So....

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by MakoMike

That's what it "normally" starts off at. Then NMFS ups the limit, because we aren't going to catch our quota, and if we don't catch our quota ICCAT may take some away.

Didn't this happen with Cod somewhere in the country? Fishermen couldn't fill the quota so the government opened up previously closed waters?

I'm a business guy and not a marine biologist, but in business when quotas consistently can't be filled it's often due to one of two things: incompetence, or unacceptably high expectations.

If the US is consistently unable to catch their allotted quota of BFT, is it because of incompetence on the fishermen's part or because the regulatory body has unacceptably high expectations with regards to the health of the tuna population?

[Mr. Sandman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

...I'm a business guy....

Sorry, you can't apply this kind of logic to fisheries. Fisheries management is more of a"fuzzy logic" kind of field, at least that is what it appears to the pragmatic population.

Also, and no offense, but I've seen some of the ivy league business decisions the wall streeters have made in the last few years, and quite frankly, I don't think that is anything to base decisions on.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman

Sorry, you can't apply this kind of logic to fisheries. Fisheries management is more of a"fuzzy logic" kind of field, at least that is what it appears to the pragmatic population.

Also, and no offense, but I've seen some of the ivy league business decisions the wall streeters have made in the last few years, and quite frankly, I don't think that is anything to base decisions on.

Since I'm so far off base... then how do you explain why the US is repeatedly below their quota for BFT?

[big jay]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Since I'm so far off base... then how do you explain why the US is repeatedly below their quota for BFT?

It's a bait issue - midwater pair trawlers have decimated all the inshore bait (macs and herring) to the point where most off the giants that normally summer in the gulf of maine keep moving north to canada (where they outlawed mid-water trawling and have ass-loads of bait).

Over the last several years the Canadians have had so many fish that they are filling their quotas in days (PEI lasted less than a week last year) - they are also getting smaller (presumably U.S. fish) earlier than they ever had. Canada was always huge fish late in the year (700 was small and it was all OCT/Nov).
Now they have 500lb fish in July.

If we fix our bait situation, we will fix our Giant fishery.

The overall #'s of fish haven't really changed, its the geographic distribution. Giants don't care about border lines, they just want something to eat.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by big jay

It's a bait issue - midwater pair trawlers have decimated all the inshore bait (macs and herring) to the point where most off the giants that normally summer in the gulf of maine keep moving north to canada (where they outlawed mid-water trawling and have ass-loads of bait).

Over the last several years the Canadians have had so many fish that they are filling their quotas in days (PEI lasted less than a week last year) - they are also getting smaller (presumably U.S. fish) earlier than they ever had. Canada was always huge fish late in the year (700 was small and it was all OCT/Nov).
Now they have 500lb fish in July.

If we fix our bait situation, we will fix our Giant fishery.

The overall #'s of fish haven't really changed, its the geographic distribution. Giants don't care about border lines, they just want something to eat.

Absolutely makes sense, but all of the above seems to fall into my second point: "the regulatory body has unacceptably high expectations with regards to the health of the tuna population" - in this case, it just happens to be a regional issue.

To get back to the core of RIROCKHOUND's initial post regarding the best interest of the fish...
Isn't the unfortunate reality of the situation that the Canadian quota (where the bigger fish intended to be caught for the US quota are) should be increased and the US quota (where the quota isn't being filled due to smaller fish) should be decreased?

[Islander77]

RRH, Fishsmith... Dogfish are endangered too... The fact is there are some people here who dont fully get it and blame ONE EFFIN SIDE... Yes business is business.... But dont PUT ALL the blame on one side... I mean most companies that have 3 ceos resign to avoid a big issue ( destroying documents to cover their arse) and another one bagged on it so 4 heads destroying documents... ENOUGH SAID

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by Islander77

RRH, Fishsmith... Dogfish are endangered too...

Not by any definition of the word. Even NMFS/NOAA admits that there are more dogfish around than every before. They have been wiped out on the European side of the Atlantic but there are plenty of them on this side.