2015 Halibut Regulations

[UkeeDreamin]

Talking with myself in the mirror, eh? I suppose I am when folks would prefer to hide behind the same old refrains while continually ignoring the valid points and facts presented. Can't blame a guy for trying to have a meaningful conversation about important fish management issues on a forum such as this, which historically has supported such discourse - at least I hope not. I will agree that I'm a glutton for punishment in thinking that facts and data will swing opinion when it's fairly clear that it's the process and established regime that is actually being defended.

In regard to the last point and the continued call for those who disagree with decisions being made to "get involved" - I for one will never again support a system that isn't fully open with the data, models and decisions or fully inclusive in the process and meetings. In this day and age there is simply no defence for not moving in that direction. Hopefully we can agree to disagree on that point yet still be open to listening to alternate views and opinions.

As a sign-off on this issue for my part in the discussion I'll end with a reiteration of the simple fact that their is ample and compelling data that clearly shows the possession slot has no effect on harvest rate or total harvest by the rec sector. I will continue to hope that one day this available data is used to assess this "experimental" reg and the appropriate management decision is made.

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[searun]

Ukee if you were attending a few meetings you would see and experience that all the things you are talking about would be abundantly covered...but like I have said before, trying to have this discussion with you on this forum is much like mud wrestling with a pig, after a while you get tired and realize the pig really likes to wrestle.

Come and see for yourself. I'm not interested in having pointless internet discussions about stuff that is totally open to anyone who wants to attend a meeting. I'm most interested in sitting across a table from you having an engaged discussion trying to understand your enlightened knowledge of how the data clearly demonstrates the current regulations choice is not working. I rather doubt we could accomplish that on here.

 

[Sculpin]

Very good explanation.

I have attended quite a few SFAC meetings and have taken time off work (that cost my company revenue by doing so) to attend a South Coast SFAB meeting at the Coast Bastion in Nanaimo. I was an observer but was more than welcome to attend as the general public (no conspiracy going on). I could sit on the side lines like anyone interested in the process, but could not speak. There were many representatives at the meeting that could speak on the recreational anglers behalf. SFAC, SFAB, BCWF, and others. There really is a system in place, right here, and right now. IMO it is working.

I took the time to witness and become involved with the system that is in place. I really wish others that think this sand box and forum will make some kind of difference (which ultimately won't) can see the light and step up the task as a sportsfisher. It's up to us to make the changes. You have to show up in person. This isn't an internet thing. There is no EASY button.

By getting to know a few of the folks involved with this process over the last few years, statements by some on this forum absolutely get my hackles up big time. Greed, conspiracy theory's, pushing personal agenda's, etc. It's all hog wash.

There are serious people doing serious work at various tables and meetings on our behalf that are not being paid to do so. Myself and many others fully appreciate there effort and hard work.

Cheers,
John

 

[vic-tory]

Talking with myself in the mirror, eh? I suppose I am when folks would prefer to hide behind the same old refrains while continually ignoring the valid points and facts presented. Can't blame a guy for trying to have a meaningful conversation about important fish management issues on a forum such as this, which historically has supported such discourse - at least I hope not. I will agree that I'm a glutton for punishment in thinking that facts and data will swing opinion when it's fairly clear that it's the process and established regime that is actually being defended.

In regard to the last point and the continued call for those who disagree with decisions being made to "get involved" - I for one will never again support a system that isn't fully open with the data, models and decisions or fully inclusive in the process and meetings. In this day and age there is simply no defence for not moving in that direction. Hopefully we can agree to disagree on that point yet still be open to listening to alternate views and opinions.

As a sign-off on this issue for my part in the discussion I'll end with a reiteration of the simple fact that their is ample and compelling data that clearly shows the possession slot has no effect on harvest rate or total harvest by the rec sector. I will continue to hope that one day this available data is used to assess this "experimental" reg and the appropriate management decision is made.

Cheers!

Ukee

Well said. Clear the searun types don't like being proven wrong...especially on a forum. You hit the nail on the head and continue to do so with facts and numbers. Something sfab clearly isn't using very well or clearly

 

[vic-tory]

If you're going to take such a ridiculously dumb cautious approach at least negotiate carry over. Use some common sense. Jesus

 

[Derby]

U just clearly do not under stand how it works?????

 

[UkeeDreamin]

U just clearly do not under stand how it works?????

Which is a direct result of the fact this public resource continues to be managed without full public access to all of the data, models, past management decisions or open access to meetings and input, etc, etc … all things that are easily achievable in this day and age.

So sad that so much effort is going towards defending the status quo rather than resolving the issues so every rec fisher does understand how it works if they so choose. We also all know the "just attend a meeting" platitude won't work because even with the very small participation in the current model the doors are closed and numbers are capped at some meetings in some jurisdictions. And being allowed to "sit on the sidelines" and "not speak" for those able to make a meeting at one of the very limited locations at very challenging times comes no where close to equating to open and inclusive. Is there an "Easy Button" - no, but are the IPHC, Oregon and Washington making it happen - absolutely, so lets not pretend there aren't readily available solutions and improved options.

I apologize as I know I said I'd made my last comment on this issue, but the amount of PM's I've received from folks on this issue is a bit overwhelming. Perhaps its a sign that the deaf ear response to so many legitimate issues raised is finally stirring folks to action and from the sounds of it I am far from the only one who doesn't see the current process as the best avenue to have a voice.

As always, I continue to appreciate the sharing of the differing views on this complex issue.

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[Clint r]

Where can I find a list of all these meetings taking place all over the province? Never been one locally, and checking out the upcoming events I don't see any listed.

 

[profisher]

Maybe one of you would like to volunteer your time to be the one person who takes all the minutes of all the local SFAC meetings in the province with motions etc, and all the SFAB south coast and north coast meetings and put them to paper so to speak. Then put them into a presentable form and then post them wherever deemed appropriate for everyone to read. Should only take a few hundred hours of your time.
The process used to be much more inclusive until DFO restricted the numbers which attend SFAC meetings. But even then the only time we would get good numbers of anglers to these meetings in Victoria is when they were told fishing restsrictions were coming. We would secure and pay for a large room to hold these meetings only to have a handful of folks show up.

 

[The Jackel]

So everyone says it is so good to be able fish to the end of the year. Then how nice it is to be able to have a 2 fish possession starting Sept. Now with the same regs as last year one would assume we will leave some more TAC in the water at the end, say maybe the same as last year, so in 3 years we would have left what, approximately half of one years TAC in the water?? Now I know some people are better fishers than others and you are only allowed 6 fish, it seems odd that one could not catch his 6 fish by say the end of Sept, a reasonable assumption?? Or maybe it takes a little longer to fill 6 fish on 3 different licenses (a common practice from what I have seen)? So if we are going to leave TAC in the water again why not have the 2 fish possession for the early months too. For me Sept. 2 possession is mute boat is out of the water, early works, just asking.

 

[Clint r]

Well, I'd gladly attend if they were truly local. That would be within 25 miles of home. If We have to drive a hundred miles to attend a meeting it's no wonder the number of attendees is so low. It's not rocket surgery. Hold these meetings in every large population center. That means every large population center. We all pay for our licenses we should all have a fair chance to say our piece. If not then it's pretty hard to say the rec sector is fairly represented.

Maybe one of you would like to volunteer your time to be the one person who takes all the minutes of all the local SFAC meetings in the province with motions etc, and all the SFAB south coast and north coast meetings and put them to paper so to speak. Then put them into a presentable form and then post them wherever deemed appropriate for everyone to read. Should only take a few hundred hours of your time.
The process used to be much more inclusive until DFO restricted the numbers which attend SFAC meetings. But even then the only time we would get good numbers of anglers to these meetings in Victoria is when they were told fishing restsrictions were coming. We would secure and pay for a large room to hold these meetings only to have a handful of folks show up.

 

[SpringVelocity]

Whats' you solution then...? How would you do it? And for record I am aware that there are small communities where meetings are held not just large populations that you say...You must have a group such as BCWF near you don't you? Maybe you should propose one and form a group?

 

[spikeydave]

My concern and I am sure there are others is that our daily possession is bunk. If we are only allowed a LEGAL season limit of 6 halibut then why can we not have a daily possession of two with a total possession of 2? We have left a significant amount of our tac in the water the last 2 seasons and there are many of us that make a substantial trip to the coast to go fishing and at times we may only have a day or two of good weather to target bottom fish. I feel that this has not been expressed enough or totally avoided to keep the tac below our limit once again. I personally have no problem with the slot although I would personally like it to be a little larger and feel this is going to push more people to the experimental licensing or having an increased amount of lodges buying into this experimental BS. I have not bothered to sign into this but if this keeps up I may just say why not and sign up for it even if it means a few dollars to come home with a few more halibut. I don't understand the mindset behind all this other than dollars and cents not what is best for us sports fishermen or the fishery.

 

[Clint r]

So where's this list of town meetings? Why do we keep skirting that? Can't attend if we don't where they are.

 

[profisher]

Come on if we hold a meeting in Victoria and we can't fill a room with people who live 10 to 20 minutes away and the meeting concerns their local waters' so they are the ones with the most to win or loose. We had just 2 meetings a year, one in the fall and one in the spring. All kinds of excuses as to why they couldn't make it. It was the same die hards who did show up at every meeting, hmmm sounds like volunteers to me!! DFO staff would drive down from Nanaimo to attend these meeting which normally started at 7pm on a weekday, giving most a chance to have dinner then come to the meeting. The DFO guys would leave the meeting around 10pm and then have to drive back the 1/12 hrs home. THEY MADE THE MEETINGS!

 

[profisher]

Clint are you on your local SFAC's email list? You can't win the lottery if you don't buy a ticket. They definetly don't have the time to phone every angler in the province to let you know about a meeting. And they don't have the resources to place expensive ads. Some of the onus is on you!

 

[SpringVelocity]

So where's this list of town meetings? Why do we keep skirting that? Can't attend if we don't where they are.

You want a question answered but never answer any when asked..I will repeat again:

Whats' you solution then...? How would you do it? And for record I am aware that there are small communities where meetings are held not just large populations that you say...You must have a group such as BCWF near you don't you? Maybe you should propose one and form a group?

 

[Clint r]

This is exactly what's wrong. Always turning it around. Can't answer a simple question. Why the hell would I start my own chapter. We've already established there's meetings all over the province. We just don't know where they are. If we can get in Or if we'll even be allowed to speak. This is info gleaned from just this thread. Going from there's meetings all over the province to start your own chapter pretty much proves my point. Interior anglers are under represented. If I knew where to go to one of these local meetings believe me I'd be there. And to answer your question 1st thing that needs to be done is EQUAL REPRESENTATION for every fisher person in The province. With out that any argument you care to make is one sided. What's your solution? Keep it how it is? As I've said before and clearly I'll have to spell it out again, I don't pretend to have any of the answers, I just know that the way it is now is not right. And again in case you missed it. I'd gladly attend a meeting and contribute what I can, but I'd need to find one first.


If QUOTE=SpringVelocity;394287]You want a question answered but never answer any when asked..I will repeat again:

Whats' you solution then...? How would you do it? And for record I am aware that there are small communities where meetings are held not just large populations that you say...You must have a group such as BCWF near you don't you? Maybe you should propose one and form a group? [/QUOTE]

 

[profisher]

And you never answered my question. Are you on an email list? You seem determined to attend a meeting but obviously haven't taken the first step to be make yourself known to the SFAB boards. DFO knows how to get in touch with the SFAB board, maybe that is the obvious place to start by asking for contact info.

 

[Clint r]

It's almost like a small group of people have made the decisions for a large group of people with limited input and then we're expected to just accept it. No questions asked, don't put up any resistance or your an arsehole. I don't take that view. I have questions and I don't like to be bullshitted. And in this particular subject we seem to get a lot of one and not too much of the other.