Recommendations for 2009 Halibut Season

[MyEscape]

At the SFA meeting on the West Coast Saturday it was a unanimous opinion that next year we have a BC restriction in the size of the halibut you may retain and if we adopt this it should go hand and hand with a 2 fish per day and 2 fish carrying limit. We recommended a 60” limit which equates to approx a 60lbs max halibut. As many of you know our quota is based on weight not # of fish therefore by reducing the retention of larger fish it will assist in staying within our annual quota and allow for a full year long season. Of course the often debated catch of large females will be over and they will be left to do what they do best producing more halibut….. It will more than likely also mean a non stainless steel hook restriction will also be put in place.

One thing to keep in mind as long as they continue to push more and more anglers off shore due to inside closures and lower salmon numbers the pressure on this species will continue to be greater and greater. If you’re out there for Salmon why not pick up some Halibut too it only makes sense. This is why we ALL need to do something NOW not later or we will be under a much more restrictive seasons in the future.

Also another option is to require the purchase of a halibut stamp and the money from that be used to purchase commercial quota.

Cheers ME

www.goldriverfishinglodge.com
www.moutchabay.com/
Email: h00kedonfishing@hotmail.com

 

[crabbuster]

How does one tell the difference between a male and female halibut?I'm new to fishing and if that rule gets set in place next year I had better know!
thanks,crabby.

 

[richmake]

quote:Originally posted by MyEscape

At the SFA meeting on the West Coast Saturday it was a unanimous opinion that next year we have a BC restriction in the size of the halibut you may retain and if we adopt this it should go hand and hand with a 2 fish per day and 2 fish carrying limit. We recommended a 60” limit which equates to approx a 60lbs max halibut. As many of you know our quota is based on weight not # of fish therefore by reducing the retention of larger fish it will assist in staying within our annual quota and allow for a full year long season. Of course the often debated catch of large females will be over and they will be left to do what they do best producing more halibut….. It will more than likely also mean a non stainless steel hook restriction will also be put in place.

One thing to keep in mind as long as they continue to push more and more anglers off shore due to inside closures and lower salmon numbers the pressure on this species will continue to be greater and greater. If you’re out there for Salmon why not pick up some Halibut too it only makes sense. This is why we ALL need to do something NOW not later or we will be under a much more restrictive seasons in the future.

Also another option is to require the purchase of a halibut stamp and the money from that be used to purchase commercial quota.

Cheers ME

www.goldriverfishinglodge.com
www.moutchabay.com/
Email: h00kedonfishing@hotmail.com

Now as far as good and bad news goes for the past month...this is the best news I've heard in months.
My guests and most others I know rarely keep anything larger than 60lbs anyways so and I believe that this was probably our best option at this time.
I got a few e-mails over the weekend from various individuals also stating that this was the route to take.

www.coastwidesportsfishing.com

 

[wolf]

YES good idea (not)one better would be an annual limit as there are some people out there who have no clue as to what or how to release a fish salmon or halibut I see it every year and I am sure alot on here do as well.Where I watch people who catch coho that you cant keep net it put it in the boat and you hear it smacking its head on the floor then they get the book out to see what it is then they finally realease it.YES that fish is going to live.
The size restriction may be good for of shore etc but on the southern waters (victoria)we tend to have larger fish and not alot of (chickens)so where does that leave us???????as we all know off of vic there is no way you can fish halibut every day here as the currents dictate what you can and cant do.

We are indeed in a lot of trouble time to take up golf!!!

Blue Wolf Charters
www.bluewolfcharters.com

 

[salmon9]

I support these recommendations that SFA put forward.

 

[Cuba Libre]

If we all work together to get the 12% quota recinded and get a WORKABLE share of the catch we will be in MUCH better shape for the future.Releasing large females will not make one iota of difference to the overall TAC. You will just be leaving them for the commercials as part of thier present 88% of a public resource.

You are playing into the hands of DFO




20ft Alumaweld Intruder

 

[chris73]

Agree with you CL. Do not confuse this with conservation. The same amount of fish will be taken - just we sporties will take less and the commercials more in order to press us back to the 12-88 rule. So, figure all the fish you throw back will end up at Costco a week later...

 

[wolf]

EXACUALLY cuba just say for instance we do go to a annual limit for one second ok!!!!!people who come here and locals who stay for 3 to 5 weeks and then ship it back home via st jeans if they were only allowed to take say 10 per year and that its, its not hard to do the math

1 liscences at an avg of 25 lbers for a day =50 lbs (give or take)
so 50 lbs x 2 fish allowed annual (10)= 500lbs!!!!!!!and thats just one person right,

SO

right now we can take whatever we want so say an avg of 10 days even more for locals fishing at a 25 lb avg =20 fish now
10 days x 50 lbs (2 hali per day)now times that by 20 fish now its 1000 lbs how much hali does one really need!!!!!!!!!!!

so 1000 lbs the old way or
500 lbs with an annual limit
SAVE 500 lbs

Now start adding more fisherpersons say 500 people saving 500 lbs per person right there you have cut the TAC by 250,000 lbs why is this bad????????? now coast wide you would save over a million lbs and then we can still fish the way we always have NO size limit NO closed seasons and yet we are conserving from what I have heard we are close to 300,000 lbs over our quota and this simple yet effective way would have saved us all heartache and stress and being mad at everyone else but ourselves
We have an annual limit for salmon why not halibut?????????


Wolf

Blue Wolf Charters
www.bluewolfcharters.com

 

[Cuba Libre]

Wolf-- I support the idea of a annual halibut limit. If someone wants to take home 8- 10 pingpong paddles annually, thats fine with me. But to start dicking around trying to measure each fish while still alive is asking for trouble-- both for the angler and for released fish. better to get your two fish a day, put the heavy gear away and go whale watching!!




20ft Alumaweld Intruder

 

[richmake]

The whole process seams like it will work for 2009 season but I like the tag idea for 2010
I'm not suggesting by any means that this is the best idea but getting access to more quota for the recreational sector is what we want for the future.
We have a chinook tag...why not a halibut tag
let's here some opinions



www.coastwidesportsfishing.com

 

[Last Chance]

I think it would be better to do the Hali stamp and buy quota. The quota system is in place, and not going anywhere anytime soon. However it was established is not going to change anything. I belive it was IronNoggin that said the sporties rarely attended when the quota system was being put into place.


And I'm willing to bet that damn near 200,000 pounds of Canadian halibut wound up in Neah Bay and LaPush. How about just cutting off fishing for Canadian halibut south of Estavan entireley for boats without a Canadian Citizen aboard as one measure, I don't have the creel numbers from there, but looking at the number of WN boats fishing and what the usual take is, I'll bet I'm close?

Kill the Northern Washington incursions, impose a one over/one under size limit as of June 1, (Because fishing effort in SCVI for big ones slows down the due to tides/dogfish anyway), and I'm willing to bet we get close.

A 60 lb limit would pretty much kill the inshore fishery, as most of our inshore halibut are a lot larger then the ones caught offshore. And the first guy that goes to the bottom when his hand gets caught in the secondary hook trying to release a thrashing 100 pound halibut beside the boat is going to be the head of the final nail in the coffin for hali fishing, just wait.

Last Chance Fishing Adventures

www.lastchancefishingadventures.com
www.swiftsurebank.com

 

[IronNoggin]

quote:Originally posted by LastChance

...And I'm willing to bet that damn near 200,000 pounds of Canadian halibut wound up in Neah Bay and LaPush. How about just cutting off fishing for Canadian halibut south of Estavan entireley for boats without a Canadian Citizen aboard as one measure, I don't have the creel numbers from there, but looking at the number of WN boats fishing and what the usual take is, I'll bet I'm close?

Kill the Northern Washington incursions, impose a one over/one under size limit as of June 1, (Because fishing effort in SCVI for big ones slows down the due to tides/dogfish anyway), and I'm willing to bet we get close.

aYup, you're close alright LC, right</u> close. The US will NOT allow any Canadian registered boat in their Pacific waters (Washington & Oregon) without having a local Guide on-board. Yet, their sports fleet routinely enters Canadian waters, remove numbers of fish (not simply halibut) and return home. They are the ones that pushed us over the limit last year, and again this year are responsible for the Lion's Share of our overage. Time to play Tit for Tat with the US, and impose like sanctions for fishing in our waters. And while this may p off a few 'Mericans, so be it, they've been stressing our catch rate for a considerable period, while imposing serious restrictions on any of us who might think to do the same in their waters.

An attempt was made to address this in the requirement to purchase licences from a Canadian vendor. From what I saw out there this year, that ain't doing the job required.

And while it is fine to discuss "remedial measures" such as slot / size limits, tags, annual limit etc, the bottom line here is we obviously need to work on getting the distribution ratio a little more fair for the recreational fleets. That will of course take time and effort. In the meantime, I wouldn't mind seeing the annual limit imposed, such as the tag system we already employ with springs. Can't buy into the size restriction though (we'd be cutting them free only to see them taken shortly thereafter by the long-line fleet. They very much prefer the larger fish of course, and will not even consider a size restriction for their operations).

Perhaps the tag purchase ain't a bad idea as well. Perhaps.It is still my belief that the funding to purchase additional quota should be sought from GenRev, and not solely on the shoulders of the recreational sector. Again, this was a privatization of a PUBLIC resource by the gov. Why we constantly have to pay the piper for their erroneous ways is beyond me!!

My 2 Pesos,
Nog

 

[richmake]

quote:Originally posted by IronNoggin

quote:Originally posted by LastChance

...And I'm willing to bet that damn near 200,000 pounds of Canadian halibut wound up in Neah Bay and LaPush. How about just cutting off fishing for Canadian halibut south of Estavan entireley for boats without a Canadian Citizen aboard as one measure, I don't have the creel numbers from there, but looking at the number of WN boats fishing and what the usual take is, I'll bet I'm close?

Kill the Northern Washington incursions, impose a one over/one under size limit as of June 1, (Because fishing effort in SCVI for big ones slows down the due to tides/dogfish anyway), and I'm willing to bet we get close.

aYup, you're close alright LC, right</u> close. The US will NOT allow any Canadian registered boat in their Pacific waters (Washington & Oregon) without having a local Guide on-board. Yet, their sports fleet routinely enters Canadian waters, remove numbers of fish (not simply halibut) and return home. They are the ones that pushed us over the limit last year, and again this year are responsible for the Lion's Share of our overage. Time to play Tit for Tat with the US, and impose like sanctions for fishing in our waters. And while this may p off a few 'Mericans, so be it, they've been stressing our catch rate for a considerable period, while imposing serious restrictions on any of us who might think to do the same in their waters.

An attempt was made to address this in the requirement to purchase licences from a Canadian vendor. From what I saw out there this year, that ain't doing the job required.

And while it is fine to discuss "remedial measures" such as slot / size limits, tags, annual limit etc, the bottom line here is we obviously need to work on getting the distribution ratio a little more fair for the recreational fleets. That will of course take time and effort. In the meantime, I wouldn't mind seeing the annual limit imposed, such as the tag system we already employ with springs. Can't buy into the size restriction though (we'd be cutting them free only to see them taken shortly thereafter by the long-line fleet. They very much prefer the larger fish of course, and will not even consider a size restriction for their operations).

Perhaps the tag purchase ain't a bad idea as well. Perhaps.It is still my belief that the funding to purchase additional quota should be sought from GenRev, and not solely on the shoulders of the recreational sector. Again, this was a privatization of a PUBLIC resource by the gov. Why we constantly have to pay the piper for their erroneous ways is beyond me!!

My 2 Pesos,
Nog

I agree Noggin.
The fact that we even have a chance somehow of getting quota back is gonna be key.
I agree that the size limit idea is probably not the best but it is a start.
let's alll remeber that the quota that all commercial fisherman have was never originally bought...it was simply alotted to each fisherman'owner based on past catch history, which in turn made a select few instant millionares.
Also...stopping the northern washington group from comming across the line daily to harvest fish has to stop.
just my opinion...


www.coastwidesportsfishing.com

 

[Last Chance]

Does anyone have the Creel numbers from Neah Bay/Lapush? Would be excellent ammo to bring to the Nov 18 meeting.

Last Chance Fishing Adventures

www.lastchancefishingadventures.com
www.swiftsurebank.com

 

[juandesooka]

Interesting discussion.

Commercial quota / instant millionaires. I think that's always the way, whether forestry land, fishing quotas, taxi license, or any other area where there's a limited resource allocated to a few people. Governments rarely seem to look at the long-run economics, and just give it away to start with (perhaps sometimes doesn't seem worth much at the time?). Anyway, it is also always the case too that once they become valuable and start changing hands, the authorities have to buy them back...another windfall profit, but not avoidable. And again in the long-run, probably worth it to act sooner than later, because if they are worth $1m now, they will be $1b in 30 years.

Halibut stamp. That seems like a pretty reasonable solution. Anyone who wants to keep a halibut pays a fee upfront, the fee goes towards "conservation" -- for salmon that means hatcheries (supposedly); for halibut that means buying back quotas. That's a good economic solution -- let people make their own personal choices instead of having to enforce increasingly picky rules, and the end result is the same.

US catches. Frustrating for sure, because once the US quota is filled, then they focus on taking all they can from the Canadian quota. That's a capital P political issue, intertwined with all sorts of trade restrictions, NAFTA, and all that stuff. But from a common sense perspective, it sure seems unfair to have Canadians not welcome in US waters, but Americans welcome in Canadian, especially those earning a profit from it (have a work visa to work in Canada?). Sadly, I seriously doubt there's the political will in Ottawa to take on the big bad USA over this issue. But if there were, maybe the way to go is a more expensive halibut stamp for non-Canadians -- if Canadians pay $20 for their 10 fish, non-residents pay $100. That would have economics help solve this problem..."fish your own fish, if you want to fish ours, then pay the REAL cost".

Annual limit. I think this is a no-brainer. There's definitely abusers out there, and it needs to stop. Effective enforcement then becomes the issue, but at least you'd have something to enforce.

Slot limit. If considering a limit on taking big ones to protect the mamas (and if in place, should be for commercial as well?), then should also be a size limit to protect the babies...if you'd be embarrassed to clean it at the dock, then throw it back!

 

[OldBlackDog]

And while it is fine to discuss "remedial measures" such as slot / size limits, tags, annual limit etc, the bottom line here is we obviously need to work on getting the distribution ratio a little more fair for the recreational fleets.</u> That will of course take time and effort. In the meantime, I wouldn't mind seeing the annual limit imposed, such as the tag system we already employ with springs. Can't buy into the size restriction though (we'd be cutting them free only to see them taken shortly thereafter by the long-line fleet. They very much prefer the larger fish of course, and will not even consider a size restriction for their operations).

Lets start with the unfair allocation and get the Government to resolve this.
The Government "gave" the commercial fleet their allocation. They the Government can resolve this by purchasing or taking back what is required for the sports sector.

Forget measuring as the commercial fleet is not throwing back large halibut.
They catch the vast majority, so lets see them release them.

This is "POLITICAL", lets deal with it as Political.

 

[juandesooka]

Pressed reply instead of edit...sorry for repeated post.

 

[Tips Up]

In my opinion a 60" size limit is an accident waiting to happen. A 58" hali should be safely harpooned outside the boat not held while measuring it with hooks and 2lb balls flying around. Not to mention I think you will see a lot of dead hali getting measured.

I am with Wolf on this one (except for his math)
An annual limit solves many problems and cuts the total lbs taken.
10 fish limit per year. (Average 25lb = 250lb per angler per year.)
This also iliminates the accused charter guys of catching daily limits for clients also.

I also believe that each area should be looked at independantly. Guides off shore need to get their 2 fish per client to make it worth while. As noted by Wolf the hali here in Sooke/ Victoria are bigger and not as plentiful. I could live with a 1 fish limit here.

So by putting an annual limit in you will cut the off shore take in half and by cutting the local daily limit to 1 you will be cutting the the take in half.

Just my thoughts.
Tips

 

[wolf]

my bad but you get my point LOL thanks Graham

I would all be for a liscence halibut stamp but who is going to govern that money??? we all paid 100% in liscence fees and habitat conservation funds about 5 or so years ago and then all of a sudden they started cutting funding to the hatchery programs so where is that money going OH YEAH thats right gen rev.
If we pay into a habitat fund and it is on top of a lic. fee then ALL that money should go to what it is intened for not new furniture for some beuricrats office!!!!!!

Wolf



Blue Wolf Charters
www.bluewolfcharters.com

 

[Nimo]

Is the tag idea a permanent purchase and therefore reallocation of the quota or basically renting the quota from them annually?

If it's simply renting the quota for the year only to leave the ownership in their hands count me out. I'm not interested in paying commercial fishers to stay home!!

If it's a permanent purchase maybe it could fly. We need to simply go and buy a few licenses A marine TLC of sorts - put the control back in our hands.