Let me start by saying that some of this is tongue and cheek to illustrate the unworkable system that DFO is trying to impose on us with their quota leasing program that we have all rejected and the new maximum size restrictions on Halibut.
So you go out and lease one lb of quota (and yes I know that if you do so and use it, it will eventually become known and one would run the risk of being declared Persona non Gratis in the sport fishing community for breaking solidarity. It would be worse if you were a guide/lodge because your reputation is everything and doing so in this internet age could be just a tad problematic public relations wise and for your future profits).
So now you have your leased pound of quota. So you catch one near the end of the season that goes over max length a bit and is 10 lbs over, based on the over max length differential and actual weight of the fish . So now you apply that one lb of lease quota to that over max size fish and you are now arguably legal or at least it should make for an interesting court case. The whole lease concept is based on allowing you to move outside of the sport fishing regs. to lease and then fish for additional POUNDS of Halibut without having to follow many of the rules that other anglers must. Yes I know in my example you now need 9 additional extra lbs but as I understand it, you have some time to go lease that addition quota to come into compliance should you go over the leased quota you have available when you catch a fish.
I suppose that DFO could argue that you should cover the entire weight of the fish with leased quota or can only use quota on fish under the size restriction but why would you when the concept is to allow you to lease and utilize lbs of halibut outside of the sport fishing regs.
DFO is desperate to show they have ‘buy in’ and make a failed “expermentall” sport quota leasing program permanent so there is pressure for them to be flexible. We can’t keep big halibut because of allocation issues not conservation issues. The commercial sector still keeps them with 85% of TAC so why would DFO not allow you to top up with leased quota.
What a legal and conceptual nightmare DFO has created with this individual sport leased quota system which may work administratively somewhat in the commercial sector but does not in my opinion work when blending it into a rule based sport fishery, especially with these new draconian sport Halibut restrictions and minimal enforcement.
So you take your over size limit Halibut that is now outside of sport fishing regulation compliance and cover the overage with your leased quota to cover you for that that slight chance that you may actually get checked and problem solved, or you could even cover the entire lbs of the oversized halibut with leased quota. It seems to me the sport quota lease system attempts to blend the commercial halibut leasing system into the rule based sport fishery which results in huge conceptual and legal ambiguity, uncertainty, severe enforcement challenges and is subject to manipulation. Government may attempt to regulate around these issues assuming they actually get any buy in to this program which is currently almost non-existent, but I suspect that will prove difficult.
One wonders how much DFO thought the new Halibut max size restrictions through, especially in light of DFO’s agenda to promote and force the Halibut leasing system down the throats of the sport fishing sector against our interests and will.
I also think that having to release all larger Halibut will result in a lot of dead larger Halibut no matter how much education is provided. We have all watched examples on the water of those who can’t release a 3 lb salmon without a good chance of killing it or netting it to check it out and measure it; let alone a 110 lb Halibut. I suspect many will spend a lot of time trying to measure a large powerful moving target beside the boat, then take pictures of it in the water, then try to figure out how or try to release it and finally eventually just cut the line rather than risk injury or falling in which in many cases will result in a slow death for the fish. If the Halibut is close to the size limit, some may even hog tie it, pull it in the boat to measure and then throw it back if it’s a cm over, after some more pictures of course. Any large dead Halibut won’t count against the sport allocation, but it won’t do much for conservation.
DFO seems desperate to keep the commercial Halibut lobby happy and push the individual sport halibut quota leasing program through at any cost because they view it as necessary to allow them to defend the entire Halibut commercial private quota ownership model and by extension other quota systems that big money interests want.
In my opinion the only quota transfer system that makes sense and has a hope of working, is one which transfers quota permanently from the commercial sector to the entire sport sector as was done with the 3%. Whether that transfer should be purchased or simply transferred can be debated. I know that many in our sector are opposed to having to pay for something that was originally given for free to quota owner fish lords in perpetuity and who’s owners then and now are not required to ever fish. More than that, there is a strong political and economic case to be made for the needs of the sport sector to be considered outside of and take priority over the commercial allocation system.
This cannot be accomplished though the SFAB process.. That is not to say that it is not a useful process for us although it is also very useful for DFO and for the first time in years DFO wasted no time in accepting and announcing all the new restrictions. I greatly respect those who volunteer for this process and fight the good fight within the confines, limitations and pressures of the process but we need to do more outside the limitations of the SFAB process.
The more restrictions DFO can place on sport caught Halibut, the less pressure there is to reallocate commercial Halibut allocation to the sport sector and less pressure against quota systems and sport quota lease systems in general. In that sense, this was a good year for the commercial Halibut quota owners, and those with an agenda to protect and expand quota allocation systems. I find it suspicious that our catch estimations went up while our numbers declined last year which together with a reduced TAC this year was used by DFO to force massive further restrictions from us.
If we continue as a sector to do things the way we always have, we will continue to get the same results and our fishery will die.
Only political and public relations efforts can change this and for that reason I support the SVIAC. I hope that it will grow to eventually include the entire Province and work collectively with other BC angler organizations. We can then reach out to form alliances with angler organizations across Canada so that we can support them and in turn be supported by them. In our system you can usually only effect change if you have power and you only have power if you have money to buy influence, or represent a large numbers of voters. Putting money/effort or both into influencing those who write the laws and appoint the judges is every bit as important as starting a law suit, perhaps more so. As an example; look at the power the NRA has and they get much of their money from manufacturers not just memberships. Without this I don’t believe we have a hope of competing successfully with the other sectors and we will always be the weak third sector who gets hammered on salt water fishery issues as just occurred, despite being the largest fishery related economic engine in the Province by far.
Get involved, -- with SFAB, SVIAC, SFI, BCWF or any of many local angler/fish and game related organizations.
(
