs, there are all sorts of options for true slots or size limits that could be explored, there could be area specific regulation as time of effort, time of availability and fish biomass is different between areas. A consideration of all the various combinations of these is what I was referring to. More specifically, I was pointing out the fact that the one over, one under reg wasn't the "only option to extend the season" as has been repeated far too many times on this forum.

I've already stated that my preference is for the development of an adaptive model that allows each year's TAC to trigger various thesholds of regulation from pretty restrictive to what we all want in a 2 per day/ 3 possession full season.

Ukee

 

[Hali killer]

A skate is 300 fathoms. 1800 feet

 

[Aces]

If that happens "Jerry" the season will be closed in August and would bet money on it

 

[GLG]

Some of us do not what the 1 and 1 and the 1 and 2 no slot opens up to a free for all.
I don't have the math but I can tell you that a bunch of us took the 1 and then quit fishing.
We did not try for the slot. That left one for someone else.
So the question is, would you support the slot? I support it, IF that is what is asked of us.
I can see how it affected me, my friends, and the resource.
I like the idea of spreading the resource to all fishers not just a few that are lucky to be beside it.

 

[Aces]

Jerry

Don't you think that there will be even more pressure on the larger Halibut without a slot size? THERE WILL BE guaranteed, by my clients as well all other guided clients. Well, maybe not for Ukee dreeming who says the Halis are under 12 lbs.........mine over the slot were over 30, closer to 40 average last year but i chose to fish for the unders once my clients had their overs. So that means i will catch up to 100 Halibut at 30 lbs instead of 12 lbs and there are a lot of good guides from the Queen Charlottes all the way down to Victoria that will do the same......do the math, quota caught early.

Also, there will be a rush to hit those Halibut early and often by those in the know before the quota is caught.

 

[Aces]

They are bigger now that once the limits went to 1 per person we (the guides in my area) stopped going way out to the banks for the chickens (because it was easier to limit out 3-4 persons on them) and started fishing closer in where the bigger ones are found. BTW, my fuel bill went down with this fishing.

 

[hookorbullet]

Does anyone know, or is there a discussion thread out there that discusses the estimated poundage or percent of the TAC that the guiding sector takes annually? From reading through the entire thread, there is an appearance that guided anglers retain larger halibut than the average non-guided angler. If this is truly the case, then it would be interesting to see who has the most impact on us reaching our 15% and it might explain why some people favor the slot limt regulation vs the 1 in possession.

 

[GLG]

Here we go again.....
Guy's the fish that gets caught is the client's fish not the guides fish.
It's not the lodges fish it's the clients fish... you know the recreational fishermen....
I fish from my boat but I have fished from a guide boat.
The fish that was caught came home with me. (when we did pick one up that is)
If your trying to back door your argument and try to divide us your not going to get far on this site.
It seems to happen every year... new guy comes to the site and tries this.
Move along ... nothing to see here...
GLG