Thursday, September 1, 2011

15 more days to critique halibut sharing plan

Here's a press release from the National Marine Fisheries Service:

Sept. 1, 2011

Public comment period extended on halibut catch sharing plan

JUNEAU — The National Marine Fisheries Service is extending the comment period for the proposed halibut catch sharing plan by 15 days, to Sept. 21.

NMFS published the proposed rule in the Federal Register on July 22 with a 45-day comment period, which expires Sept. 6.

The decision to extend the comment period comes following a visit to Alaska last month by NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco, who attended a luncheon in Homer with U.S. Senator Mark Begich to hear concerns and comments about the draft plan firsthand from both charter and commercial halibut fishermen.

"Alaska fisheries have been among the healthiest and most sustainable in the world, and we are working to keep them that way for both recreational opportunities and the long-term economic benefit of Alaska fishermen and fishing communities," Lubchenco said. "During my recent trip to Alaska, I was honored to visit communities where the local economy is tied to the halibut fishery. I listened to the community's concerns and I want to make sure that everyone has a chance to provide input in this public process of shaping the final halibut catch sharing plan."

"While we need a plan to keep all segments of the halibut fishery within catch limits to sustain and rebuild the stocks, charter fishermen raised several legitimate issues at the Homer meeting warranting further consideration," Begich said. "While many fishermen have already submitted comments, this extension will allow additional time for fishermen still out on the water to make sure they are heard. I am pleased Dr. Lubchenco is taking action and responding to the comments we heard when we spoke to the Homer Chamber of Commerce."

The halibut stock in Southeast Alaska and the Central Gulf of Alaska has seen a steep decline in the past several years. The proposed catch sharing plan is designed to foster a sustainable fishery by preventing overharvest of halibut and would introduce provisions that provide flexibility for charter and commercial fishermen. Currently, the commercial and charter halibut fisheries are managed under different programs.

The proposed catch sharing plan was shaped through an open and public process through the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, which recommended the rule to establish a clear allocation between the commercial and charter sectors that fish in Southeast and the Central Gulf.

NOAA is extending the comment period to respond to numerous requests from the public. Comments must be received by Sept. 21.

For options on submitting comments, click here.


Anonymous said...

I cannot wait for all the comm fishers to start whinning about how all the charter guys are stealing their fish, and that they who have over 85% of the halibut quota are going broke, due to the fact that over $7 per lb ex vessel price, is not cutting it! Do you want some cheese with your whine?

Anonymous said...

It is the American way to take from the people who make good business decisions and give to the people who don't !

Anonymous said...

And the commercial charter boats who have a bit of difficulty distiguishing between the term commerce and sport are the most amusing group in the world.
Why is it that every state issues charter vessel licenses through the commercial divisions of their F&G Departments? When the Charter Boat owner cannot comprehend this simple theory of COMMERCE(1789) somthing is very wrong with a education system that brings these people to believe their sport fishers.Are the laws of every state, this confusing to a group of so called fisher's?
They didn't call Homer the end of the road for washed out hippies for nothing!
Even a Farmer can read Homer, and understands what Commerce me4ans to, or was the US Department of Commerce, still of the screen in Homer?

"Ours are the only farmers who can read Homer"
Thomas Jefferson, 1787

Anonymous said...

Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't.

To buy halibut in the restaurant or grocery store, you don't need a sport fish license.

You need a sport fish license to catch halibut on a private boat or on a charter boat.

Why is that too difficult for some people to understand???

Anonymous said...

Alaska did in fact, issue vessel licenses to charter boats through the Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission until quite recently when they bowed to the charter industrie's lobbying efforts. The halibut charter industry is now, and has always been, a stealth, commercial fishery that is very adept at flying under the average sport angler's radar. Hopefully the public will wake up soon and see then for what they are.

Anonymous said...

"The question of questions for mankind-the problem which underlies all others, and is more deeply interesting than any other-is the ascertainment of the place which man occupies in nature and of his relations to the universe of things."
Huxley, Man Place in Nature

"So the first biological lesson of history is that life is competition. Competition is not only the life of trade, it is the trade of life-peacful when food abounds, violent when the mouths outrun the food. Animals eat one another without qualm' Civilized men consume one another by Due Process of Law."
Will Durant The Lessons of History

William H Seward, a due process expert, confusing Alaska since 1868

Anonymous said...

"Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't."

Someone somewhere should inform anyone about the classics from ADF&G.

Evidently total discriminatory action for years, even going on today in a few fisheries, denying certain individuals basic and standard Constitutional and Economic Equality across the State, is obviously STILL Confusing Many!

"Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't."

Ever reviewthe Alaska Department of Fish and Game's COURT RECORDS?

OH YES DUMB is the correct term!

Take for instance todays illegal allocation system as used in the Bristol Bay Slamon Fishery, upheld by 7 morons on the Board of Fish, and the illegal
"ALLOCATION WITHIN A SINGLE FISHERY" sa DEFINED by the Alaska Supreme Court in State v. Grunert????

"Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't."

OH what a COUNTRY, oh WHAT an IDIOT!

Yea hire the handicapped Lance Nelson from the Alaska Department of LAW, a lawyer who couldent get a job in the real world so he went to work for the state.

He couldent read GRUNERT 1, so the Court worte Grunert 2, for the HANDICAPPED at ADF&G???

Should we bring up Mr Lance Nelsons Case of CONFUSION ON COMMERCE, shown best in Carlson v State of Confusion, with those illegal, COMMERCE CONCEPTS, for 1789 that has ballonned to over 80 million dollars of damages going back to Jay Hammond, when finding a lawyer was don't by hiring those who flunked law ]school 101!

Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't.

Take for instance and permit stacking system in ALL other States of the UNION...


Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't.

Every State Stacking permits, gives an equal amount of geear TO BOTH PERMIT HOLDERS???

OF Course in the Confederates State of ALASKA, the Constitutional 14 ACause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't.Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't.Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't.Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't.ndment of 1868 could confuse ALASKA!~

Of course the LIMITED ENTRY ACT, and STATE CONSTUTUTION COULD also only confuse Alaska!

Allocation when it's illegal, is shown best in the COOK INLET and Bristol Bay Drift Net Fisheries, but only by the drift fleets, the set net fleet get 2 equal shares of gear, but of curtse everyone knows Palins Husbands Business, thats hoe you end up with Set Net Chairman Vince Webster, Todd's best Friend!

Oh I wish I were in the land of Cotton old times there were not forgotten... look away look away look away Dixie land...

VOTE PALIN- VOTE Parnell, and you too can get another Attorney General, that still dosent get it

"Cause other states are dumb and our state through ADF&G isn't."

Anonymous said...

The fair and open process of the Council and NMFS - are you joking?

No real economic impact study or analysis of halibut catch share plan on the directed commercial harvest and charter operators.

Calls of parity in a catch share plan when there are two completely different industries - yet no attempt whatsoever by the Council or NMFS to understand the econmic impacts of the proposed CSP.

Yet when reductions are proposed for all the other commercial uses of halibut in the Prohibited Species Catch analysis - amazing how suddenly there can be economic analysis with values per metric ton of halibut caught as bycatch for every other commercially harvested species.

The PSC "analysis" indicated much higher values per metric ton through bycatch of halibut when fishing for pollock and every other fish the Council sets limits for.

In the PSC "analysis" the overall metric tonnage of halibut is not tagged with the same up and down movement of the TAC as proposed with the charter fleet and the directed longline harvests, because not fishing for pollock and other fish that harvest halibut as bycatch would be a losing economic proposition for the overall commercial fishing industry.

Yet after 15 years of asking NMFS and the Council for economic impact surveys on the sport fish use of halibut - nada, zippo, nothing - cause it is outside of financial interests of those who sit on the council and advisory panel, and outside the myopic "commercial" vision of NMFS.

So in the fair and open public process of the Council, commercial fishing interests that utilize halibut as bycatch get significantly less reductions in their overall limits (not floating with the TAC as the halibut IFQ does), based on a back of the napkin (simple) economic analysis that shows more economic output from halibut as bycatch than from the directed catch of the longliners.

So in one instance, economics (through a very simple analysis) is used to justify little reductions in bycatch and wastage of halibut in the commercial fishing industry, because it doesn't make economic sense.

In the next instance, at the same time, charter harvests in the recreational sector are going to be tied to the up and down float of abundance for halibut with the longliners in the proposed CSP, without an understanding of the economic impacts to charter fleet, anglers and coastal communities.

Anonymous said...

And, oh by the way, for 3A in Southcentral, the average removals of the charter fleet have been at or below, except for one year, the guideline harvest levels since implementation.

But guess what - the proposed CSP magically reallocates up to a 30% reduction from what was the charter target by the prior GHL.

Which means a one fish bag limit for most abundance levels when in the past it was two fish per day and within the GHL. 95% of anglers surveyed report they won't go charter fishing for halibut with a one fish bag limit, and the results in 2C are that it is killing angler effort and harvests.

Sitting and ignored on the shelf the the Council and NMFS is an independent economic survey (Criddle study on Pacific Halibut)that shows the maximum benefit with a 70% 30% split between commercial and sport fishing uses of halibut - but the council is going with a 85% / 15% split just cause. Just cause the Council can. Cause it is just.

Just like NMFS can say with a straight face - um, yeah, no real economic analysis that we generated, so no real economic information exists on charters - even though the same state that provides NMFS with estimates of guided and unguided halibut harvests also completed the most extensive analysis of the econmic impacts and contributions to the State of Alaska - in 2007 - prior to the CSP being adopted. And NMFS claims, with the official governmental nod and wink, that there is scanty, little information for any sort of economic analysis in the CSP.

Let's see - a fair and open process - I can't see the economic report from the state of Alaska sitting on the shelf, I will ignore the economic optimization model on Pacific halibut that indicates the recreational sector is being shorted allocation in the CSP, and to top it off let's short change up to another 30% from the charter operators from the existing GHL in 3A.

In any other country, it would be called crony capitalism at its best - in this country it is called a fair and open process.

Anonymous said...

you poor little charter nazis everyone picks on you poo poo!!!!!but when you are trying to steal something that you have no right too what do you expect?you are providing an adventure for a tourist to come north and have fun!not for a horde of carpetbagging blue nose people who think like yourselves to come north and take boxfulls of halibut fillets south!just remember even under hook and realease rules for your sorry ass'es your still making money and providing the tourist with his or hers adventure!!!stay sporty sport!!!!

Anonymous said...

They just can't comprehend, sport, and recreation, at the bottom of the food chain!

That's why non-resident sport license fees can be set at any rate, and non-resident commercial rates have limits...those Commerce Clauses from 1789, didn't make it into kindergarden charter schools either.

Oh well, let em cry all they want, due to the fact that it really don't matter 1 ioata or quota share, 1000 years of Court Precident saying the same thing could only confuse the same old group.

"The codfish lays a thousand eggs
The homely hen lays one.
The codfish never cackles
To tell you what shes done.
And so we scorn the codfish
While the humble hen we prize
Which only goes to show you
That it pays to advertise."

The homer hens are cackling
The farmers from the sky.
They'll tell you what you want to hear
and then they'll spit in ye eye.
They know their spit, but have no wit
to accept the plan or die!

Anonymous said...


It pays to advertise!

Anonymous said...

When NOAA built the Arc, it was not raining.

Anonymous said...

And COMMERCIAL commentors, please make mention of the PASSIVE COMMERCE theory, as explained in "Federalist #11" with regard to our Navy and Commercial Fisheries written by Alexander Hamilton, during the pre-Constitutional Convention

The Department of Commerce, and NMFS, must be informed of Hamiltons great term

"PASSIVE COMMERCE" that Charter Boat Fishing for short.

Anonymous said...

yeah and the tea partys about reality too!!!!!!!!jeez give us a break you charter operators are nothing but a bunch of blue nose carpetbagging opertunist,who don't give a dam about the resource your stealing or the communnitys you get your mail box at,although the mail box might get you more halibut,being rural that is wink wink!!!!!