PDA

View Full Version : NO MORE FISHING?


acorn
01-16-2011, 7:28 PM
My friend tells me today that beginning in February it will be illegal to fish between Newport harbor and Dana Point harbor, as well as many other coastal areas. Is this true? I went to DFG website and couldn't find any info. Is this the Obama fishing ban he might be referring to? What gives?

Ahhnother8
01-16-2011, 7:34 PM
MLPA - coming to an ocean near you...

ADAM
01-16-2011, 7:43 PM
My friend tells me today that beginning in February it will be illegal to fish between Newport harbor and Dana Point harbor, as well as many other coastal areas. Is this true? I went to DFG website and couldn't find any info. Is this the Obama fishing ban he might be referring to? What gives?

say what

Clee
01-16-2011, 7:49 PM
Welcome to California pal! I'm not sure about the specific area you mentioned but there are Alot of closures. Alot GOOD spots. I can't seem to find the link right now. I know my guide friend is not happy. I believe parts of Catalina are off limits too.

acorn
01-16-2011, 7:50 PM
Just found this!

http://sciencedude.ocregister.com/tag/fishing-ban/

Helpful_Cub
01-16-2011, 7:59 PM
That stinks for you fishing people. At least you get to save money on an ocean fishing license this year.

TadyMan
01-17-2011, 12:06 PM
Save money!? Hell no we dont. The price of a fishing license has gone up 3% and 20% of our ocean is now taken away!!! If there are any CDFG on here please give me a reason to not be mad at this whole situation.

chris
01-17-2011, 12:54 PM
That stinks for you fishing people. At least you get to save money on an ocean fishing license this year.

thanks for the F U in your post.

judging by these parts in the article the enviromentalnuts wanted more.

“We should be done arguing about whether the MPAs work or not,” said commissioner Richard Rogers minutes before the vote was taken. “They do.”


we will see if they do.

this one takes the cake.
Environmental groups celebrated the decision late Wednesday, while some sportfishing advocates said they were weighing their legal options, and that the decision could prove disastrous for the Southern California sportfishing industry.


^^^^^ clearly this is the end result they want for the sportfishing industry.


and did anyone also know that California has in it's Constitution the right to fish.

http://www.serconline.org/huntandfish.html
“The people shall have the right to fish upon and from the public lands of the State and in the waters thereof, excepting upon lands set aside for fish hatcheries, and no land owned by the State shall ever be sold or transferred without reserving in the people the absolute right to fish thereupon; and no law shall ever be passed making it a crime for the people to enter upon the public lands within this State for the purpose of fishing in any water containing fish that have been planted therein by the State; provided, that the Legislature may by statute, provide for the season when and the conditions under which the different species of fish may be taken.” (California Constitution, Article 1, Section 25, 1910)



i also agree what this guys says.
“Clearly, this was an illegal process,” said Bob Fletcher, a past president of the Sportfishing Association of California, which includes sportfishing boat operators in Orange County. “This thing they adopted was an illegal product of that illegal process.”

Fletcher also expressed fears that the protected areas would concentrate fishing in the areas left open, depleting the resources there, as well as causing conflict.


i wonder what this stupid state will do when they see fishing license revenue go south?

CACitUP
01-17-2011, 1:49 PM
Having fished the California coast for most of my life I can say this isnt a bad thing. Our fisheries have been depleted and we have not practiced sustainable fishing techniques since....well since never. It used to be that in a single trip I could limit out on monster lings and take some nice flatties, followed up by a sack of rockfish of respectable size. Now you are lucky to hit a ling of legal size in a single trip. Halibut is still ok but you have to work hard for marginal size, but the most hard hit is the rockfish populations, which are a joke by comparison to what they were 30 years ago. Most of this is related to commercial fishing, but unfortunately, in the end, it impacts sport fishing. Its a sign of the times, get used to it, it is needed. Much like the no take regs for steelhead and silver salmon. I would expect these types of regs to hit the pelagic species in another decade or so. We are lucky to get 20+ lb longfins anymore. Anyone wanna buy a boat????

chris
01-17-2011, 1:58 PM
Having fished the California coast for most of my life I can say this isnt a bad thing. Our fisheries have been depleted and we have not practiced sustainable fishing techniques since....well since never. It used to be that in a single trip I could limit out on monster lings and take some nice flatties, followed up by a sack of rockfish of respectable size. Now you are lucky to hit a ling of legal size in a single trip. Halibut is still ok but you have to work hard for marginal size, but the most hard hit is the rockfish populations, which are a joke by comparison to what they were 30 years ago. Most of this is related to commercial fishing, but unfortunately, in the end, it impacts sport fishing. Its a sign of the times, get used to it, it is needed. Much like the no take regs for steelhead and silver salmon. I would expect these types of regs to hit the pelagic species in another decade or so. We are lucky to get 20+ lb longfins anymore. Anyone wanna buy a boat????

yep it's nothing like it was 30 years ago. but the problem with this type of things is that they will never be lifted once fisheries are at a good level. once taken away never given back. remember what this state does is never good for anyone other than the special interests that proposed it and bankrolled it.

i'm for conservation not banning an area to fishing for all time that we know will happen i also believe that this was an illegal act and should be pursued as such. i seriously doubt that these closures are for the benefit of the fish it really is about control. remember gun control has been quite successfull in this state now the control of fishing is underway by taking away areas once open to fishing.

when no one is left to speak for your outdoor passion whome will you B*tch to about no one speaking up for you.

CACitUP
01-17-2011, 2:10 PM
This is science, not a political debate over control. This is no different than when they stopped the take of steelhead and silvers on west coast rivers. Steelhead was on the brink 10 years ago, but has rebounded because of the "controls" put in place a decade ago. These coastal "rookeries" are the breading grounds for these populations and if not sustainably fished they will disappear. I dont like it any better than you. I Love Fishing. But I also see whats happening with my own two eyes. If you have a better solution I would like to hear it.

chris
01-17-2011, 3:13 PM
This is science, not a political debate over control. This is no different than when they stopped the take of steelhead and silvers on west coast rivers. Steelhead was on the brink 10 years ago, but has rebounded because of the "controls" put in place a decade ago. These coastal "rookeries" are the breading grounds for these populations and if not sustainably fished they will disappear. I dont like it any better than you. I Love Fishing. But I also see whats happening with my own two eyes. If you have a better solution I would like to hear it.



what is your solution i would like to see if we have the same ideas?

if the science is sound why is The Partnership for Sustainable Oceans (PSO) filing for legal action? there maybe more to this than we have heard on the MPA.

from this page there is not much info other than pending legal action.
http://californiasportfishing.org/mlpa/mlpa-a-flawed-process/

Two weeks ago the California Fish and Game Commission voted 3 to 2 to approve implementing the South Coast Marine Protected Area array. This is in spite of the opposition to what has been a flawed process. The Partnership for Sustainable Oceans (PSO) presented a document at the hearing which put on the record all of the facts of improper procedure. The PSO is now moving forward with legal action.



i in no way support the illegal take of fish that are not of the proper size defined by the DFG and also taking more fish than legally allowed too.

in recent years i have seen Scuplin make a comeback from the 10 in limit imposed on them. i have caught more sheephead also. i have never fished for the fish you have mentioned they are not really prevalent in OC waters. Rockfishing is pretty good i fished in Montery a couple of years ago and i caught more fish than you can shake a stick at i did throw back fish i caught after my limit.

most of the fish in my area are migratory such as Sand Bass and there numbers are down for a number reasons these being water temperature being cooler than normal, Giant Squid being around more than usual, Sea Lion population that is out of control i see more of them than fish. i do not have all the answers as to why some years are good some are not. and really don't think the scientist do either IMO. nature will do what it want's to whether we like it or not.

there is really no one solution to overfishing. i do not think an outright closure of the ocean will really solve anything. it will have an economic impact that we have yet to see. from people not fishing and people not purchasing any fishing licenses due this action being approved. and this state needs the money more than we can believe.

CACitUP
01-17-2011, 3:35 PM
First of all the PSO is basically Shimano, with a few other corporates and the National Marine Manufacturers Association mixed in. Hardly a group that has the preservation of our local fishing interests at heart. The time for "Limiting" fishing access and placing restrictions on the size, type and place of catch are long gone. This should have been done 10-20 years agao, but guess who opposed those restrictions 10-20 years ago. No, the only real solution to the overfishing of our local waters is complete closure of the areas identified as key breading grounds. If you protect these areas the populations WILL rebound. Maybe not in your lifetime or mine, but they will rebound for our kids and grandkids. The fact is we F%#!@ up and now we have to pay the piper. People will find outher outlets for fishing, and no, they arent closing all areas to all fishing. Just select areas identified as critical to the survial of the species. I say build yourslef a fly rod and see what kinda action you can find in the Sierras, or stalk bass in your local warm water ponds and quarries. The oceans are in a world of hurt and not likely to recover in your lifetime. And yes, I really do have a boat I will sell you. Beautiful Wellcraft 20' center console sport fisher. Fully equiped.

chris
01-17-2011, 4:40 PM
And yes, I really do have a boat I will sell you. Beautiful Wellcraft 20' center console sport fisher. Fully equiped.

no thanks i have a boat. :D


I say build yourslef a fly rod and see what kinda action you can find in the Sierras, or stalk bass in your local warm water ponds and quarries. The oceans are in a world of hurt and not likely to recover in your lifetime.

no thanks i really don't like fly fishing at all. and driving the Sierras is cost prohibitive from where i live. fishing in the Sierras is fun but not a passion for me.



The fact is we F%#!@ up and now we have to pay the piper.

that's a pretty borad statement saying that we all F***** it up. not everyone overfished i'm pretty much going to say fisherman are like gun owners 99.999999% follow the law and that tiny percentage F****** it up for us.


The time for "Limiting" fishing access and placing restrictions on the size, type and place of catch are long gone. This should have been done 10-20 years agao, but guess who opposed those restrictions 10-20 years ago.

i have been fishing in the ocean since i was 6 and that is 34 yrs. i have never took a fish undersize and yes there are people that do it. those are the ones that messed it up also.

fishing size and limits have been in place for atleast if not more than 10-20 yrs. and by the timeline your suggesting is only 2000 or 1990.

another fish that we will never fish is the Black Sea Bass and that ban has been in place since before i was born. now that is a fish that was nearly fished out. that is one fish neither of us or your kids if you have any. (i don't have any nor plan to have children in this F***** up world.) as for the current numbers of Black Sea Bass i have no idea.

one fish that has made a comeback with size and limits is the White Sea Bass i believe before June you can get 2 and after it is 1. there is progress which is good. i see the pens for them in the harbors near my house.

the golden era of fishing is over and i forsee it being almost gone before the next generation is allowed to fish. i distrust this state in regards to opening these areas up again. the track record of it proves this.

CACitUP
01-17-2011, 4:44 PM
ok....just turn the light out when your done.

acorn
01-17-2011, 6:39 PM
ok....just turn the light out when your done.

It sounds like you already live in the dark.

chris
01-18-2011, 1:51 PM
ok....just turn the light out when your done.

It sounds like you already live in the dark.

i believe he does. he gave up when i stood up to his solution. i also think he was a little off when stating the size a fish limits were not around 10 to 20 years ago. well that puts it at 2000 to 1991.

Rusty_Buckhorn
01-18-2011, 2:02 PM
you SoCal guys probably should have had this discussion last year, when all this was proposed and open for public comment. Probably wouldn't have helped though, I don't think there was a lack of public comment on this issue. If I remember right, this was a big reason the last DFG commissioner stepped down.

CAL.BAR
01-18-2011, 2:19 PM
Having fished the California coast for most of my life I can say this isnt a bad thing. Our fisheries have been depleted and we have not practiced sustainable fishing techniques since....well since never. It used to be that in a single trip I could limit out on monster lings and take some nice flatties, followed up by a sack of rockfish of respectable size. Now you are lucky to hit a ling of legal size in a single trip. Halibut is still ok but you have to work hard for marginal size, but the most hard hit is the rockfish populations, which are a joke by comparison to what they were 30 years ago. Most of this is related to commercial fishing, but unfortunately, in the end, it impacts sport fishing. Its a sign of the times, get used to it, it is needed. Much like the no take regs for steelhead and silver salmon. I would expect these types of regs to hit the pelagic species in another decade or so. We are lucky to get 20+ lb longfins anymore. Anyone wanna buy a boat????

EXACTLY! I too grew up fishing here, and I have to tell you, there isn't much left out there. (really) Yields are terrible, and what you do catch is smaller. Between Newport and Dana there are no less than half a dozen boats working with hundreds of anglers going out every day during the summer. the ocean CANNOT handle that kind of pressure.

If you want to take your children or grandchildren fishing some day, we HAVE to cut back today. Don't be short sighted.

CACitUP
01-18-2011, 2:50 PM
I stated my solution. Its the current solution and now the current regs. I spoke up and had attended many of these meetings....have you? I guess I got what I wanted....well not really, but you get my point. And yes 20 years ago Rockfish, Lingcod, Halibut, in-fact just about every local fish with the exception of Salmon and Crab was a year round fishery with no size or bag limit. Tuna was wide open and seeing red decks 2 feet deep in bloody longfins was a regular thing. It wasnt until the late 90's that you started to see size limits on Ling Cod, but nothing on the other fish. Regularly taking 50 fish bags of rockfish of any size being the norm. In 2002 the fishery crashed and the fat lady started to warm up her voice. Now she is shreiking like a PMS ravaged whore. That ship has sailed. There is nothing left to do now but wait. Or you could get involved with the FERC relicensing issues that are currently effecting many of the states waterways. Oh wait, you might have missed that boat too...........It just irks me to hear people complain after the party is over.



i believe he does. he gave up when i stood up to his solution. i also think he was a little off when stating the size a fish limits were not around 10 to 20 years ago. well that puts it at 2000 to 1991.