SpringVelocity
Crew Member
Graham don't let them stir it up on the thread. You know full well Chris Bos and Tom Cole in our area bring it up a lot within Sviac and the sfab.
Halibut opening
- Thread starter Roberth
- Start date
Graham don't let them stir it up on the thread. You know full well Chris Bos and Tom Cole in our area bring it up a lot within Sviac and the sfab.
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
Ok. Then in that sense I can somewhat see the point. I don’t think Jencourt knew the answer though so I don’t think he was chirping sfab. Just looking for an answer.
The responses though indicate it has not been brought up in a motion however. And I went through past 2 years of sfab main board minutes and it was not a motion. He did not ask if it was “brought up”
Of course it is brought up but it is a different thing to bring it as a motion (that’s the “process”)Not sure about before that. I don’t think Jencourt or I are trying to bring this as a sfab ****ed up again type of post. More of a maybe it should be done as it is within their power as an advisory group and the more we harp (including through the process) the more attention it gets.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
I am just trying understand what does it really matter though if they did of didn't in the end? And even so how does that help us now? I guess I am looking for solutions instead of negatives.
GLG
Well-Known Member
Remember the days when we saw what social media could do?
https://www.facebook.com/BC-Halibut-Allocation-198424906849609/
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
Not sure who is admin of the facebook group (aka person that has to restart it), but lets get it back up and going.
GLG
Well-Known Member
Don't think about restarting it... think about using it as a blueprint. Look at what worked and what mistakes were made and learn. See who was approached and are they still around. Some of the folks that worked on this from our side are still around today and if your nice to them perhaps they would help. Don't expect them to lead again as they have done their part and got you from 12% to 15%.
Jencourt
Well-Known Member
Maybe adjust your hair trigger back a little folks. For God sake !
I am not being negative or trying to blame someone for not getting my way at all.
I was asking a question. Lots of talk about a focused direction and wanting to know what exactly people would be getting behind. That led me to wondering what we are actually asking for. After going through the minutes that I was able to dig up, I did not find a motion anywhere. so I asked. Yes GLG I also recall some old motions. I personally have not seen anything newer or new this year so I asked.
If after all these years of this BS a couple of you want to bring into question my intentions and suggest I am starting the beating or stirring the pot for no good reason , or mad because I did not get my way, give your head a shake.
Yes I asked a question about the SFAB process and yes I expected someone on here could provide an answer.
I am not being negative or trying to blame someone for not getting my way at all.
I was asking a question. Lots of talk about a focused direction and wanting to know what exactly people would be getting behind. That led me to wondering what we are actually asking for. After going through the minutes that I was able to dig up, I did not find a motion anywhere. so I asked. Yes GLG I also recall some old motions. I personally have not seen anything newer or new this year so I asked.
If after all these years of this BS a couple of you want to bring into question my intentions and suggest I am starting the beating or stirring the pot for no good reason , or mad because I did not get my way, give your head a shake.
Yes I asked a question about the SFAB process and yes I expected someone on here could provide an answer.
Last edited:
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
But again I will ask this if they didn't what is the point? That is sort of what I am getting at. What difference would it have made, and to be honest why should they? What would it do? They aren't there to lobby. They are there to talk what we are given
and make the best of it. That is what I don't understand where you headed with your post.
Jencourt
Well-Known Member
There are motions put forward all the time, requesting dfo to make changes to or re evaluate current management strategies. Many come from area Sfac groups and then travel the process to eventually be adopted by SFAB main board as something to push forward to DFO. That is the process as it is intended.
So to answer your question. Which no one has done for me so far.
My point was to find out if there is a current up to date motion in play? Also if not, why? And If so,what are we asking for, or if it suits you better, “what are we suggesting “?
Last edited:
wolf
Well-Known Member
Attend the meeting at put the motion forward but ill answer it for you YES it is always discussed , you guys think you can solve everything on a forum ...well you CANT....
plain and simple you need to get involved as for backing!!!!!!!!!!!!SVIAC went to bat for us BIG TIME along with certain guys that went over and fought for our right to fish (in Vancouver). IF it wasnt for them it would have been alot WORSE.... certain user groups voted for some very bad things to happen.
Sviac stands up for all fisherman and I dont care if you think its for the south only or not its FOR ALL OF us mostly REC fisherman or as they like to call it tin boat anglers. the way you guys talk you would think its only guides that take people out fishing and we are the only ones out there....????
I can tell you there is maybe 10 guides from race to sydney that fish halibut the rest is all rec guys and sometimes i see a lot of you out there....and where are YOU when push comes to shove???
We all have to stand united this separation and fighting among is totally not working ...
Wolf
plain and simple you need to get involved as for backing!!!!!!!!!!!!SVIAC went to bat for us BIG TIME along with certain guys that went over and fought for our right to fish (in Vancouver). IF it wasnt for them it would have been alot WORSE.... certain user groups voted for some very bad things to happen.
Sviac stands up for all fisherman and I dont care if you think its for the south only or not its FOR ALL OF us mostly REC fisherman or as they like to call it tin boat anglers. the way you guys talk you would think its only guides that take people out fishing and we are the only ones out there....????
I can tell you there is maybe 10 guides from race to sydney that fish halibut the rest is all rec guys and sometimes i see a lot of you out there....and where are YOU when push comes to shove???
We all have to stand united this separation and fighting among is totally not working ...
Wolf
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
"There are motions put forward all the time, requesting dfo to make changes to or re evaluate current management strategies."
Exactly but not lobbying for quota. Any one of these guys will say same thing. That can't be done through those groups. So even if there is anything it is not going to do anything. Maybe Derby/Cutplug or someone else can explain again. I am not on board BTW but am close enough and attend meetings. I have seen what happens. It seem like we still all think it still just a shut door process. If you had gone to your area meeting you could have asked that question and your SFAB chair would have to bring that motion up. My big question again why is so important to have this brought up by an advisory group? What difference will it make?
Exactly but not lobbying for quota. Any one of these guys will say same thing. That can't be done through those groups. So even if there is anything it is not going to do anything. Maybe Derby/Cutplug or someone else can explain again. I am not on board BTW but am close enough and attend meetings. I have seen what happens. It seem like we still all think it still just a shut door process. If you had gone to your area meeting you could have asked that question and your SFAB chair would have to bring that motion up. My big question again why is so important to have this brought up by an advisory group? What difference will it make?
Jencourt
Well-Known Member
And again I am out. Not wasting any more time on This. Should not have to explain my level of involvement every time a question is asked.
This thread reads the same as they did 6-8 years ago.
BTW I was able to forward my thoughts on to the chair of my SFAC. At that time I did not have that question in mind.
Jencourt OUT!!!
This thread reads the same as they did 6-8 years ago.
BTW I was able to forward my thoughts on to the chair of my SFAC. At that time I did not have that question in mind.
Jencourt OUT!!!
Last edited:
Gear'n'beer!
Well-Known Member
Let's do another one of these......worked last time didn't it? Joe public needs to be reminded which specific billionaire is profiting from this resource. Mike Hicks is regional chair of jdf.....effectively a mayor, and has already been working with Horgan on crd issues. I'm sure Chris Bos would take it on.
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
It’s not lobbying when a motion is put through. Using your logic every single motion sfab puts through is lobbying. Lobbying for 3 lings per day this year instead of 2...why’d they put that motion forward then?
Your logic makes zero sense. And if Jencourts question is ignored that gives the answer itself. So there’s your answer. Moving on to now to fix this...
Last edited:
Franko Manini
Well-Known Member
Honestly folks, I think we need a totally new system here... I'd be interested to know what everyone thought about a tagging system - similar to hunting.
I think I'd be in favour of using a "zip tie" like tag approach. If you checked "I fish for halibut" on the form when you submit your licensing information, you'd be mailed 2 or 3 or 6 tags (whatever way they wanted to set the policy), all with unique IDs. You can't share them or reassign them. When you catch a fish, you tag it through the gill plate. Compulsory reporting for used tags. Unused tags go back to DFO at the end of the season and can be reassigned the next year. Maybe they even say you can only have two unused tags in your possession at any time to cover off maximum possession limits. Then they can add on any size restrictions as a separate policy.
I think there are some other issues that get in the way of TAC allocation. Firstly, we know there are folks out there that catch more than 6 fish per year. Hell, they just reprint their licenses and don't report fish caught on previous licenses. It's a hole big enough to drive a ferry through. Secondly, without compulsory reporting, there is always the "fudge factor" and people will always manage the risk on the safe side. If the data says we caught X kilos of fish, they will add some percentage onto that to cover the risk associated with lack of precision. I know there will be people who don't want to report their catch to the government. I think this hurts us in the long run as there will be some bean counter who's job it is to assess the risk of under reported catch and then add some margin of error. That bean counter will ALWAYS cover the risk - and them some. I see it all the time in my career. Compulsory reporting reduces this error, thereby reducing the margin of error compensation.
A tagging system would be a good step towards collecting accurate data and we can use that advance our case. Because without dependable data, we can't really have anything but a pissing match.
Mostly guys, I'm just thinking out loud, and I haven't done any research into this, but what do you guys think? Would it be helpful to the cause or just a PITA?
I think I'd be in favour of using a "zip tie" like tag approach. If you checked "I fish for halibut" on the form when you submit your licensing information, you'd be mailed 2 or 3 or 6 tags (whatever way they wanted to set the policy), all with unique IDs. You can't share them or reassign them. When you catch a fish, you tag it through the gill plate. Compulsory reporting for used tags. Unused tags go back to DFO at the end of the season and can be reassigned the next year. Maybe they even say you can only have two unused tags in your possession at any time to cover off maximum possession limits. Then they can add on any size restrictions as a separate policy.
I think there are some other issues that get in the way of TAC allocation. Firstly, we know there are folks out there that catch more than 6 fish per year. Hell, they just reprint their licenses and don't report fish caught on previous licenses. It's a hole big enough to drive a ferry through. Secondly, without compulsory reporting, there is always the "fudge factor" and people will always manage the risk on the safe side. If the data says we caught X kilos of fish, they will add some percentage onto that to cover the risk associated with lack of precision. I know there will be people who don't want to report their catch to the government. I think this hurts us in the long run as there will be some bean counter who's job it is to assess the risk of under reported catch and then add some margin of error. That bean counter will ALWAYS cover the risk - and them some. I see it all the time in my career. Compulsory reporting reduces this error, thereby reducing the margin of error compensation.
A tagging system would be a good step towards collecting accurate data and we can use that advance our case. Because without dependable data, we can't really have anything but a pissing match.
Mostly guys, I'm just thinking out loud, and I haven't done any research into this, but what do you guys think? Would it be helpful to the cause or just a PITA?
Clint r
Well-Known Member
Yep. Someone asked what would happen if 100 people showed up at one of these meetings. Guess there’s the answer.
I agree that is not lobbing , all that has accomplished is PO a individual that was asking some reasonable questions. I still say were in a bad position to get any thing more as I believe DFO is trying to dry us up or segregate certain groups and force them into buying quota to fish or stay in business. The SFAB is given all the responsibility to negotiate something fair but are given no authority to lobby or refuse what DFO is presenting, which leads to criticism and righty so volunteer or not, this has to be changed. Were given numbers to work with that no one believes and any good numbers person can change and make the numbers work for them. If DFO WANTS TO REALLY MONITOR OUR CATCH , it could be done electronically. Will just say 5$ halibut tag , users buy one , wow guess what we now know how many people are now trying to catch a flat one. Now put some onus on the fisher to get another tag you have to put region/weight or what ever you want. It works for hunting, or Walmart for ordering nuts and bolts they no exactly where there at. We need a clear and conscious strategy, not some showing a pic of a dead horse, that is not leader ship, that belongs in a circus. I think we all need or should have already BEEN writing the MINISTER OF FISHERIES asking why on the East Coast if you have a license you need to fish it or lose it. Is that not the exact thing the SFAB or other groups has put forward for our COAST , that's the real issue. You should never ever except something when your told you had better take this as next year is going be worse. Time to dig heals In and fight. You can write your minister as we all should , yes it ties up a bit of his/her time but they don't mind it as the public isn't aware of the fight, they can keep it quiet. we have to get business , communities , on our side . SFAB SHOULD GO MORE PUBLIC to the media showing that they have great ideas , and how they are hand cuffed by DFO , how to bring more money to the communities, if this is not the mandate it should be , I for one am tired of being bent over and made to follow a dysfunctional regulation that could be served better for all Canadians . It should be noted that this regulation will be accepted under protest.
fogged in
Well-Known Member
My understanding is we will open 1 month later then last year with the same regulations.
Not sure if the size maximum is the same or back to the previous size.
It is yet to be determined when the season will close.
DFO have yet to release the final regs.
Right or wrong???
After thinking about this a bit more I think it may be time for a national advocacy group to emerge representing anglers, hunters and outdoor recreational interests. We are dealing with the feds and therefore it makes sense to have a group with huge numbers of memebers from across the entire country. (look at what the NRA does down south....agree or disagree with some of their positions) Politicians comsider their arguements because they have the voting weight of their memebership. Obviously tbis would be a huge undertaking to launch and build....you aren't going to get this done with volunteers. It will require paid knowledgable staff. One benefit of a group like this is the educational potential for members to learn through a newsletter what the issues are outside their local area. People in Sask become aware of issues here in BC and we learn about issues in PEI as examples. Just throwing it out there to provoke thought.
