Derby
Crew Member
88/12 what part do you not under stand ?- Stick your commercial sport- The tide has changed and not in your favor
I'll be personal enjoying the day when I say-
-
The true recreational fisherman are getting BLINDSIDED
- Thread starter sport rec
- Start date
88/12 what part do you not under stand ?- Stick your commercial sport- The tide has changed and not in your favor
I'll be personal enjoying the day when I say-
-
Osama Bin Hopper
Active Member
88/12 what part do you not under stand ?- Stick your commercial sport- The tide has changed and not in your favor
I'll be personal enjoying the day when I say-
Roger that buddy. Wish you were out here!!!
As I said before - they should fatten up while they can because you are going to be yanked atta the feed bag reeeeeel soon...
fish4all
Well-Known Member
A very ignorant response. Perhaps you should look a little into the history of the fishery. You can continue to flog a dead horse or you can find a solution that DFO will actually implement. Dfo designed the fishery so quotas are bought and sold. To try and blame commercial fishermen for playing by DFO rules is outrageous. Under the current system with reducing tac's it was either be bought out or buy up there was no choice for those that had boats, crews and families to feed. To compare that to a stock investor is a joke. I believe picfi has set the rules as to how allocations will be adjusted. But hey keep it up and we will be right back here in 2012.
fish4all
Well-Known Member
Seems to me that there are only 165 active halibut fisherman left in the industry. Why not remove the quota from the inactive fisherman and divide it up between the active commercial fisherman and the rest of the people of Canada. Sounds like a win-win for us. The only losers would be the guys that were gifted and chose not to fish. It sure would be good for commercials fisherman as there highest operating cost (lease quota) would be removed and it would leave room for profit and even the deckhands would see an increase in pay.
GLG
not arguing with your point. The problem at the moment is DFO cannot distinguish between fished quota and leased quota. Not saying that won't change but at the present it doesnt work.
fish4all
Well-Known Member
might want to be careful with that. I believe dfo has made the decision already as to who is going to be cleaned up.
Steelhead S2
Active Member
Hmm, I don't know smiley, isn't there some value in learning the commercial arguments early? By having a couple of commercial advocates/apologists posting here those of you who are worked up about the quota thing get a good understanding of the opposition you face. There's no point in trying to shield yourself from it, because you set yourself up for being blindsided later on. You may find it frustrating to face opposition, whether cogent or otherwise, but you've got to be thicker skinned than that. I actually think it's good to see some discussion between the special interests because at the end of the day there is lots of common ground(fish).
Hali quota is not my issue, but I do think the industrial harvesters are in a better position to offset a small loss of quota. With less fish on the market prices will/should rise, allowing fishermen and slip-skips alike to make up the difference.
Hali quota is not my issue, but I do think the industrial harvesters are in a better position to offset a small loss of quota. With less fish on the market prices will/should rise, allowing fishermen and slip-skips alike to make up the difference.
Charlie
Well-Known Member
Not really that ignorant! I believe if you check you will find halibut futures can be bought and sold, just like a “stock investor,” actually even by a stock investor, ever heard of “Commodity Futures Trading?” Chris73 statement, is actually more correct than your history and DFO statements! J
Those are actually NOT rules DFO designed, DFO did NOT design anything… check YOUR history. Everything was designed by commercial fishermen organizations! Might I also add – WITH NO RECREATIONAL VOTE ALLOWED! About the only THING correct, “You can continue to flog a dead horse or you can find a solution that DFO will actually implement.” As far as choice… tell that to ALL those crews and families to feed, that were part of the commerical “cod” fishermen! I can’t see any “Joke” there, at all!
I am NOT saying the commercial halibut fishery didn’t do a good job running the commercial fishery; in fact, they did a very good job. Did you note the word “running?” The commercial sector has ran that fishery from the beginning! About the only thing DFO can do at this point, is try to keep the commercial sector within Canadian law - and THAT seems to be under question, as we speak!
Speaking of history… ever heard the name A. L. Hager: "... spent much of his time furthering conservation measures in the halibut and salmon fisheries. He is known as the father of the Halibut Treaty which was consummated between Canada and the United States in 1923. Under this treaty an outstanding success was made in rehabilitating the fishery and was considered a model for future international fisheries conservation. In 1940, A.L. Hager received a letter from Prime Minister McKenzieKing acknowledging the beneficial results of co-operation between the governments of Canada and the United States under the Halibut Convention."
http://www.goldseal.ca/wildsalmon/salmon_history.asp?article=8
The International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC), the IPHC consists of three government-appointed commissioners for each country who serve their terms at the pleasure of the President of the United States and the Canadian government respectively. Those current Commissioners are:
James Balsiger United States
Ralph G. Hoard United States
Larry Johnson Canada
Philip Lestenkof United States
Laura Richards Canada
Gary Robinson Canada
The Commission encourages public participation in the management of the resource and regularly seeks advice from the Conference Board, the Processor Advisory Group (PAG), and various State and Federal agencies.
The Conference Board is a panel representing Canadian and American commercial and sport halibut fishers. Created in 1931 by the Commission, the Board gives the IPHC the fishers' perspective on Commission proposals presented at Annual Meetings in January. Members are designated by union and vessel owner organizations from both nations.
The Processor Advisory Group (PAG), as the name suggests, represents halibut processors. Like the Conference Board, PAG lends its opinion regarding Commission proposals and offers recommendations at IPHC Annual Meetings. The group was formed in 1996.
The Research Advisory Board (RAB), which formed in 1999, consists of both fishers and processors who offer suggestions to the Director and staff on where Commission research should focus. RAB generally meets in November, prior to the IPHC Interim Meeting.
So, with the IPHC, does Area 2B recreational sector get to vote on anything?
Now let’s look at DFO “Halibut Consultations.” The “Halibut Advisory Board Members 2009-2011” consists of 20 members and alternates, with another 11 appointed for a total of 31 – ALL are in or associated with COMMERCIAL FISHERMEN, except, a Tribal Council, and two very lonely SFAB individuals! Yep, that sure sounds fair to me!
The Groundfish Hook and Line Advisory Committee (GHLAC) Terms of Reference states its members will be: Commercial Rockfish Outside licence holders; Commercial Rockfish Inside licence holders; Commercial Schedule II Lingcod licence holders; Commercial Schedule II Dogfish licence holders; United Fishermen and Allied Workers’ Union (UFAWU); First Nations. With “Participant observers”: Government of BC; Government of Canada. Membership, “Each of the interests noted above will be represented by”: Elected ZN licence holders; 2 appointed Schedule II Lingcod licence holders; 2 appointed Schedule II Dogfish licence holders; 1 appointed UFAWU representative; and 1 appointed First Nations representative. Participation by the federal and provincial government as participant observers will be determined on an as needed basis. The Committee can invite people to participate when appropriate.
I can go on forever, but I believe it is quite clear who has been running British Columbia fisheries, since at least 1923 – THE COMMERCIAL SECTOR! The ONLY THING Canada or DFO has ever done, and ever will do – is enforce Canadian Laws! And Yes the tide is turning – those laws are about to be tested in your Supreme Court – good luck to the “commercials” on that one!
That is not true – DFO has that capability and the information is provided! That information is actually input directly to DFO through the internet.
Well, I certainly agree DFO needs to install an accurate accounting system for the sport sector; however, I actually do believe that decision is nothing more than a stall tactic being used by DFO, until your Supreme Court makes that ruling! IMHO, if the commercial sector was smart, they would come to an agreement now – while they have a choice. Once that ruling is made the commercial sector may just get its quota found un-constitutional! I might even take bets on that one! J
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
BINGO Charlie! Yet another enlightened set of observations my Friend! You are absolutely correct regarding just who designed, and who runs the fishery in Canada... at this point. I do believe we are on the precipice of substantial change. As you have indicated, the current system is not only broken, it is most likely in fact illegal according to the Constitution, related Legislation and Supreme Court Rulings.
I do hold out some hope that the matter can be resolved to the betterment of both Working Fishermen and the Recreational Sector without actually going through the legal process. However as more resistance to that effort, including intentionally misleading "facts" from the opposing sector, is being realized (rather than constructive investigations towards a realistic solution), my hopes are fading in this regard. DFO will not do ANYTHING beyond their simplistic "band-aid" approach as put forth this year without the implicit support of those who in fact and function actually do run the fishery. Given their stated position, that has a very poor chance of ever occurring. And for that I am actually saddened. We COULD work this out in a Fair and Equitable manner were both sides to lower their horns a little and agree to work together towards our common goals.
Time will tell if the political actions bear much in the way of fruitition. In this I also still retain some hope. If we have to go the way of an inordinately expensive legal action, methinks the end result will be of considerably more discomfort to the Commercial Sector than simply setting aside a few percentage points of the TAC to adequately address the requirements of the Recreational Fishermen.
KUDOS once again Charlie!
Cheers,
Nog
Gunsmith
Well-Known Member
I have a gut feeling that the DFO is going to be told what to do to correct this situation. We are making vibes that are not only being felt by the trough piggies but the Govt is feeling these vibes also. These trolls are worried that is why they are spending this much effort on this site.
Derby
Crew Member
D
Ding Dong!
Guest
It certainly takes time, and many folks have been getting frustrated for the efforts that they have expelled; just always remember that some views and opinions have been previously shared that were pointing in this direction already. http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum...x-halibut-controversy-now&p=162589#post162589
However, everyone is a troll if he is not following the group at the time in their view.
However, everyone is a troll if he is not following the group at the time in their view.
Little Hawk
Active Member
Hope we get another great turnout at the South Island SFAB meeting on Wed.
As the tenor of these meetings will surely only get worse, I'd hate to be one of the DFO 'punching-bags' Shea sends out to these ****-fests!
Gotta' get her out here sittin' in front of us - can you imagine?
As the tenor of these meetings will surely only get worse, I'd hate to be one of the DFO 'punching-bags' Shea sends out to these ****-fests!
Gotta' get her out here sittin' in front of us - can you imagine?
Tailspin
Active Member
Due to the high price of Quota this year, several longline boats I know, are simply going to fish there intitial quota in March, April and thats it. Could have a few slippers having a tough go at selling their share off until it forces prices down, then it`s practicaly given away late season. This means a significant amount should be left in the water by season end. Maybe DFO will buy it for us? LOL. I even know of one fella who is just trading the boat for new slippers, and a nice truck and camper.
88/12 What a Joke!
88/12 What a Joke!
Fishing Guide
Active Member
Cheers Sports Rec;
Please read my lips...and make note of it for it shall not change:
I did not set up the fatally flawed system...it was set up by the commercial sector in bed with DFO for commercial interests without any regard to the sports sector or the rest of Canada. The only persons who benefited for far too long were 435 selfish commercial fishermen. When asked - repeatedly for a small token to keep sports fishermen
on the water - these same commercial fishermen either rebuffed those requests or demanded kingly ransoms for a right invested with all Canadians - namely the ability to utilize a Common Property Resource.
I recognize that, based on information that was set up at the time, that some commercial operators took massive loans and invested their future on that information by purchasing quota. The loss of such would be a huge hit and I understand that it would negatively affect them and their familes. Even some banks would suffer. I understand that as I am a passionate and understanding Canadian. We do have sensibilities and I would be the first to empathize when that situation occurs ... well, except for the banks!
However...when the ITQ is held to be ultra vires due to a Supreme Court Ruling or a change in political direction then that loss is going to occur. A prudent business operator would hedge his bets and only bet that which he could afford to lose. The commercial sector was asked for a minor cut which would have negated all this rhetoric and bickering. They refused and rolled the dice on keeping everything...and having it ALL - their way. I respect that that they have that ability and will support whatever that entails when it occurs.
Should you find yourself in that situation perhaps you should proceed directly to the mirror for there is the source of your situation. Do not point the finger at me! I have been, along with all other Canadians, negatively affected by this situation and have worked tirelessly (and at some considerable expense) to restore some semblence of reasonableness to the situation. The offer to meet and fix it has been met with the constant rhetoric of "feed me more money for that is the only way I will give you what you want" attitude. Shame on you; you cower under the Canadian DFO flag demanding "your' rights to a Common Property Resource - that you were given/or purchased - and offer a pittence but only at your exclusive discretion and then heap distain towards any - also Canadians - that find issue with that approach and draw breath and identity from that very same flag!
As for how this has affected me personally let me assure you that it has had a financial toll as well. It has also had a negative impact on many, many, many others in the sport fishing sector, in fact, vastly more than the few 435 orignal ITQ holders. It would be simple solution, and one our government routinely does, to simply throw more money in a futile effort to fix things. However...on the principle that this resource already belongs to ALL Canadians I will politely refuse your demand that I continue to line your pockets with further infusions of cash and find a solution that is less odious and more legitimate.
I hope this clears up any confusion you may have upon my take on this issue and for you to discover that I truely do understand: I AM CANADIAN!
Last edited by a moderator:
fish4all
Well-Known Member
I am curious how you say they asked for a small bit of fish to carry on. the reps asked for 10-15% of every license holders quota. It did not matter to them at the time if it was an active fishermen or a leasor. I find it hard to believe that anyone including yourself would be willing to hand over 10-15% or your income.
Sushihunter
Active Member
Charlie
Well-Known Member
Have you ever heard of the term, “renationalization”? Let me help you out!
“A renationalization occurs when state-owned assets are privatized and later nationalized again, often when a different political party or faction is in power. A renationalization process may also be called reverse privatization. Nationalization has been used to refer to either direct state-ownership and management of an enterprise or to a government acquiring a large controlling share of a nominally private, publicly-listed corporation.”
You, or anyone think that can’t or won’t happen in Canada? You might want to think about this, “The government nationalized British Columbia Electric and the British Columbia Power Company, as well as smaller electric companies, renaming the entity BC Hydro.”
The “commercial” sector just might want to re-think their position, as that very well could happen! As stated... GOOD LUCK! J
Fishing Guide
Active Member
Cheers Fish4all,
I routinely return 10-15% of my income every year.
For instance - I donate charters to charity. This year I have donated 4:
- Two to the Nanaimo Children's Development Centre
- One to a high school so their band could travel to a National band competition
(*I cannot imagine anything more worthwhile than helping those who will shape our future)
-One to the Pacific Salmon Foundation
I also do memorial charters for those who have lost family members for free.
I return 10% as a finder's fee for charter referals.
I have donated about 25% of this year's charters to commercial fishermen as I anticpate I won't be fishing until the end of the year.
Don't even try and suggest that I don't give back ... I give back to my community more than 10-15%!
And I AM CANADIAN!
I routinely return 10-15% of my income every year.
For instance - I donate charters to charity. This year I have donated 4:
- Two to the Nanaimo Children's Development Centre
- One to a high school so their band could travel to a National band competition
(*I cannot imagine anything more worthwhile than helping those who will shape our future)
-One to the Pacific Salmon Foundation
I also do memorial charters for those who have lost family members for free.
I return 10% as a finder's fee for charter referals.
I have donated about 25% of this year's charters to commercial fishermen as I anticpate I won't be fishing until the end of the year.
Don't even try and suggest that I don't give back ... I give back to my community more than 10-15%!
And I AM CANADIAN!
fish4all
Well-Known Member
I never said you didn't give back.
so you CHOOSE to volunter some of your time and money, must be nice to be in that position. Very admirable but there is a significant difference between choosing and having something taken from you that you paid for.
Fishing Guide
Active Member
Cheers Fish4all,
Forgot about the ongoing charters I donate to the Nanaimo Community Kitchens...up to 5 charters right now and I know I'm forgetting some. But the point is there and it appears you acknowledge it.
I am not in the positon to give but I am in the position that I feel we must all give. Hence I lead by example.
As for paying for it...that was not my doing. You felt it was a good deal. Almost too good to be true. Perhaps the addage that, if it appears to be too good ... it just might be.
I own a company that works in the court system and deal with lawyers on a continual basis. I have heard of many cases where people have paid good money - money they could not afford to lose - to purchase items that were later deemed to be unavailble for sale as the vendor could not provide good title. The goods were returned to the true owner with the purchaser on the hook for the whole amount and forced to run after the vendor for damages. In the case of 'Renationionalization' - where the courts or another government determined that good title could not have been provided then you would be in that same position. When confronted with the words and tone of the commercial sector you are asking me to feel sorry for you? Especially when I watch the torture you have put many of the sports community through. I may have some but, in the end, my alllegience lies in the democracy of the many sports fishermen who outnumber the commercials by a vast amount.
One other issue...as I provide my charters to charities and my community I am now in a postion to explain the situation that is occuring about Common Property Resources and I have had some wonderful responses from fellow Canadians as well as visitors. I shall continue until the message has been heard by all.
I will make one final point: I am not against commercial fishermen. In fact I think they have a great service to provide, I have friends who are commercial fishermen and I respect their profesionalism on the water and their place as fellow Canadians. My rail is against a system that is fatally broken. The resources of Canada MUST be used for the common good and not a select few. The commercial quota should be leased out to commercial fishermen but with the proceeds going back to the DFO to provide financial resources to this sector and that the lease must be done so the commercials can make a living and not simply make a 'non-fishing quota holder' rich.
I don't know which sector you belong but I would hazard a guess you are a commercial who actually fishes. My wishes are that you survive and prosper but that is also my wishes for the sports fishermen and the halibut fishery as a whole.
Forgot about the ongoing charters I donate to the Nanaimo Community Kitchens...up to 5 charters right now and I know I'm forgetting some. But the point is there and it appears you acknowledge it.
I am not in the positon to give but I am in the position that I feel we must all give. Hence I lead by example.
As for paying for it...that was not my doing. You felt it was a good deal. Almost too good to be true. Perhaps the addage that, if it appears to be too good ... it just might be.
I own a company that works in the court system and deal with lawyers on a continual basis. I have heard of many cases where people have paid good money - money they could not afford to lose - to purchase items that were later deemed to be unavailble for sale as the vendor could not provide good title. The goods were returned to the true owner with the purchaser on the hook for the whole amount and forced to run after the vendor for damages. In the case of 'Renationionalization' - where the courts or another government determined that good title could not have been provided then you would be in that same position. When confronted with the words and tone of the commercial sector you are asking me to feel sorry for you? Especially when I watch the torture you have put many of the sports community through. I may have some but, in the end, my alllegience lies in the democracy of the many sports fishermen who outnumber the commercials by a vast amount.
One other issue...as I provide my charters to charities and my community I am now in a postion to explain the situation that is occuring about Common Property Resources and I have had some wonderful responses from fellow Canadians as well as visitors. I shall continue until the message has been heard by all.
I will make one final point: I am not against commercial fishermen. In fact I think they have a great service to provide, I have friends who are commercial fishermen and I respect their profesionalism on the water and their place as fellow Canadians. My rail is against a system that is fatally broken. The resources of Canada MUST be used for the common good and not a select few. The commercial quota should be leased out to commercial fishermen but with the proceeds going back to the DFO to provide financial resources to this sector and that the lease must be done so the commercials can make a living and not simply make a 'non-fishing quota holder' rich.
I don't know which sector you belong but I would hazard a guess you are a commercial who actually fishes. My wishes are that you survive and prosper but that is also my wishes for the sports fishermen and the halibut fishery as a whole.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
