2012 Halibut season

[pope]

Does anyone have their finger on the pulse as to whats going to happen with the season and limits this year?

[Serengeti Charters]

Won't know for sure for another few weeks

[Jamie]

Won't know for sure for another few weeks

Double tap.
GRRRRRR

But I am hearing it should be the same as last year with a closing not until after the summer. That still allows people to get out there and get on some of those HAWGS!!!!!!!

Jamie

[pope]

well, two hawgs.

[Serengeti Charters]

I've heard that sportsfishing section may get increase of 5% in TAC but since the tac recommended by iphc went down this year for cdn waters, we'll end up with only a slight increase in allowed catch, I'd guess march- end of oct season.

[Tofinofish]

The article below was recently penned by an industry collegue of mine and sums up the overall situation. I have a meeting on Thursday in Vancouver and hope to be able to provide some more "concrete" info or at least probabilities. The assumption of 2/2 March to October opening is a very hopeful scenario but I am not holding my breathe for that to happen..
Will post here soon.
J.




By Jeremy Maynard
The Ardent Angler
The west coast recreational fishery has been awaiting two decisions about halibut in the run up to the 2012 season, these being the results of the review of the inter-sectoral allocation policy between the commercial and recreational sectors and the final determination of Canada’s total allowable catch (TAC) for this year. The former is by far the most important of the two for several reasons, and should be known anytime soon, but last Friday the overall harvest ceilings for each fishing area within its jurisdiction were announced at the conclusion of the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) annual meeting, held this year in Anchorage.
To be shared amongst all user groups, at 7.038 million pounds the 2012 halibut TAC for Canada (IPHC Area 2B) represents a reduction from last year of 612,000 pounds. Not a good news story but better than it could have been; some readers may recall the pre-Christmas news that IPHC staff were recommending a 2B TAC of 6.63 million pounds so obviously the Canadian delegation (including Chuck Ashcroft from the Comox Valley) were persuasive in making the case for a higher amount.
The lower allowable catch ceiling is because the halibut resource continues to go through a phase of lower productivity throughout its range in the northeast Pacific Ocean. Research indicates there are in fact lots of halibut in the water, resulting from two successive highly productive spawning seasons about a dozen years ago, but growth and recruitment to a harvestable size continues to be much slower than those rates observed over the long term.
With lots of smaller halibut competing with each other for the same food resource, compounding the situation there has been a significant increase in the Arrowtooth Flounder population at the same time. A far less desirable flatfish, they compete with halibut for the same food sources across much the same range.
So now we know how much halibut in aggregate Canadian’s are allowed to catch this year, what we don’t know at this point is how much will be allocated to the recreational fishery. It is upon this calculation that decisions regarding start and end dates for the season as well as bag and possession limits will be made. Under the present 12% recreational catch share ceiling, the 7 million pound TAC would translate into a short and not very sweet season for anglers, but this simply demonstrates the need for change in the allocation policy.
And the present situation of not knowing what the regulations for the recreational halibut season, which traditionally opened Feb. 1, are detrimental to recreational fishing interests of all kinds. Resident anglers can’t make plans about when they might go halibut fishing, tackle stores don’t know how much related tackle to order and those offering a service (guides and lodges) at peak marketing time can’t tell prospective clients when or how many halibut they might be able to catch this year.
Stay tuned, the results of the halibut allocation policy review lead by MP Randy Kamp should be made known any day now.
Like the original allocation policy announced in October 2003, those in Ottawa will determine any change, not regional DFO staff. This includes both politicians and senior departmental staff at national headquarters. Ordinarily interactions between the latter and fishermen like me are infrequent at best but recently I got a glimpse into the thinking that drives fishery considerations at the highest level.
The occasion was a daylong session about fisheries modernization entitled “A Discussion on the Future of Canada’s Commercial Fisheries”. Held in Vancouver and lead by two assistant deputy-ministers (ADM’s) from Ottawa as well as senior regional staff, despite the topic a broad range of fishery stakeholders (First Nations, commercial and recreational fishery and NGO’s with an interest in fisheries management) were invited to attend and provide comment on the presentations. I was there as one of several representatives of the recreational fishery selected from the Sport Fishing Advisory Board. As part of a national fisheries initiative, this session was the latest in a series of meetings held in cities around coastal Canada.
This is not the place to get into the subject matter but those participants from outside the commercial fishery were there because all fisheries are inter-related and so management actions within one should be considered in context of the others; the present commercial-recreational halibut allocation issue is but one example.
In the midst of his initial presentation, Kevin Stringer, the ADM for Program Policy stated, “uniquely here in BC the relationship between commercial and recreational fisheries has to be considered.” To me this is a good news/bad news story. The good news is, obviously, the positive emphasis on considerations for the regional recreational fishery and, although Mr. Stringer didn’t reference it, is merely an affirmation of Principle 6 of the Recreational Vision document signed in both Ottawa and Victoria two years ago and which states that the needs of the recreational fishery will be explicitly considered in integrated fishery management plans.
The bad news, as I see it, is that outside BC where DFO has responsibility for fisheries management the recreational fishery is out of luck and all available evidence seems to support that view. As an angler don’t expect to go fishing for halibut or tuna or lobster or snow crab in Atlantic Canada, to use but a few desirable examples.
After First Nations Section 35 FSC requirements have been assured, 100% of the remaining TAC for these species is allocated to the commercial fishery – always has been and likely always will be unless someone is brave enough to take up a lengthy and expensive legal challenge for non-commercial fishing Canadians to have access to their fair share of what is supposed to be a common property resource.
Well it isn’t going to be an angler from this part of the world, but what this narrative does emphasize is the challenge the angling community here faces when trying to get a favourable decision on any matter pertaining to the recreational fishery from those in Ottawa. Opportunities we largely take for granted in the Pacific region are evidently unknown elsewhere in Canada and against this background it’s little wonder the halibut allocation issue has taken the course it has; I guess we were supposed to feel grateful the recreational fishery got 12% at all.

[Tofinofish]

Just in...
Canada area 2B allocated 7.04 Million pounds

Still reading the document and will provide further info.

[Tofinofish]

The report I just read through was a very extensive summary of the Halibut Conference Board Meeting and possibly more than most of you want to absorb....Reminder that this is not the Canadian allocation discussion process with DFO, but the base level Pacific Halibut Conference Board. The Conference Board sets the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) that is then handed to and "allocated" by DFO to harvest groups within the country.

The United States accredited 38 organizations for participation
Canada accredited 21 organizations for the proceedings.
Co-Chairpersons from each country included representation for Canada by Chuck Ashcroft, whom is a very intellegent and experienced person on most all fisheries related topics.


Below is Canada's "stance" on issues related to Pacific Halibut management.

2012 Canadian Stakeholder Discussion PaperCatch Limit Allocation Principles
Catch limit allocations must provide for fair and sustainable access to the Pacific Halibut resource. Stock assessment and advice must be scientifically sound, and account for all removals by area. When determining catch limit allocations now and into the future, Canada proposes that the following principles be considered:
1.
The total coastwide removals limit must be conservation‐based.
2.
Parties to the treaty must be directly accountable for all removals.
3.
All removals from both directed1 and non‐directed2 fisheries must be monitored at a defined minimum standard of accuracy.
4.
Actions in one area that result in negative impacts to another area must be mitigated.
Consistent with these principles Canada has made significant advancements in catch monitoring and accountability for total removals, but continues to be impacted by management decisions in other regulatory areas. For example, the level of bycatch and discard mortality occurring in areas 3 and 4 has a considerable negative impact on Area 2’s exploitable biomass. While work to better understand the sources and impacts of bycatch has begun in earnest through the Commission’s Halibut Bycatch Working Group, progress must still be made to (1) better account for bycatch mortality through improved catch monitoring and (2) ensure that responsibility for bycatch mortality is carried by the national party in whose jurisdiction the mortalities have occurred. To advance these concerns, Canada continues to support ongoing work aimed at better understanding the implications of current halibut bycatch and exploring possible actions to address these concerns. The following objectives were accepted by the Commission in 2011 and Canada supports continuing this work in 2012:
1.
To gain a better understanding of the amount of halibut bycatch occurring in each regulatory area.
2.
To gain a better understanding of the impact of bycatch on the halibut resource and on the available harvest.
3.
To explore options for reducing the overall level of halibut bycatch.
4.
To explore options for mitigating the impact of bycatch in one regulatory area on the available harvest in other regulatory areas.
Canada does not accept the IPHC’s apportionment methodology
Currently, the IPHC estimates exploitable biomass in each regulatory area as a percentage of the estimated coastwide exploitable biomass. The "apportionment" methodology estimates the proportion of biomass in each regulatory area as a function of the relative survey catch rate (WPUE) in each area scaled to the amount of habitat available (total bottom area between
1 Directed fisheries are those fisheries specifically engaged in harvesting Pacific Halibut
2 Non‐directed fisheries are those fisheries not specifically engaged in harvesting Pacific Halibut, but where Halibut is incidentally caught
13
depths of 0 and 400 fathoms). Catch limits within each regulatory area are in turn determined by applying a target harvest rate to the exploitable biomass estimated from the above calculation. While this approach uses data readily available to the IPHC staff, the methodology depends on assumptions that have not been or cannot be tested; therefore Canada is unable to support the current apportionment methods. Canada acknowledges the changes that have been made to address various concerns raised since 2007. However, the overall methodology is still unacceptable. In particular, Canada is concerned that the apportionment method incorrectly estimates exploitable biomass in regulatory areas, and that bottom area is not an appropriate surrogate for national entitlement to a migratory species, especially when the impact of large extractions of halibut biomass to the North and West of Canada are not being taken into account when calculating entitlement.
The primary concern is that use of the survey catch rate in the current apportionment method assumes constant catchability among all regulatory areas (i.e. the probability of catching a halibut is similar across ecosystems, habitat type and competitor assemblages). Hook timing adjustments made to compensate for differences in species composition are probably insufficient, as many other factors, such as bottom type and structure can affect the efficiency of survey gear in a given area. Furthermore, it is unlikely that gear selectivity is constant among regulatory areas. Selectivity is partly determined by the fishing gear but it is also a function of availability of fish to the gear. Availability may be affected by differential age and size composition of the halibut stock among areas.
In addition, the bottom area used in the apportionment method is calculated for habitat between 0‐400 fathoms. The inclusion of depths greater than 300 fathoms is to accommodate recent commercial fishing between 300‐400 fathoms in area 4, particularly area 4A. These depths are not fished to a great degree in any of the other areas, and the impact of this re‐classification of bottom area to apply in the apportionment scheme reduced Area 2B’s proportion of coast‐wide habitat by 18.5% (from 9.2% to 7.5%). Other areas declined on average by 20%, while area 4CDE increased by 20%. This highlights the extent to which the current apportionment method is influenced by selection of bottom area, which is somewhat subjective, and which has a large impact on the apportionment of biomass to regulatory areas. Furthermore, since the survey, and therefore the WPUE in each regulatory area, only covers the depth range 20‐275 fathoms, there is potential for bias in the apportionment methodology if halibut density in unsurveyed depths is different to that in surveyed depths.
Canada takes the position that the IPHC’s apportionment methodology is strongly influenced by assumptions about relative catchability, selectivity and depth‐distribution of fish among regulatory areas. Scientific uncertainties surrounding relative catchability and selectivity are unlikely to be resolvable with available resources in the near future, if at all.
Canada feels that the apportionment methodology is fundamentally flawed due to irresolvable scientific uncertainties, and perhaps consideration should be given to move away from attempting to resolve the problem of allocating catch among regulatory areas by purely scientific means and consider other examples of resource sharing arrangements utilized
14
internationally. This type of work would align with the IPHC’s desire to advance a Management Strategy Evaluation for Pacific Halibut.
Canada’s Position for 2012
While Canada believes that progress has been achieved in the provision of harvest advice over the past year, more work remains if we are to satisfy the principles outlined above.

Canada continues to support the stock assessment improvements aimed at ensuring direct accountability for all removals; however, as non‐directed removals of small halibut negatively impact coast‐wide fishing opportunities, additional effort is required to address the treatment of under‐26 mortality.

To ensure that all removals from directed and non‐directed fisheries are monitored at a defined minimum standard of accuracy (consistent with principle 3 above and the recommendation received from Conference Board in 2010), Canada supports the development of a bi‐lateral working group led by IPHC staff to start developing a defined minimum standard of accuracy for monitoring and reporting of halibut catch in the recreational fishery. In the future, this work can be expanded to include the development of standards for the other harvesting sectors as well (see attached proposal).

Given the intrinsic uncertainties associated with the apportionment methodology (as well as with the coastwide assessment model itself) Canada suggests that provision of harvest advice as a single catch limit derived from a single point estimate of biomass is unacceptable. Provision of risk‐based advice, in the form of decision tables or similar, that provides predicted stock status over a range of alternative management options and alternative plausible states of nature is current best practice for stock assessments in the USA and Canada. In this context, stock status implies size of the halibut stock or level of fishing mortality relative to pre‐defined reference points that are directly related to management objectives.

Canada feels a peer‐review of the Slow Up‐Fast Down/Slow Up Full Down policy should be conducted.

Canada supports the work by IPHC staff to develop a Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) approach for Pacific Halibut. This process may allow both parties to the Treaty to assess the consequences of a range of management strategies or options and have the results presented in a way which illustrates the tradeoffs in performance across a range of management objectives. It is imperative that the MSE process be open, transparent and collaborative from the beginning.

The adoption of the 7.04 Million pounds is a decrease from the 2011 season, which will see our recreational fishing opportunites become further restricted unless the DFO actually follows through with their commitment to facilitate a transfer mechanism that is fair to both sectors. I hope to learn more on Thursday in regards to potential allocation changes being discussed.

[Serengeti Charters]

Halibut will be open on March 1st, no word on how the Minister is going to deal with allocation yet, but sounds like we should know in the next few weeks.

[Tofinofish]

The indication right now is that it will not be "status quo" as eluded to in the meeting with Minister Ashfield yesterday.

The question in mind mind, is that whole or in part.....?

Status quo of Season ending date? Allocation? Daily and possesion limits?

The Total Allowable Catch for all of Canada has decreased again from last season, so to allow a longer season at last year's regulations or a full season at "normal" regulations of 2 day/3 possession, the allocation model would need to be changed. There are a number of variables involved.

We look forward to more positive news to share soon.

[Tofinofish]

This will be a little harder than "normal" to deal with, but I guess if it allows for a full Halibut Fishing season, it will be worth it... a case of Short Term pain I hope...


Category(s):
RECREATIONAL - Fin Fish (Other than Salmon)

Fishery Notice - Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Subject: FN0299-RECREATIONAL - Fin Fish (other than Salmon) - Clarification on Measurement of Halibut

Further to FN0192:

As a condition of your Tidal Waters Sport Fishing Licence, the possession limit
for halibut is two (2), of which only one may be greater than 83 cm in length.
This measurement (referred to as “Head-on”) is from the centre of the tail to
the foremost end of the lower lip.

This limit applies at all times while the licensed angler is away from his or
her ordinary place of residence.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) advises recreational fishers that in order to
comply with the licence condition, halibut in your possession must be retained
in such a manner that the size of the fish can be readily determined. If you
have two fish in your possession you must be able to show that at least one of
them is 83cm or less.

Halibut may be left whole, head on, gut removed. This will allow fishery
officers to measure the fish most accurately for compliance to the length
requirement.


“Head off” measurement

The International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) uses a conversion factor of
0.75 from head on to head off as measured from as the base of the pectoral fin
at its most anterior point to the extreme end of the middle of the tail. This
measurement is illustrated on the DFO website at: http://www.pac.dfo-
mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/opportunities-possibilites/fin-nageoire-eng.htm

The licence condition for one fish 83cm in length, would equate to a fish
62.25cm head off, as measured above. DFO will accept a 63cm head off
measurement as meeting the requirement of a whole fish being 83cm in length.
Fish of this size may be cut into four fillets, providing one fillet has the
pectoral fin and tail attached.

If fish size is close to the 63cm limit, and the measure will be stretched by
not having the back bone attached, it is suggested that you leave the backbone
attached to the fillet with the pectoral fin and tail attached.

Fishers are reminded that the Fishery General Regulations state:

Section 36. (1) No person shall possess fish that were caught by any person
while fishing for recreational or sport purposes and that have been skinned,
cut, packed or otherwise dealt with in such a manner that
(a) the species cannot be readily determined;
(b) the number of fish cannot be readily determined;
(c) where weight is used to determine catch limits, the weight of the fish
cannot be readily determined; and
(d) where size limits are applicable, the size of the fish cannot be readily
determined.

[Mike_W]

Hmmm that will be fun to package for the trip home:sign0176:

[Tofinofish]

Hmmm that will be fun to package for the trip home:sign0176:

Agreed!...Hopefully just some Short Term Pain..We are already working on future opportunities beyond these tougher measures.

After looking at the transport guidelines again, it is not too bad. You have always needed to leave skin on, or a portion of..
The Fillets on an approx. 15 pound Halibut are easy enough to deal with regarding size, when leaving 4 fillets intact from one fish. One of the fillets needs to have the collar with Pec fin and tail attached. Tail can be folded over to save space when packaging. Not too bad considering 3 of the 4 fillets can be dealt with as normal, and the 4th needs to have additional measuring aspects still attached.
The tougher part will be to measure the Halibut when it is flopping around to ensure you are not over size. I've had more than my share of hooks in my hands from thrashing Halibut, and now it looks like this process will contribute a few more..Regardless, I'm pumped with the opportunities we have right now, that should last into early October when the weather turns.
After some work in the boat yard today, I'll be soaking some fresh Herring on one of my closest spots for a fresh one to take down Island this weekend. (Dad just returned from winter home in Mexico and I think it is best to offer fresh Hali for his efforts in restocking my supply of Don Julio...)

J.