Crab Poach Patrol?!?!

Something like this?  Weighted rope obviously.

Yes, Crash that is the situation exactly. In fact that is how the manufacturer reccomends to use it. But it is made for heavy steel commercial pots that are just tossed off the ship.

In my drawing the rope is long enough to lower it all the way to the bottom before letting go.

Something never made much sense to me.  Wouldn't you still have roping swinging in the ocean, ripe for whale entanglement?  Or perhaps it must not be there if you can't see it?

-Allen

Yes, but the rope is only covering some fraction of the water column, not the entire thing.

Why does that make a difference?  Whales swim in all directions.

-Allen

The same reason that Gill nets don’t stretch across the entire length of the river.

In my drawing let’s assume 50 FOW.  The rope now only covers 15” instead of 50, a 70% reduction in coverage in the water column.

I'm not just thinking of the vertical direction of the water column.  You now have rope in the horizontal direction.  Actually who knows what direction it's going in.

-Allen

Something like this?  Weighted rope obviously.

Yes, Crash that is the situation exactly. In fact that is how the manufacturer reccomends to use it. But it is made for heavy steel commercial pots that are just tossed off the ship.

In my drawing the rope is long enough to lower it all the way to the bottom before letting go.

Something never made much sense to me.  Wouldn't you still have roping swinging in the ocean, ripe for whale entanglement?  Or perhaps it must not be there if you can't see it?

-Allen

Yes, but the rope is only covering some fraction of the water column, not the entire thing.

Why does that make a difference?  Whales swim in all directions.

-Allen

The same reason that Gill nets don’t stretch across the entire length of the river.

In my drawing let’s assume 50 FOW.  The rope now only covers 15” instead of 50, a 70% reduction in coverage in the water column.

I'm not just thinking of the vertical direction of the water column.  You now have rope in the horizontal direction.  Actually who knows what direction it's going in.

-Allen

If it's a weighted rope, it's going in the down direction.

Something like this?  Weighted rope obviously.

Yes, Crash that is the situation exactly. In fact that is how the manufacturer reccomends to use it. But it is made for heavy steel commercial pots that are just tossed off the ship.

In my drawing the rope is long enough to lower it all the way to the bottom before letting go.

Something never made much sense to me.  Wouldn't you still have roping swinging in the ocean, ripe for whale entanglement?  Or perhaps it must not be there if you can't see it?

-Allen

Yes, but the rope is only covering some fraction of the water column, not the entire thing.

Why does that make a difference?  Whales swim in all directions.

-Allen

The same reason that Gill nets don’t stretch across the entire length of the river.

In my drawing let’s assume 50 FOW.  The rope now only covers 15” instead of 50, a 70% reduction in coverage in the water column.

I'm not just thinking of the vertical direction of the water column.  You now have rope in the horizontal direction.  Actually who knows what direction it's going in.

-Allen

If it's a weighted rope, it's going in the down direction.

I dunno.  It depend on the weighting system and the currents.  Seems to me it would be better to have some sort of system that coils the rope, like in the video jp52 posted.

-Allen

I think its hard to argue its worse than having an extra 30% of line out there so might as well reduce the surface area of tanglable material.  I dont think any alternate universe exists where 70 feet of line in the water is more tanglable than 100 feet of it... There is still at least the exact same amount of upward force on the rope at full extension, so its no going any more sideways than it normally would.   If anything its more straight as its actually under tension for the whole time and not slacked off and diagonal like a normal buoy whos theoretical center of pressure displacement is above the waterline, thus putting less upwards pressure on the rope than had it been below the waterline.

Wireless security cameras 

I think its hard to argue its worse than having an extra 30% of line out there so might as well reduce the surface area of tanglable material.  I dont think any alternate universe exists where 70 feet of line in the water is more tanglable than 100 feet of it... There is still at least the exact same amount of upward force on the rope at full extension, so its no going any more sideways than it normally would.   If anything its more straight as its actually under tension for the whole time and not slacked off and diagonal like a normal buoy whos theoretical center of pressure displacement is above the waterline, thus putting less upwards pressure on the rope than had it been below the waterline.

It's also hard to argue that having it coiled is better than having it loose.   

I'm a data kind of guy.  Any published research supporting which is better?  I'm sure is something somewhere, I just didn't find it in a quick search.  And is that amount of better worth the added effort/cost?

We're talking about X feet of line out to a floating buoy vs. X feet of line out, doubled over and loose, and potentially swaying in the current.

-Allen

Just spitting in the wind, but would it work better if the rope and buoy were in a rubbermaid type of bucket?  (To avoid tangles)  and the lid released  on a timer that others have mentioned?

I'm clueless by the way on the logistics but just think that the tangles will be better controlled if the rope is coiled in a confined space.(and the whales wont got caught in the rope

There's two independent concerns going on to solve for.

First, have as little rope int he water as possible to avoid marine mammal entanglements.

Second, have a way to control the descent of the pot so it lands and fishes correctly, traditionally done by holding onto the rope and lowering it in a controlled manner until it contacts bottom.

Ancillary concerns are to limit the buoyancy of the line or otherwise limit the tendency of the pot to walk due to the float causing the line to be under constant tension where it would normally be slack using traditional methods.

Anything else I'm missing?  Solving one problem so far has made the other problem worse.

Attach a caribiner to the bucket that has the buoy in it and lower it with a rope that isn't tied to anything but is running through the caribiner?  Instead both ends of the rope are controlled by you so you can control the descent? 

It warmed my heart to see the diagram on a dry erase board.  It's been too long. 
 
I liked the idea of taking pictures of poachers and posting them to threads here, Coastside, or wherever local boaters are getting their info.  Word gets around and social shaming has its place.

It warmed my heart to see the diagram on a dry erase board.  It's been too long. 

I use that dry erase board all the time.  I have considered making the entire wall a dry erase wall.  Another wall in that room is a chalkboard wall.

I should take a pic of the new and improved drawing, which now includes an anatomically correct male marine mammal about to get entangled, which I drew for someone to demonstrate the problem we were trying to solve when they asked about the board.

Second, have a way to control the descent of the pot so it lands and fishes correctly, traditionally done by holding onto the rope and lowering it in a controlled manner until it contacts bottom.

Uhh ... I don't hold the rope and lower it in a controlled manner until it contacts bottom.  This is with a weighted pot.  I just let it sink a bit, pull it tight to straighten the pot, then let it all go.  I've never had a problem with this method.  And, most boats I've gone on also just do something similar.

-Allen

Second, have a way to control the descent of the pot so it lands and fishes correctly, traditionally done by holding onto the rope and lowering it in a controlled manner until it contacts bottom.

Uhh ... I don't hold the rope and lower it in a controlled manner until it contacts bottom.  This is with a weighted pot.  I just let it sink a bit, pull it tight to straighten the pot, then let it all go.  I've never had a problem with this method.  And, most boats I've gone on also just do something similar.

-Allen

Off a power boat it's much easier obviously.  Weighted pots, davits, power winches, you have a lot more options.  I guess I made the assumption that we were talking about danielsons, promars. and kayaks.

Second, have a way to control the descent of the pot so it lands and fishes correctly, traditionally done by holding onto the rope and lowering it in a controlled manner until it contacts bottom.

Uhh ... I don't hold the rope and lower it in a controlled manner until it contacts bottom.  This is with a weighted pot.  I just let it sink a bit, pull it tight to straighten the pot, then let it all go.  I've never had a problem with this method.  And, most boats I've gone on also just do something similar.

-Allen

Off a power boat it's much easier obviously.  Weighted pots, davits, power winches, you have a lot more options.  I guess I made the assumption that we were talking about danielsons, promars. and kayaks.

Well, I'm talking off my kayak as well. Mostly promars with 3-4# of weight.

-Allen

Second, have a way to control the descent of the pot so it lands and fishes correctly, traditionally done by holding onto the rope and lowering it in a controlled manner until it contacts bottom.

Uhh ... I don't hold the rope and lower it in a controlled manner until it contacts bottom.  This is with a weighted pot.  I just let it sink a bit, pull it tight to straighten the pot, then let it all go.  I've never had a problem with this method.  And, most boats I've gone on also just do something similar.

-Allen

Yeah, me too.   I use 3-5# of lead or rebar, evenly spaced on the floor of the trap.  They're super bottom heavy, I pretty much let 'em fall.