Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 53

Thread: Ak Fishing News: Halibut Limit Cut to One Fish

  1. #1
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 1997
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    532

    Arrow Ak Fishing News: Halibut Limit Cut to One Fish

    This news clip is from Alaska Fishing News. Discussion is welcome, but these robot generated news threads are not monitored by the webmaster.

    The International Pacific Halibut Commission has cut the bag limit to one fish for part of the summer in southcentral and southeast Alaska. Commercial fishing interests point out that the charter fleet has consistently gone over its quota for several years. Sport fishing interests point out that the commercial fleet has the lion's share of available fish.

    The decision will become regulation upon signature of the US Secretary of State, although court action is possible.

    Read the entire story in the Anchorage Daily News >>>

    In a related opinion article, Anchorage Daily News outdoors writer Craig Medred wrote "The people who manipulated the political system to make halibut into a luxury item priced almost out of reach of the average consumer are at it again. To keep their lock on 90 percent of Alaska's flatfish catch, commercial fishing interests are now going after John Q. Angler."

    Medred points out the disparity of catch between the huge catches of the commercial fleet and the much smaller catches of the charter fleet.

    Read the entire story in the Anchorage Daily News Outdoors section >>>


    Read the individual article on Alaska Fishing News...

    We welcome news tips that are useful to the community. Please send tips and links to complete stories by email to
    webmaster@outdoorsdirectory.com.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    690

    Default @#$%!&*

    I think I'll say it best by representing all halibut anglers when I say ________.




    I'm going to savour my remaining fillets in the freezer and stop sharing them now. Thanks commercial guys, thanks a lot.

    Okay, now that I see that South Central is only affected for 15 days it seems a bit more palatable; but at the same time... why do the commercial guys get to control the catch and the charters seem like they don't have a voice? Doesn't seem to bode well for the derbies in all ports either.
    Last edited by Daveinthebush; 01-24-2007 at 10:33. Reason: Read the ADN article, language

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sarasota, Florida
    Posts
    802

    Default Big Business Clout

    The reason why is quite simple. Big business uses lobbying and pays for a lobbiest(s) in support of legislation to effect change.

    If sportsfishermen are unorganized and have not formed a state-wide association with membership, charter, and funds, they have no voice in influencing the legislative table in their behalf as a political group.

    http://www.alaskanauthor.com

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Palmer, Alaska
    Posts
    230

    Default

    I read the paper over the weekend. Only one fish for two weeks and for those on charters is not asking too much. However, these things are typically just a start (kind of like taxes) and the rest is the slippery slope. Wonder if we could organize a group of personal use fishing folks and local charter companies in order to get a seat at the table. I am pretty certain more local money is generated by those fishing locally than the commercial folks (e.g., they send the profits out of state -- like the cruise ships, oil companies, timber companies, etc.). Perhaps, this is a crazy idea -- Alaskans deciding policies for Alaskans? Oh well -- may be I should just be happy that the out of state commercial halibut folks will even let me get one halibut?

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sarasota, Florida
    Posts
    802

    Default Organizing...

    It is not a crazy idea. It is an excellent idea. Just to have persons begin to think about a state-wide sportfisherman's advocacy group is a start, and it's a very good start...

    http://www.alaskanauthor.com

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,293

    Default Meldred?

    Don't believe the hype. This is not that big a deal, charters are not just personal use sportfishing boats in fact they are in direct competition for the fish with the average joe (who most likely doesn't have a superfast, superbig Klamath to fish on). Also the Halibut Longliners are not some huge corperations. Meldred is the same guy who got a ticket this summer don't forget. His article is not factual. I know the top 3 guys that own halibut IFQ and they fish and work up here all year. They deliver the halibut to Alaska processors that give alaskans jobs. They fished their entire lives and now they are doing ok. They risked their lives to get that IFQ And they most likely have loans out the wazoo to pay for what extra IFQ they have aquired. Bycatch is a very complicated issue and he (Meldred) has no idea what he's talking about. I've said it b4 and now I'll say it again...this is not an issue of biomass and the halibut stocks. This is an issue of a user group growing unchecked and taking more and more of a public resource.

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

    Default No Big deal

    Ak Browns Fan:

    Yea it is no big deal for you or your high liner buddies. But I can tell you it is a big deal for the charter industry and for the communites that depended on those tourism dollars that will be lost.

    The problem is that the regulatory bodies failed to do their job ten years ago and now a guy who has done everything right and obeyed all the laws is getting screwed in a ****ty process. All the while your pals are getting an 880,000 pound increase in their harvest...

    No big deal for you maybe.... It is for me.

    See you in Portland.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,293

    Default good luck

    AkCapt I wish you good luck. It may seem like it but I'm not anti-charter. If you've done everything right for over ten years I think you deserver to keep chartering....which is why in another thread I brought up license limitation based on historical years. I'll ask you a couple questions and you let me know what's up from your point of view.
    How many charters have sprung up in the last couple years?
    Do you fish in the Southeast or around Homer?
    Do you think ANY management is needed?
    Since this was announced have any of your reservations been cancelled?

    I am hoping that you and many other alaskan charters have a great year. I personally don't think that tourists will cancel a halibut charter b/c of one fish vs. two, but I'll admit I dont' know and I'll also admit that it won't hurt me $ wise if they did cancel. I can see your concern. Still I see a user group growning with no real checks. I think that chartes need to be managed one way or another. I do wish that a different option had been pursued by IPHC. I see a lot of stuff said that isn't factual, and I point that out. I've stated before that I think charters should get some more of the overall quota, but not much more than what is currently harvested by the charters. I just wanted to point out that the "big business" angle for the halibut Longliners is kinda BS. The people that own, run, and fish the boats are just normal dudes. Once again I wish you good luck. I'd love to hear your angle on this though. I am pulling for you as I support small business, but I see the writing on the wall. Management is coming one way or another. I'm hoping for the fairest management possible.

  9. #9
    Member AKBighorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    1,244

    Default

    From what I have been reading the commercial industry allotments have grown since the late 90's and at the same time there was no growth alotted for the charter industry. Is this fact? If so how can that be fair? We are where we are with this but I don't think it would be as big of a deal if both industries were alotted the same % of growth.

  10. #10

    Default Feeding the Nation

    Don't you guys know that the ocean owes the commercial folks, they feed the nation. Well, they actually feed the people that can afford a 19.00 dollar plate of Halibut. Commercial folks will always say they are the stewards of the sea, when in fact, if given the option they would fish until there are no more. If you don't believe me, look at the King Crab fishery around Kodiak, there is none, and whose to blame....the commercial folks.

    The truth is the recent propsal was introduced to the IPHC by a Long Liner, that is fact. The board voted down the lines 30 commercial 6 sportfish...how is that fair, its not.

  11. #11
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    15 days now next time 30 days then 40days ETC..... Once they have there foot in the door it's going to be hard to get them out..
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  12. #12
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,393

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shawn View Post
    Commercial folks will always say they are the stewards of the sea, when in fact, if given the option they would fish until there are no more.
    I would really, really appreciate it if you wouldn't tell me how I feel and what I would do if given the chance. You are painting with awfully broad brush strokes, and you have very little clue what you're talking about in this regards. I would fish until there is no more, simply because I am a commercial fisherman? ..... It is rare that I allow myself to become offended or upset by what I read on-line, as it's not worth it. I must admit, though, that I am upset over this statement.

    I was raised on the water in PWS, spending my summers from a toddler forward helping my parents pull the heads off of shrimp, bait hooks, and mend nets. It was such an important part of my upbringing, and I credit that time with who I am today. I desperately want to bring up my own (future) children in such a way, teaching them responsibility and respect for God's creation through working together as a family. I take my responsibility as a steward of the resource very seriously, as I have a life-long stake in it. Actually, I don't have that stake technically, as I do not hold any IFQs. I'm going to try to figure out financing in the next few years, though, and buy into the fishery - at which point I'll be up to my ears in debt for 20 years so that I can spend summers with my family on the water.

    I can't believe that you come on here and presume to tell me that I want to fish until there's nothing left simply because I'm a commercial fisherman.

    Why is it that we can't discuss disagreements over policy in a respectful manner without painting those with opposing viewpoints with such negative descriptions. I know as little about you (or anyone else) as you do about me - thus, I will not describe who you are or what your motivations are. Please return the favor.

    Sorry for the steam...I hope this doesn't overstep my bounds as a moderator.

    -Brian

  13. #13
    Moderator Daveinthebush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Valdez, Alaska
    Posts
    4,402

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by B_M View Post
    Sorry for the steam...I hope this doesn't overstep my bounds as a moderator. -Brian
    I don't think it does. All the moderators did not inherit their roles at the beginning of this web sites creation. We started by being concerned Alaskans that posted here because we cared about issues that affected our lives. We may be modertors, but we were Alaskans first. I feel that we all have a right to speak.

    Vietnam - June 70 - Feb. 72
    Cancer from Agent Orange - Aug. 25th 2012
    Cancer Survivor - Dec. 14th 2012

  14. #14

    Default So much bull that the IPHC thinks we can't read.

    Since the high of 2000 we are just now recovering from a down turn in the Charter business in 3A. At best we are even with year 2000 now.
    --------- Licensed------------Total
    Year----Businesses--Boats----Trips
    2000---456---------570------25,180
    2001---452---------560------23,818
    2002---405---------491------18,573
    2003---405---------499------18,592
    2004---427---------532------22,600
    2005---450---------567 ------na
    So much for the out of control growth in the charterboat industry, just a plain commercial lie. The reason were supposatly over is Bad data! In 2C/3A from 2000 to 2005 there was not even a place on our logbooks for Halibut and F&G, NPFMC, and the IPHC had no idea how much Halibut was being taken. 2006 and we get logbooks with you guessed it! a space to mark down Halibut. Now they have an idea whats coming out of 2C/3A.

    This data is the most recent and is available @ http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/npfmc/curre...atorium107.pdf

    "If sportsfishermen are unorganized and have not formed a state-wide association with membership, charter, and funds, they have no voice in influencing the legislative table in their behalf as a political group."

    We do belong to a statewide charterboat org. its ALASKA CHARTERBOAT ASSN. With 287 member businesses from all over the state. The national org. is NATIONAL ASSN OF CHARTERBOAT OPERATORS, USA wide.

    We are in process of raising funds for a legal challege to this one fish rule and for a fair share of the resource, Ive collected alot from average fishermen because we need the public's backing to win this and not just money. Letters of protest flooding into our government opens eyes and the commercials can't match that.

    United States Secretary of State:

    Secretary Condoleezza Rice
    US Department of State
    2201 C Street NW
    Washington, DC 20520

    Fax: 202-647-2283
    e-mail: crice@state.gov (VERIFY)

    United States Secretary of Commerce:

    Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez
    Office of the Secretary – Mailstop 61
    US Department of Commerce
    14th and Constitution Avenue, NW
    Washington, DC 20230

    Phone: 202-482-2000
    Fax: 202-482-2741
    e-mail: cgutierrez@doc.gov

    NOAA Fisheries:

    William T. Hogarth
    Assistant Administrator for Fisheries
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
    1315 East West Highway
    14th Floor
    Silver Spring, MD 20910

    Phone: 301-713-2239
    Fax: 301-713-1940
    e-mail: Bill.Hogarth@noaa.gov

    Alaska Senator Ted Stevens:

    The Honorable Ted Stevens
    United States Senate
    522 Hart Senate Office Building
    Washington, DC 20510

    Phone: 202-224-3004
    Fax: 202-224-2354
    e-mail webform: www.stevens.senate.gov/contact.cfm


    Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski:

    The Honorable Lisa Murkowski
    United States Senate
    709 Hart Senate Office Building
    Washington, DC 20510

    Phone: 202-224-6665 Toll free (Anchorage) 877-829-6030
    Fax: 202-224-5301
    e-mail webform: www.Murkowski.senate.gov/contact.cfm#form


    Alaska Governor Sarah Palin

    Juneau Office:
    Governor Sarah Palin
    P.O. Box 110001
    Juneau, AK 99811-0001

    Phone: 907-465-3520
    Fax: 907-465-5400
    Email: http://gov.state.ak.us/govmailSP.php

    Anchorage Office:

    550 W 7th Avenue
    Suite 1700
    Anchorage, AK 99501
    Phone: 907-269-7460
    Fax: 907-269-0263
    Frank
    Alaska Wildrose Charters and Cabins
    www.wildroselodge.com

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    607

    Default

    Commercial fishing has destroyed many fisheries by overharvesting - the North Atlantic Cod fishery, bottom fish in the Chesapeake, redfish in the Gulf of Mexico, etc. There was an article in the paper on Sunday about New England fish chowder having to be made with lobster as all of the fish normally used had been fished out. The list goes on and on. I would never claim that any individual fisherman was inclined to wipe out the resource but the commercial fishing industry as a whole has a very poor record as the steward of the fish.

  16. #16
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,393

    Default

    Gus - True, there have been instances of poorly managed commercial fisheries - I don't dispute that. Alaska's fisheries, halibut and sablefish in particular, are different in that they are managed very carefully based on data that is continually being collected. I am not suggesting for one moment that there isn't room for improvement, but Alaska's long-line fisheries are a very different beast than east coast cod, etc. The conventional wisdom used to be that the ocean was a limitless resource - of course we now know that is not true and adjust the fisheries accordingly.

    -Brian

  17. #17
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Thumbs down The stewardship of sportfishing. . .

    Quote Originally Posted by gusdog44 View Post
    . . . the commercial fishing industry as a whole has a very poor record as the steward of the fish.
    I think that if you do a little research you'll find that Alaska's sustainable commercial fisheries are the model for and the envy of the rest of the world.

    But in fact, there are some fisheries under more threat from sportfishing and commercial sportfishing than from nets and long-liners. Overfishing, habitat degradation, development, and pollution have poor records where fishery stewardship is concerned.


  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,293

    Default managed

    As the above stated this isn't the east coast (thank god). Alaska is the model on fishery management on a federal level. On a statewide level we are ramping it up to collect more and better data. Did you know that we have the largest amount of biologists going to sea and collecting data on these boats? Alaska has more sea days from biologists than anywhere else in the world? That the boilogists collect substantiated, unbiased, indepentent data on total catch, bycatch and species compistions, collect biological specimens to determine age and stock health, monitor for marine mammel interactions, seabird interactions, and regulatory complience?
    YOu know who came up with the revolutionary (at the time it was the first such program in the US) plan? The fishermen did. You know who pays to have this expensive biologist on board thier boats, the fishermen do. The relationship isn't always easy, and lot's of fishermen dislike the biologists but most understand the need.
    Before we throw words around we should all do a little research. I didn't know the fleet numbers handn't grown much. The above post told me that. I even buy the idea that the new outcry is because they were now keeping logbooks. (why would the numbers be higher....hmmmmm...to get extra fish maybe if we use logbooks and poundage? Nah) (having put that in there, I'd also say most charters wouldn't likely do that.) Still I just see another fishery that is coming into the new era where we manage fisheries and get some real data on what is going on. Once again this started b/c some Longline Guy in Junuea proposed it. It has been on the table for a while now, and needs to be cleared up. I dont' see this killing the charter fleet, but I dont' know if it will or not. I certainly hope the good charters, and the ones that have been doing this for a while get to keep taking clients fishing.

  19. #19
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Smile Good question. . .

    Letter to the Editor
    Peninsula Clarion
    Web posted Monday, January 29, 2007

    Writer: Where’s the consumer’s side?

    Regarding your article on Friday regarding the IPHC decision to limit charter clients to one fish for a small part of the charter season season: I am not surprised that once again the U.S. consumer was left out of the story. You quote Ms. Bondioli as saying, “The demand for halibut will be there.” It’s a shame to limit access to a public resource.

    Both commercial and charter industries are big business. What is missing is that commercial charter operators are a business that requires a fair bit of wealth on the part of the client — while the commercial fleet in Alaska is fishing for the U.S. consumer, of which there are over 250 million.

    When you look at the allocation split in this way it becomes obvious that the charter industry is really getting considerably more than its “fair” share based on access to the resource.

    The U.S. consumer would easily purchase all of the allowable harvest if given the opportunity but is well managed and has stayed within its allocation for each of the last 10 years while charter has exceeded their GHL in 2C every year it has been in place.

    The commercial industry has been asking for fairness in management — an allocation is just that and each sector should be managed to stay within it’s limits.

    We all know the charter industry is vigorously lobbying for a larger piece of a fully utilized resource and may well end up with a larger allocation. Where does that leave the real American consumer who can’t afford to come to Alaska on vacation to catch fish?

    It would be nice to see a reporter take an unbiased look at the whole story.

    Victoria O’Connell
    Sitka


  20. #20

    Default Foreign poachers

    The bigger problem we seem to forget is the unchecked poaching in our waters by China, Japan, Tiawan, Russia........... Affects us all, both legitimate commercial fishermen and sport fishermen.
    Now just why in the hell do I have to press "1" for English???

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

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
  •