Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Alaska commercial fishing news and notes
About me
- Deckboss
- I'm a journalist covering Alaska's commercial fishing industry. My real name is Wesley Loy. Reach me at wloy61@gmail.com.
Alaska commercial fishing news and notes
19 comments:
There won't be a halibut fishery if something drastic doesn't change, but it's unlikely anything will change. There are too many conflicting interests.
The power trawl contingent does not want a large halibut biomass because of problematic bycatch. They will object to any agenda that will help a halibut recovery. IFQ fishermen are in debt and can't afford a big fishery reduction. Management doesn't want to admit their mistakes — they will let halibut collapse, and blame environmental conditions.
That's not true. I am a halibut IFQ holder and have been since it started. I also trawl for cod and pollock. Fish for salmon also. I have a lot of friends that pretty much do the same. There's no way in hell that we want to go out and catch halibut in our trawls or any other bycatch for that matter. If trawlers that fish for cod fish at the right time there's pretty much no bycatch. The observer program can prove that. We have in the past and continue to try to fish right to avoid bycatch. One of the biggest issues is there always seems to be a couple bad apples in the bunch. I'm referring to WGOA fishing but even the Bering Sea trawlers have agreed to bycatch avoidance plans. There's definitely more than one culprit that is causing halibut decline and I think we all realize that. So please quit pointing at trawlers as the sole problem.
Most fisheries populations are going to drastically change in the coming decades as the ocean continues to change. Putting hard biomass thresholds on halibut will probably just result in a closure of the directed fishery unless ocean conditions change. It doesn't matter what the halibut population was 20 or 30 years ago — the management strategy is set up to allow a fishery at whatever level the ecosystem supports today. If we want to continue to have wild fisheries we must not manage based on historic population sizes.
So, the answer is we just continue to fish it down to nothing? If the price of halibut wasn't so high the fishery would be unprofitable, and in some areas like the Bering Sea and Aleutians it is already unprofitable. We've been on a downward spiral for more than a decade. Running more gear, using more bait, all the latest technology, but still catching less fish. We have a management problem not a "changing ocean conditions problem." Management mistakes were made and now it's time to attempt to correct them and save this fishery for the next generation. We've already blown it for the second-generation guys that are so upside down in quota loans they'll never recover at this point, so let's try and do something for the next generation. It's OK to admit that the halibut fishery hasn't been managed correctly since the implementation of IFQs. It was great for the market/quality and great for those that benefitted tremendously, but looking back it's been horrible for the resource. We are at ALL TIME historic lows for the halibut stock, folks — the alarm bells have been ringing for over three years now.
Shorten the length of the IFQ season by at least half to start with. See if that helps.
People that want to point out one variable or action that caused the downward fall of halibut is plain silly.
There are plenty of issues across the board. Working on solutions rather than finger-pointing, a strong stock can be built again. Sorry not sorry that fisheries are complex and complicated, and all stakeholders need to put aside differences for whole reason we are at the table for best utilization of the fish.
The alarm bells have been ringing on Cook Inlet kings for 30 years. No big deal, just wipe 'em off the map and eliminate the fishery, just like Cook Inlet set, with no more sets.
If Buck wants to stop fishing, that's fine. The young guys who bought in and are in debt sure can't. How about we make it so all original issue quota can't fish anymore? They already got 30 years of free IFQ.
Fish have to come first or nobody will be fishing. Doesn't mater what your business plan is.
Where do you get the idea that because you're in debt, the original issue IFQ holders can't fish, 3:13? I remember when guys paid $800,000 for a Chignik seine permit. Funny how they didn't get one opener a couple years back, no matter if they got the original issue or the $800K model.
Deckboss, for all those anonymous dock talk BS peddlers, chew on this. All quotes from IPHC web data.
"Assessment of halibut stocks in 1980 was based on a variety of techniques and relied on several sources of data.... A wide range of results were obtained.... Although some of the methods produces results which contradict previous conclusions or appear to be unrealistic, they are included in the documents to indicate the uncertainties associated with the assessment of stocks."
Now, fast forward to 2024 IPHC meeting. "Due to the many remaining uncertainties in Pacific halibut biology and population dynamics, a high degree of uncertainty in both stock scale and trend will continue to be an integral part of an annual management process."
I have nothing but admiration for those whose work is based on a better understanding of the complex dynamics of our natural resources so that today we can harvest while saving something for tomorrow.
Sincerely, Doug Hatfield
Original issue permit and IFQ holders got a free ride for the last 50 years and over half of them have got a cushy retirement by selling what they got for free to some young guy. Graying of the fleet, people don't want to work anymore. The last generation fished 80 percent of our fisheries down to nothing, made millions of dollars and then still feel entitled to get every last dime out they can in lease fees and purchase price for fishing rights they got for free. Screw them. How about actually doing something to ensure we have another generation of fishermen in Alaska? Not more low-interest loans that bury them in debt. Throw the whole thing out and start over. Trip-limit fisheries, real owner-operator requirements for a start. At least enforce the rules on the books! All these BS medical transfers and lease terms going on robbing the crew actually doing the work.
You are falling for the "it's all global warming, there is nothing you can do." Are you from the agency? Sounds familiar. How do you know that these low levels are inevitable unless you try? Rebuild plan fixes this.
Concerned folks should show up at IPHC and council meetings and get involved. Decisions aren't made here.
Buck did NOT get original IFQ. He bought every pound he has. Making your last payment to the bank the day the last fish is gone is not a business plan. What sucker will buy it? We've all been suckers believing the IPHC. People should be pissed. We are all in this together. We did it to ourselves. The point is trying to save something for someone else. Not just have a remnant of a fishery.
For the farmers out there. If you get so hungry you eat the seed stock you perish or move or savage the farm next to you. We aren't there yet but there are enough stressors to see that as a possibility.
The problem with a poor halibut fishery is coastal Alaska loses resiliency. Like running on one engine while flying. No margin for error. Next bad salmon season and there is no way to work through it.
If people don't start paying attention you will have another 30-year failure like New England cod.
A rebuilding plan first has to protect the spawning biomass and the spawning potential.
Saving fishermen's dumb asses comes after.
"So you're telling me there's a chance." Dumb and Dumber
Those of us who bought in cheap after the original issue permits and IFQ were issued for free are doing fine. Once they close it down, like the Copper River was in 1980 for all sockeye fishing after three king openers, permits were $15,000. Just like in Bristol Bay in 2002, when permits were $15,000. Listen to 'em cry, they got the college education and want somebody else to pay that one off too. Those of us who bought 10 permits in Bristol Bay really scored! The Department of Education reported 130 million adults couldn't read at a 6th grade level in 2023. We need to find out why so many of them in this business also flunked 6th grade math. Oh boy, don't take the money and run, just run from the money and cry that you need some run money to get it figured out!
Right, but you can fire people up here!
Trust what you see for yourselves. On the grounds. If you think fishing is fine...good enough...you still find some fish...well, good for you. You are better than average. Stick your d'ck out for all to see big AK fisherman! If you kept a logbook, look back 10, 15, 20 years ago. What do you see?
This is not a natural cycle. Plenty of blame to go around, but bottom line we are taking too much out of the water (all sources of mortality) and the model doesn't know why the stock keeps going down.
IMO we have a remnant of a fishery. IFQs let us have an opener (just like the BS crabbers) but we got the crumbs. The leftovers.
If a guy could have shorted the IPHC (bet against the market or the science advice) 10 years ago, he would have made more than he did fishing. The IPHC still thinks there are fish out there.
Doing the same thing but expecting different results = insanity.
Don't wait for anyone else to save you. You are going to have to do it. No halibut out there makes NMFS' job easier. No halibut = no bycatch to constrain other fisheries.
Ask IPHC to do their job.
They only have one job...halibut fishery and halibut conservation.
On X @nomorehalibut
Post a Comment