Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Ding, Ding, You Ready for Round 2?

  1. #1
    Member DRIFTER_016's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Yellowknife, NWT
    Posts
    3,318

    Default Ding, Ding, You Ready for Round 2?

    Looks like they're after you SE Charter guys again.

    http://community.adn.com/adn/node/135843

  2. #2
    Member garnede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    soon to be back in Alaska
    Posts
    1,214

    Default

    their guideline harvest level of 1.43 million pounds... The actual sport charter harvest was 1.75 million pounds in 2004, 1.95 million pounds in 2005, 1.86 million pounds in 2006, and 1.92 million pounds in 2007.
    7.48 million pounds harvested over 4 years
    1.87 million pounds yearly average

    The commission has reduced the commercial halibut catch in southeast Alaska from nearly 11 million pounds annually between 2004 and 2006 to just over 6 million pounds for 2008. The final commercial harvest level for 2009, proposed at 4.5 million pounds, will be set by the International Pacific Halibut Commission in January.
    39 million pounds harvested over 4 years...
    9.75 million pounds yearly average.

    I wonder which has hurt the fishery more? At least they have also cut the comercial quota too. I hope this does not pass.
    It ain't about the # of pounds of meat we bring back, nor about how much we spent to go do it. Its about seeing what no one else sees.

    http://wouldieatitagainfoodblog.blogspot.com/

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

    Default All i can say is BOHICA

    BOHICA from the Marine Corps Manual meaning Bend Over Here It Comes Again!

  4. #4
    Member sayak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central peninsula, between the K-rivers
    Posts
    5,788

    Default That is actually an Alaskanese word

    Quote Originally Posted by kgpcr View Post
    BOHICA from the Marine Corps Manual meaning Bend Over Here It Comes Again!
    While it may indeed be coincidentally found in Jarhead lingo, we Alaskans have experienced bohica in regards to the feds for many, many years. Especially under certain administrations which come into power from time to time. The two greatest such were the Carter-bohica and the Clinton-bohica eras. I think we best ready for another one. The enviros are already licking their chops.

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

    Default Action needed

    Time for the State to take the Feds to Court.

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

  6. #6

    Default How did this become political?

    So, how would it be bad if the Obama administration continues in making a move that has clearly already started to further limit fishing to both comercial and recreational fishermen in a halibut stock that is seemingly struggling in an effort to save the very halibut stock that is being overfished? Was it Obama, Clinton, Carter, Lincoln, Jackson, or Reagan that started this decline in the fish stocks in the SE? This isn't about policics, this about conserving and protecting a fish stock that is decline for whatever the reason. Personally, I guess I'd rather be blamed for trying to save it and tightening some belts, then I would for not trying to save it and letting it be decimated. I must be missing something.

    Now, if your gripe is about how the fish are allocated, that is entirely different. I don't think it is fair for a small group of people to "own" such a large portion of the available fish. But, it is what it is. I hope the fishery makes a quick recovery and things go back to normal sooner rather than later.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    607

    Default

    Mr. Bauer hit the nail on the head.......it's about allocation. I think we all agree that we need to protect the resource but some of us have heartburn with a very few people owning the right to harvest millions of pounds of Halibut while the rest of, guided and un-guided sportfishermen, make do with a very small percentage of the total.

    Save the fish first - but then lets get the allocation imbalance fixed as well.

    By the way - I don't fish Halibut.....its too much like hard work!

  8. #8
    Member AKCAPT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seward
    Posts
    1,126

    Default Agreed

    This has nothing to do with who is in the White House, although is it always fun to blame who ever is in power for all the problems in the world..... Thanks for messing up the economy, starting wars, making the fuel prices go up, crappy salmon returns, too much snow, too little snow, what ever....

    This issue has transcended politics as it as been going on for 15 years or more.

    Is anyone ready for round #2? The real question is if the charter industry is ready to pony up another 120 K to stop the inevitiable? Keep in mind, I am a charter operator who has fought this battle for over a decade. I have spent thousands of dollars and hours trying to get the best plan for our industry....look where that has lead us....I will never attend another meeting or spend a dime on any fisheries issue in Alaska again. Total frustration.

    Stocks have declined in SE by 43% in the last few years. It is really becoming a conservation issue in SE. Is a one fish bag limit for one sector of the sportfishing fleet the best way to limit the catch while perserving business oppertunity....NO......... but it seems that finding the best way to restrict harvest to meet the needs of the charter fleet has given way to finding the simplest way to restrict the harvest without regard for the economic impact. That is where the bias and make up of the State, Councils, Boards, IPHC all come into play.

    Will there be a legal challange? Maybe if some rich people want to make a fight but my feeling is that last one was costly and after a season like 2008, where tourism was down and the fuel prices were so high, I for one, can't throw any money at a lawsuit.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKCAPT View Post
    This has nothing to do with who is in the White House, although is it always fun to blame who ever is in power for all the problems in the world..... Thanks for messing up the economy, starting wars, making the fuel prices go up, crappy salmon returns, too much snow, too little snow, what ever....

    This issue has transcended politics as it as been going on for 15 years or more.

    Is anyone ready for round #2? The real question is if the charter industry is ready to pony up another 120 K to stop the inevitiable? Keep in mind, I am a charter operator who has fought this battle for over a decade. I have spent thousands of dollars and hours trying to get the best plan for our industry....look where that has lead us....I will never attend another meeting or spend a dime on any fisheries issue in Alaska again. Total frustration.

    Stocks have declined in SE by 43% in the last few years. It is really becoming a conservation issue in SE. Is a one fish bag limit for one sector of the sportfishing fleet the best way to limit the catch while perserving business oppertunity....NO......... but it seems that finding the best way to restrict harvest to meet the needs of the charter fleet has given way to finding the simplest way to restrict the harvest without regard for the economic impact. That is where the bias and make up of the State, Councils, Boards, IPHC all come into play.

    Will there be a legal challange? Maybe if some rich people want to make a fight but my feeling is that last one was costly and after a season like 2008, where tourism was down and the fuel prices were so high, I for one, can't throw any money at a lawsuit.
    All those interested: I am going to say this and just say it.......

    I will go for whatever benefits the majority of hardworking Alaskans. That is where I am at. If that means that I am supporting the protection of the commercial fleet, I am ok with that. If that means protecting entire town's welfare thanks to the Charter Fleet and Tourism; such as Valdez, Seward, Homer, Cordova, and the like over a few pounds of fish that will likely sell at the dock for less than manure sells at Home Depot, so be it.

    To date, especially near tourist destination, I am unconvinced that total take is greater from commercial fishermen than it is from charters. Are commercial fishermen important? Well, hell yes they are.

    However, are the tourist destinations important? Well, yeah, they are too. The income they generate is huge, I'd even call it collosal in fact.

    Clearly, a balance must be met.

    Just my two cents....

    T. Bauer

  10. #10
    Member CanCanCase's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bandon, OR
    Posts
    614

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.R. Bauer View Post
    ...Now, if your gripe is about how the fish are allocated, that is entirely different. I don't think it is fair for a small group of people to "own" such a large portion of the available fish. But, it is what it is. I hope the fishery makes a quick recovery and things go back to normal sooner rather than later.
    Bingo. I've said before and I'll say again... IF conservation of the resource is the problem, fine... Let's ALL stop fishing for a few years and see what happens. Really, this isn't an issue of one group or another harvesting too many fish. The problem is that the pie is shrinking over all, and more people want a small piece, while the commercial folks feel "entitled" to maintain the harvest levels that they bought in at a few years ago.

    The real problem I have is that the regulations (and so-called "conservation effort") aren't being applied to all anglers evenly. This year, I'll get to pull my sport fishing boat up next to another sport fishing boat, and I can take 2 while some on the boat next to me (who paid the same fee for the same license as I have) may only harvest one fish. Oh, and the crew on a commercial fishing boat can pull up and join the party and catch 2 fish apiece also! When I was still chartering, I refunded over 50% of my annual gross revenue in a single season to sport fishermen who had booked a trip, then opted to go to Homer where similar limits were not in effect.

    If, at any time, someone proposes an allocation plan which fairly and equitably distributes the fishing priveledge, I'll support it fully and whole-heartedly. Until then, I can only see this sort of legislation and regulation as an attack on my right to access our public resources.

    -Case
    M/V CanCan - 34' SeaWolf - Bandon, OR
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  11. #11

    Default The writing is on the wall......

    I have said this before, and I will say it again. All that it will take is the cruiseship industry, the major hotels, thousands of local citizens, and other major tourist stakeholders to band together with legal representation to change the way the fish are allocated. I'm not saying it is good, bad, or anything else, just doable. They certainly can afford to lobby right up there with commercial interests.

    However, this will not happen until they start the feel the pinch too. Right now, they are just taking it and seeing what happens. When push comes to shove, they will fight to survive too just like the commercial guys have been doing for years.

    Who will win? I hope the fish do

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
  •