Crabbing From a Public Pier – Do You Need Marked Buoy?

February 27, 2020

Question: The regulations say crab traps must possess a buoy and each buoy must be legibly marked with the trap operator’s GO ID number as stated on his or her sport fishing license. If I’m fishing my crab trap off a pier (not a boat), am I still required to use a buoy with a GO ID? (Alvin)

Answer: There are several gear types that can be used for crabbing on a public pier. Crab traps are rigid in structure and require a destruct device and escape ports and are only allowed north of Point Arguello, Santa Barbara County. These traps are required to have a buoy marked with a the operator’s GO ID number. A hoop net is differentiated from a crab trap by being comprised of one to three rigid rings connected to soft mesh material. If deployed south of Point Arguello, Santa Barbara, this gear type is required to have a buoy marked with the operator’s GO ID number unless the trap is deployed from shore or a man-made structure like a public pier.

Crab loop traps (aka crab snares) are generally operated on a fishing rod-type implement and don’t require a buoy.

More details on these gear provisions can be found in California Code of Regulations Title 14, section 29.80.

Thankfully the answer was provided, albeit after too many other scenario descriptions, IMHO.

It's not really clear if "Alvin" was just using the term "trap" generically to mean both traps and hoop nets, or whether he really meant just the rigid traps as per the regulation definition.

As you noted, the response is extremely convoluted.  All of the responses from these Q&As tend to just regurgitate the regulations rather than provide any true explanation or further context.  I honestly can't decide if the person (or people) writing the responses sincerely believe they are providing helpful and clear answers.

For that matter, the regulations themselves are convoluted, inconsistent, poorly worded, and probably don't fully convey what is intended. 

A lot of effort is made to define hoop nets as something distinctly different than traps. They also have slightly different requirements, so there is clearly an intent to regulate them differently. For example, hoop nets require a "surface buoy," but traps require a "buoy."  Effectively, it may be the same.  For that matter, there is no explicit requirement to have any kind of marking or buoy for hoop nets when used north of Pt. Arguello no matter whether used from a pier or not (which would be most of the folks in on NCKA).  Although, I'd bet that a warden wouldn't hesitate to give somebody a citation for it anyway and would try to re-interpret the regulations to mean ALL types of recreational crab gear must have a buoy and GO ID.  Personally, I do it anyway to avoid the hassle.  Plus, I think it's actually a reasonable practice.


Rather than the given response, I think something like below would have been much better.  Even if not absolutely true (although I think it is), at least it would provide a somewhat reasonable explanation:

"Yes, even when fishing from a public pier or similar man-made structure a crab trap must have an attached buoy marked with your GO ID.  If the line attached to the trap were to somehow slip from your hands or otherwise become disconnected from the pier, there would be no easy way to recover the trap without an attached buoy. 

When fishing from a pier, the other devices allowed for taking crabs (hoop nets and crab snares) are not required to have an attached buoy.

Unlike hoop nets or crab snares, which allow for crabs of any size to easily escape if the gear becomes un-recoverable for some reason, traps only allow smaller crabs to exit the escape rings until the required destruct device corrodes or fails.  Such lost and abandoned crab gear can lead to the needless death of bigger crabs.

See Section 29.80. Gear Restrictions for more specific definitions and differences between the types of gear allowed for taking crabs."

Thankfully the answer was provided, albeit after too many other scenario descriptions, IMHO.

Right?

Yesterday, I was on a section of the Truckee east of Reno and asked my friend, who invited me along, what the regs were for the section we were now fishing. His response was that he didn’t know and that it was Nevada (said as if explosives would be allowed). Being familiar with CA, I pulled up the NV regs on my phone and found the section we were on was, on a year round basis, artificial lures with a single, barbless hook. Since we were fly fishing, it’s what I was already set up with.

Regardless of the source, or the answers, of a Q&A, checking the regs yourself for what you’re targeting, when you’re doing it, where you’re doing it, and how you’re doing it, will make the visit with the warden a much better experience. IMO, of course.

The source of the answers to this column is Carrie Wilson, a senior DFW biologist. She does a great job on this column and maybe misses one answer in 20, which are then subsequently corrected. She’s not a law enforcement officer, and she has to answer some very basic questions that come from some very dumb people.

I thought she did a great job answering this question. Maybe when she gives a seemingly long winded answer to a seemingly straight forward question, it would be better so lead off with:

Short answer - no

Long answer - here’s all the different types of legal contraptions that you can use to catch crab that may or may not be what you refer to as a “trap”, here’s the geographical restrictions.


That said, she usually does a great job and there’s not a lot to nitpick here.

Traps should be banned.

I like hoops.   

Traps should be banned.

I like hoops.   

That day may be coming.  Traps are responsible for a lot of whale entanglements.  The technology exists to avoid ghost fishing and whale entanglements, it’s probably just a matter of time before rules are implemented to reduce those problems to zero with time release buoys on commercial traps and the like.

Sure, I get that she's really trying to answer many more questions related to the one cited. And she's great at doing that. Just at times it seems a bit off track. But if I was writing these things, there would be a bit more profanity 

I for one thought the response was informative and straight forward given the vague question.   I appreciate the thorough answer  and the citing of the reg.  Otherwise it can be just an opinion and we know where that leads us