Rain City
Crew Member
That's exactly what I was going to add to my comment earlier. If the TAC is based on weight, so should your personal allotment.
Early Halibut Opening
- Thread starter carpeweekend
- Start date
- Status
Derby
Crew Member
Thunder21
Well-Known Member
It might be too complicated but what would be cool is at the time of purchasing your license for the year you could decide between 2 Halibut options. 10 fish with the regular max length or 5 fish with a slightly larger length . When you print the license it reflects your choice and you are stuck with your choice for the year.
Won’t help reduce tac as most don’t even get 5 halibut (hence why this years regs really do hurt the avg angler) but an idea for giving options.
Newf
Crew Member
I’m one of those who would love to take Granny out but unfortunately she’s been gone for years. I do however take multiple people out individually which include, 2 friends and 5 family members. They fish only with me and I take them not to “get extra limits” for myself but so that they can experience the same enjoyment that I do from fishing and from sometimes catching one.
I agree and do not understand the need for a limit of 10 but I’m sure there is some logic behind it that most of us are not aware of. Some on here discuss the fact that reducing to a yearly limit to 6 would have no effect on amount caught. If this is true then why is there a need to have it at 10? Is this for a very small number of fishers who do go out and get 10?
In my case as an example, the 8 licences (5 different families) on my boat caught a total of 14 fish last year so even if the limit was 6 we would be no where near the allowable quota.
My average weight was around 12lbs so inline with what the data is saying about smaller fish becoming the norm.
I would like to echo what others have already said and that is to thank those who volunteer and represent us. It’s mostly a thankless job but I’m sure that your efforts are much appreciated by the majority of us.
Doug
Well-Known Member
I also believe it should be 6 halibut.
Last night I attended the SFAB meeting at Esq Angler. I got the feeling it will be 102 cm halibut per day and one in you possession and opening April 1st.
Halibut fishing in areas 19/20 has a lots of great tide flow dates in March and as the months go on it appears there are less and less flavorful tide flow dates. Then late June a lot of dog fish start moving in. .
What ever the final out come is, we have to do our best with it. The guys representing Rec fisherman are doing the best for us all because they are fisherman too. Thanks for volunteering.
Last night I attended the SFAB meeting at Esq Angler. I got the feeling it will be 102 cm halibut per day and one in you possession and opening April 1st.
Halibut fishing in areas 19/20 has a lots of great tide flow dates in March and as the months go on it appears there are less and less flavorful tide flow dates. Then late June a lot of dog fish start moving in. .
What ever the final out come is, we have to do our best with it. The guys representing Rec fisherman are doing the best for us all because they are fisherman too. Thanks for volunteering.
Newf
Crew Member
Please explain. Why is it stupid? What’s your logic behind the response? Is seems to be a common thread on here that the “vast” majority on here do not catch 6 fish per year. Is the limit of 10 for a very small minority? I don’t know which was why I said that there must be some logic behind it that most of us don’t understand. If someone “needs” more than 6 they could just get their granny to get a license and tag along for a trip. Only helps if she would be willing to share her catch.
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Because it will make zero difference in reducing the TAC we use. That’s why. Won’t be helpful at all.Please explain. Why is it stupid? What’s your logic behind the response? Is seems to be a common thread on here that the “vast” majority on here do not catch 6 fish per year. Is the limit of 10 for a very small minority? I don’t know which was why I said that there must be some logic behind it that most of us don’t understand. If someone “needs” more than 6 they could just get their granny to get a license and tag along for a trip. Only helps if she would be willing to share her catch.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
Thank you someone got it.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
I like to be different! You don't anger me my friend
. Hope your doing well.
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
I like to be different! You don't anger me my friend
Was not at all meant to anger.
I was rather really wondering the why of your stance.
Got it now.
Cheers
Newf
Crew Member
Not trying to be argumentative but rather trying to understand. If it will make zero difference why the need for 10. It was 6 for years but if it makes no difference what the limit is, why not bump it up to 20 for the few that really target halibut. A 20 yearly limit would make no difference according to your logic. Why have a limit at all? I’m having a hard time with “ it makes zero difference “ with no reasoning behind it. Not saying you’re wrong but would like to understand what supports your argument. How does having set limits not affect the amount that’s caught? It’s like saying to us that fish halibut that this year you guys caught 30,000 lbs more than your quota so next year we are going to bump your limit to 15 because it make no difference what the limit is. How is that logical?
BearCove
Crew Member
I remember the PM flew into either Comox or Campbell River in Eater weekend prior to the election to save John Duncan’s butt and promised more halibut, and it happened. It can happen again if the masses were to rally
Bryan Allen
Well-Known Member
I was in CR too at that Con damage control session . It worked-- it could work again if we did talk as one.
I'm no expert on any of this, and only really even attempted to target hali for the first time last season - but I have been following along with this whole thread and the various perspectives, so I think I've at least gathered enough to start to form an opinion.
First, I agree with the premise that the ratio of commercial to rec needs to be adjusted. To what, I am not smart enough to do that math but it sure seems like the rec fishery is basically the table scraps from the commercial fleet. This seems like both the most impactful change that could be made for the better, but also the least likely to actually happen.
Second, I also see the logic of having the big lodges take be attributed to commercial, rather than rec - but I could see the logistical challenges with that. How do you differentiate between a big lodge and small guide operation in the regulations? Where is the distinction drawn? Does that catch get recorded on the guest's license as personal quota still, even though is contributed to the commercial TAC? Maybe there are simple answers to those questions, I don't know.
Third, add my name to the list of those that have a hard time understanding why any one personal quota needs to be 10 fish. Between the wife and I, we took a total of 6 hali last year. None of them particularly big. Two were guided, two were on our own, and one was gifted to us by a guide at the cleaning table. 5 in May, 1 in August. So 6 fish in freezer for the season, which we still have some left. Granted there is only two of us in the house, but I can't see how we wouldn't be wasting meat if we had taken 10 each. I'd be fine with a quota of 6 or even 5 - but if vast majority never get close to the quota then maybe it is largely an imaginary ceiling, and I can buy how reducing it might have little impact.
As to US citizens access to our fisheries - especially when they are so limited already - well I'll refrain from stirring that pot to much other than to say priority should go to Canadians when it comes to a Canadian resource.
First, I agree with the premise that the ratio of commercial to rec needs to be adjusted. To what, I am not smart enough to do that math but it sure seems like the rec fishery is basically the table scraps from the commercial fleet. This seems like both the most impactful change that could be made for the better, but also the least likely to actually happen.
Second, I also see the logic of having the big lodges take be attributed to commercial, rather than rec - but I could see the logistical challenges with that. How do you differentiate between a big lodge and small guide operation in the regulations? Where is the distinction drawn? Does that catch get recorded on the guest's license as personal quota still, even though is contributed to the commercial TAC? Maybe there are simple answers to those questions, I don't know.
Third, add my name to the list of those that have a hard time understanding why any one personal quota needs to be 10 fish. Between the wife and I, we took a total of 6 hali last year. None of them particularly big. Two were guided, two were on our own, and one was gifted to us by a guide at the cleaning table. 5 in May, 1 in August. So 6 fish in freezer for the season, which we still have some left. Granted there is only two of us in the house, but I can't see how we wouldn't be wasting meat if we had taken 10 each. I'd be fine with a quota of 6 or even 5 - but if vast majority never get close to the quota then maybe it is largely an imaginary ceiling, and I can buy how reducing it might have little impact.
As to US citizens access to our fisheries - especially when they are so limited already - well I'll refrain from stirring that pot to much other than to say priority should go to Canadians when it comes to a Canadian resource.
Aces
Well-Known Member
Yes, 6 is plenty imo
Newf
Crew Member
I’m glad someone got it but would be happier if someone could explain it. I’m not the smartest tac in the box so it takes me longer to get it. If some folks are catching 10 how are they not adding more to the totals than those who are catching 6 or less??? As I said I’m not the sharpest tac.
Eden Island
Well-Known Member
I'm assuming that only a small [negligible] fraction of fishers are catching between 5 and 10 halibut in a year. That would explain why lowering the annual limit wouldn't have much effect on TAC. It doesn't however explain why guys are too impatient to help others understand.
Please either confirm or explain.
Last edited:
Rain City
Crew Member
Someone explained it a couple pages back I believe. Something to do with the way they count the previous years catch to determine this year's numbers. It's based on actual catch data, which for the most part was less than 10 fish per license and an average size of x. So they take THAT number and multiply it by, whatever. So the projected catch actually has nothing to do with annual limits. I think that's what it was anyway.
Last edited:
- Status
