Halibut: Bad News

[Pursuit 648]

Not editing my post at all you call tell me to go F my self then I have every reason to give it back
You don’t think I am passionate and want the same thing as you.. OK then think what you want
I guess I was wrong in your eyes to think that trashing the SFAC or SFAB was productive on this site
oh well entitled to my opinion much like yourself you should be able to realize that
Good post Holmes come up to gold river haha classic!
U tell me to go F myself to my face - good luck with that

 

[Cuba Libre]

Again I have to ask. Does anyone know who are these guys are and do we leverage of this already formed rec group or start another??

http://fightforhalibut.wordpress.com/action-toolkit/

Kitimat based... part of the BC Sportfishing Coalition.

 

[Clipper]

I actually DO have the answer!

You want to extend your sport season… That may not that hard to do? Go online and READ:
‘COMING OUT OF HIBERNATION: THE CANADIAN PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE’
By KATE PENELOPE SMALLWOOD
https://circle.ubc.ca/handle/2429/1465

Then contact, discuss the above, and make an appointment with a law firm like:
Ecojustice
Main Office Vancouver
214 - 131 Water Street | Vancouver BC V6B 4M3
T 604-685-5618 F 604-685-7813
You can call us toll-free from anywhere in Canada at 1-800-926-7744.
http://www.ecojustice.ca/

And, and file a f@!king law suit asking for immediate access to YOUR RIGHT TO FISH the PUBLIC resource that the government of Canada does NOT own, can NOT legally privatize!!! It certainly does appear the Government of Canada has indeed violated the “public trust” concerning a Canadian citizens “right” to fish halibut by illegally privatizing a fishery resource, which was to be held in trust: Might also want to throw-in YOUR RIGHT to fish salmon, while at it:

“A long and dusty trail through early English and Canadian law reports reveals that Canadian common law has recognized a public trust with respect to navigation and fishing, as well as a trust over highways. However, the public trust concerning navigation and fishing has largely lain dormant since the late nineteenth century. Interestingly, the strongest modem common law expression of a public trust in Canada is that with respect to highways.”

Charlie, maybe you have found the 'silver bullet' that we have been looking for to end the ITQ system and put access to fish resources back in the public domain.

 

[Cuba Libre]

Letter from Gerry Kristianson SFAB Chair

8 March, 2012
Fellow anglers,
I thought it might be useful to provide some background on the SFAB proposal to experiment this year with what we are calling the “normal and under” possession approach to halibut. DFO has agreed that for the remainder of the 2012 fishing season, anglers will be allowed to retain one halibut a day, and two in total possession away from their place of residence, but with one of these fish being subject to a maximum size restriction of 83 cm. which translates to 15 lbs in round weight and 11.25 lbs in dressed weight.
Following the federal government’s decision to increase our allocation to 15% of the fish available to the commercial and recreational sectors, the SFAB Halibut Working Group was challenged with the need to find a way to live within a 2012 season total of 1,084,650 lbs. This was 138,855 lbs less than our actual 2011 harvest, which itself had led to premature closing of the fishery early last September. Analysis based on past harvest patterns made clear that continuing with last year’s possession limit of “1 and 2” made a mid-summer closure inevitable and a return to the more traditional “2 and 3” even less practical.
The Halibut Working Group’s mandate from the main SFAB board has always been that the primary objective is to maintain reasonable opportunity and expectation for as close to a full season as possible. We also were determined to avoid measures which seemed to favour one class of anglers, one part of the coast, or one group of service providers, against another.
The “normal and under” approach seemed to meet these needs. By keeping the total possession limit at “1 and 2”, the basic “opportunity” remained the same. However, analysis of the catch pattern in recent years suggested that by limiting the size of one of these fish to 83 cm (or about 15 lbs round weight), we could spread this opportunity over a longer period and hopefully to the end of the year. Anglers don’t catch many halibut in the Fall, but the chance to do so is important to many coastal residents.
Other options were also considered including:
 Reducing the possession limit to “1 and 1”, especially during the summer months. This might have kept us within our TAC, but would have greatly reduced both the social and economic value of the fishery by removing opportunity and dampening expectation during the time when most people are able to take their holidays and go fishing. Also it introduced an important element of uncertainty. Would anglers simply shift their effort into periods where there were more generous limits?
 Keeping the possession limit at “1 and 2” but imposing a size limit on both fish. This would have had the effect of further reducing expectation and increasing enforcement challenges

____________________________________________________________________
In fact, all of the potential measures, including “normal and under”, are experimental. Their likely impact is based on a series of assumptions that have not previously been tested in Canada. For this reason, it would be preferable to have a safety net, and the SFAB asked the department to try and provide the means by which we could move to move to the more restrictive rule of “1 and 1” if that seemed to be necessary in mid-summer to avoid exceeding our TAC and thereby prompting a premature closure, as happened in 2011. Unfortunately, we have been told that this kind of rule is not possible at this time.
The SFAB’s Executive Committee unanimously supported the “normal and under” recommendation of the Halibut Working Group. It also endorsed a suggestion that work begin immediately on the preparation of new educational material for anglers that will help explain both the rationale behind the new management measure and the contribution individual fishers can make to the sustainability of the resource through such things as the voluntary release of large halibut.
So I ask the tolerance of the recreational sector in accepting this year’s new rules. Of course, it would be nice to have more fish available. But Canada is obliged to live within its international allocation, and while that allocation was reduced again this year, the Government of Canada did respond positively to our sector’s request for a larger share of the domestic pie with an uncompensated transfer of access from the commercial sector. We should repay this gesture with a serious effort to stay within our allocation. Anglers should keep in mind that every fish counts and that every fish should be counted and measured. By sticking to the new rules there is an excellent chance that our sector will be able to keep catching and counting fish until the end of the year.
Gerry Kristianson


So, we may not like the decision, but enough is enough!!! I bet the commercials are laughing their heads off at us. Get involved, all this dickering is a waste of time! Do something productive....

 

[Derby]

Thank you for posting this...I was just about too.....got to agree with your last statement

"So, we may not like the decision, but enough is enough!!! I bet the commercials are laughing their heads off at us. Get involved, all this dickering is a waste of time! Do something productive.... "

 

[finaddict]

Now back to fighting the good fight and showing a unanimous front of solidarity against the distribution of the TAC. 15% this year, 18% next year, 21% the following year and so on until our TAC allottment is equal to the TAC for Alaska at 36%.

 

[traveller]

I have been following the halibut threads for quite a while now, and as I have been involved in the Sport Fishing Coalition from the beginning, and worked through the townhall meetings, walked on the picket lines in front of MP offices, and written letters to many, as well as attending the “information meetings” with Randy Kamp to help in setting up the allocation reform process. I think I do have a bit of a background to comment from.

I believe that there is a problem in the discussions going on lately that are very critical of the representatives ( all volunteer) who are putting in long hours, let me tell you, to try to do several things at once….and perhaps therein lies one of the problems. The one strong, driving reason for the success we have had so far, (yes, we have had some success which I believe should be more celebrated than it is) and that reason is solidarity…all the community of recreational anglers coming together and making a clear statement together. Make no mistake, we are a true community made up of different fishing styles, different abilities to afford those fishing styles, differing available time for fishing, and some who have a career based on helping others to fish. To represent a community as diverse in nature, but united, I hope, in the strong love of fishing and desire for those in the future to enjoy the same, is a challenge, and it appears that at times one part of that larger community does not feel well served by the representation that tries to do the most good for the greatest number….a common problem we see all around us in other actions of government or community planning.

Our main persistent and immoveable goal, not yet reached, is to have adequate, fair allocation of pounds of halibut set aside for the recreational community as a whole. We all know that we have not yet reached that goal, and I hope that no one wants to remove the support for continuing to fight for it….yet, I believe that talk of separate organizations being formed from those present, or talk of removing support for different parts of our whole community will do just that…strongly damage our plans to move forward to our goal. Phoning the Federal Minister of Fisheries to tell him that the Sportfishing community is not all together, and telling him established representatives are not speaking for the community will be the strongest wedge that anyone can drive into what we have all been working for, in my opinion.

Please separate out the heartfelt feelings of dissatisfaction with the allocation of TAC this year which everyone acknowledges is not enough for a full season of 2 and 2 from the recent quick decision to establish a slot limit. Please stop and reflect on the fact we want to be a cohesive, united group while maintaining the ability to look at process within our community. Can the SFAB and supporting SFAC groups benefit from more participation…you bet, and they actively want that increased participation, but not just when something doesn’t sit right on one issue…we need increased support and numbers at meetings so we can spread the load of work, develop e-mail lists of people who want to be active in helping decision making, and be available at short notice when quick decisions do have to be made.

The slot limit decision was made by a good sized working group of the SFAB with reps from all groups who make up the SFAB. All volunteers trying to work at day jobs, honour family commitments, and at the same time trying to extend the season as long as possible knowing that no decision made around the basic inadequate, unfair allocation would be good or popular. They did the best they could to extend the season based on the info presented to them, none of which guaranteed…after all, halibut are animals and have tails to move , often unpredictably. Weather will play a huge role as well

I'm surprised Hot Rods is even participating in this forum debate. He's known as someone who gets things done rather than just talk about it…his SFAC committee is well attended year round, and well run with frequent e-mailed info to all participants during the year.

By all means express personal disappointment in a decision, and make plans to be constructive at your next local SFAC meeting, but for goodness sake please keep us as one stable and meaningful force as we further the effort to get a better, fair allocation.

 

[Hot Rods]

Thanks Traveller. You nailed it. After over five decades of sport fishing and trying to understand fish politics you would think I would know when not to take the bait or **** into the wind.

Always happy to send info or data related to our sport to anyone who wants it. Just send me a pm and I will respond.

That's a (30) for me on this thread.

 

[Englishman]

Kitimat based... part of the BC Sportfishing Coalition.

Thx Cubre. Good to know they are part of the Sportfishing Coalition. Although they are Kitimat based, I thought the Web site was a useful and powerful communications resource. It contains sample letters, names of Ministers and others to send letters to, action kits etc. etc. This kind of Web site is a valuable focus point to coalesce interested parties around the halibut isse and support/generate group action. Not suggesting SFAB and Sportfishing Coalition processes should not be supported as well, but as far as I am aware, they don't have anything like this available.

http://fightforhalibut.wordpress.com/action-toolkit/

 

[Hot Rods]

Geez Charlie gimme some slack. I responded to your request earlier and again a few minutes ago. I included my home email address (as I did with the pm to Ukee). I monitor that on a regular basis rather than occasionally like this chat forum.

 

[traveller]

Englishman,

The Kitimat group is well organized, has been a tremendous part of the BC Sportfishing Coalition supporting us all as well as any one could. They even had me come up and help run a town hall meeting along with the BCWF representative, Ted Brookman there which packed to overflowing the hall...probably had half the town there at least...huge support and huge letter writing campaign, even had the Federal MP there to talk to us after the power point presentation promising full support. They had local TV and newspapers there, as well as a CBC stringer who filed a report. This is just one example of how strong we became last Spring, and still are, given a unified and cohesive action group to ensure our right to fair access to our resource. Kitimat was indeed an inspiration to talk to and work with.

 

[lorneparker1]

I have been following the halibut threads for quite a while now, and as I have been involved in the Sport Fishing Coalition from the beginning, and worked through the townhall meetings, walked on the picket lines in front of MP offices, and written letters to many, as well as attending the “information meetings” with Randy Kamp to help in setting up the allocation reform process. I think I do have a bit of a background to comment from.

I believe that there is a problem in the discussions going on lately that are very critical of the representatives ( all volunteer) who are putting in long hours, let me tell you, to try to do several things at once….and perhaps therein lies one of the problems. The one strong, driving reason for the success we have had so far, (yes, we have had some success which I believe should be more celebrated than it is) and that reason is solidarity…all the community of recreational anglers coming together and making a clear statement together. Make no mistake, we are a true community made up of different fishing styles, different abilities to afford those fishing styles, differing available time for fishing, and some who have a career based on helping others to fish. To represent a community as diverse in nature, but united, I hope, in the strong love of fishing and desire for those in the future to enjoy the same, is a challenge, and it appears that at times one part of that larger community does not feel well served by the representation that tries to do the most good for the greatest number….a common problem we see all around us in other actions of government or community planning.

Our main persistent and immoveable goal, not yet reached, is to have adequate, fair allocation of pounds of halibut set aside for the recreational community as a whole. We all know that we have not yet reached that goal, and I hope that no one wants to remove the support for continuing to fight for it….yet, I believe that talk of separate organizations being formed from those present, or talk of removing support for different parts of our whole community will do just that…strongly damage our plans to move forward to our goal. Phoning the Federal Minister of Fisheries to tell him that the Sportfishing community is not all together, and telling him established representatives are not speaking for the community will be the strongest wedge that anyone can drive into what we have all been working for, in my opinion.

Please separate out the heartfelt feelings of dissatisfaction with the allocation of TAC this year which everyone acknowledges is not enough for a full season of 2 and 2 from the recent quick decision to establish a slot limit. Please stop and reflect on the fact we want to be a cohesive, united group while maintaining the ability to look at process within our community. Can the SFAB and supporting SFAC groups benefit from more participation…you bet, and they actively want that increased participation, but not just when something doesn’t sit right on one issue…we need increased support and numbers at meetings so we can spread the load of work, develop e-mail lists of people who want to be active in helping decision making, and be available at short notice when quick decisions do have to be made.

The slot limit decision was made by a good sized working group of the SFAB with reps from all groups who make up the SFAB. All volunteers trying to work at day jobs, honour family commitments, and at the same time trying to extend the season as long as possible knowing that no decision made around the basic inadequate, unfair allocation would be good or popular. They did the best they could to extend the season based on the info presented to them, none of which guaranteed…after all, halibut are animals and have tails to move , often unpredictably. Weather will play a huge role as well

I'm surprised Hot Rods is even participating in this forum debate. He's known as someone who gets things done rather than just talk about it…his SFAC committee is well attended year round, and well run with frequent e-mailed info to all participants during the year.

By all means express personal disappointment in a decision, and make plans to be constructive at your next local SFAC meeting, but for goodness sake please keep us as one stable and meaningful force as we further the effort to get a better, fair allocation.

Great post Traveller. As i mentioned in the Pm i have been waiting 2 weeks for a post like this. Enough talk, time to get active!

 

[Clipper]

traveller, a lot of words and I am sure you are very sincere in your view but not once did you speak about getting rid of the ill conceived and possibly illegal ITQ system. I no longer want to fight over % of quota, I want to change the entire rotten system of allocating public resources to private individuals or corporations. This % 'fight' is just smoke and mirrors, IMHO.

 

[Pursuit 648]

see Holmes ! I give up
jeeeeesh

hey clyde you do an amazing job dont for one second think you dont or let anyone tell you that you dont

 

[searun]

Traveller nailed it. Time for us to move on from this season's effort to scope out a decent opportunity to fish, and get focused on working together on the longer term issues. The only one's benefiting from the infighting is FFALL and his band of merry detractors. No one likes the present situation, we just have to figure out how to work with it for the short term while advancing a longer term strategy. We all need to get involved in the process in some way, learn the facts, and work together to build a better way forward.

 

[Charlie]

I would really love to see those DFO raw numbers for the years 2008 through 2011. I have been tracking the numbers and would like to see how the numbers compare to the information I have already obtained. Anyone like to see what your numbers look like from year to year? Does anyone see why IPHC might question those DFO estimates in 2007? FYI... THAT IS WHEN YOUR SEASONS AND CATCH LIMITS STARTED BEING REDUCED!!


If not familiar with the different DFO Areas referred, you might want to look them up, as you will be surprised who DFO thinks is catching those large halibut!!! I do have this on a spreadsheet if anyone would like. The following was copied directly from IPHC reports with some Alaska data deleted to fit that 10,000 max:

 

[Charlie]

Regulatory Area	Areas	Numbers projected	Average Weight	Net weight in pounds
2B	DFO Areas 1-11	30,349	18.3	557,034
	DFO Areas 12-29	14,198	20.3	288,645
	WDF&W Neah Bay	10,805	20.3	219,666
	Total	55,442		1,065,345
2C	Southeast Alaska	141,567	18.3	2,596,000
3A	Southcentral Alaska	259,270	19.3	5,002,000
3B	Kodiak Island West	541	22.8	12,335
4	Bering Sea/Aleutians	1,901	22.8	43,343
	Total	403,279		7,653,678
	Grand Total			8,719,023
Regulatory Area	Areas	Numbers projected	Average Weight	Net weight in pounds
2B	DFO Areas 1-11	42,895	18.8	806,426
	DFO Areas 12-29	16,906	21.6	365,677
	WDF&W Neah Bay	9,277	21.6	200,662
	Total	69,078		1,372,764
2C	Southeast Alaska	117,496	19.6	2,306,000
3A	Southcentral Alaska	281,927	16.8	4,743,000
3B	Kodiak Island West	465	19.6	9,114
4	Bering Sea/Aleutians	785	19.6	15,386
	Total	400,673		7,073,500
	Grand Total			8,446,264
Regulatory	Areas	Numbers	Average	Net weight in
Area		projected	Weight	pounds
2B	DFO Areas 1-11	55,795	15.8	883,235
	DFO Areas 12-29	46,552	23.2	1,077,679
	WDF&W Neah Bay	12,990	23.2	300,719
	Total	115,337		2,261,632
2C	Southeast Alaska
	Charter	105,651	20	2,113,000
	Private	70,798	14.2	1,004,000
	Total	176,449	17.7	3,117,000
3A	Southcentral Alaska
	Charter	216,551	18.2	3,947,000
	Private	147,325	14.5	2,141,000
	Total	363,876	16.7	6,088,000
3B	Kodiak Island West	530	20.9	11,077
4	Bering Sea/Aleutians	3,035	20.9	63,432
	Grand Total	543,890		9,279,509
Regulatory Area	PFMA Area	Numbers projected	Average weight	Net weight in pounds
2B	1	24,000	12.7	304,800
	2	15,000	12.7	190,950
	3/4	19,980	13.2	263,336
	5/6	5,808	13.2	76,549
	7	1,095	13.2	14,432
	8	1,372	13.2	18,083
	9	1,873	13.2	24,686
	10	0	0
	11	0	0
	12	3,778	20.6	77,827
	13	58	20.6	1,195
	14	0	0	0
	15	0	0	0
	16	0	0	0
	17	0	0	0
	18	0	0	0
	19	451	14.5	6,540
	20	540	14.5	7,830
	21	12,965	15.2	197,068
	23	19,982	12.2	243,780
	24	1,364	12.2	16,641
	25	2,442	17.3	42,247
	26	2,725	12.7	34,608
	27	2,247	30.7	68,983
	28	0	0	0
	29	0	0	0
	Total	115,680		1,589,555
	WDF&W Neah Bay	13,045	14.1	183,935
	Grand Total	128,725		1,773,490
Regulatory Area	PFMA Area	Numbers projected	Average weight	Net weight in pounds
2B	1	21,500	10.1	216,290
	2	13,000	12.7	165,490
	3/4	15,690	13.2	206,794
	5/6	5,115	13.2	67,416
	7	1,350	13.2	17,793
	8	2,137	13.2	28,166
	9	1,591	13.2	20,969
	10	0	0
	11	0	0
	12	5,709	15	85,635
	13	0	0	0
	14	0	0	0
	15	0	0	0
	16	0	0	0
	17	0	0	0
	18	0	0	0
	19	2,392	11	26,312
	20	801	11	8,811
	21	17,970	11	197,670
	23	18,673	8.7	162,455
	24	2,269	10.4	23,598
	25	2,813	14.2	39,945
	26	2,845	14.2	40,399
	27	4,493	30.8	138,384
	28	0	0	0
	29	0	0	0
	Total	118,348		1,446,127
	WDFW Neah Bay	9,977	11	109,747
	Grand Total	128,325		1,555,874

[TD="colspan: 5"] Table 4. 2003 Projections for Areas 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B, and 4 sport halibut harvests.
[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 5"][/TD]

[TD="colspan: 5"] Table 4. 2004 Projections for Areas 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B, and 4 sport halibut harvests.
[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 5"][/TD]

[TD="colspan: 5"] Table 3. 2005 sport halibut harvest projections for Areas 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B, and 4.
[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 5"][/TD]

[TD="colspan: 5"]Table 3 2006 Sport halibut harvest for Area 2B
[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 5"][/TD]

[TD="colspan: 5"]Table 3 2007 Sport halibut harvest for Area 2B
[/TD]

 

[Charlie]

A quote from IPHC: http://nwcoastenergynews.com/2011/1...ds-drastic-cuts-in-quotas-with-worse-to-come/

For a simple question, this has a bit of a complicated answer. The simple answer is, they are still here. Or at least the same age fish are still here. For the past 15 years or so, halibut growth rates have been depressed to levels that haven’t been seen since the 1920′s. Both females and male halibut have the potential to grow rapidly until about age 10, about 2 inches per year for males and 2.5 inches for females. Thereafter, females have the potential to grow even faster, while males generally would slow down relative to female growth. Growth rates for these larger fish in the last 10 or so years are more on the order of one inch or less per year. This translates into a much smaller fish at any given age. There was a dramatic increase in halibut growth rates in the middle of this century, especially in Alaska. Sometime around 1980, growth rates started to drop, and now Alaska halibut of a given age and sex are about the same size as they were in the 1920′s. For example, in the northern Gulf of Alaska, an 11-year-old female halibut weighed about 20 pounds in the 1920′s, nearly 50 pounds in the 1970′s, and now again about 20 pounds. The reasons for both the increase and the decrease are not yet known but may be tied to increased abundance of other species, such as arrowtooth flounder, and availability of food supply

How does Canada account for the “public resource” in “trust” is simple. The "curent" data being collected is not enough. Combining the current data with the old - see above! IMO... There is NOT enough "good" data to give any type of accurate estimates, especially in Areas 11-25! Based off old data being used those DFO estimates have to be "HIGH"!!!

 

[Rockfish]

Interesting analysis Charlie. I would be interested in knowing if those size changes correlate with the commercial fishing of halibut food supply fish such as herring and pilchards.

I doubt anyone at DFO is doing that kind of analysis; nor do I suspect we will see it as our current Federal Government is about to engage in massive budget cuts and does not seem to like science and analysis where it gets in the way of commercial exploitation and profit.

We are definitely moving away from evidence based decision making here.

 

[Gunsmith]

The DFO runs on the Peter principle. This is where people are promoted fast until they reach a job they cannot do and that is where they stay. That should explain their amazing stupidity.