One Halibut limit in area 2C
- Thread starter TS
- Start date
Clarification 2C is southeast Alaska, Area 3a south-central Alaska the limit is still two Halibut. Kodiak, Valdez, Homer, Seward,Deep creek are all still two Halibut.
thewhop2000
New member
Butt, For how long?
Butt, For how long?
The door is opened. What is now written in stone, in southeast. How long till it spills over to South-Central? Any guess is almost right. Trust me on this, It is coming OUR way. Ken
Butt, For how long?
The door is opened. What is now written in stone, in southeast. How long till it spills over to South-Central? Any guess is almost right. Trust me on this, It is coming OUR way. Ken
Nothing is written in stone, this happened last year and they (lodge owners-charter operators) got it overturned and their working on doing it again! Lawsuit coming.
Bill S.
Well-known member
This is a type of discrimination against private fisherman who have to use a charter. If there is a problem (I'mm not debating if there is or the cause), we need to control the growth of the charter industry instead of punishing the fisherman. I cannot afford a boat so I go with a charter. Suddenly I' another class of fisherman. If I could afford a boat, then I get 2, since I can't and charter once a year (3 of us) I get 1.
Any one that wants to help can with donations,
Any one that wants to help can with donations,
Response Requested
Contact:
Richard Yamada
(907) 523-8850
[email protected]
Charter Halibut Task Force
Decision has been made to Litigate
A CHTF statewide conference call was held today with CHTF legal counsel Earl Comstock. A unanimous decision was reached to support a lawsuit to stop the recent decision of NMFS to impose a "One Halibut Rule" on guided recreatioinal anglers in Area 2C, Southeast Alaska, effective June 5, 2009. The following is a statement from Earl.
Dear Charter Operators and Guided Recreational Fishermen --
Your support is needed to bring a lawsuit to stop the new one halibut a day rule that is set to take effect in Area 2C on June 5. Last year charter operators from Areas 2C and 3A successfully filed a lawsuit that stopped the one fish rule from taking affect last year. Now the National Marine Fisheries Service is trying again. With your support we have the opportunity to try and stop this new rule.
The Charter Halibut Task Force is working with the same attorneys at Sher & Blackwell LLP who we had file last year's successful lawsuit. Sher & Blackwell has committed to cap the cost of this year's litigation at $60,000, and as legal counsel to the Charter Halibut Task Force (CHTF) I will be devoting my time to assisting Sher & Blackwell once again on the research and arguments that go into the briefs we will file with the court. We need your contributions to pay for the lawsuit and to continue CHTF's efforts.
There is no sure thing in litigation, and everyone needs to understand that the courts give great deference to the government in any court challenge. However, like last year, we have strong substantive and procedural arguments we can raise, and after careful review and discussion of the final rule the attorneys at Sher & Blackwell and I agree that there is a reasonable chance we could prevail and that it is worth pursuing the case. The fact that we have a good chance does not guarantee success, but we believe it is the best course of action to pursue.
For those of you wondering what are the pros and cons, let me list them briefly.
The reasons for filing the suit are:
1) it is the only opportunity to stop the one fish rule;
2) it demonstrates that the charter sector and guided anglers are serious about pursuing a fair and equitable allocation;
3) if we prevail it means that any future discussion of what constitutes a fair allocation needs to start from a status quo of two fish a day rather than one;
4) it is the best chance we have to get an unbiased review of whether an 87/13 split of the resource in favor of the commercial sector is fair;
5) if we prevail it will likely delay implementation of the Council's Catch Sharing Plan that NMFS is preparing to try and implement next year; and
6) if we don't file a suit the commercial sector will have won and will have successfully set the precedent that one fish is enough for guided anglers.
The only downside is if we lose it arguably sets the precedent that the GHL was a fair and equitable allocation, but since that is the position that NMFS and the Council already have taken, we really don't lose anything.
Charter operators and guided anglers in Area 3A need to understand that the rule NMFS has issued for Area 2C also directly affects them. It does so because in this rule NMFS has changed the status of the GHL (Guideline Harvest Level) from a simple benchmark to a "preseason estimate of the allowable harvest" for the guided sector. This means that they now are saying that the GHL is the cap to which guided anglers will be managed, and that they can take action IN ADVANCE to make sure guided anglers don't exceed this new "allowable harvest level". Area 3A has been over their GHL every year since 2004. With the change in law that is being done for both areas as part of the Area 2C rule, the success of the 2C rule will set the rule for Area 3A as well.
Please take action to support the lawsuit by sending an email to Richard Yamada ([email protected]) to let us know of your pledge to support the lawsuit and sending a check as soon as you can made payable to SHER & BLACKWELL LLP. Checks should be sent to:
John Butler
Sher & Blackwell LLP
1850 M Street NW
Suite 900
Washington, DC 20036
Please note in the memo line of the check "HALIBUT LITIGATION". The checks will be deposited by the law firm in an escrow account, and the money will only be spent to cover their costs on the litigation.
You can also send checks to support CHTF, which pays for my participation in the lawsuit, to:
Charter Halibut Taslk Force
500 Lincoln Street, Unit B9
Sitka, AK 99835
Thank you.
Earl Comstock
Counsel for the Charter Halibut Task Force
202-255-0273
A Personal Challenge
We need your pledges no later than next Friday, May 15th, to determine if we have the funds to finance the lawsuit. I personally have pledged $4,000 ($1,000 per boat I operate) and I encourage those that feel like I do, that we need to take a stand against commercial fishing interests that feel they own 100% of the halibut resource, to step forward and match my pledge.
Together we can win!
Richard Yamada
Plaintiffs Needed
If you have suffered a guest cancellation or the loss of a potential booking due to the impending "One Halibut Daily Bag Limit", we would like to add you as a plaintiff to our lawsuit. It is important that we demonstrate irreparable harm to our businesses by the passage of this rule. Please contact us with your testimony.
Any one that wants to help can with donations,
Response Requested
Contact:
Richard Yamada
(907) 523-8850
[email protected]
Charter Halibut Task Force
Decision has been made to Litigate
A CHTF statewide conference call was held today with CHTF legal counsel Earl Comstock. A unanimous decision was reached to support a lawsuit to stop the recent decision of NMFS to impose a "One Halibut Rule" on guided recreatioinal anglers in Area 2C, Southeast Alaska, effective June 5, 2009. The following is a statement from Earl.
Dear Charter Operators and Guided Recreational Fishermen --
Your support is needed to bring a lawsuit to stop the new one halibut a day rule that is set to take effect in Area 2C on June 5. Last year charter operators from Areas 2C and 3A successfully filed a lawsuit that stopped the one fish rule from taking affect last year. Now the National Marine Fisheries Service is trying again. With your support we have the opportunity to try and stop this new rule.
The Charter Halibut Task Force is working with the same attorneys at Sher & Blackwell LLP who we had file last year's successful lawsuit. Sher & Blackwell has committed to cap the cost of this year's litigation at $60,000, and as legal counsel to the Charter Halibut Task Force (CHTF) I will be devoting my time to assisting Sher & Blackwell once again on the research and arguments that go into the briefs we will file with the court. We need your contributions to pay for the lawsuit and to continue CHTF's efforts.
There is no sure thing in litigation, and everyone needs to understand that the courts give great deference to the government in any court challenge. However, like last year, we have strong substantive and procedural arguments we can raise, and after careful review and discussion of the final rule the attorneys at Sher & Blackwell and I agree that there is a reasonable chance we could prevail and that it is worth pursuing the case. The fact that we have a good chance does not guarantee success, but we believe it is the best course of action to pursue.
For those of you wondering what are the pros and cons, let me list them briefly.
The reasons for filing the suit are:
1) it is the only opportunity to stop the one fish rule;
2) it demonstrates that the charter sector and guided anglers are serious about pursuing a fair and equitable allocation;
3) if we prevail it means that any future discussion of what constitutes a fair allocation needs to start from a status quo of two fish a day rather than one;
4) it is the best chance we have to get an unbiased review of whether an 87/13 split of the resource in favor of the commercial sector is fair;
5) if we prevail it will likely delay implementation of the Council's Catch Sharing Plan that NMFS is preparing to try and implement next year; and
6) if we don't file a suit the commercial sector will have won and will have successfully set the precedent that one fish is enough for guided anglers.
The only downside is if we lose it arguably sets the precedent that the GHL was a fair and equitable allocation, but since that is the position that NMFS and the Council already have taken, we really don't lose anything.
Charter operators and guided anglers in Area 3A need to understand that the rule NMFS has issued for Area 2C also directly affects them. It does so because in this rule NMFS has changed the status of the GHL (Guideline Harvest Level) from a simple benchmark to a "preseason estimate of the allowable harvest" for the guided sector. This means that they now are saying that the GHL is the cap to which guided anglers will be managed, and that they can take action IN ADVANCE to make sure guided anglers don't exceed this new "allowable harvest level". Area 3A has been over their GHL every year since 2004. With the change in law that is being done for both areas as part of the Area 2C rule, the success of the 2C rule will set the rule for Area 3A as well.
Please take action to support the lawsuit by sending an email to Richard Yamada ([email protected]) to let us know of your pledge to support the lawsuit and sending a check as soon as you can made payable to SHER & BLACKWELL LLP. Checks should be sent to:
John Butler
Sher & Blackwell LLP
1850 M Street NW
Suite 900
Washington, DC 20036
Please note in the memo line of the check "HALIBUT LITIGATION". The checks will be deposited by the law firm in an escrow account, and the money will only be spent to cover their costs on the litigation.
You can also send checks to support CHTF, which pays for my participation in the lawsuit, to:
Charter Halibut Taslk Force
500 Lincoln Street, Unit B9
Sitka, AK 99835
Thank you.
Earl Comstock
Counsel for the Charter Halibut Task Force
202-255-0273
A Personal Challenge
We need your pledges no later than next Friday, May 15th, to determine if we have the funds to finance the lawsuit. I personally have pledged $4,000 ($1,000 per boat I operate) and I encourage those that feel like I do, that we need to take a stand against commercial fishing interests that feel they own 100% of the halibut resource, to step forward and match my pledge.
Together we can win!
Richard Yamada
Plaintiffs Needed
If you have suffered a guest cancellation or the loss of a potential booking due to the impending "One Halibut Daily Bag Limit", we would like to add you as a plaintiff to our lawsuit. It is important that we demonstrate irreparable harm to our businesses by the passage of this rule. Please contact us with your testimony.
Its only a matter of time before the commercial Halibut fishermen push for a one fish limit for all sport fishermen, They're taking it one step at a time, Thats why all sport fishermen need to help in the fight now or a one fish limit for all sectors of the sport fishing community is coming soon.
Grampyfishes
New member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2006
- Messages
- 2,883
- Reaction score
- 86
The truth is, even State and Federal managers separate the two classes of sport fishermen accordingly. And rightfully so. Private sport fishermen are non-commercial sport fishermen who do not use the commercial charter industry or engage in commerce with the commercial sport fishing industry to get their fish. They do not have commercial-type impacts to the resource. On the other hand, charter sport fishermen are commercial sport fishermen, who do use the commercial charter industry, and who do engage in commerce with the commercial sport fishing industry to get their fish. Their impact to the resource is on a commercial-type scale. There is no justification for charter and private sport fishermen to be treated the same.Bill S said:
We all have the same, equal opportunities to fish. You've simply chosen the opportunity to use the commercial sport fishing industry...Maybe because it's easier or cheaper than owning your own boat. I don't know, but it doesn't really matter. What matters is that by making your own choice you become subject to the conditions of the charter industry, not the private fishing industry. If you want 2 fish, you always have the same opportunity as the rest of us to sport fish non-commercially.Bill S said:
I disagree. The one fish limit on charters is good for the private, non-commercial sport fishermen, and it will help him retain his current two fish limit. After all, according to the ADF&G data, the commercial charters take about 60-70% of the total sport catch. FYI, information from the department of commerce shows that about 95% of 2C harvest (where the one fish limit is being instituted) is by non-Alaskans. And for what it's worth, the commercial fishermen are simply fighting to keep the allocations that they have already been given under the law. It is their fishery that has sacrificed and been under fire by the unlimited and uncontrolled charter industry for so long, as evidenced in these threads.Captain T said:
It is unfortunate this site has allowed itself to be used by special interest organizations to solicit class action law suits.Captain T said:
heres how I see it. the charter fleet catches more then their allotted amount. so because know one self regulates these days (not the commercial guys either) they have to reduce the charter boats limits. or they could have shorten your season. say no halibut fishing in july (that would be bad for the charter guys). so the fact that regulations are put in place is not because fish and game hates charters its because fish and game had to do something to stop the charter fleet from over catching.
