RF depth restrictions in 2017

Boccaccio is being taken off the concern list and the sub bag limit will go away.

So the changes proposed for groundfish bag limits are:

3 blacks, reduced from 5
1 canary, increased from 0
2 lingcod, reduced from 3
10 boccaccio, increased from 3

All that being said, I'm concerned with the proposed yelloweye closures.  Although there isn't much info to go on in the pdf, I'm envisioning these things as looking like MPAs: a big block of water closed to fishing that extends from the shoreline out to some rounded mileage.  I very much hope the Department does what it says when they say "the proposed hot spot closures will be forwarded for further exploration and refinement." So taking into account the typical depth ranges that yelloweye inhabit and not imposing a closure that doesn't meet their objective (i.e., closing off a bunch of 20-30 foot depth reefs to fishing in order to protect YE).

In addition, I assume the "industry" they're working with for this information consists of charter boat operators and others who rely on bottomfishing as a livelihood.  The Department should keep in mind that, while these guys are going to be very knowledgeable about the areas they fish, that these guys will likely want to retain the areas they LIKE to fish and not be forced to drive further than usual to fish new areas (increased operating costs).  So the knee-jerk reaction from these guys could be to propose closures in places where they may have fished a couple times, or are longer distances from port than they like to drive.

CA DFW was adamant that the OFS hotspot closures were a 2 year trial and were NOT like the MPAs.  These things have a way of staying closed though.  I asked them to only close the OFS and YRCAs to bottom fishing and to still allow trolling for salmon.  YE won't be caught as bycatch by salmon trollers.

As for industry, that is us.  We are an industry group.  They just hadn't heard about us until now.

All that being said, I'm concerned with the proposed yelloweye closures.  Although there isn't much info to go on in the pdf, I'm envisioning these things as looking like MPAs: a big block of water closed to fishing that extends from the shoreline out to some rounded mileage.  I very much hope the Department does what it says when they say "the proposed hot spot closures will be forwarded for further exploration and refinement." So taking into account the typical depth ranges that yelloweye inhabit and not imposing a closure that doesn't meet their objective (i.e., closing off a bunch of 20-30 foot depth reefs to fishing in order to protect YE).

In addition, I assume the "industry" they're working with for this information consists of charter boat operators and others who rely on bottomfishing as a livelihood.  The Department should keep in mind that, while these guys are going to be very knowledgeable about the areas they fish, that these guys will likely want to retain the areas they LIKE to fish and not be forced to drive further than usual to fish new areas (increased operating costs).  So the knee-jerk reaction from these guys could be to propose closures in places where they may have fished a couple times, or are longer distances from port than they like to drive.

CA DFW was adamant that the OFS hotspot closures were a 2 year trial and were NOT like the MPAs.  These things have a way of staying closed though.  I asked them to only close the OFS and YRCAs to bottom fishing and to still allow trolling for salmon.  YE won't be caught as bycatch by salmon trollers.

As for industry, that is us.  We are an industry group.  They just hadn't heard about us until now.

Encouraging news.  Thanks Doug.

I do hope the Department recognizes the changing demographics in CA sport anglers.  The old-school thought of looking at ports and boat ramps as the only ways for anglers to access ocean fisheries is inconsistent with the reality of today's new technologies and watercraft.  And they'd have to be living under rocks not to recognize the exploding number of kayak anglers up and down the coast, a number that seems to grow exponentially with every passing year.

Well said, Chris.
Here is the entire collection of data from the April PFMC debriefing: http://www.pcouncil.org/resources/archives/briefing-books/april-2016-briefing-book/#gfApr2016

I understand they have to find another way to reduce impact on YE, if they allow deeper fishing (because deeper fishing would inevitably result in increased YE harvest). To be clear, the YRCAs were established 7 or 8yrs ago. These newly proposed "hot spots" are complete BS. I don't see the dept taking those seriously.

So, in a perfect world, the solution would be to simply allocate more incidental harvest of YE in CA by shifting some of the annual quota from other areas like Oregon, Washington, or the general scientific research community (which is allowed to harvest 3.3 metric tons of YE in the name of science! All of CA is only allowed to incidentally harvest 3.5mt). 
This idea is suggested in one of those docs: ""The Council has not yet finalized two-year allocations for yelloweye rockfish and it is possible that additional yelloweye rockfish could be allocated to the California nearshore fishery. If this occurs, allowing access to deeper depths could likely be accommodated within the allowable allocation.""



Speaking of barotrauma, checkout this cool new device: http://seaqualizer.com/

There wasn't a lot of support for increasing the California rec incidental YE when it was discussed in the groundfish advisory subpanel.  There just aren't that many yelloweye to go around. Its also a big unknown just how the new depth and longer seasons will impact YE, so instead what is happening is that CA is getting broad in-season powers to restrict and close fishing outside of the PFMC.  If YE are getting caught at a greater than expected rate, depth restrictions are coming back and seasons will be closed early.

Funny this.is.being brought up. This is the first time i have ever had.a bioligist who was at the dock opening day.giving away fish decenders. Coincidence ?

They have been giving them away on and off for years. I picked one up at ABC, where they had them on the counter by the office next to the regs books.

Can anyone post recommendations on descending devices?  A quick search and I only find stuff that costs $45 or more.  I want to get one before GSX. 

I'm pretty sure I have an extra shelton descender.  I always grab a handful when the biologists are giving them away.  I'll give one to you when I see you at the cove. 

Can anyone post recommendations on descending devices?  A quick search and I only find stuff that costs $45 or more.  I want to get one before GSX. 

I'm pretty sure I have an extra shelton descender.  I always grab a handful when the biologists are giving them away.  I'll give one to you when I see you at the cove.

Thanks!  I was just reading about the shelton descender.  I'm gonna rig up a pole just for that, so I can drop 'em quick-like.

Cheers!!

Can anyone post recommendations on descending devices?  A quick search and I only find stuff that costs $45 or more.  I want to get one before GSX. 

I'm pretty sure I have an extra shelton descender.  I always grab a handful when the biologists are giving them away.  I'll give one to you when I see you at the cove.

Would have like to have done the same but was barely able to talk them out of one other for Albycor . .
Hope to use mine this season if necessary .

Can anyone post recommendations on descending devices?  A quick search and I only find stuff that costs $45 or more.  I want to get one before GSX. 

I'm pretty sure I have an extra shelton descender.  I always grab a handful when the biologists are giving them away.  I'll give one to you when I see you at the cove.

u can just clip it on to the same rod u caught the fish with. 


Thanks!  I was just reading about the shelton descender.  I'm gonna rig up a pole just for that, so I can drop 'em quick-like.

Cheers!!

With some of these changes we have to give of yelloweye areas called YRCA  that will be closed to fishing.  I don't see any reason why areas south of Point Arena need any deeper since the party boats there and south have caused lots of the problems with rockfish.

You fog og to note that blacks are going to a bag limit of 3, canary take will be 1,  and lingcod will be reduced back to 2.  This will only work if people use descenders and don't kill lots of fish by fishing deep and bringing them up fast so they experience too much barotrauma.

Bringing a rockfish up slowly does not decrease the barotrauma.  Anglers realistically would never be able to reel up a fish slow enough to reduce the barotrauma.  So bring them up fast and get them back down fast so as to minimize the time a fish bloated.

-Allen

I kind of shook my head, and wondered if we were going to leave that a certain depth for 20 minutes then bring to another depth and let them hang there for 10 minutes or so before bringing them up?  Just didn't think that would work to well.