New regulations for the Napa River

Perhaps not the best outcome, but very clear and specific, that I like.

So, to add a little more detail to the story. The proposed change to move the rivers to inland waters was submitted last year. In December they became aware that doing what they did made a unenforceable mess. They got together and decided to define SF Bay to include San Pablo Bay and the tidal portions of the rivers that flow in and move the rivers back to ocean waters. He told me a story about using high powered flashlights to spotlight game when hunting. The regs need to be updated to include the new technology, but it is so difficult they can't get it done. That left me believing that they realized changing the rivers to inland waters would require rewriting a lot more regs. With it being so difficult, they took the easy way out that required making fewer changes. I really think it was how much work was involved that kept them from allowing us to use two poles. I'm going to suggest they consider creating a SF Bay two pole stamp. It would mean more money for the state. I don't know why the bay is restricted to one pole but I doubt it is to prevent Stripers from becoming extinct. In the begining I asked that they enforce the regs as written or change the regs to match the enforcement. It seems that they went kicking and screaming, but they got it done. I have to at least give them credit for that.

I really think it was how much work was involved that kept them from allowing us to use two poles. I'm going to suggest they consider creating a SF Bay two pole stamp. It would mean more money for the state. I don't know why the bay is restricted to one pole but I doubt it is to prevent Stripers from becoming extinct.

I just wanted to point out that is is legal to use 2 rods inside SF Bay, depending on which fish you're targeting (e.g., halibut).

I really think it was how much work was involved that kept them from allowing us to use two poles. I'm going to suggest they consider creating a SF Bay two pole stamp. It would mean more money for the state. I don't know why the bay is restricted to one pole but I doubt it is to prevent Stripers from becoming extinct.

I just wanted to point out that is is legal to use 2 rods inside SF Bay, depending on which fish you're targeting (e.g., halibut).

You would need to find that in the rule book. What I read limits everyone and everything to one pole in San Francisco and San Pablo bays and soon the tidal portions of the rivers that flow into the bays.

I really think it was how much work was involved that kept them from allowing us to use two poles. I'm going to suggest they consider creating a SF Bay two pole stamp. It would mean more money for the state. I don't know why the bay is restricted to one pole but I doubt it is to prevent Stripers from becoming extinct.

I just wanted to point out that is is legal to use 2 rods inside SF Bay, depending on which fish you're targeting (e.g., halibut).

Nope. 28.65(a) = one line with no more than three hooks.

Oh snap, you're right. Thank you.
That's a new one to me. And I guess shows how disinterested I am in fishing the Bay from kayak/boat.
Funny thing is you are still allowed 2 rods when fishing from a public pier or jetty in SF Bay.
 

Oh snap, you're right. Thank you.
That's a new one to me. And I guess shows how disinterested I am in fishing the Bay from kayak/boat.
Funny thing is you are still allowed 2 rods when fishing from a public pier or jetty in SF Bay.
 

Where do you see that?  28.65(b) is a further restriction and does not modify or create an exception to 28.65(a). As always, when there are more than one applicable section, the more specific takes precedence over the more general. If you are fishing off a pier in Santa Cruz, you can use 2 rods. If you are in the SF Bay, it's still one rod. I also dont see any limitation about the number of rods on a jetty, just on public piers.

https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Fishing/Ocean/Beach-Fishing#320781176-how-many-rods-can-i-actively-use-while-fishing-from-a-public-pier-inside-san-francisco-bay

https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Fishing/Ocean/Beach-Fishing#320781176-how-many-rods-can-i-actively-use-while-fishing-from-a-public-pier-inside-san-francisco-bay

That answer makes no sense.  Why does 28.65(b) modify 28.65(a), but 28.65(c) does not?  Neither subsection indicates an intention to provide an exception to 28.65(a), yet one does and one doesn't according to that answer.  And we are just supposed to divine what does and doesn't.

What a mess.

Of course, if you get cited for 2 poles on a public pier in SF Bay hold up that web page FAQ answer and waive it.

Since there are piers in and out of SF Bay, I would read it to say that (a) further restricts (b) and only one line can be used. I would think they would need to add the words "except on piers" to (a) if they want to allow two poles on piers in SF bay.

We need to remember that I had many people in DFG tell me what I knew was and ultimately was proved wrong. I don't know how much training law enforcement officers get on reading legal language. They need to submit these questions to the lawyers instead. 

I had another discussion with DFG today and this topic came up. He said they are exploring possible changes to regs to help make things more straight forward. For example, why can you fish on a pier in SF Bay with two rods and move 100 ft over to the shore and be limited to one Rod? Why on a pier on the ocean are you limited to two rods but if you move 100 ft over to the beach you can have unlimited rods? Why is there a night time restriction in the bay? Why is the bay limited to one Rod? No one seems to know anymore what the reason was for enacting these restrictions. What the outcome will be no one knows. Maybe some restrictions will be changed.

As far as my suggestion to have a two Rod stamp for the bay's, he said that requires a legislative action and would take years. So that idea is not something they want to pursue.

I had another discussion with DFG today and this topic came up. He said they are exploring possible changes to regs to help make things more straight forward. For example, why can you fish on a pier in SF Bay with two rods and move 100 ft over to the shore and be limited to one Rod? Why on a pier on the ocean are you limited to two rods but if you move 100 ft over to the beach you can have unlimited rods? Why is there a night time restriction in the bay? Why is the bay limited to one Rod? No one seems to know anymore what the reason was for enacting these restrictions. What the outcome will be no one knows. Maybe some restrictions will be changed.

As far as my suggestion to have a two Rod stamp for the bay's, he said that requires a legislative action and would take years. So that idea is not something they want to pursue.

We should try to get on an ad hoc committee or citizen's advisory panel.  We need a seat at that table.

So as a new angler in the rivers and bays my ability to read through and understand there regs is still difficult for me. From what I'm reading on this thread is that the use of two poles for striper or surgeon(barbed or barbless) is not permitted in the Napa river below the Trancas bridge? Can someone either confirm or correct me? Thanks

So as a new angler in the rivers and bays my ability to read through and understand there regs is still difficult for me. From what I'm reading on this thread is that the use of two poles for striper or surgeon(barbed or barbless) is not permitted in the Napa river below the Trancas bridge? Can someone either confirm or correct me? Thanks

At this moment I'd say two poles are illegal. I'd be watching to see what they do next year when they fix the changes they tried to make. Keep in mind, above and below the Trancas St bridge are different books. What applies to one doesn't apply to the other. Look at the ocean book for downstream of the bridge. Inland waters for above the bridge. However I haven't checked to see if they have published any changes since they learned of the problems with the regs.