what considered inland waters?

Hi,
I was cited for fishing with two rod in napa area by hwy 29 a couple years ago. I have a 2 rod stamp.I would thought that river considered inland waters.
The warden states that inland means land lock as to lakes and reservoirs. I thought it includes rivers and delta waters too. if anybody can explain and specify.
thanks,

ask Traildad and he'll set you staight. 
.......... 2 poles can only be used EAST OF THE CARQUINEZ STRAIGHT. No other bay waters or ocean waters.....not even up the pet river.

Delta is ok for two poles.....it is east of the carquinez.

Paging traildad

Thanks for info fishunter. please  clarify, is it ok east of the Carquinez bridge I80 or has be be east of I680 bridge?
thanks

Hi,
I was cited for fishing with two rod in napa area by hwy 29 a couple years ago. I have a 2 rod stamp.I would thought that river considered inland waters.
The warden states that inland means land lock as to lakes and reservoirs. I thought it includes rivers and delta waters too. if anybody can explain and specify.
thanks,

It is ridiculous that the wardens enforce the reg in a way that clearly was not spelled out in the book. If you read both the inland waters and ocean waters regulations you will see that the tidal portion of the Napa River is included in the Ocean Waters District. Since the River is in the Ocean District, the inland waters two pole stamp does not apply in any way. The Ocean Waters allow unlimited poles unless fishing for certain species or in certain areas. 28.65 in the Ocean Regs says that San Francisco and San Pablo Bays are restricted to one pole. It does not say the Napa River is restricted, so we should be able to use unlimited poles. For some reason some people believe that 27.00, which defines the Ocean District, somehow defines the Napa River to be San Pablo Bay and therefore covered by the one pole restriction. It makes no sense to me.

How much was the fine? I am considering getting a ticket on purpose just so I can get a judge to offer an opinion.

Paging traildad

Thanks for info fishunter. please  clarify, is it ok east of the Carquinez bridge I80 or has be be east of I680 bridge?
thanks

I80. I680 is the Benicia Bridge.

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, and the waters of Elkhorn Slough, west of Elkhorn Road between Castroville and Watsonville. Also see Section 1.53.

How much was the fine? I am considering getting a ticket on purpose just so I can get a judge to offer an opinion.

I've got no problem with someone going to great lengths to prove a point,

But consider this,

In 2007 I got a ticket for not filling out my ab tags while OTW in my kayak, the reg has been changed since to not require tags to be filled out til you get to shore.  I just plain forgot to fill out the tags, as I started fishing as soon as I finished diving, even the warden writng the ticket noted that it appeared to be unintentional.

So in court the first thing the judge asked of the prosecutor/clerk? was if I had any prior DFG citations, No was the answer, so the Judge made a point of saying since this was my first offense and even the warden noted it appeared unintentional.  The charges were dropped. (In lieu of a $250 donation to SCAN).

My point is that I would do everything in my power to keep my DFW record clean just in case you do get a ticket someday in the future for some unintentional reason it becomes way easier to argue your circumstances if your record is spotless.

I wanna see traildad get a ticket.

-Allen

I wanna see traildad get a ticket.

-Allen

I think it would be much more entertaining to see me fight it in court. 

How much was the fine? I am considering getting a ticket on purpose just so I can get a judge to offer an opinion.

I've got no problem with someone going to great lengths to prove a point,

But consider this,

In 2007 I got a ticket for not filling out my ab tags while OTW in my kayak, the reg has been changed since to not require tags to be filled out til you get to shore.  I just plain forgot to fill out the tags, as I started fishing as soon as I finished diving, even the warden writng the ticket noted that it appeared to be unintentional.

So in court the first thing the judge asked of the prosecutor/clerk? was if I had any prior DFG citations, No was the answer, so the Judge made a point of saying since this was my first offense and even the warden noted it appeared unintentional.  The charges were dropped. (In lieu of a $250 donation to SCAN).

My point is that I would do everything in my power to keep my DFW record clean just in case you do get a ticket someday in the future for some unintentional reason it becomes way easier to argue your circumstances if your record is spotless.

You're probably right. Just for the record, I wouldn't be trying to prove a point. I want the wording changed or the enforcement changed. If I won on appeal I think the judge could explain to them that the wording does not cover anything but the bay. I mean really, who would ever assume they were fishing in San Pablo Bay while fishing in downtown Napa? Ignorance of the law is no excuse, so it must be written in a way that makes sense.

I wanna see traildad get a ticket.

-Allen

I think it would be much more entertaining to see me fight it in court.