DFO Halibut Reg Proposals (very long)

[fishwish]

B.C. SPORT FISHING ADVISORY BOARD

To Minister Loyola Hearn, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
January 25, 2008

Information regarding upcoming Main Board Meeting re Halibut

For all members:
As most of you are very aware, there have been ongoing deliberations by DFO and the SFAB regarding the management of the Canadian Recreational Halibut Fishery.
In Dec 2003, then Minister Thiebeualt, Minster of Fisheries and Oceans made a decision to fix the recreational sector at a 12% catch ceiling of the overall Canadian TAC. Growth in the recreational catch would be accommodated by a yet to be established market based mechanism.
In recent years, DFO has calculated the recreational catch to exceed this 12% cap resulting in negotiations with the Canadian stakeholders (recreational and commercial halibut reps) to establish the means by which a transfer might occur. Meetings are ongoing this and next week in efforts to establish this mechanism.
Last week the International Pacific Halibut Commission established its catch limits for the countries (areas) who jointly fish halibut. The net result to Canada further complicates the recreational sectors situation. The Canadian TAC was reduced by 21% which again shrinks the size of the recreational sectors share within the Cdn TAC. (See data in package prepared by DFO)
In addition to working to establish a transfer mechanism, DFO has held three meetings with the SFAB halibut committee to initiate discussion regarding possible management measures that might assist to achieve the recreational Cdn TAC.
The SFAB firmly holds the opinion that it is the government of Canada who needs to solve this problem via a compensated transfer from the commercial sector. However, without that yet to be aquired full transfer of allocation, we are in the position of having to consider a package (combination of management measures, transfers of quota, and resolving Neah Bay issue) in order to achieve DFO’s rec fish cap of 12%.
We have also maintained a firm position through out these meetings that no one geographic area should bare any particular pain more than others. The halibut committee has not endorsed the options presented to us here in this package. In fact, DFO and BC continues to press hard for specific measures to eliminate US charter boats fishing in Canadian waters, hence their inclusion of regulations outside of 12 miles in areas 121.
Today we face uncertainty. With the development of a transfer mechanism incomplete, we cannot be assured how much quota can be transferred to the recreational sector. With the main board looming next week we have been asked by DFO to review a series of possible management options and provide them feedback as to which of these options might be least damaging to the recreational fishery.
DFO believes that there are three likely scenarios that may occur. There are three options under each scenario. Each is detailed in the attachment. We are being asked to consult our members to recommend to DFO, which option, under each scenario.
The SFAB executive needs your prompt and thoughtful consideration of these options by end of day Wednesday Jan 30, 2008 in order for your perspectives to be integrated into a final recommendation that would be tabled at the main board on Feb 3. While in the Interim the SFAB Executive, Halibut and Groundfish Committees will still press for the shortfall to be fulfilled by a transfer mechanism.
Thank you and looking forward to receiving your thoughtful advice. Please send all correspondence to Devona Adams. adamsd@pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca and cc to Chuck Ashcroft, Chair SFAB Groundfish Shellfish Committee chuckashcroft@telus.net .
On behalf of the SFAB Executive and Halibut Committee,
Marilyn Murphy
Chair


Scenario 1 Savings of 480K lbs
(No fish through transfer mechanism)

•Time and Area annual closure for Area 121(>12nm); and a coastwidedaily limit of 1/day for full season(480K lbs), or
•Time and Area annual closure for Area 121 (>12nm); and a coastwidedaily limit of 1/day for July and August;
and a coastwide annual maximum size limit of 90cm (493K lbs), or
•Time and Area annual closure for Area 121 (>12nm); and a coastwidedaily limit of 1/day for July and August;
and a coastwide annual maximum size limit of 95cm (460K lbs).

Scenario 2 Savings of 380K lbs
(100K lbs through a transfer mechanism )

•Time and Area annual closure for Area 121 (>12nm); and a coastwidedaily limit of 1/day for July and August(360K lbs), or
•Time and Area annual closure for Area 121 (>12nm);; and a daily limit of 1/day for May, June and September; and a coastwideannual maximum size limit of 85cm (366K lbs), or
•Coastwidedaily limit of 1/day for July and August; and a coastwideannual maximum size limit of 95cm (400K lbs).

Scenario 3 Savings of 280K lbs
(200K lbs through a transfer mechanism )

•Coastwidedaily limit of 1/day for July and August(300K lbs), or
•Time and Area annual closure for Area 121 (>12nm); and a coastwideannual maximum size limit of 85cm (272K lbs), or
•Time and Area annual closure for Area 121 (>12nm); and a coastwidedaily limit of 1/day for May, June and September; and a coastwideannual maximum size limit of 90cm (287K lbs), or
•Coastwidedaily limit of 1/day for May, June and September; and a coastwideannual maximum size limit of 85cm (306K lbs).

Next Steps

•Delay opening date of recreational fishery to March 1
•Consultations
–Local SFAB committees with feedback to DFO by Jan 30,
–Groundfish/shellfish Working Group on Feb 1,
–MainboardSFAB on Feb 2-3
•Decision by senior managers
•Communication packages
•Future management options
–Coastal fish protection act
–Annual limit
–Over-under size limit

 

[chris73]

That's the end of any halibut derby and any halibut charter fishing...

 

[salmon9]

I think the max size limit is a good idea.

 

[finaddict]

quote:Originally posted by salmon9

I think the max size limit is a good idea.

Gotta agree. Killing the big females has to be real detrimental to the population

 

[abbyfireguy]

Glad I use my hali rods for sturgeon too!!!!
The little guy gets it in the arse again...[}]

 

[ratherbefishing]

I'm all for both size and daily limits. With increased closures/limits/restrictions on salmon a lot of people I know spend more time chasing halis. More pressure = more harvest = decreased abundance = long term problems. It is not rocket science. That said, the mechanism whereby the rec sector ended up with 12% needs to be addressed as I would rather see more go to the sporties as I believe the economic impact is farther reaching and better for the economy in the long term. My hats off to the SFAB for looking out for us.

 

[chris73]

I think you guys are wrong if you believe that this measures will somehow better protect the hali stocks for instance by sparing the big females. These measures are not there to decrease the fishing pressure on halis. I have yet to see a single hint in those proposals that the overall hali take out quota is reduced. It's only the sporties quota that gets cut back. So the commercials fare well and get to catch their normal share or more on the back of us sporties. And don't think for a second that the 100 lbs barn door that you will have to release soon gets spared by the commercials... This is not a species protection program but a quota distribution fight between commercials and sporties and guess who will win this struggle?

 

[fishyboy99]

I may be wrong on this, but isn't the commercial size minimum 32". This would force the recreational fishermem to harvest small halibut. I understand that the main reason why the size minimum is used by DFO and the IHPC is because this gives the female halibut time to spawn and contribute to the biomass, such as the lingcod regulations. I could be wrong on this, but if I am not, wouldn't it make sense to follow along the same guidelines as the commercial catch. Just my own thoughts

Regards, Fishyboy

 

[new generation]

If you want to cut the poundage taken from bc waters its really quite easy.
1.Make a quota,like chinook say 10 halibut per year per person
2.Stop the guides from giving there 2 halis to charter customers
3.keep what you first get,dont throw back 20s and keep lookin for 40s
I have fished at swiftsure bank many times,some times by 10 in the morning I have already had 20-25 halis in the boat.How may of those fish we throw back dont make it?

 

[Nimo]

Great ideas New Gen.

This doesn't appear to be a realocation but ensuring that the sportfishers only take the original allocation less the current total TAC reduction (across the board ) of 12%.

Wanna bet this is also a pre-emptive move to what DFO anticipates will be a seriously curtailed Chinook fishery this year? May as well make the annual Halibut 5 because that's what the Chinook annual limit will have to move to this year (if any at all) if we are to ensure returns to the WCVI rivers.

DFO's primary mandate is to protect the stocks and given returns of last year and their serious errors in judgement (ie commercial chinook openings in Alberni last year,) they are going to have to make very unpopular decisions for the coming season(s.)

 

[Last Chance]

It's either catch a few less fish now, or none in the future. It just means that instead of spending an hour to catch 50 ping-pong rackets, we just have to spend a little more time to target some quality fish.

I think this action is aimed primarily at the "Swiftsure Meat Market".. Sure, some guides may loose a couple of "meat" customers, then again, people are going to keep coming back to whomever puts the fish in the boat for them, and shows them the best time.

I wonder what limiting the annual limit of Halibut would do to the formula, probably not much since the bulk of fish, I am willing to bet, go to the guests of the charter fleet.

And one other thing. No more US boats in our waters. Period. If I can't pound the spots that I know over there, then they can't pound ours spots over here.

 

[yo mama]

I think this is a great idea and should be applied in some way to the salmon as well. Between those regs this fishery might have a chance to rebound. Nobody needs that much fish to begin with and one nice spring and one hali a day would make a great amount of meals.

 

[Nimo]

A reduced daily and annual limit of 1 and 5 would be very good for the stocks for halibut and Chinook. The limit would put a stop to the meat hunters that come for the summer and abuse the resources.

It would also stop guides from taking daily limits all summer (if this is in fact happening.) If the guides are giving their daily limit to their guests: number one they should be ashamed, number two who's catching those fish? If it's the guests, they are being over-limited by the very fisherman who's livelihood depends on sustainable resources. I hope this is not happening.

It's time to take control of our actions and ensure fish stocks for our children's future.

 

[chris73]

Again, I think you guys are missing the point: the overall hali take out quota will likely not be changed. What will happen is that sporties will get less of the total share and commercials will catch more instead. Bottomline: no hali conservation by those proposed methods! And also, they propose a MAX size limit, not a MIN. That means you will be able to keep the 20 lbs but not the 70 lbs - LastChance - it will be ONLY ping-pong rackets and NO quality fish! But I agree with you regarding the US-invasion at Swiftsure - it's a shame that our government doesn't have the gutts to stand up and prevent this. The US would probably have already torpedoed a Canadian intruder fleet...

 

[new generation]

I think if you took a survey of charter boats,most customers only fish hali once a year,maybe twice.I know if i'm paying $1000 for the day i want 2 halis for the day.If I get 2 30lb halis at 60% fillet recovery thats about 40lbs of fillet,thats a good catch.Thats good for me and the family for the year.Some customers are on holidays and want to fish back to back days,thats where the 3 halis over 2 days comes into effect.The more I think about it,Nimo is on the right track,make it 5 per person per year.That way a paying customer can go on 2 charters and come out with 4 hali,a weekender on holidays can fish back to back days and come out with 3 halis,and the charter boats can still make a living because not many people are going to charter for a $1000 for 1 hali and 1 spring?In the salt water regulations anyone is allowed to give there fish away as long as they give a letter with name and phone number on it.Ottawa came up with that along time ago.The charter captains that give there catch to the paying customer are doing nothing wrong.If a captain fishes 75 days and gives away 150 hali at 25lbs each thats 3750 lbs of hali X 10 boats thats over 35000lbs of hali,that could be conseritive, considering the american side.

 

[Tips Up]

An annual catch limit would be a good idea. It would keep the charters from keeping there limits for guests, keep guys who book in for a week or 2 and meat fish sending fish out of camp with others...

A minimum size is not a bad idea although a max size would be tough. Hali aren't an easy fish to tail beside the boat long enough for measurements and hard to release after putting a harpoon through them.

A later opening probably would not make much difference. Not a lot of guys fishing them in February.

I am all for a little early concervation effort. It is better than waiting until later and having to do something drastic.

Like I always say about regulation changes and concervation. Let's get on with it and make some small changes. Better a little now than a lot later.

Tips

 

[chris73]

Again and again - Tips Up: It's not a conservation measure - the total catch will be the same! We get less and the commercials get MORE! Is that CLEAR enough?

 

[Tips Up]

I understand your point Chris.

Commercial fishing aside I think there are sporty areas that are getting over fished and will be a problem in the future. Swiftsure comes to mind. Last year there was wall to wall boats with chickens getting slaughtered everywhere. Boat after boat day after day.
I would like to see some changes here as I like to go to Renny a couple of times a year and having the resource of hali and salmon available for the future.

Like salmon issues I think that everyone should take a hit. I am OK with a few cutbacks in the sporting sector. Annual limit would be good.

Maybe the wrong thread for my comments as this thread is about allotment.

Tips

 

[new generation]

Chris 73 we all understand what your saying,some of us are just making sugjestions for conservation purposes.We all know sooner or later there will be cut backs and rule changes for hali,it won't go on like this for ever.I remember in victoria when you were allowed 4 springs a day,thats 4 20lbrs if you could get them,per person per day.WE all know what happened to the stock of springs.I fished renfrew last year one day,we trolled hard for 8 hours for 2 teens and a pink.The idea of throwing back big fish is not fair.My biggest hali off swiftsure is 95lbs,if a person wants to fish hard and is rewarded with a big fish thats part of the fun,thats why we fish for the chance of a lunker and good memories.I guess i'm off the topic,I read a couple of reports that were posted,sounds like the stocks are in good shape for now.IF they do increase the commerical catch it would be nice if that a certain percent would stay in bc stores so the halibut price would drop to $5.00 a pound,so we could afford to eat it here instead of the fish plants selling it to the highest bidder around the world.

 

[Nimo]

Bear with my while I try to make sense of the numbers:
"In Dec 2003, then Minister Thiebeualt, Minster of Fisheries and Oceans made a decision to fix the recreational sector at a 12% catch ceiling of the overall Canadian TAC. Growth in the recreational catch would be accommodated by a yet to be established market based mechanism."
This tells me 12% of the total CDN allocation is quota for sports.

"In recent years, DFO has calculated the recreational catch to exceed this 12% cap resulting in negotiations with the Canadian stakeholders (recreational and commercial halibut reps) to establish the means by which a transfer might occur.[/i] Meetings are ongoing this and next week in efforts to establish this mechanism."

This tells me the sports are taking more than our allocation (guide's daily catch?.)

"Last week the International Pacific Halibut Commission established its catch limits for the countries (areas) who jointly fish halibut. The net result to Canada further complicates the recreational sectors situation. The Canadian TAC was reduced by 21% which again shrinks the size of the recreational sectors share within the Cdn TAC. (See data in package prepared by DFO)"

This tells me the total CDN TAC (all sectors) has been reduced by 21%. Summarizing the above three paras it would appear that the sports has to find a way to continue to take 12% of the total CDN TAC which has been reduced by 21% for Canada.

Please correct me if I misunderstand the data.

I am not in favor of seeing the sports loose more share, there is no question that the dollar value is way higher than these fish being taken by the commercial sector. However, in the face of having to find a way to reduce our take on stocks that are apparently healthy, I think the annual and daily limit restriction would go a long way toward ensuring a longer fishing season for all and conservation for the future - these are interdependant decisions. We will not have one without the other.