a visit by landlord's son

I met his son yesterday. 6 ft long with a big body.
The lingcod got to swim away afterall, with only top half the body! 

Well,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,tell us more about it!!

Especially since it's posted in the section where you actually get into the water to do these things,  and all your fish seem to have holes in them,

just bought myself a new speargun,

so I want to know more,  like where were you?

dale

Wow!!!

Please Elaborate....

Yea, enough of the tease already, tell us more!

That was a nice lingcod

I met his son yesterday. 6 ft long with a big body.
The lingcod got to swim away afterall, with only top half the body! 

do you think the DFG would cite you for that part of a ling on your stringer? i mean, as picky as they can be and all i could see them raising a stink about something like this.

so what happened? whatever took the rear half off that ling did it nice and clean with some sharp tools!

do you think the DFG would cite you for that part of a ling on your stringer?

 

do you think the DFG would cite you for that part of a ling on your stringer? i mean, as picky as they can be and all i could see them raising a stink about something like this.

so what happened? whatever took the rear half off that ling did it nice and clean with some sharp tools!

It was braught up in a recent CDFG California Outdoors Q&As:

California Department of Fish and Game

NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE      Sept. 11, 2009

CDFG California Outdoors Q&As: Shark-shortened halibut

Contact: Carrie Wilson, DFG Office of Communications,
[email protected]

Question: A diver friend recently speared a halibut that was clearly
legal, but before he could get it to shore, a shark bit off the rear
half. What remained was not 22 inches long meeting the minimum size
limit. I'm sure this same situation happens to rod and reel fishermen
too.

Would the diver or fisherman in possession of a shark-shortened fish be
cited? It seems a shame to throw away the remains of what was a legal
fish, but I want to be clear on the law. I have no desire to be the test
case in this area. (Bill M., San Clemente)

Answer: This is one of those "letter of the law" vs. "spirit of the
law" questions. By the letter of the law, if a fish no longer measures
the minimum length required by law, then technically that fish is no
longer legal to possess and the diver/angler could be cited for having a
short fish. It is unlawful to possess on any boat or to bring ashore any
fish with a minimum size limit that is in such a condition to where it's
size or weight cannot be determined (Fish and Game Code Section 5508.)

As far as the spirit of the law goes, if the Department of Fish and
Game (DFG) game warden could clearly see what had happened and believed
the fish started out as legal size, it would be up to him/her to decide
whether or not to cite for what is now a "shark-shortened" fish, as you
put it. This is something that would be entirely up to the discretion of
the game warden. One suggestion if this happens again is to not fillet
the fish. Keep the fish whole as evidence to show that the shark bite
matches up to the story, and wait to fillet the fish until getting it
home.

The bottom line according to Assistant Chief Rob Allen, if the fish's
minimum total length or filet size cannot be determined, then the safest
decision would be to let the fish go back to nature. This would not be a
waste of fish issue since the fish was supposedly legal when originally
taken. If the fish is half-eaten and there is no way to measure the
size, the diver/angler could be cited for keeping it. In a situation
like this, a fish being returned to the ocean half-eaten would provide
food for other organisms, such as crabs and fish.

LEONY,

Post up more detail........Was it on the stringer, on the speartip or swimming free?  Where you in the yak or in the water?

Was up? Enough of a tease already......What part of the Coast were you on.

Wow!  Sure it was a white shark and not a soupfin or sevengill?  Both of those are local sharks with slicey dicey teeth rather than pointy ones.

This would not be a
waste of fish issue since the fish was supposedly legal when originally
taken. If the fish is half-eaten and there is no way to measure the
size, the diver/angler could be cited for keeping it. In a situation
like this, a fish being returned to the ocean half-eaten would provide
food for other organisms, such as crabs and fish.

Why would the 1/2 eaten make a difference?

I guess if it's 3/4 eaten it'd only be head, and if it were only 1/4 eaten it might still be legal.    OP may have only kept it for the photo, doesn't look like much meat was left on that guy.

Knowing leony a little bit, I am guessing he was somewhere between Monterey and Lucia. Just speculating. But I think he dives with a paddle board; not a kayak. So an encounter with whitey w/b pretty dang scary. I would also guess it got chomped while still on the spear; not on the stringer.
Either way, that is truly an incredible picture. I hope we get the whole story.

OK. Tell us what happened! Now I'm anxious to hear about it! 

I was diving out of a popular spot south of Carmel. Pat is right, I dive with a boogie board. I speared all the fish earlier. Usually I put the bleeding fish on top of my board if I see any seals around. But that day I didn't see any seals, so I let my guard down and just let the fish hang from my board in the water. I left the board inside a kelpbed about 30 yards from me. I was on the outside edge of the kelpbed (sandy bottom), swimming with thousands of anchovies in about 30 feet of water when I saw a big fish swimming right under me. The vis wasn't good enough to let me see very clearly but I can tell it's a big shark in grey color. So it could very well be a big soupfin or seven gill, but I cannot tell the difference (how do you tell the difference? I am all ears.). I decided to get out of the way and went inside the kelpbed. After a while, when I checked my board, the ling was chomped off already! Out of all the fish hanging, that thing only chose to chomp on the lingcod. The cut was extremely clean, looks like he only took one easy bite. That was enough for me so I headed in. The remaining lingcod was returned to the ocean after my photograph. I figured that even a ranger would want to see how clean the bite was, and I just have to take a picture.
So the fact is that the shark did go into a kelp bed to get to the lingcod. And whatever it is, it has extremely sharp teeth and a powerful bite. It looked to be about 6 ft long with a thick girth to me, although it's hard to judge the size when a fish is 30 ft below.

fat girth is an indicator for a gws, mako, or salmon shark and only the gws has that sort of cutting bite from the triangular teeth, not the grabbing bite with pointy teeth. seems like young GWS is a good candidate.