Lets get this thread back on track Here isthe original document:
From the SFAB---------------------------
When adopting the Halibut Committee’s recommendation for the 2012 halibut fishing plan, the SFAB executive committee made clear that it considered the approach an experiment. A subsequent motion of the Main Board endorsed this decision calling on DFO “...to consider this year’s regulatory measures as EXPERIMENTAL and that discussion re various additional options available at certain levels of the TAC for 2013 start taking place with the SFAB Halibut Committee in a timely manner such that the local SFACs have adequate consultation and input into the 2013 recreational halibut management plan.”
Against this background, the SFAB has been asked by DFO to provide advice on alternative management options for the 2013 season. This document is intended to give local SFAC’s an understanding of the goals the Halibut Committee has adopted, the tools available within the context of the current 85\15 allocation policy, and a set of parameters by which the effectiveness of these tools can be compared. It is hoped that this document, and a supplementary paper that will be provided once analysis of 2012 catch data is complete, will facilitate discussion at the local level, so that anglers can provide practical advice on the management tool or combination of measures most likely to succeed.
Local committees are requested to carefully consider this information and to frame the advice they wish to offer in the form of motions that can be discussed at the regional committee meetings in early December and the results referred to the Halibut Committee so that it can prepare a report to the Groundfish Shellfish Working Group prior to the Main Board Meeting in early February.
Goals
The SFAB believes that the current allocation formula does not provide the recreational fishery with the ability to maximize its economic and social contribution to Canada available from the halibut resource. However, while the policy debate undoubtedly will continue since the minister’s allocation authority is being challenged in Federal Court by elements of the commercial sector, the SFAB has no choice but to assume that the current 85\15 allocation formula will be in effect for the 2013 season. The Halibut Committee proposes to proceed based on the following goals. Local committees should feel free to comment on these goals and to suggest refinements or additions.
1. Conservation: Since the recreational sector is allocated a very small portion of the overall TAC for Canada, the conservation risk posed by our fishery is proportionate in both a regional and coast wide context. That said, and consistent with the first principle of the recreational Vision that “conservation of naturally reproducing fish and their habitat is the highest priority”, it is the responsibility of our sector first and foremost to conduct its fisheries in a responsible manner that respects the fish, and in no way poses a threat to the future of the stock.
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/docs/rec-vision-eng.pdf Maximizing our ability to account for our catch, minimizing release mortalities, complying with all regulations, and doing our part to ensure Canada fulfills its obligation to fish within its national TAC are fundamental aspects of the recreational fishery operating in a sustainable manner, thereby ensuring the conservation of the stock.
2. Full seasons: The SFAB halibut committee is committed to achieving the longest season possible for our sector until the overarching goal of Feb 1st to Dec 31st can be achieved.
3. Fairness: Halibut are managed by the Government of Canada on a coast-wide basis for the benefit of all Canadians. Management measures should be easily understood and enforceable. Within this context, there are two ways Canadians benefit from the recreational halibut fishery: first, through the ability to actively participate in the fishery and enjoy the social and dietary benefits it provides; and second to gain employment or economic opportunity by providing services or products to the fishery. It has been the practice of the SFAB to take both of these considerations into account when providing advice to government.
Parameters.
When considering how proposed management options meet the goals outlined above, local committee members should take into account whether such options are conservation-based, measureable, enforceable and timely.
Conservation based: Is the measure a responsible approach that respects the fish and conserves the stock in both the short and long term? Does it present the likelihood of increased incidental mortalities of other species? Does it present the likelihood of increased handling and release mortalities for halibut?
Measureable: Is it possible to quantify the impact of the measure in pounds of catch saved? Can the catch over time be predicted, thereby facilitating an estimate of the potential length of season?
Enforceable: Can the measure be effectively enforced by DFO? Are there legal or practical barriers in place that would prevent its application?
Timely: How long would it take to implement the measure? Is it possible to implement it for the 2013 season?
Management Measures for Consideration
Maximum Size Limit
One version of this approach was experimented with during 2012. As a condition of license, anglers were required to limit their total possession while away from home to one fish of any size and one that does not exceed 83cm in length. The hope was that this measure would reduce the total weight but not necessarily the total number of fish harvested. It would thereby maintain opportunity and a measure of expectation while extending the season length. As this approach can produce measurable results as long as catch and effort do not change significantly, analysis is underway to determine the extent to which opportunities to fish for halibut were extended by implementation of this measure in 2012.
It needs to be kept in mind that a measure related to the maximum (or minimum) size of a retained fish can impact different areas in different ways given variations in the size of available fish. In addition to considering the total impact on harvest, anglers need to reflect on how this rule affected their personal behavior and whether some other choice of maximum size on one or both fish is preferable.
Individual Annual Limit
It has been suggested that total harvest could be reduced through an annual personal limit similar in principle to the rules that currently apply to chinook salmon coastwide and to ling cod in the Strait of Georgia.
The impact of this measure cannot be predicted at the present time and obviously would depend on the number chosen.