RF Reg. Petition - Rockfish Nearshore Draft Petition

Hey Paul, good work, sorry I wasn't able to help.
I would like to suggest deleting the length limit altogether, as it seems arbitrary.
Perhaps I am biased though, as I often fish with a friend in his 20' rowing dory!
My alternate suggestion would be to limit the capacity of the craft, i.e., "carrying no more than two persons" - that accomplishes your goal of limiting take-per-boat, without establishing an arbitrary number that might lead to problems. It also makes enforcement easier, as they only have to count heads, instead of measuring length while on the water.
Numbers encoded in a regulation have a way of becoming difficult... next year someone might come out with a nice tandem fishing kayak just over 19 feet long... or someone mods his yak with a bowsprit or something. If the intent is to limit the number of fish taken by a single vessel, focus on that instead of the vessel length.

Again sorry to be coming in here late with this. I'm sure there will be multiple revisions if this proposal gains traction with the agency.
Tim

Non-motorized and motorized need to be defined.  Are sailing vessels motorized or non-motorized?  Battery powered motors?  Is there a horsepower cutoff?  Why 19’ limit? 

I appreciate all the effort that goes into something like this.  Good job.

We had a definition for non-motorized one point but decided not to include it in our petition since the term was commonly used already in the regulation.
We picked 19' to cover most of the fishing kayaks.  The longest popular model I know is the Stealth PROFISHA 575. Length: 5.75m / 18.86 ft.

Paul

Where are the regulations for the Northern division?

Northern Management Area doesn't have a published 50-fathom rule, and we didn't know how to include it in the petition.
We hope CDFW will apply a similar rule when they accept our petition.  If you have detail petition language, please let us know.

Paul

Hey Paul, good work, sorry I wasn't able to help.
I would like to suggest deleting the length limit altogether, as it seems arbitrary.
Perhaps I am biased though, as I often fish with a friend in his 20' rowing dory!
My alternate suggestion would be to limit the capacity of the craft, i.e., "carrying no more than two persons" - that accomplishes your goal of limiting take-per-boat, without establishing an arbitrary number that might lead to problems. It also makes enforcement easier, as they only have to count heads, instead of measuring length while on the water.
Numbers encoded in a regulation have a way of becoming difficult... next year someone might come out with a nice tandem fishing kayak just over 19 feet long... or someone mods his yak with a bowsprit or something. If the intent is to limit the number of fish taken by a single vessel, focus on that instead of the vessel length.

Again sorry to be coming in here late with this. I'm sure there will be multiple revisions if this proposal gains traction with the agency.
Tim

Non-motorized and motorized need to be defined.  Are sailing vessels motorized or non-motorized?  Battery powered motors?  Is there a horsepower cutoff?  Why 19’ limit? 

I appreciate all the effort that goes into something like this.  Good job.

We had a definition for non-motorized one point but decided not to include it in our petition since the term was commonly used already in the regulation.
We picked 19' to cover most of the fishing kayaks.  The longest popular model I know is the Stealth PROFISHA 575. Length: 5.75m / 18.86 ft.

Paul

Hi Tim

Thank you for your great suggestion.  We will definitely consider your suggestion during our next meeting.
You are the person who convinced me to look into the RF regulation.

Paul

We received a total of 64 responses so far and got many great supporting comments.

It will take less than 3 minutes to provide your support and comments: https://forms.office.com/r/g2eDqsrW8R

Just saw Moo's video on YT talking about this partition.  Thanks guys for organizing this.

Thank you, MooMoo, for posting on your YouTube channel.
Our response jumped from 64 to 140 just in several hours due to your video.

 

Thank you, MooMoo, for posting on your YouTube channel.
Our response jumped from 64 to 140 just in several hours due to your video.

I'll put a post and video out later this week and a blast to my mailing list. Sorry, i've been MIA on this topic. I am very supportive of the effort to organize and get a coalition to speak up for our interest. Juggling work, life, kayak fishing and the dozen of other interest takes a toll on me.  Thanks Paul and all those taking a lead on this important topic. 

I think the CDFW will hear loud and clear from the Kayak Fishing Community on this topic. --TLA

Hi all,

I'm not too active here and a relatively new member but I do have some thoughts to contribute to this cause:

1.   Meeting Date Uncertainty.  It looks like the California Fish and Game Commission meeting will occur over two days in San Jose (W-Th, Oct. 11-12).  Based on their past 2-day agendas (posted online), it looks like the Commission discusses certain items on Day 1 and certain items on Day 2. If the rockfish closure is a specific item on the agenda, they will only discuss it and/or take action on one of the two days. I believe that means if we show up on the wrong day, we won't have the same kind of opportunity to speak. We won’t know for sure on which day the rockfish closure will be discussed by the Commission, if at all, until we see the agenda. The agenda is not yet posted to the CDFW website, and it might not be posted until perhaps a week prior to the meeting.  If the rockfish closure is not on the agenda, there will be a general comment period during which NCKA members (or a spokesperson) can stand up to speak about any topic not on the agenda (such as the rockfish closure). But the general comment period is at the top of the agenda, so it is important to be on time to the meeting. Every meeting agenda also has an item for acceptance of petitions, though it is not clear to me yet whether our opportunity to speak will be during general comment or acceptance of petitions, or during a specific item on groundfish regs. I will try to post an update here if I learn more (and I intend to ask).

2.   Meeting time. Their past meetings started at 8:30 AM. I suspect it will be the same for Oct. 11-12, so plan on it. I will update here if I find out differently. The general comment period could start by 8:35 AM.

3.   NCKA Attendance In-Person. NCKA members should be encouraged to attend the CFGC meeting in person, and to speak before the Commission in support of the NCKA petition, or to appoint a spokesperson to speak in person. In-person attendance will have the greatest impact on the Commission – you can look them in the eye, which hits home more than email or zoom. If we can get 10, 20, or even 50 people to show up and speak, it will have a huge impact.

4.   NCKA Virtual Attendance. When the agenda is posted to the CDFW website, it will provide instructions on how to participate in the meeting by Zoom and/or teleconference for those who cannot attend in person.  Virtual attendees will be able to make oral comments to the Commission. That means for those who cannot attend in person, they should carve out the time to attend virtually. Here is an example (from the August 22-23 CFGC meeting) of the virtual participation instructions: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=213347&inline. Do not rely on these past instructions as they are from the Aug meeting and could change for the Oct meeting. Wait for the Oct. 11-12 instructions to become available on the CDFW website. If we flood their Zoom meeting with NCKA members in support of the petition, it will also have a big impact on the Commission. They do encourage organizations to appoint a spokesperson to give comments so we should consider that, but even if we do that, a large crowd in person and on Zoom will make the spokesperson's comments more impactful. if you are in the room, stand up when our spokesperson approaches the lectern to speak so the Commission knows how many of us are there for the rockfish closure.

5.   Written comments. Every supportive NCKA member, even those who can attend in person or virtually, should email written comments to fgc@fgc.ca.gov.  The written comments are then compiled for Commission members prior to the meeting. But for your emailed comments to get to the Commission members, they should be sent at least TWO WEEKS prior to the meeting (based on their past deadlines). For an Oct. 11-12 meeting, all supportive NCKA members should be sending an email by Sept. 27.

Takeaways:
A. Start scheming on how to get out of work on Oct. 11 or 12 to attend the CFGC meeting in San Jose. In person is preferred, but Zoom or teleconference is the next best thing. Be prepared to give appropriately professional remarks. You will probably be time-limited to 2-3 minutes, or a bit more if you are a spokesperson for a large group.
B. Write an email to the fgc email address above in support of the NCKA petition. Do it by Sept. 27 to make sure it gets in from of the Commission meeting.
C. Watch this thread for updates on the above. We might not know the exact date until a week or so before the meeting, when the agenda gets posted online.

You will not be commenting on the petition October 11-12, at least for action to be taken. The Commission will merely receive the petition and punt it for action/consideration in December in San Diego (or later), if it is received by staff September 27, 5:00 PM or earlier.

You had better submit the petition ASAP before people jump the the gun and start sending emails that don't map to a submitted petition.

Thank you, Fuzzywuzzy and Rick, for the detailed comments.

Workgroup Schedule:

• Receive comments by September 11, 2013
• Review comments  & Finalize Petitionon September 12, 2013
• Submit the final petition to FGC  no later than September 25 (anticipate by September 19 or sooner)

"A petition will be rejected by Commission staff if it is not submitted on form FGC 1, if it fails to contain necessary information in each of the required categories listed on FGC 1, or if it does not pertain to regulations under the Commission’s authority. A rejected petition will be returned to the petitioner by the Commission staff within 10 working days of receipt.

Commission Action on Petition: An accepted petition will be scheduled for consideration at the next available Commission meeting. The Commission will consider the petition, the Commission staff’s recommendation, Department of Fish and Wildlife's initial evaluation, if any, and any oral or written public comments received, and take one of the following actions:

If the Commission finds that the petition does not provide sufficient information to indicate that the petitioned change may be warranted, the Commission may deny the petition.
If any petition requesting a functionally equivalent regulation change was considered within the previous 12 months and no information or data is being submitted beyond what was previously submitted, the Commission may deny the petition.
If the Commission finds that the petition provides sufficient information to indicate that the petitioned change may be warranted, the Commission may grant the petition for further consideration and add the petitioned change to its rulemaking schedule.

*An accepted petition is a petition which (1) is submitted on the proper form, (2) contains the necessary information in the required categories listed on FGC 1, and (3) pertains to regulations under the Commission's authority."

The reason we are trying to mobilize as many people as we can on October 11th is to get attention from FGC and take an opportunity to speak during the General Public Comment session.
I am hoping at least three people get an opportunity to speak (NCKA member, Fresh & Salt Member, and Business Owner Impacted by Nearshor closure).  After we submit our petition, we plan to communicate with FGC staff about our intention.  Based on the latest survey, we will have close to 100 people attending the Oct. 11th meeting.

We are currently focused on the petition, but as soon as we complete this task, we will shift to the FGC meeting (signs, letter writing, contacting TV and newspaper reports, parking information, T-shirts...)

Our main communication will be using the email list generated by the survey.  If you have not participated in the survey, please use the following link (it takes only 3 minutes): https://forms.office.com/r/g2eDqsrW8R

Petition Workgroup Member, Paul

I read this thread but I still don’t understand the purpose/intent of this petition. Is the goal to reopen the nearshore RCG fishery to non-motorized vessels?

I read this thread but I still don’t understand the purpose/intent of this petition. Is the goal to reopen the nearshore RCG fishery to non-motorized vessels?

Yes, during the 50-fathom rule restriction period, allow non-motorized vessels to fish all depths, which includes the nearshore.
In addition, requires the use of a descender for all rockfish fishing.

If you have not watched yet, MooMoo did a great job explaining in his video:  https://youtu.be/JdGUwMdj4DU?si=PKjQxfVbc1xwwNBu

Paul

Where are the regulations for the Northern division?

Northern Management Area doesn't have a published 50-fathom rule, and we didn't know how to include it in the petition.
We hope CDFW will apply a similar rule when they accept our petition.  If you have detail petition language, please let us know.

Paul

We certainly do have a 50 fathom rule since our nearshore season was shut down before your nearshore was .  I’m not talking about the beginning of the season.  The groundfish laws aren’t permanent.  They change or amend them often during the season.  We used to be only 120ft depth limit then they upped to 180ft.  It used to only be open to October 31st then gave us till the end of the year.  They gave us all depth after October 31st for the 4 or 5 years, but only once or twice did we actually get all depth because they would say the limit had been reached on incidental yelloweye take and keep us at 180ft which so so stupid cause there are plenty of yelloweye in 180ft of water.  We also don’t have much reefs deeper than 180ft anyways.  Really my main concern is salmon and pacific halibut because if I really wanted rockfish or lingcod it’s almost as easy to just go catch some from shore since they aren’t a sportfishing and are some of the easiest fish to catch.  I wish y’all luck with this venture, but I have my doubts that CADFW will change whatever their plans are for the season.  Having the opportunity to fish Cape Mendocino for nearshore is about the only place that will get me to target rockfish and let ngs specifically.

Where are the regulations for the Northern division?

Northern Management Area doesn't have a published 50-fathom rule, and we didn't know how to include it in the petition.
We hope CDFW will apply a similar rule when they accept our petition.  If you have detail petition language, please let us know.

Paul

We certainly do have a 50 fathom rule since our nearshore season was shut down before your nearshore was .  I’m not talking about the beginning of the season.  The groundfish laws aren’t permanent.  They change or amend them often during the season.  We used to be only 120ft depth limit then they upped to 180ft.  It used to only be open to October 31st then gave us till the end of the year.  They gave us all depth after October 31st for the 4 or 5 years, but only once or twice did we actually get all depth because they would say the limit had been reached on incidental yelloweye take and keep us at 180ft which so so stupid cause there are plenty of yelloweye in 180ft of water.  We also don’t have much reefs deeper than 180ft anyways.  Really my main concern is salmon and pacific halibut because if I really wanted rockfish or lingcod it’s almost as easy to just go catch some from shore since they aren’t a sportfishing and are some of the easiest fish to catch.  I wish y’all luck with this venture, but I have my doubts that CADFW will change whatever their plans are for the season.  Having the opportunity to fish Cape Mendocino for nearshore is about the only place that will get me to target rockfish and let ngs specifically.

 

Thank you for your efforts, Paul. As well as everyone else that has contributed.

Al