Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: from the new IPHC annual report

  1. #1
    Sponsor offshore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    159

    Default from the new IPHC annual report

    Here are a couple of pages I found disappointing from the new IPHC report. Remember that "wastage" and "bycatch" are separate things. Sorry about the lousy image. 3A has the "most poorly understood estimates of bycatch of all regulatory areas" and wastage of U32 fish was never estimated prior to 2013.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails IMG_0920.jpg   FullSizeRender.jpg  

  2. #2
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,368

    Default

    some pretty staggering numbers there!

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,448

    Default

    Did I read that right? Millions of pounds of wasted halibut????

  4. #4
    Sponsor offshore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    159

    Default Yes

    Quote Originally Posted by kgpcr View Post
    Did I read that right? Millions of pounds of wasted halibut????
    Area 3 (3a and 3b)- bycatch was 2.3 million in 2013, down from 3.5 million in 2012
    Wastage was 1.4 million, down from 1.7, but it looks like that's all areas combined.

  5. #5
    Member AKBassking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE Alaska-Summer Columbia River-Winter
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Yet the restriction on sportfishing and comm fish continues

    ALASKAN SEA-DUCTION
    1988 M/Y Camargue YachtFisher
    MMSI# 338131469
    Blog: http://alaskanseaduction.blogspot.com/

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    Look at Area 4 (bottom of the second page). Halibut by-catch was 5.2 million pounds, down from 6.2 million. That's alot of halibut....

    It would be interesting to see a length/frequency graph of the halibut by-catch. Is it 5 million pounds of juvenile halibut (less than a pound) or is it 5 million pounds of adults that are also marketable and desirable in recreational/commercial fisheries?

    Once again, therein lies the conundrum of managing in a mixed stock fishery. If you exploit the very harvestable whiting or hake, you also kill an enormous amount of extremely valuable fish such as halibut and salmon. So even in the face of significant restrictions on commercial or recreational harvest, large amounts of by-catch are tolerated as collateral damage to support the whiting or hake fishery.

    This trade-off is not new, is not unique to Alaska, and has been a source of controversy for decades. As long as fishing gear remains non-selective to the target species, this trade-off will always be difficult and controversial.

    And will always be grist for the mill on this BB.....

  7. #7
    Member AKCAPT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seward
    Posts
    1,126

    Default

    The council is taking action on by catch in
    and April

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,039

    Default

    offshore, I think you read that wrong. It is entire Area 3 (not just 3A) that has the "most poorly understood estimates of bycatch of all regulatory areas". Area 3 extends to the southern Gulf and Aleutians. Also, wastage of U32 fish were in fact estimated prior to 2013, they were just estimated indirectly, and accounted for when setting exploitation rates rather than as direct removals. No doubt some of the new models, changes, and programs in 2013 will be an improvement.

    Keep in mind this "new" IPHC report is for 2013. Last year's 2014 report will be out at the end of 2015, and should show continued reductions in by-catch and wastage, along with better understanding of by-catch and wastage. We are seeing progress - a good thing.

    I would also like to point out that by-catch and wastage are calculated into the exploitable/harvestable portion of the biomass to ensure sustainability of the stock. My point being that even if by-catch and waste were eliminated in the trawl fishery, those fish would just be allocated/shifted and caught by another sector anyway. So it boils down to allocation, and the ethics surrounding waste due to regulation. The stock doesn't care what sector kills them, or for what reason.

    The most interesting thing I read was the explanation and evaluation of the decline..."The long time-series model suggested that the stock increases of the 1980's and 1990's, and the present stock declines, would have occurred even without removals of halibut by human hands."

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IPHC 1.jpg 
Views:	4 
Size:	44.4 KB 
ID:	82608 Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IPHC 2.jpg 
Views:	3 
Size:	56.2 KB 
ID:	82609


    Cohoangler, FYI there is a mountain of information in this report regarding halibut size/age/sex, much of it fascinating. It begins on page 48, and gets quite specific from page 56 on. Too much to post here. You might be able to find the IPHC Annual Report at their web site. I believe the halibut fishery, and most mixed-stock fisheries, can be managed sustainably, even with sacrifices to bycatch and wastage - they will be part of any fishery. It's more of a balancing act.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •