One pole or two on the Napa River?

I'll play it safe with one, as one is all I want to handle with a large fish on.

One rod west of Benicia bridge and two rods east of Benicia bridge.  I got a warning a few years back for 2 rods in Sonoma Creek.

Here is the definition of Ocean and San Fransisco Bay District.  It is defining what is included in The Ocean and San Francisco bay District as opposed to the freshwater portion of the state.

27.00.  DEFINITION. The Ocean and San Francisco Bay District consists of the open seas adjacent
to the coast and islands or in the waters of those open or enclosed bays contiguous to the ocean, and
including San Francisco and San Pablo bays plus all their tidal bays, tidal portions of their rivers and
streams, sloughs and estuaries between the Golden Gate Bridge and Carquinez Bridge. . .

This is the regulation limiting the number of hooks in that portion of the Ocean and San Francisco Bay District that is in what are commonly called San Francisco San Pablo bays.
 

28.65.  GENERAL. Except as provided in this article, fin fish may be taken only on hook and line or
by hand. Any number of hooks and lines may be used in all ocean waters and bays except:
(a) San Francisco and San Pablo bays between the Golden Gate Bridge and the west Carquinez
Bridge, where only one line with not more than three hooks may be used

There is no indication that there is any third area like you contend.  None.  the simple, fair reading is that if you are in San Francisco or San Pablo Bay, between the two bridges, you can use one pole.  It requires a tortured reading to find a magic third area that is between the bridges, part of the Ocean and San Francisco Bay District covered by the ocean regs, and not in San Francisco or San Pablo bays.

+1

Nice work, crash. Thanks for doing the legwork there !

Furthermore, note the use of the possessive "their" in the definition. 

including San Francisco and San Pablo bays plus all their tidal bays, tidal portions of their rivers and
streams, sloughs and estuaries

Here is the definition of "their".

their
T͟He(ə)r/
determiner
possesive pronoun: their; possesive pronoun: Their; determiner: Their

    1.
    belonging to or associated with the people or things previously mentioned or easily identified.

So the tidal bays, tidal portions of their rivers and streams, sloughs and estuaries belong to the bodies of water previously mentioned!!

This is really plain, simple, and black and white, common definition stuff.

Thank you for settling this Crash.  I just couldn't understand why Traildad was so set on not listening to what majority of the people here said, which you clarified nicely.

I just couldn't understand why Traildad was so set on not listening to what majority of the people here said, which you clarified nicely.

This comes to mind:

con·jec·ture/kənˈdʒɛktʃər/ Show Spelled [kuhn-jek-cher] Show IPA
noun
1. the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
2. an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.
3. Obsolete . the interpretation of signs or omens.
verb (used with object), con·jec·tured, con·jec·tur·ing. 
4. to conclude or suppose from grounds or evidence insufficient to ensure reliability.
verb (used without object), con·jec·tured, con·jec·tur·ing. 
5. to form conjectures.

I think of conjecture as having more of an air of argumentative persistence.  I've accused my teenage daughter of it...

Traildad - maybe you should be on a debate team.  Doug can be one of the judges.   

PS - If someone shows up at GS questioning regs and pushing limits I'm disqualifying them - that's spelled out in clear English, but you may be able to break it down into segments which may or may not mean what I intend...

The question arises because the ocean regs allow for unlimited poles.

You may also want to look into this further as well.  It all depends on the species you wish to target.  Roughly from the top of my head, I do know that halibut and white seabass, you are allowed as many rods as you are able to handle.  Salmon, RF/Lings, its 1 rod per person.

I can't do this at work right now so I'll explain it with the regs tonite. But for now, take a look at how they word the regs on crabbing inside the Golden Gate Bridge. Note that they don't simply say SF and SP Bays. If your understanding was correct they would not use the extra words.


PS : how is trying to get the DFW to enforce the rules as written or change what's written to match enforcement in any way breaking rules, encouraging others to break rules etc? When this came to my attention I also played it safe. Just because a warden says its true doesnt prove its true. Is everyone saying we don't need defense lawyers anymore because every time the police arrest and charge someone they are always right? Sometime law enforcement gets it wrong and the courts need to correct them. Of course I could be wrong also and that is harder to get the courts involved in without great cost.

The regs are not a model of clarity. That is absolutely true.

Remember when I said that it takes a tortured reading of the regs to find a magic third area?  There it is.

Well, if you take the definition, it says plus. Then if you look at the gear restrictions it doesn't say plus, but if you look at the crabbing regulations it does say plus. So even though it isn't explicitly stated anywhere in the regs, MAGIC THIRD AREA BOOM!!!

And that, friends, is how to make a tortured reading of the regs.

No third area needed. The definition of ocean waters district includes the words rivers so that we know that the rivers are covered by those regs. The reg in question does not use the word rivers so by default we know that the rivers are not covered by those regs. It really is as simple as that.

PS: I don't know why people suggest using two poles to see what a warden would do as though that proves something. I already know that answer. The warden would say my 2nd pole permit is not good for ocean waters and cite me. This discussion is about what is the legal meaning of the regs, not what the man on the beat thinks they do or should mean. It needs a legal answer from a judge.

No third area needed. The definition of ocean waters district includes the words rivers so that we know that the rivers are covered by those regs. The reg in question does not use the word rivers so by default we know that the rivers are not covered by those regs. It really is as simple as that.

PS: I don't know why people suggest using two poles to see what a warden would do as though that proves something. I already know that answer. The warden would say my 2nd pole permit is not good for ocean waters and cite me. This discussion is about what is the legal meaning of the regs, not what the man on the beat thinks they do or should mean. It needs a legal answer from a judge.

Wait, are you saying that the two rod stamp does apply?  That is obviously incorrect. Why would a warden tell you that unless you offered that excuse?

You do realize that judges can and do come to different opinions on matters, right?  This doesn't need input from a judge unless you are willing to pay the fine when you are wrong. Since you are wrong.

Questions:

Was 9/11 an inside job?
Is the IRS a legitimate institution?
How about the federal reserve?
Do you even fish?

Thanks.

Since you are wrong.

Questions:

Was 9/11 an inside job?
Is the IRS a legitimate institution?
How about the federal reserve?
Do you even fish?Thanks.

 

That depends........ how do you, a warden, a judge, the supreme court, Jesus, God and Aliens,  define "fish" ?

Since you are wrong.

Questions:

Was 9/11 an inside job?
Is the IRS a legitimate institution?
How about the federal reserve?
Do you even fish?Thanks.

 

That depends........ how do you, a warden, a judge, the supreme court, Jesus, God and Aliens,  define "fish" ?

 

Wait, are you saying that the two rod stamp does apply?  That is obviously incorrect. Why would a warden tell you that unless you offered that excuse?

No that is the explanation that was given me on the phone by the warden when I asked what was the reg that made it illegal to use two rods.

Wait, are you saying that the warden was wrong? If he doesn't know that was wrong how can I trust their opinion. Or did he know it was wrong but was just lying to me to justify their position because there is no reg that prohibits using two poles on the Napa River.