Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: New Rule Curtails Butt Charters out of Homer

  1. #1
    Member AKBassking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE Alaska-Summer Columbia River-Winter
    Posts
    2,007

    Default New Rule Curtails Butt Charters out of Homer


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

  2. #2

    Default

    Alaska Department of Fish and Game: Even though Alaska lacks management authority, it monitors the sport harvest. Alaska State Troopers assist with enforcement.

    Read more: http://www.adn.com/2010/11/21/156632...#ixzz162DsIEZ1

    Why? This is very much related to the question I posed in the Ask the Trooper Thread.....and got lambasted for it.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

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

    Default

    Good ol feds. In the middle of one of the worst recessions in history, and they enact rules to wipe out a third of an industry and its associated jobs. One which impacts 20% of the resource, but the rules are enacted to supposedly conserve that resource. 154 small businesses in Alaska will be forced to close their doors due to this ruling by NPFMC. Was this rule necessary?

    And AKRes, of course the troopers enforce federal law. A contact is a contact. A ticket is a ticket. If they can write a ticket for expired flares, then that is a contact made and ticket written. The beancounters at the end of the year love that sort of thing. Doesn't matter that it does nothing to protect the resource, that for every contact made for USCG boating violations, that is time spent that isn't being spent finding poachers.

  4. #4
    Member fullbush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,674

    Default

    Hey welcome to reality. The charter industry was an unknown entity that like everything had to be managed on a trial and error basis. When the charter boat owners number exploded they had to limit them. The same way they did the open commercial fisheries. All I know is instead of crying in your beer I'd be trying to procure one of the eligible guide licenses right awaY while they're cheap because you know they'll go through the roof just like limited entry permits and IFQ's. Its simple math that theres too many charter guys and they're getting cut throat because the competition is fierce, and if you're a private boat owner forget about getting any room from the proprietary guides. I think they should cut the commercial IFQ allotments in half too so don't be thinking I'm all about the IFQ program. I don't think the feds should have any jurisdiction of anything that swims with 90 miles of Alaska but thats me

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food View Post
    Good ol feds. In the middle of one of the worst recessions in history, and they enact rules to wipe out a third of an industry and its associated jobs. One which impacts 20% of the resource, but the rules are enacted to supposedly conserve that resource. 154 small businesses in Alaska will be forced to close their doors due to this ruling by NPFMC. Was this rule necessary?

    And AKRes, of course the troopers enforce federal law. A contact is a contact. A ticket is a ticket. If they can write a ticket for expired flares, then that is a contact made and ticket written. The beancounters at the end of the year love that sort of thing. Doesn't matter that it does nothing to protect the resource, that for every contact made for USCG boating violations, that is time spent that isn't being spent finding poachers.
    The Bottomline has to be the fact that we are directly responsible for making this a reality. Again and again, we pool our local LE resources to bear and enforce the "King's Law" on our citizenry. We can place the Blame on no one but ourselves.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  6. #6
    Member AKBassking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE Alaska-Summer Columbia River-Winter
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    To me it seems as though the commfish what the cake and icing. They get 80% of the pie already, yet greed dictates they want more. Hey I am all for the commfish working hard and getting a fair share, but this ain't it. I don't think I would try to get into the guiding business any time soon with all this BS.

    Just really irks me when the attitude from the commfish is:

    "You can only buy fish from your friendly commercial fisherman! You are not allowed to feed your family with your own catch!"

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

  7. #7
    Member FishKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    260

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    The Bottomline has to be the fact that we are directly responsible for making this a reality. Again and again, we pool our local LE resources to bear and enforce the "King's Law" on our citizenry. We can place the Blame on no one but ourselves.
    This whole thing amounts to the commerical fisherman wanting to keep all for them selves. I have a co-worker who says that all sport fishing should be outlawed and if we want fish we can go to the store and get the fish they provided. BOTTOM LINE. Until the sport fisherman standup and protest it will get worse and worse. see how fast the law makers change things if no one would buy a fishing license. The state would freak out because of lost revenue.... It is not doing it to ourselves....

  8. #8
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKBassking View Post
    To me it seems as though the commfish what the cake and icing. They get 80% of the pie already, yet greed dictates they want more.
    That's not what it is about. It's not about wanting more, it's about wanting to slow down or stop the erosion of their shares. When the charter catch increases every year, that catch comes out of the allowable commercial quota. Until now, there has been nothing that prevents the charter catch from increasing without end. The conservation burden has been borne almost entirely by the commercial industry over the past decade, especially in 2A where the allowable commercial catch has declined by ~50% while the charter catch has continued to grow. At some point the charter industry had to become a part of the conservation equation as well.

    As for those who will lose their businesses, that is indeed an unfortunate thing. That being said, hasn't this been seen coming for a long time? It's not like this was a bombshell dropped out of the blue.

  9. #9
    Member tccak71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,174

    Default

    Where's Captain Zero on this issue? He's been rolling up his sleeves and taking shots at the feds. Someone has to stand up to fedzilla...

    Tim

  10. #10

    Default

    It's not doom and gloom for all the charter outfits. Some made out very well with this deal, and they were given something of value, for absolutely nothing. The free market put a few guys around here out of business. They even had other other jobs, but they still received permits because they happened to be fishing during the boom. Other guys got two permits, because they happened to run their back up boat enough days in the qualifying years.

    I've always been opposed to these permits. They are nothing more than a handout to the guys who created the problem in the first place.

  11. #11
    Member AKBassking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE Alaska-Summer Columbia River-Winter
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    That's not what it is about. It's not about wanting more, it's about wanting to slow down or stop the erosion of their shares.
    How is getting less than 80% stopping the erosion? We have all argued this point to a deadhorse here before. Commfish (at least some) want to stop sportfishing. No matter how the commfish guys bend it, twist it, roll it bottomline this impacts sportfishing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    At some point the charter industry had to become a part of the conservation equation as well.

    I disagree. Sportfishing has long supported conservation equations. Stop the waste of bycatch and then sportfishing may have a little sympathy towards the commfish guy/gals. For now, it appears it is all about greed on the commfish part.

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

  12. #12
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,396

    Default

    Longliners have nothing to do with the bycatch occuring in the trawl fishery. I agree, the bycatch issue is atrocious, but it isn't the halibut fishermen doing that.

    The idea that commercial fishermen want to stop sportfishing makes for a good emotional argument, but I don't buy it for a second. Yes, there might be a handful of commercial fishermen that would say such a thing, but the vast majority would not. I know, everyone knows someone who has said x, y, or z in the past, but that doesn't represent the whole. I'm a commercial fisherman (though I don't hold any IFQ shares), and I'm also a sportfisherman. Most commercial fishermen are the same, and we have no desire to stop sport fishing. What we desire is for the charter industry to share in the reductions that have been necessary with a shrinking catch limit. When the overall catch declines, the IFQs shrink, and yet the # of charters continues to grow at a high rate, something doesn't add up. It's not about stopping sportfishing.

  13. #13
    Member AKBassking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    SE Alaska-Summer Columbia River-Winter
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    Longliners have nothing to do with the bycatch occuring in the trawl fishery. I agree, the bycatch issue is atrocious, but it isn't the halibut fishermen doing that.

    The idea that commercial fishermen want to stop sportfishing makes for a good emotional argument, but I don't buy it for a second. Yes, there might be a handful of commercial fishermen that would say such a thing, but the vast majority would not. I know, everyone knows someone who has said x, y, or z in the past, but that doesn't represent the whole. I'm a commercial fisherman (though I don't hold any IFQ shares), and I'm also a sportfisherman. Most commercial fishermen are the same, and we have no desire to stop sport fishing. What we desire is for the charter industry to share in the reductions that have been necessary with a shrinking catch limit. When the overall catch declines, the IFQs shrink, and yet the # of charters continues to grow at a high rate, something doesn't add up. It's not about stopping sportfishing.
    You do present a good argument. However it is ultimately about sportfishing. Who is the charter service taking out to catch all these huge numbers of the commfish's resource? Sport fisherman. The two (charter and sportfishing) are connected at the hip and can not be separated.

    Yet the commfish keeps on attacking the charter operators. If the commfish industry would be honest and transparent regarding their intentions, then there could be a debate. They were successful in SE, now they are moving to southcentral.

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

  14. #14
    Member Vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fairbanks most the time, Ancorage some of the time,& on the road Kicking Anti's all the time
    Posts
    8,989

    Default

    maybe they should just limit boat and boat parts sales.... then there would be no new anybody...
    "If you are on a continuous search to be offended, you will always find what you are looking for; even when it isn't there."

    meet on face book here

  15. #15
    Member fullbush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince View Post
    maybe they should just limit boat and boat parts sales.... then there would be no new anybody...
    Anybody that wants to charter will be able to even the newbies. For some reason some people can't grasp the fact that you will be able to buy a charter permit. Just like a taxi cab permit or a liquor license.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    Longliners have nothing to do with the bycatch occuring in the trawl fishery. I agree, the bycatch issue is atrocious, but it isn't the halibut fishermen doing that.

    The idea that commercial fishermen want to stop sportfishing makes for a good emotional argument, but I don't buy it for a second. Yes, there might be a handful of commercial fishermen that would say such a thing, but the vast majority would not. I know, everyone knows someone who has said x, y, or z in the past, but that doesn't represent the whole. I'm a commercial fisherman (though I don't hold any IFQ shares), and I'm also a sportfisherman. Most commercial fishermen are the same, and we have no desire to stop sport fishing. What we desire is for the charter industry to share in the reductions that have been necessary with a shrinking catch limit. When the overall catch declines, the IFQs shrink, and yet the # of charters continues to grow at a high rate, something doesn't add up. It's not about stopping sportfishing.
    The number of Charters are declining not growing,and they will decline by 35% next year because of the LEP.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,031

    Default yes, a few, among many

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    The idea that commercial fishermen want to stop sportfishing makes for a good emotional argument, but I don't buy it for a second. Yes, there might be a handful of commercial fishermen that would say such a thing
    Of course all of them/us are not on the same page, so far as being anti-the-other.

    I've had many hundreds of comm boats motor out to see past my dipnet, but only a few have intentionally "waked" the PU guys (where they intentionally cause a big wake, which gets into PU's waders, and washes out to sea some of the PU's gear and fish). So, percentage wise, easily way less than 1 percent of comm guys that could have waked me actually did.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,448

    Default

    All IFQ's should be a fish it or loose it IFQ. If you dont fish it then it goes away. Comfish would love that LOL. IFQ's were not meant for people to retire off of them and never fish them themselfs

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
  •