HALIBUT REGULATION UPDATE
- Thread starter yammy5
- Start date
M
Mr. Dean
Guest
I don't understand how these limit reductions are good.
- 1st off they're NOT about conservation. Therefore, NOT needed.
- They're about restricting your rights/privileges as a Canadian, while the REAL slaughter continues.
Seriously, I read these posts and its simple too see just who all bothered</u> to get informed.
I find it embarrassing. All that was needed was a weekend of dedication and the willingness to think with a clear and open mind. Other than an internet connection, knowing how to read would have been the ONLY other requirement.
In your opinions, how many Halibut do we need to have swimming around, before we can go back to keeping three lowsy fish???
And yet many CRY for MORE restrictions (puke).
Gentlemen, Its time to start thinking with your heads instead of going by what the heart is telling you. Continue on down this path and it will only be met with a dead end.
But I guess for some; that would be the noblest of acts... An embraced total recreational closure for a species that has seemingly more importance on a deli table, than it does in your freezer at home. Yup, it sure FEELS good!
Can anybody</u> that posted thier fondness, show me ANY supporting data that this reduction is necessary?
Several people here have tried to educate. Now it’s your turn to reciprocate. Obviously we missed on something.
I'm appalled at my government. IMHO, this is nothing more that a ‘hush-up’ regulation. The amount of letters they received was likely staggering. This makes them ‘look’ as if we were considered, via the tossing out of the size limits. It’ll also keep most guys that would have dropped out, still out there fishing. And it will keep those uninformed, still wanting more (as seen... puke x2).
All I can say is that I hope that all who wrote in when the proposals were 1st made public, keep up the good job by drafting up another one!
Being sold out by government is one thing; that I am used to. BUT, being sold out by…………….
Forget it. Rant done.
- 1st off they're NOT about conservation. Therefore, NOT needed.
- They're about restricting your rights/privileges as a Canadian, while the REAL slaughter continues.
Seriously, I read these posts and its simple too see just who all bothered</u> to get informed.
I find it embarrassing. All that was needed was a weekend of dedication and the willingness to think with a clear and open mind. Other than an internet connection, knowing how to read would have been the ONLY other requirement.
In your opinions, how many Halibut do we need to have swimming around, before we can go back to keeping three lowsy fish???
And yet many CRY for MORE restrictions (puke).
Gentlemen, Its time to start thinking with your heads instead of going by what the heart is telling you. Continue on down this path and it will only be met with a dead end.
But I guess for some; that would be the noblest of acts... An embraced total recreational closure for a species that has seemingly more importance on a deli table, than it does in your freezer at home. Yup, it sure FEELS good!
Can anybody</u> that posted thier fondness, show me ANY supporting data that this reduction is necessary?
Several people here have tried to educate. Now it’s your turn to reciprocate. Obviously we missed on something.
I'm appalled at my government. IMHO, this is nothing more that a ‘hush-up’ regulation. The amount of letters they received was likely staggering. This makes them ‘look’ as if we were considered, via the tossing out of the size limits. It’ll also keep most guys that would have dropped out, still out there fishing. And it will keep those uninformed, still wanting more (as seen... puke x2).
All I can say is that I hope that all who wrote in when the proposals were 1st made public, keep up the good job by drafting up another one!
Being sold out by government is one thing; that I am used to. BUT, being sold out by…………….
Forget it. Rant done.
M
Mr. Dean
Guest
Deewar25,
Could you PLEASE show me where/how shipping catches is illegal?
I cant seem to find a regulation on it...
Thanks.
I'm not reading too many posts from guys that are not relatively informed - seems differences of opinions, which is welcome.
The conservation issue has been hammered, but when did we define conservation only as protecting stocks that are in trouble? Oh ya, twenty years ago when we still had a shot to conserve and protect the salmon stocks. Maybe we can conserve in May so we can still fish within the quota in August.
In your opinion, how many hali's do we need laying in our freezer? I'd vote 5 per year max, any more than that and you'd have to be selling them to get through them - it's very unlikely that I would take more than 2 -3.
So if a fisher doesn't get out until August, the quota has been reached and the fishery shut down (and this is a possibility), where is the fairness for all in that? Where are my fish?
Would you guys vote for a short season (say 2 months) in exchange of the daily and possession limits? Nor would I. I believe these regs extend the season for all. Lets go after the quota.
Deewar25
Well-Known Member
No, doesn't specifically outline that...I suppose its an ethical loophole to get around the limit...its INTENDED to be the limit of fish during one complete trip - whether it be 1 day, 2 days, 2 weeks - that legally is all you are allowed to bring back. If you are shipping back daily, you are cheating the system and the rest of us IMH
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/recfis..._between_a_daily_limit_and_a_possession_limit
It just takes from duckfart to Dusk!
wolf
Well-Known Member
Ok I will say it some of you guys are idiots!!!!!!!
Nimo you say 2 to 3 per year is fine ok then how maybe 5 good point!!!!!
I have clients that come from all over the world 1 time per year to get halibut do you still consider this "meat hunting" because if you do your totally wrong he is entitled to fish just like you and me and they take there 2 per person home same as you would do how is that different.
The boys in renny do the same for there clients their clients come out once a year to get fish why should they not be allowed the same????the plus for the renny boys is they only need to go out 1 time to the bank so they will save on fuel this year thats the only plus!!!!!!! now that this is inked in stone you dont realise once we LOOSE something we never will get it back where does it stop!!!!!!!!
Next it will be you can only fish mon,wed,fri,if it doesnt include a full moon or rainy day or whatever it will come to this!!!!!!
You have the luxury to go fishing whenever you want and there are some out there who go every halibut tide and get a fish every time so when he stops he has now gotten close to 50 or 60 halibut per year you know what they are doing with it, traded it for new seats etc bartered it away.
A client coming to our coast to come fishing generates economy for our WHOLE province just not your little world, it goes all the way down to a kid in 7-11 working to a major hotel,restaurants, airports,taxis etc on this island tourism is a major economy here!!!!
The meeting that was held in Van was telling a good friend of mine who was there representing the island,we have a sortfall of 500,000 lbs in which 300,000 was being taken from the boys from the states so now we are short 200.000 lbs and now dropping down to 2 per possession will by far exceed the that 200.000 lb mark. you know I know it. the halibut stocks have been stronger than ever if you have done some research ask a commercial halibut fisherman he will tell you I have.
We got sold out for big business the commercial sector didnt get touched on bit hhhhhmmmmm food for thought hey.
Ill say now to you nimo sorry for directing this at you!!!!!!
Like Mr dean said it is not about coservation it is still going to be caught by commercial there is no differece in the quota same amount of tonnage being caught all they did was take away from the place where it generates the most income. Mr patterson is/will/and loving this because now he gets even more money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
im still mad about this whole thing call me a bear with a thorn in his paw but it is all wrong!!!!!!!!!
Wolf
Nimo you say 2 to 3 per year is fine ok then how maybe 5 good point!!!!!
I have clients that come from all over the world 1 time per year to get halibut do you still consider this "meat hunting" because if you do your totally wrong he is entitled to fish just like you and me and they take there 2 per person home same as you would do how is that different.
The boys in renny do the same for there clients their clients come out once a year to get fish why should they not be allowed the same????the plus for the renny boys is they only need to go out 1 time to the bank so they will save on fuel this year thats the only plus!!!!!!! now that this is inked in stone you dont realise once we LOOSE something we never will get it back where does it stop!!!!!!!!
Next it will be you can only fish mon,wed,fri,if it doesnt include a full moon or rainy day or whatever it will come to this!!!!!!
You have the luxury to go fishing whenever you want and there are some out there who go every halibut tide and get a fish every time so when he stops he has now gotten close to 50 or 60 halibut per year you know what they are doing with it, traded it for new seats etc bartered it away.
A client coming to our coast to come fishing generates economy for our WHOLE province just not your little world, it goes all the way down to a kid in 7-11 working to a major hotel,restaurants, airports,taxis etc on this island tourism is a major economy here!!!!
The meeting that was held in Van was telling a good friend of mine who was there representing the island,we have a sortfall of 500,000 lbs in which 300,000 was being taken from the boys from the states so now we are short 200.000 lbs and now dropping down to 2 per possession will by far exceed the that 200.000 lb mark. you know I know it. the halibut stocks have been stronger than ever if you have done some research ask a commercial halibut fisherman he will tell you I have.
We got sold out for big business the commercial sector didnt get touched on bit hhhhhmmmmm food for thought hey.
Ill say now to you nimo sorry for directing this at you!!!!!!
Like Mr dean said it is not about coservation it is still going to be caught by commercial there is no differece in the quota same amount of tonnage being caught all they did was take away from the place where it generates the most income. Mr patterson is/will/and loving this because now he gets even more money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
im still mad about this whole thing call me a bear with a thorn in his paw but it is all wrong!!!!!!!!!
Wolf
Tailspin
Active Member
A Damn fine Idiot I will say! Thanks Wolf for your kind words...[8D]
The commercial boyz don't have the cake walk either i hate to admit. I would love to blame someone but the commercial sector has had it's hits as do we sporties. I look at this notice as being much better than the worst case scenario of complete closure and size slots etc.
One strike of the pen in Ottawa and it's done regardless of what we say or do. Surprised we are not paying a fish tax to add to the carbon tax, lol. What a Province.
The commercial boyz don't have the cake walk either i hate to admit. I would love to blame someone but the commercial sector has had it's hits as do we sporties. I look at this notice as being much better than the worst case scenario of complete closure and size slots etc.
One strike of the pen in Ottawa and it's done regardless of what we say or do. Surprised we are not paying a fish tax to add to the carbon tax, lol. What a Province.
Not sure what this means but I don't think it was nice
Can someone tell me if I understand this correctly?
-TAC was cut down therefore effecting commercial and sporties.
-12% is allocated to sporties and 88% to commercial. This has not changed.
-The DFO figure sporties are catching over their 12% so these regulations have been put in play to keep us in our 12%. (not for concervation reasons)
In short is this all about keeping us in our 12%?
Just want to know if I understand the reasoning. Not saying I agree or disagree.
These questions are open to opinions:
If this in the DFO's eyes brings our catch to below 12% will they make ammendments next year and increase the limits? You would hope.
Or will they decide that we only reached 8% so give another 4% to commercial and so on...
If they think ahead and put a 10 hali annual limmit would this keep us in our 12% and therefore make the daily limit cut back unneccessary?
Tips
M
Mr. Dean
Guest
That link only mentions that stockpiling in camp is a no-no. It clearly states that your catch MUST be home in order to fish more.
IMHO, it endorses the use of packing services. With these reg's, packers will see a 30% boost in business.
____________________________________________________________________
It's these types of spin-offs that make the recreational fish hunter a viable and worthy piece of the puzzle. Too frown upon a guy that believes in sustaing himself, especially</u> while a commercial fishery is working; is ironic....
We have the right to provide for our families. My family consumes as much fish as other meat products. 3 fish were never</u> enough to meet this demand, let alone 2. So I guess that these new regs will only serve to better a commercial interest, of one type or another, as well as serving the march to choke off the rec-fisher.
Yup, it's all gooood!
For the better of a beloved pastime, everyone should do some brushing up on what ANY catch restrictions placed upon a rec-fisher is actually all about. Any limits place upon us ONLY benifit commercial interests.
Would our Salmon stocks be the way they are now; IF we didn't have a global economy for them that was and is being promoted?
M
Mr. Dean
Guest
quote:Originally posted by Tips Up
Not sure what this means but I don't think it was nice
Can someone tell me if I understand this correctly?
-TAC was cut down therefore effecting commercial and sporties.
-12% is allocated to sporties and 88% to commercial. This has not changed.
-The DFO figure sporties are catching over their 12% so these regulations have been put in play to keep us in our 12%. (not for concervation reasons)
In short is this all about keeping us in our 12%?
Just want to know if I understand the reasoning. Not saying I agree or disagree.
These questions are open to opinions:
If this in the DFO's eyes brings our catch to below 12% will they make ammendments next year and increase the limits? You would hope.
Or will they decide that we only reached 8% so give another 4% to commercial and so on...
If they think ahead and put a 10 hali annual limmit would this keep us in our 12% and therefore make the daily limit cut back unneccessary?
Tips
You have it figured right.
Rec-fishers have demonstrated the need for more guota of the TAC. With the handling of this fiasco, I seriously doubt we will see any increase of it; only further restrictions.
Especially while anglers keep calling for more. [B)]
wolf
Well-Known Member
Graham you need to read all 180 pages of that TAC pamplet.
We got screwed thats the bottom line, we will never ever get back what we have lost just have to look at the past!!!!!!!!
coho,barbless hooks,once we loose something they never give it back.
Dont get me wrong I am all about conservation for the last 4 years I have told my client if we get a hali over 100lbs in my estimation I amd cutting the line, and they are fine with that.
What i would have liked to see was 2 hali per person possesion of 2 but then a annual limt in place (say 10 per year) thats where the problem really lies here.
Just look at the the number 88% and we get a pitance of 12% and sport fishing definattly brings in way more money I think the last numbers I heard was over a billion $$$$$ to our province generated by sport fishing thats you me your friends and a tourism just look at what it costs us to go with buddies per day.
boat,gear,launch,pops,food,then you loose some gear!!!!
Write down what it costs and include EVERY thing you spend down to a pack of tooth picks you will be surprised at how much money you accually spend.
Good luck Wolf
We got screwed thats the bottom line, we will never ever get back what we have lost just have to look at the past!!!!!!!!
coho,barbless hooks,once we loose something they never give it back.
Dont get me wrong I am all about conservation for the last 4 years I have told my client if we get a hali over 100lbs in my estimation I amd cutting the line, and they are fine with that.
What i would have liked to see was 2 hali per person possesion of 2 but then a annual limt in place (say 10 per year) thats where the problem really lies here.
Just look at the the number 88% and we get a pitance of 12% and sport fishing definattly brings in way more money I think the last numbers I heard was over a billion $$$$$ to our province generated by sport fishing thats you me your friends and a tourism just look at what it costs us to go with buddies per day.
boat,gear,launch,pops,food,then you loose some gear!!!!
Write down what it costs and include EVERY thing you spend down to a pack of tooth picks you will be surprised at how much money you accually spend.
Good luck Wolf
M
Mr. Dean
Guest
Tips,
Tac is to be achieved... If rec's don't catch their guota, the commercials will do it for them. It's THAT simple.
But not a problem likely faced while DFO figures that WE should do the suffering to preserve commercial catches that created this issue in the 1st place.
Tac is to be achieved... If rec's don't catch their guota, the commercials will do it for them. It's THAT simple.
But not a problem likely faced while DFO figures that WE should do the suffering to preserve commercial catches that created this issue in the 1st place.
Just wanted to see if I had an understanding the DFOs reasoning for these changes when even they have stated it is not for conservation.
Sounds like I do.
In the big picture...
No I do not agree with it. If we are surpassing our 12% then 12% is not enough.
In the local picture...
I am OK with some restrictions to control those who over fish and abuse the fishery.
Agreed.
Don't ever talk to my wife!
Ya fishing is expensive and as you know Roy with my success rate on hali it is very expensive for me.[B)]
Sad that whether we talk about hali, salmon, steelhead whatever...
It is $$ first and environment and the Canadian people last.
Tips
Sounds like I do.
In the big picture...
No I do not agree with it. If we are surpassing our 12% then 12% is not enough.
In the local picture...
I am OK with some restrictions to control those who over fish and abuse the fishery.
Agreed.
Don't ever talk to my wife!
Ya fishing is expensive and as you know Roy with my success rate on hali it is very expensive for me.[B)]
Sad that whether we talk about hali, salmon, steelhead whatever...
It is $$ first and environment and the Canadian people last.
Tips
M
Mr. Dean
Guest
Ummm lets see.
I layed 6 in the freezer and the wife killed 3, over the course of the entire last year. We coulda handled 3 more with NO problem of having it consumed before the next wetting of the line. Of all that, maybe 10lbs was 'gifted' to people that aren't living under our roof that has 3 occupants.
Seeing as you concerned with our diets;
I'm a FIRM believer that if theres a fish in the freezer, theres no need to go out and fish for more. I don't believe in catch-n-release but NEVER will I denounce it. Its a personal choice and should remain as such.
Would we accept limits on the amount of meat products we buy in stores?
How is this ANY different?
You're informed?
FYI we already have. This is the</u> problem; not enough guota to meet demand.
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
Hmmm... I am confused. Does this new area restriction (see the map coordinates listed in the first note of this thread) replace the existing no fishing zone on Swiftsure Bank, or is it in addition to the existing no fishing zone?[?]
Does anyone out there no the answer to this? Thanks for your replies.
Does anyone out there no the answer to this? Thanks for your replies.
T
Tuffcity
Guest
Whole in the Water:
The new hali (& lingcod & rockfish) closure is in addition to the existing Swiftsure closure. Basically it's a closure from the 12 mile limit out, but only in area 121. Clear as mud?
And to play devils advocate for a moment...
RC
The new hali (& lingcod & rockfish) closure is in addition to the existing Swiftsure closure. Basically it's a closure from the 12 mile limit out, but only in area 121. Clear as mud?
And to play devils advocate for a moment...
the commercial guys got cut back a little over 2 million pounds. If the rec sector does not catch their "quota" it isn't given to the commercial boats to catch. It's carried over and can be sold by the SFAB to the commercial guys- just like it was for 2 consecutive years a couple of years ago.
RC
What happened to all those reasonable and good proposal by the SFAB to purchase additional sport quota from existing funds? It was all there but ignored. Very disappointing! The 12% agreement is a joke and somebody with money should sue them for this. I am sure this arbitrarily set 12% limit is in violation of the constitution and right of freedom.
