Early Halibut Opening

[Newf]

Because it will make zero difference in reducing the TAC we use. That’s why. Won’t be helpful at all.

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]

View attachment 114998

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]

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

I was in CR too at that Con damage control session . It worked-- it could work again if we did talk as one.

 

[chille51]

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.

 

[Aces]

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.

Yes, 6 is plenty imo

 

[Newf]

Because it will make zero difference in reducing the TAC we use. That’s why. Won’t be helpful at all.

Thank you someone got it.

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]

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.

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.

 

[Rain City]

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 of explain.

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.

 

[wildmanyeah]

the average guy retaining a halibut is probably going out with a guide once or twice a year retaining less then 4.

Then there is probably the guys making a trip once or twice a year to the island or even less going north with their own boat. So it would be the same for them 4 or less.

Thee guys that own a boat and get out multiple times a year and lot live close enough to a halibut hole and retain more then 4 a year is such a small minority imo

You can also look at the where the majority of the Tac is being taken and a lot of it is in areas with lodges.

So it’s really not hard to deduce and I believe the irec numbers and log book numbers backed that up.

Also guided success is magnitudes higher then non guided.

 

[Derby]

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 of explain.

Perhaps joining your local sfac and asking the chair to explain would help out.Something are better explained in person as it can be harder to try to explain in this forum of communication. Believe or not .

 

[Rain City]

the average guy retaining a halibut is probably going out with a guide once or twice a year retaining less then 4.

Then there is probably the guys making a trip once or twice a year to the island or even less going north with their own boat. So it would be the same for them 4 or less.

Thee guys that own a boat and get out multiple times a year and lot live close enough to a halibut hole and retain more then 4 a year is such a small minority imo

You can also look at the where the majority of the Tac is being taken and a lot of it is in areas with lodges.

So it’s really not hard to deduce and I believe the irec numbers and log book numbers backed that up.

Also guided success is magnitudes higher then non guided.

You also have to factor in all of the "guide-gifted" catch to all of the VIP guests . I'll get my popcorn ready...

 

[wildmanyeah]

I hate to break it to you guys but the average salt water angler may not even own fishing rod. . .

 

[Rain City]

I hate to break it to you guys but the average salt water angler may not even own fishing rod. . .

3 of the 4 in my family don't own any

 

[Reel Time]

Keep the max size higher and reduce limit. How many big halibut are going to be released with hooks swallowed deep into the throat. These catch and release slots suck for salmon and halibut. If someone wants a 4 pound Chinook for the table let them keep that too, tack it to the license. These slots are doing more damage IMO. I know some friends who can fish freely if I ever get desperate, but havent had problems finding them myself. Seems the biomass was great the past years unless some are under reporting.

 

[SG2.0]

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.

A very very few catch over 3 halibut a year. Avg according to dfo is about 1 halibut per license who target halibut...less so overall. So could make license 20 halibut per year and would make no difference in catch poundage towards tac. Upper size limits needs to be higher.

Today did get motion passed for modelling of 70, 75, 80cm min size limit on halibut. Would see some nice savings from that, mainly affecting areas 1-4, which wouldn't affect the average angler either. Plus right now the majority of the stock composition is in that smaller size, and they aren't counted towards the actual biomass until they are of commercial size limit (82cm). So allowing those fish to grow into the biomass would drastically also increase the TAC we get every year. Win-win IMO.

 

[wolf]

Perhaps joining your local sfac and asking the chair to explain would help out.Something are better explained in person as it can be harder to try to explain in this forum of communication. Believe or not .

YES I agree with ya theere, not worth trying to explain it...

 

[eroyd]

A very very few catch over 3 halibut a year. Avg according to dfo is about 1 halibut per license who target halibut...less so overall. So could make license 20 halibut per year and would make no difference in catch poundage towards tac. Upper size limits needs to be higher.

Yet the season is cut short because the TAC has been met. Enough are catching at least "their" ten. Logically this is shortening the recreation season for the rest of us that would like to enjoy sport fishing all year. even if it is for just one halibut.

I reality, regulations, limits, mean little without enforcement and honesty. Spot checks, creel surveys, fly overs etc. can only make calculations of sports a best guess.

 

[Tips Up]

Lots of great ideas and conversation here but in my opinion we are getting away from the real problem. The 85/15 Allocation. We need this adjusted. This is not a conservation issue this is an allocation issue.

 

[Doug]

At the Weds, SFAB meeting in Victoria. There was a discussion about forming a halibut working group of about 20 fishermen (rec, guides and SFAB) to discuss options on how to deal with area 19/20 halibut fishery.

The proposal to get a working group together would go a long way to understand the underlying issues and disseminate the reasoning on actions taken. It will also provide more information so a motion can be proposed at the next SFAB meeting.

Now the question is who will be invited and who wants to be on the working group. We all want an increase in TAC of 20% but who is going to over see the battle. After reading what the last guys went through in getting a 3% increase it might be hard to get someone to step up.

 

[Eden Island]

At the Weds, SFAB meeting in Victoria. There was a discussion about forming a halibut working group of about 20 fishermen (rec, guides and SFAB) to discuss options on how to deal with area 19/20 halibut fishery.

The proposal to get a working group together would go a long way to understand the underlying issues and disseminate the reasoning on actions taken. It will also provide more information so a motion can be proposed at the next SFAB meeting.

Now the question is who will be invited and who wants to be on the working group. We all want an increase in TAC of 20% but who is going to over see the battle. After reading what the last guys went through in getting a 3% increase it might be hard to get someone to step up.

Doug, are you or someone else collecting names? I am mostly an Area 12 fisher, but I live in Victoria and fish in 19 and 20.