DFO 2020 Halibut Fishery Announcement & Regs
- Thread starter Whole in the Water
- Start date
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
I don't know man not in agreement either with your statement you posted, but what else is new. Remember a lot of us fish multiple areas not just one.
Not into my area closed so should yours be. Gets us nothing honestly. Just more closed areas, and limited opportunities.
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Yeah I guess everyone could move to the open areas but how does that protect the run. If you simply move all the boats and pressure to the border of closed/open areas what was the point? Unless you’re talking different fish, where you catch them doesn’t impact the fact they are caught? All that would seem to increase the environmental foot print of the fishers . More fuel being burned either transiting on the water or towing on the roads to the open areas from a closed ones, then crowding in to harvest the fish before they get into a safe/closed zone. I’m sure if everyone were to move to the open areas from the closed ones DFO would find a way to put a stop to it. Anyway back to the original topic.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Shift rec pressure is definitely a thing, don’t think we have really seen what it will fully look like yet as 2019 was a blind side and 202o was covid.
searun
Well-Known Member
Ya, its not rocket surgery as to why the halibut fishery is managed coast wide. If we assigned TAC by sub-areas the fleet would just move from one spot to the next, or even more entertaining would be all the cross border shopping and fighting.....oh the humanity. For example, if we assigned an area TAC to 121 in 2019, they caught 93,000 pounds of TAC in June....it would have been slammed shut. Then what?
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
In terms of salmon it’s not hard to see WCVI being the next area to be hit hard with more restrictions. Especially if salmon stocks don’t improve and rec pressure spikes as a result of basically every other area being closed till August.
In some ways covid and keeping the border closed have really saved us from having to reconcile with some of that. It’s really not hard to see things like wild coho retention to be further restriction. As well
As First Nation getting more pie that is pretty much an done deal at this point.
so like wolf says it’s pretty much a matter for fact that it will continue to spider.
In some ways covid and keeping the border closed have really saved us from having to reconcile with some of that. It’s really not hard to see things like wild coho retention to be further restriction. As well
As First Nation getting more pie that is pretty much an done deal at this point.
so like wolf says it’s pretty much a matter for fact that it will continue to spider.
searun
Well-Known Member
WCVI hasn't been immune to restrictions in the past, likely depends on what the DNA and CWT stock composition and run timing tells us. One hugely problematic approach has been so far some stakeholders light their hair on fire even if there are miniscule encounters of certain stocks. There has to be some scientific analysis to determine what level of incidental encounters represents an acceptable risk biologically. Zero interception isn't a realistic approach - its an ocean, fish are likely to be anywhere in random locations. The paranoia is crazy, and honestly IMO more about pressing a political agenda than managing to reasonable science-based risk.
wolf
Well-Known Member
Thank you for a honest response...finally nice to see....
that was the worry that was stated years ago with area and to be honest I was out alot then and it really never happened a few boats yes but not masses like "they" said it would be you and I know you can really only fish about 14 days in a month in our area for halibut as the currents are just too strong .....
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Well that pretty much was the basis for my original question. If it’s not. “Rocket Surgery” for a coast wide plan for one why not the other, especially when in salmons case it might be the same run? Why would there be a coast wide plan for Halibut but not salmon? Is the theory salmon fishers wouldn’t move to follow the openings while halibut fishers would? Doesn’t make much sense because many fish both species. As has been stated on here, people simply pack up and go to where there’s an opening. I suspect I’m missing something and was hoping someone might know.
scott craven
Well-Known Member
Fish swim, that's a fact.
they go where the food is until it's time to return to their natal system.
The closures are political for the most part, with the odd bit of science
thrown in.
the user group with the "most pull" in the government always wins.
sorry, won't derail this any further
they go where the food is until it's time to return to their natal system.
The closures are political for the most part, with the odd bit of science
thrown in.
the user group with the "most pull" in the government always wins.
sorry, won't derail this any further
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
Maybe start another thread on salmon. What you guys are suggesting is that all areas must be closed if one area is under restrictions. I don't get it. Isn't the goal to have a many opportunities as possible?
Anyway back to halibut. So if I am hearing correct SVI wants a two to three month season or shorter. That is news to me. I thought you south anglers wanted longer season as possible? If we went to area specific halibut that is what would happen. I know some anglers I fish with down there would have an issue with that honestly.
Anyway back to halibut. So if I am hearing correct SVI wants a two to three month season or shorter. That is news to me. I thought you south anglers wanted longer season as possible? If we went to area specific halibut that is what would happen. I know some anglers I fish with down there would have an issue with that honestly.
Last edited:
Gear'n'beer!
Well-Known Member
Who said SVI anglers want a 2-3 month season?
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
i read it as the opposite other areas are open so, so should mine.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
So your alternative is shut down entire coast? Please enlighten me.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
my alternative is that other areas should also be open
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
Yes we should open areas where there are limited stocks of concern where we can. I.E. Marked selected fisheries. Preference to those with stronger DNA data.
searun
Well-Known Member
Halibut are managed to an assigned TAC - 15% of Canada's TAC. Whereas, rec salmon are managed to an "expected catch." Expected catch doesn't have a set limit, where once reached the fishery closes. Halibut under TAC management are fished until the set TAC is caught, then the fishery closes. Under that situation how do you assign a TAC to a specific PFMA area? Especially when the fleet is mobile and many participants travel from various areas. How do you assign or divide up TAC among various areas without creating significant infighting? I think it would create a wonderful blood sport for those into that sort of thing. So the whole idea isn't practical, would divide the community and lead to significant challenges even completing catch monitoring could become a cluster - incentives for people not to be honest about catch reporting in order to keep "their area" open.
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Arguably you’ve pretty much described how salmon currently fishing works. Lol
searun
Well-Known Member
So your solution using some method to divide up the Halibut TAC into all the PFMA areas is exactly what? How does that work?
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Nope, want to show me where I said that? My question was and still is why we need two different systems. So far no one seems to have a real good answer other than “they prefer things as they are”. Anyway I thank those who responded but clearly I need to submit a letter to DFO and get the staff answer.
Last edited:
