Number of Fishing Rods With Rockcod Aboard

I wonder if dropping your jig back down while deploying a rod rigged with a pin descender to release a rockfish at depth would be ok. I haven't done it, but a line with no hooks in the water shouldn't count against you.

I'd give that a .0001% chance of not getting you a ticket.   

Thanks for posting this, Howard - how about finding the part where people ask (over and over it seems) if they can fish two rods until they catch and keep one of the species listed above and then go to one.  Totally illegal.

True, and yet somehow people are still very confused by this.  It seems to be clearly spelled out in the regs to me: 

When pursuing rockfish, .......  or salmon north of Point Conception, or when any of these species are aboard or in possession, only one line with not more than two hooks may be used

If you are pursuing rockfish. If you are pursuing something else and unintentionally catch one then you must change your gear if you keep the fish. But it does not say that the fish caught unintentionally is illegal.

You may not keep the fish. The regs are very, very clear.

28.55

...

(d) Method of take: When angling, gear is restricted to not more than two hooks and one line. For purposes of this section, a hook is a single hook, or a double or treble hook with multiple points connected to a common shank.

I am often critical of the regs and their lack of clarity. This is not one of those times.

You may not keep the fish. The regs are very, very clear.

28.55

...

(d) Method of take: When angling, gear is restricted to not more than two hooks and one line. For purposes of this section, a hook is a single hook, or a double or treble hook with multiple points connected to a common shank.

I am often critical of the regs and their lack of clarity. This is not one of those times.

That is much clearer than the "pursuing" quote above. Is there a similar more clearly worded restriction on method of take for salmon?

Yes

27.80(a)

...

(4) One Rod Restriction north of Point Conception. Salmon may be taken by angling with no more than one rod in ocean waters north of Point Conception. See Section 28.65(e).

October 10, 2013

Question: If we are fishing on a boat in Monterey, how many fishing rods are allowed? If we already have rockcod aboard, do I need to use one rod? Can I use two rods to target lingcod or halibut if we don't have rockcod? Can I still use a second rod for bait fishing if rockcod are aboard? (Kenual L.)
 
Answer: Generally, any number of hooks and lines may be used in ocean waters and bays, but there are exceptions involving certain locations and species of fish. When pursuing rockfish, lingcod, cabezon, kelp or rock greenlings, or salmon north of Point Conception, or when any of these species are aboard or in possession, only one line with not more than two hooks may be used (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Section 28.65(c)). When rockfish are aboard, you may not use a second rod even for bait fishing. Instead, plan to fish for bait before fishing for these species. Anglers should read Section 28.65 on page 46 of the 2013-2014 Ocean Sport Fishing regulation booklet before fishing with multiple hooks or lines.

If I understand, they are saying you can have more than one rod aboard, you just can't use more than one under certain circumstances.

Yes

27.80(a)

...

(4) One Rod Restriction north of Point Conception. Salmon may be taken by angling with no more than one rod in ocean waters north of Point Conception. See Section 28.65(e).

What about the barbless hook part. That was the part that had me confused.

Yes

27.80(a)

...

(4) One Rod Restriction north of Point Conception. Salmon may be taken by angling with no more than one rod in ocean waters north of Point Conception. See Section 28.65(e).

What about the barbless hook part. That was the part that had me confused.

Same section.

(2) Barbless Hooks. No more than two (2) single point, single shank barbless hooks shall be used in the ocean north of Point Conception (34° 27’00” N. lat.) when salmon fishing or fishing from any boat or floating device with salmon on board.
(3) Other Hook Restrictions. When fishing with bait in the ocean between Horse Mountain (40°05’00” N. lat.) and Point Conception, if angling by any means other than trolling, then no more than two (2) single point, single shank, barbless circle hooks shall be used. The distance between
the two hooks must not exceed five inches when measured from the top of the eye of the top hook to the inner base of the curve of the lower hook, and both hooks must be permanently tied in place (hard tied). A circle hook is defined as a hook with a generally circular shape, and a point which turns inwards, pointing directly to the shank at a 90 degree angle. Trolling is defined as angling from a boat or floating device that is making way by means of a source of power, other than drifting by means of the prevailing water current or weather conditions. See Section 28.65(g).

If you are pursuing rockfish. If you are pursuing something else and unintentionally catch one then you must change your gear if you keep the fish. But it does not say that the fish caught unintentionally is illegal.

Sorry, traildad, but your misstatement is exactly what I was criticizing earlier in this thread - it is absolutely illegal to keep a fish if you caught it using gear that isn't allowed for that species!  If you could fish two rods with barbed hooks for salmon and then just change gear when you caught and kept one it wouldn't make any sense at all, IMO.

There have been multiple extended threads on this topic. 

Yes

27.80(a)

...

(4) One Rod Restriction north of Point Conception. Salmon may be taken by angling with no more than one rod in ocean waters north of Point Conception. See Section 28.65(e).

What about the barbless hook part. That was the part that had me confused.

Same section.

(2) Barbless Hooks. No more than two (2) single point, single shank barbless hooks shall be used in the ocean north of Point Conception (34° 27’00” N. lat.) when salmon fishing or fishing from any boat or floating device with salmon on board.
(3) Other Hook Restrictions. When fishing with bait in the ocean between Horse Mountain (40°05’00” N. lat.) and Point Conception, if angling by any means other than trolling, then no more than two (2) single point, single shank, barbless circle hooks shall be used. The distance between
the two hooks must not exceed five inches when measured from the top of the eye of the top hook to the inner base of the curve of the lower hook, and both hooks must be permanently tied in place (hard tied). A circle hook is defined as a hook with a generally circular shape, and a point which turns inwards, pointing directly to the shank at a 90 degree angle. Trolling is defined as angling from a boat or floating device that is making way by means of a source of power, other than drifting by means of the prevailing water current or weather conditions. See Section 28.65(g).

Yes that is the one. "When salmon fishing or with salmon on board". Very different than "method of take". Sturgeon rules are along the lines of the method of take wording. It seems they are trying to express something different than saying you must use barbless hooks to take salmon.

I'm starting to get a bit annoyed. Go read the section for yourself. I can't read the damn book for you.

The title of subsection (a) is Methods of take

If you want to argue or disagree with me at least give me the courtesy of reading the regulation you want to argue about.

If you are pursuing rockfish. If you are pursuing something else and unintentionally catch one then you must change your gear if you keep the fish. But it does not say that the fish caught unintentionally is illegal.

Sorry, traildad, but your misstatement is exactly what I was criticizing earlier in this thread - it is absolutely illegal to keep a fish if you caught it using gear that isn't allowed for that species!  If you could fish two rods with barbed hooks for salmon and then just change gear when you caught and kept one it wouldn't make any sense at all, IMO.

There have been multiple extended threads on this topic.

First I don't mean to be nit picky. The regs are legalese and need to be very precise. Your wording "if you could fish two rods with barbed hooks for salmon". The regs say if you are fishing for salmon. I say what if you are not fishing for salmon. I don't mean a lie to use, I mean what if you unintentionally catch a salmon with a barbed hook.

I'm starting to get a bit annoyed. Go read the section for yourself. I can't read the damn book for you.

The title of subsection (a) is Methods of take

If you want to argue or disagree with me at least give me the courtesy of reading the regulation you want to argue about.

Do you have a vested interest in this? The rule book is such a morass of poorly worded confusing legalese that even the DFG can't understand it. It is difficult to prove myself wrong. Since you were so sure I thought you would be able to quote the section and I could read it. When I saw the "pursuing" quote I assumed it was from the regs. You showed me they were misspeaking. I have spent a lot of time on the barbless salmon question and I mistakenly assumed the one pole rockfish question was the same because the word pursuing was used. If it annoys you to take part in a friendly discussion about the regs, why do it?

If you are pursuing rockfish. If you are pursuing something else and unintentionally catch one then you must change your gear if you keep the fish. But it does not say that the fish caught unintentionally is illegal.

Sorry, traildad, but your misstatement is exactly what I was criticizing earlier in this thread - it is absolutely illegal to keep a fish if you caught it using gear that isn't allowed for that species!  If you could fish two rods with barbed hooks for salmon and then just change gear when you caught and kept one it wouldn't make any sense at all, IMO.

There have been multiple extended threads on this topic.

First I don't mean to be nit picky. The regs are legalese and need to be very precise. Your wording "if you could fish two rods with barbed hooks for salmon". The regs say if you are fishing for salmon. I say what if you are not fishing for salmon. I don't mean a lie to use, I mean what if you unintentionally catch a salmon with a barbed hook.

If you unintentially catch a salmon with a barbed hook you must release it. If you catch a rockfish with more than on rod out you must release it. Pretty simple.

I'm starting to get a bit annoyed. Go read the section for yourself. I can't read the damn book for you.

The title of subsection (a) is Methods of take

If you want to argue or disagree with me at least give me the courtesy of reading the regulation you want to argue about.

Do you have a vested interest in this? The rule book is such a morass of poorly worded confusing legalese that even the DFG can't understand it. It is difficult to prove myself wrong. Since you were so sure I thought you would be able to quote the section and I could read it. When I saw the "pursuing" quote I assumed it was from the regs. You showed me they were misspeaking. I have spent a lot of time on the barbless salmon question and I mistakenly assumed the one pole rockfish question was the same because the word pursuing was used. If it annoys you to take part in a friendly discussion about the regs, why do it?

Of course I have a vested interest in the conversation.  We all do.  When you go out there on your kayak sporting NCKA stickers on your rig, maybe even at a gathering, and you get a ticket for violating the regs, it reflects poorly on all of us.  When some lurker of this site says "Well, I saw it on NCKA where this dude traildad says its ok" then that is a MAJOR problem for me.

This isn't a friendly discussion about the regs,.  This is saving us all egg on our face.  This is you being demonstrably wrong and spreading misinformation, without even having bothered to RTFM.  In a section on the site specifically about CA Regulations.

It is not difficult to prove you wrong.  You are wrong.  I've pointed you to the regulations that explicitly say so.  You came right out and said its ok to keep a rockfish if you are using two poles.  You are wrong, wrong, wrong.

Sorry if the salmon talk is a thread jack.

28.65
(e) North of Point Conception (34°27’00” N. lat.), where only one rod and line may be used by each angler fishing for salmon, or fishing from any boat or floating device with salmon on board.

27.80
(a) Methods of take:
2) Barbless Hooks. No more than two (2) single point, single shank barbless hooks shall be used in the ocean north of Point Conception (34° 27’00” N. lat.) when salmon fishing or fishing from any boat or floating device with salmon on board.

27.90
(d) Methods of take: Only one single point, single shank, barbless hook may be used on a line when taking sturgeon.

28.27
(d) Method of take: When angling, gear is restricted to not more than two hooks and one line.

28.55
(d) Method of take: When angling, gear is restricted to not more than two hooks and one line.

These are the different quotes I could find. Notice how some are worded the same and some are worded differently. I have to ask why the different wording unless it is intended to have a different meaning. Why doesn't the salmon gear restriction use the same wording the sturgeon gear restriction uses? When taking, when fishing. Two different things. Fishing and catching. Angling and diving.

I can't, nor can anyone else claim to know what is in the mind of the person that wrote the rules. I can read what they wrote and try to figure it out. The clearer and simpler the words, the easier it is for everyone to agree on their meaning. If they use the word fishing instead of taking or catching then I think it is reasonable to assume they did it with intention and because they meant to convey a different meaning. Your mileage may vary.