SFI-Up-date Feb. 2013

[Derby]

SFI Update - February 2013
Halibut Recommendations
BC Stats Report on Fisheries
CTAG





February 5, 2013

It's been a busy few weeks on the fisheries planning front and we thought it was a good time to share some of the important developments in the sport fishing industry with you.

Halibut 2013

The Sport Fishing Advisory Board held its annual main board meetings last weekend and considered a variety of issues facing the sector. Of critical importance, the board looked at options for the 2013 halibut fishery and wrestled with how best to maintain fishing opportunities and an extended fishing season. Ultimately, after lengthy discussion of a variety of options and with consideration of risk to opportunity, the board opted to recommend that for 2013, the season open on March 15, and that anglers be allowed to retain one fish per day, two in possession. They voted to maintain last year's requirement that one fish be under 83cm (approximately 15 pounds) but added that the other could not be larger than 126 cm (approximately 60 pounds). In addition the board voted to recommend that anglers be allowed to retain a maximum of six halibut this year, a measure that, based on estimates, will allow the season to remain open until December 31st.

Obviously the March 15 opening will impact charter boat operators on Southern Vancouver Island and the Northern coast, and the maximum limit will impact some individual anglers who fished and harvested through the entire season. But on balance it appears that the board made a tough decision between a range of unpopular options that will achieve the desired result of the longest season possible.

 

[scott craven]

I hope DFO give us a little leeway as it's gonna be difficult measuring a Halibut in the water.
Also 126cm = approx 50" (not 5' as mentioned in another post)

 

[Derby]

Sfi is not voluneteer and primarily funded by lodges and guides. The biggest contributers are the big guys. So this is no surprise

Get your facts straight before you shoot your mouth off

 

[Derby]

So with this, it is going to be open till the end of the year. Now what if it was to close say Oct.1st would that make room to get rid of the <60 lber rule. After Oct. 1st weather will come into play so days would be limited????

If there is quota still left the fishery will be left open...

 

[fish4all]

Hey Jerry, Do you think the commercial guys should have to let the big fish go too?

why should they? the proposal is to try and lengthen the season for the rec sector. every commercial is off the water once they hit their individual allocation. some as early as april 1.

 

[scott craven]

why should they? the proposal is to try and lengthen the season for the rec sector. every commercial is off the water once they hit their individual allocation. some as early as april 1.

With 85% of 7,000,000 lbs they should be on the water for quite a while
if they are actually fishing their quota.

 

[fish4all]

It's All about conservation Isn't it. Perhaps it would be good for the resource! we All know you Target them!

shows how little you know..

1) the larger fish hang out in the reefs where the majority of commercial boats cant fish as they dont have the yelloweye or quillback quota to work in shallows.

2) our price drops over 80lb. if you look on the effort chart the majority of commercial fish is taken off langara (what is called the deep hole) and south of grey rock (called the 800 line). both areas are smaller fish areas.

 

[fish4all]

With 85% of 7,000,000 lbs they should be on the water for quite a while
if they are actually fishing their quota.

there are quite a few small quota holders that only fish 1 maybe 2 trips at the most. last year it was 9 days fishing to put in our quota.

 

[wolf]

There small fish areas now as they out fished the bigger ones.
Fishall give me a break if a boat can fish 5 days and load up on big ones he does less $$$$$$ but outwighs fuel/food/boat etc spending 3 weeks getting small its a trade of more commie bs

 

[UkeeDreamin]

"They voted to maintain last year's requirement that one fish be under 83cm (approximately 15 pounds) but added that the other could not be larger than 126 cm (approximately 60 pounds)."

This statement in the SFI release epitomizes the misunderstanding of the fishery by those who voted on the regs. All of those involved talk about the slot as though it applies in all cases, when in fact it does not apply in the vast majority of cases. The majority of effort will be by folks only targeting their daily fish, not their slot possession fish so it's not a matter of "one will be under and the second over". For the majority, all of their fish can be over 83cm. This is the major flaw in DFO's model and why it doesn't work yet this faulty thinking is clearly ingrained in all those involved in the process as it's the same story when Searun and GLG refer to the issue.

Why does this matter? It matters because DFO's flawed model wasn't questioned, let alone challenged, by a single person who participated on the weekend despite it's complete failure to accurately forecast last year. Because of DFO's shaken confidence in the model's lousy performance, and because no one had the knowledge or balls to suggest a fix, DFO adopted super conservative buffers to their forecasts which necessitated stacking the additional restrictions on top of the failed slot - the max size, the season limit and the late start date. Let's not forget we have the same TAC this year as last which the model had predicted would give a "full season".

This pisses me off because it is something that could have and should have been addressed and remedied and which would have meant less restrictive regulations this season. An inexcusable mistake by all parties involved in my opinion.

Ukee

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Sorry to hear you had a short season, maybe if your sector stopped targeting big breeders, there would be more recruitment to the fishery and it would last a bit longer for all of us. Come on guys, it's all about conservation.. isn't it?

You need to go to the IPHC site and do some research PHMA. This is not a conservation issue. This is one of the most highly regulated fisheries from a science-based recruitment and biomass assessment stand points and has amongst the most conservative harvest rates of any managed fishery in the world. Harvest within the IPHC quotas has proven year in and year out to adequately maintain the breeding stock and recruitment age classes. It also quickly responds with adjusted quotas when there are concerning recruitment trends at any age class. Not a conservation issue.

Ukee

 

[fish4all]

Sorry to hear you had a short season, maybe if your sector stopped targeting big breeders, there would be more recruitment to the fishery and it would last a bit longer for all of us. Come on guys, it's all about conservation.. isn't it?

yup more bs from the nightmare. average weight of commercial caught halibut 22.9lbs. you sure we are targeting big ones.

http://www.iphc.washington.edu/publications/rara/2012/rara2012085_commage.pdf page 86-87

And my season was't short. fishing was some of the best we have seen in years hence only taking 9 days to get it done.

 

[fish4all]

we do release the really big ones. also we use a 16/0 circle hook that cant get around the jaw of a large female so we catch very few. you should do some reading before spouting off.

from iphc bluebook

IPHC biologists see no benefit to preserving the largest females from a conservation standpoint. There are plenty of small halibut available to grow into the large fish we all like to catch and eat. According to the Bluebook handout for the 1999 IPHC Annual Meeting, implementing a maximum commercial size limit of 50 inches (or 150 cm, about 80 lbs) does not appear to add substantial protection to the stock to justify a change in regulations.5 While large females can each spawn many more eggs than medium-sized females, their overall reproductive contribution is nevertheless small as not many females reach those large sizes under the current reduced growth rates.

 

[searun]

Fish4all, what's your take on the recruitment concerns expressed by IHPC this year? Would that be by-catch in Alaska?

I'm just curious to see Ukee's math on all the options the SFAB had to choose from, can you post it? I want to compare it to the DFO modelling when I get a chance. Thanks for your offer of help.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Wow ukee, sounds like the guys at the main board could have really used your expertise! I'm assuming because you know what everyone said that you were there. Why didn't you explain to them about the slot size? Perhaps you should have made a presentation on why the increase in average size from the IPHC survey was just a figment of everyones imagination. Why didn't you do something to stop this? You should send n your resume to both DFO and the IPHC, I bet they would hire you for sure!

Great use of sarcasm PHMA, you must have been the coolest in high school.

The IPHC survey data for Area 2B shows size change from 0 to 2.5%, depending on year class, with all data from the commercial fishery, which is not the Rec fishery. Regardless of that very significant fact, a 2.5% size change, at best, for only a fraction of the population doesn't even register in an estimation model that has error variation due to the method of survey - overflights, voluntary (not mandatory) log books and inconsistent creel surveys, that is orders of magnitude larger than that for both rate of harvest and total harvest. Simple facts available to anyone willing to spend some time educating themselves. But I know that relying on sarcasm is a lot easier.

Ukee

 

[searun]

If it was voted no and it was 1/1 no size restriction, annual limit...What would happen? Would it just close pretty much same time early Sept as last year? I understand you guys came to a consensus but are we all missing something? This is far worse than last year? And there no concrete date of Dec 31...your are saying estimate? Why the huge shift??

Ukee's offered to run the math for us so we can compare the DFO modelling to his analysis. We should relax and give him time to post it.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Fish4all, what's your take on the recruitment concerns expressed by IHPC this year? Would that be by-catch in Alaska?

I'm just curious to see Ukee's math on all the options the SFAB had to choose from, can you post it? I want to compare it to the DFO modelling when I get a chance. Thanks for your offer of help.

Predictable, once again not addressing or countering a single fact I've presented or the points they raise.

I've never claimed to be able to build a forecast model Searun, though I've worked with a few and worked with the products of many. I do know, as most practical folks do, when one doesn't work, particularly when the reasons are obvious. If I had access to the DFO model I could tweak it to remove the assumption that 50% of harvest are under slot fish and eliminate the new buffers added due to last year's failure. Then it's just a matter of punching in the numbers with the various options and viewing the results.

It doesn't take any form of expertise to admit that you take away the buffers due to the uncertainty caused by last year's failure that fewer restrictions are required. Those are simple facts.

So, since you put it out there, if you can secure me a working copy of the DFO halibut rec harvest forecast model I will recruit the help of some friends and see what I can do.

Ukee.

 

[fish4all]

Fish4all, what's your take on the recruitment concerns expressed by IHPC this year? Would that be by-catch in Alaska?

I'm just curious to see Ukee's math on all the options the SFAB had to choose from, can you post it? I want to compare it to the DFO modelling when I get a chance. Thanks for your offer of help.

My take is that the ESTIMATED(iphc made reference it could be 3X this much) 10 million lbs of bycatch (of which only a portion is under 26cm) from the trawl fleet in Alaska, that is killing 22.6 million lbs of potential spawning biomass every year, is having the biggest negative impact on recruitment in all areas. How can you continually grind up and throw back all those juvenile fish and not expect your recruitment to suffer. One must remember that it is an ESTIMATE..... so far my experience has shown that estimates when concerning catch or bycatch are usually significantly under hailed when not properly monitored. Food for thought.. how many dead animals are we talking about when we are expressing terms in 10's of millions of lbs?

not sure if that answers your question.

 

[searun]

My take is that the ESTIMATED(iphc made reference it could be 3X this much) 10 million lbs of bycatch (of which only a portion is under 26cm) from the trawl fleet in Alaska, that is killing 22.6 million lbs of potential spawning biomass every year, is having the biggest negative impact on recruitment in all areas. How can you continually grind up and throw back all those juvenile fish and not expect your recruitment to suffer. One must remember that it is an ESTIMATE..... so far my experience has shown that estimates when concerning catch or bycatch are usually significantly under hailed when not properly monitored. Food for thought.. how many dead animals are we talking about when we are expressing terms in 10's of millions of lbs?

not sure if that answers your question.

I agree with you. May be one of the arguments that took hold and allow us to press for same TAC as 2012 also. I'm still concerned about large spawning females and impact of removing them on recruitment. As was suggested it would be very interesting to see what would happen if we all avoided certain age class of fish....but somehow shutting down the by-catch would likely deliver an impressive response by the fish.

 

[searun]

Predictable, once again not addressing or countering a single fact I've presented or the points they raise.

I've never claimed to be able to build a forecast model Searun, though I've worked with a few and worked with the products of many. I do know, as most practical folks do, when one doesn't work, particularly when the reasons are obvious. If I had access to the DFO model I could tweak it to remove the assumption that 50% of harvest are under slot fish and eliminate the new buffers added due to last year's failure. Then it's just a matter of punching in the numbers with the various options and viewing the results.

It doesn't take any form of expertise to admit that you take away the buffers due to the uncertainty caused by last year's failure that fewer restrictions are required. Those are simple facts.

So, since you put it out there, if you can secure me a working copy of the DFO halibut rec harvest forecast model I will recruit the help of some friends and see what I can do.

Ukee.

Sorry, I misunderstood your post. It sounded like you had already run the numbers and could help prove the DFO model was incorrect.