Bad Vibes circling about Major closures on WCVI ?

Was just wondering about something:-

Commercial Halibut harvesters are not restricted to a size limit....correct?

If they aren't......then if a guest/person at a lodge buys "extra quota", that quota comes from a commie.
So...shouldn't the person who bought it be entitled to fish "anysize" halibut as well....?

Or do the commies have a size restriction as well............

The IPHC stipulates 81.3 cm min. size for the commies. As the IPHC is an international commission (USA + Canada), my guess is that size limit is for both sides of the line

Someone correct me if I'm wrong---this was from the 2012 regs
 
I read their PDF where it says about "Minimum" size.......but I can't find anything about "Maximum" size halibut for commies.

That is more what I was referring to....
 
yes, correct--there never has been an upper size limit for the commies---bigger has always been better. Unfortunately, the percentages of 60/80's and 80+ for the last few years have been dwindling to the point where most of what shows up at the dock are 10/20's and 20/40's --- that was the reason the IPHC came down so heavy on catch restrictions for both commies (by quota) and sports (by size)
 
Ya Serengetiguide, I live in your neck of the woods and I have heard the same reports. My best friend's brother-in-law lives in Bella Bella and he told me they've been nailing them out towards Hakai and that was about a week or 2 ago. I'm with you, they're on there way... Be patient, before everybody starts sounding the alarms!
 
bigger is not better

yes, correct--there never has been an upper size limit for the commies---bigger has always been better. Unfortunately, the percentages of 60/80's and 80+ for the last few years have been dwindling to the point where most of what shows up at the dock are 10/20's and 20/40's --- that was the reason the IPHC came down so heavy on catch restrictions for both commies (by quota) and sports (by size)

correction....bigger is not always better ;) .....when it comes to selling or marketing commercial halibut.
as a ex-commie i have had our buyer tell us what size range he wants before we go out.
that would translate into where we fished as many areas are prolific for chickens other areas 30-50 , and some areas are known for big slabs 75 +++
Most buyers dont want the big slabs as the local fishmonger fish market has trouble selling a 15lb steak. The 30-50 range is popular target.
I wish we could have a market for the 100 + size as its a fun fishery. I know a dozen or so places on the coast that always produce the biggies, and they must be getting bigger as they dont get hit by commies.
Maybe i should buy a small quota and take some trophy fishermen out to my secret
100+ plus spots and make some ca-ching$.
 
In Chris's post he mentioned that lodges feel that they need to sell quota because persons coming from far away and spending big bucks are, in many cases, after the big "fish of a lifetime" when it comes to Halis also.

I am NOT condoning buying extra quota at all.

But it seems to me that if you are one of those people that has blown 6000 dollars to come here and fish...and....you are one of the people that bought "extra hali quota" which in reality is a direct buy from commercial quota, then you should be able to catch and retain a halibut with no upper size limit because that is what you paid for:- a portion of commercial quota.

The moral ethics of catching and retaining biggies is a story by itself.

But I think it's a bit of a kick in the cojones when a person would purchase commercial "supplementary" quota and then be denied the advantages of same.

The old saying is "you get what you pay for"......but it appears to be not so in this case......
 
So if this program is successful you can accept that salmon will go to a quota system and the commercial guys will get a fat chunk leaving us with less than we need for a full season. So we will have to come up with creative ways to slow down our catch....like a maximum size limit. But that is ok because you can always pay the commi's for some quota so you can keep your 50 pound spring. That is where government wants to go. Halibut is just the start of it.
 
Agreed Profisher

Anybody who isn't outraged at this quota buying is very short sighted.

All fisheries will go this way eventually.

FYI there already I'd a sport quota for salmon, we just havnt filled it yet
 
FYI there already is a sport quota for salmon, we just havnt filled it yet

There has been an of allocation of springs for the recreational sector for many years now. And yes actually, that fleet has run over it's allocation on several occasions that I am aware of. When they do so, the overage is then deducted from Area G's total, and means the difference between a September opening for them or not.

Agree on the "outrage". Complete BS IMHO. And those that do buy in are indeed paving the road to all our future fisheries as you suggest. :(

Nog
 
I think a real protest is warranted if SVIAC or somebody doesn't have success lobbying we need some real protests to raise public awareness and show its not ok what's happening.

Blacklisting those who participate in the quota leasing program is a good start but some real action is going to be needed in the coming years.

I'd like to see a halibut protest off victoria after the rec season is shut down. Start with a line of boats along the waterfront (not blocking the harbour) and get the word out what's really happening.
 
I think a real protest is warranted if SVIAC or somebody doesn't have success lobbying we need some real protests to raise public awareness and show its not ok what's happening.

Blacklisting those who participate in the quota leasing program is a good start but some real action is going to be needed in the coming years.

I'd like to see a halibut protest off victoria after the rec season is shut down. Start with a line of boats along the waterfront (not blocking the harbour) and get the word out what's really happening.

Like protesting the legislature and parading around Victoria, like a few years ago? Yeah that really worked didn't it? The average citizen just doesn't care about this issue.

Only political pressure in Ottawa will do ANYTHING. Until we hire fulltime hard core lobbyists we are doomed, IMO.
 
And that is exactly what SVIAC hopes to be able to achieve. All it takes is money and a $40 membership is a good start.
 
Searun, I don't disagree with staying involved with the SFAB but after that posting can you also understand why SVIAC has formed? Southern Vancouver Island has been and continues to be the sacrificial lamb. You guys are getting relief because we are taking all pain...and often we are targeting the same fish. Victoria and Sooke continue to get hammered.

Have to agree.

I very much want to know what the justification is for Victoria and Sooke only being allowed to keep 1 unclipped Coho a day and then only after Oct 1st while at the same time DFO has been more generous with the rest of the province including allowing UP to 4 a day all summer long, all of which can be unclipped/wild in at least one area. Sure other areas have various degrees of restriction but they are virtually all and increasingly better off than Victoria and Sooke in many categories, including Coho.

This seems to be an extension of the Magic Flying Chinook Policy to Coho. That is to say the Fraser Chinook that fly past the West Coast and the rest of the province, dive into the water when they hit JDF and then jump back into the air when they get past Victoria and Sooke only to impale themselves in Fraser River drift nets and end up in freezer plants where it seems DFO has little interest in insuring that these food fish are eaten and not sold for profit. Unlike the west coast we don’t really have much of a large Chinook fishery left; being only allowed to keep small ones and clipped ones because of the slot.

This year those Chinook slot restrictions have yet again been advanced forward from June 15th to July 19th with a faint hope possibility that we could end the slot a little earlier. Basically that gives us August to actually fish for big Chinook plus a week in July and Sept before most big Chinook are past us. Now we have about 7 weeks to fish large Chinook off Victoria and Sooke when just a few years back we had 7 months to try and get a big Chinook. This is really in my opinion, getting unfairly and unjustifiably unbalanced, all the more so now that we appear not to be getting fair access to Coho and yes I understand there are some differences on the West Coast such as trying to intercept US Fish that are seldom in JDF waters.

Last year JDF was absolutely full of Coho and hard to avoid while trying to get down to Chinook and I understand DFO’s Coho numbers were very high. It is looking like all our sacrifice has been paying off but we are yet to benefit off Sooke and Victoria.

Many of the Coho swimming past Victoria &Sooke also get caught all along the coast and it is concerning that our UNCLIPPED Sooke hatchery Coho (the smaller ones released to allow for acceptable bio-load levels as others grow) can be retained elsewhere during the summer but not off of Sooke itself until Oct and then only the 1.

Being allowed to keep only clipped Coho off Victoria and Sooke all summer long will, as last year, result in large numbers of Coho being weeded through looking for the clipped ones. Not all those released are in the best of shape and not all hatchery Coho are clipped. Allowing retention of at least one unclipped Coho off Victoria and Sooke in the summer or part of it would greatly reduce the weeding process.

Perhaps SFAB needs to be asking for a meeting to get an explanation as to once again why Victoria and Sooke sport fisheries are being sacrificed. If someone has an explanation I think all of us on the south end of the Island want to hear it. There will be a rational; there always is.

Perhaps also it is time to end commercial fishing for Coho (I assume it goes on as I do see them in the stores in the summer and I don’t think they are imported) if there is such concern that Victoria and Sooke must still have such heavy restrictions. I understand that Coho like Chinook are a prioritized sport fishing species. As I understand it DFO has a hard time opening Coho to commercial fishing unless sport fishing is also open, so one wonders if that is a driving force. There is no Commercial Coho and Chinook fishing off Sooke and Victoria so Commercial interests aren’t pushing for openings here which then facilitate sport Coho openings.

Things could change if DFO and big money interests move away from prioritizing Coho and Chinook as sport fishery species and move to a Quota lease model for Coho and Chinook just like they are trying to force through with Halibut. Something to think about for those few on hear who can’t grasp the risk and attempt to justify the few lodges that have purchased commercial Halibut quota this year and feed oxygen to a program that was all but dead and is incredibly destructive to the interests of all anglers. Perhaps it will sink in when they are paying $6.00 a lb to lease Coho and Chinook quota and opt out of the sport fishing regulations that the peasant anglers have to abide by.

I understand SVIAC is working to push DFO to increase work on restoration rather than their tendency to utilize only restrictions that cost nothing and we will all continue to fight the give away, privatization and consolidation of our fish into corporate hands.

There needs to be other tools added to the DFO fishery management tool box than just further restrictions and the transfer of our fish into private ownership and increasingly corporate hands and the right to catch our fish leased out forever by those who never fish themselves. To borrow from an old song, ‘money for nothing and the checks are free’.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Since recreational fisheries is supposed to get a major portion of springs, maybe DFO can give us 85% of the allocation and the Commies could buy excess quota from us? Just thinking. SVIAB?
 
non retention of unclipped coho is supposidly to protect your fraser r. fish. we have had the same restriction on this side of the strait for several years. it would be a far better idea to simply change this to 'first 2 fish' as i have also sorted fish and many of those i doubt would survive. stupid rule that really does not consider the impact on released coho.
 
Just stupid to think that playing 10 fish to get a clipped one does not have a negative effect on the overall stock. Get your two fish and be done. Not rocket science.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top