Anybody commenting proposed trout regulations for CA?

[mogaru]

The gopher/mole is back again trying to "derail the thread". Please ignore the "trol". Now that the topic had some reasonable and sensible opinions.......

[WLREDBAND]

The gopher/mole is back again trying to "derail the thread". Please ignore the "trol". Now that the topic had some reasonable and sensible opinions.......

<<<"Everone hates flyfishermen". I think that quote alone tells us all we need to know about Fishstopper.
And if you believe allowing bait in certain rivers won't affect a wild trout stream, you are extremely naive. >>>

WOW, glad to see this thread devolving into personal attacks and name calling, just because someone disagrees with someone else. I guess I have to add another quote in MOGGIE.

[mogaru]

<<<"Everone hates flyfishermen". I think that quote alone tells us all we need to know about Fishstopper.
And if you believe allowing bait in certain rivers won't affect a wild trout stream, you are extremely naive. >>>

WOW, glad to see this thread devolving into personal attacks and name calling, just because someone disagrees with someone else. I guess I have to add another quote in MOGGIE.

hahahaha, I can live with that quote........fortunately I can smell a "ciber troll" from a country mile.

[WLREDBAND]

hahahaha, I can live with that quote........fortunately I can smell a "ciber troll" from a country mile.

Too bad you're dead wrong. Kinda ironic though, the water barons hate him also because he tries to get more water for anadromous fish in his day job by providing biological data for law suits.

[Fishtopher]

Maybe we should focus not on fisheries that are depleted to fisheries that are not because of regulations in place presently.

So you mean fisheries where the population is healthy and stable and additional take might be possible?

This is the exact point of revisiting and evaluating whether current regulations are overly protective or exploitative. Liberalizing bag limits and gear type indicates to me that CDFW considers many fisheries under exploited. Good thing there's ways to estimate how additional take affects populations...

[mogaru]

[QUOTE=WLREDBAND;189204]Too bad you're dead wrong. Kinda ironic though, the water barons hate him also because he tries to get more water for anadromous fish in his day job by providing biological data for law suits.[/QUOT

You mean dead wrong like when you claimed there were "fly fishing only" waters in California. Glad you two know each other that well.

[WLREDBAND]

[QUOTE=mogaru;189206]

Too bad you're dead wrong. Kinda ironic though, the water barons hate him also because he tries to get more water for anadromous fish in his day job by providing biological data for law suits.[/QUOT

You mean dead wrong like when you claimed there were "fly fishing only" waters in California. Glad you two know each other that well.

Read the regs. To save you some time here they are for Hot Creek for 2019:
(7 Hot Creek (Mono Co.). Hot Creek from the State hatchery property line to the confluence with the Owens River.Season: All year� Only artificial flies with barbless hooks may be used� 0 trout

[mogaru]

[QUOTE=WLREDBAND;189207]

Read the regs. To save you some time here they are for Hot Creek for 2019:
(7 Hot Creek (Mono Co.). Hot Creek from the State hatchery property line to the confluence with the Owens River.Season: All year� Only artificial flies with barbless hooks may be used� 0 trout

I think I already explain it to you. Exactly "Flies only" not "fly fishing only", which means that if you wish you can fish you can fish with a spinning outfit and a fly. There a no "fly fishing only waters" in CA. I believe some other states have some "fly fishing only water" rules, and clearly define what constitutes fly fishing which sometimes bans tenkara. Hope you understand it now!

[ycflyfisher]

Hey Jeff, you are correct I mixed NFF with MFF.

(68.1) Feather River, Middle Fork (Plumas Co.), from the Union Pacific Railroad Bridge (1/4 mile upstream of County A-23 bridge) to the Mohawk Bridge.
Move to 7.0 statewide reg (Which means year round no restrictions)

(68.2) Feather River North Fork from Belden Bridge downstream to Cresta Powerhouse (excluding reservoirs) (Butte and Plumas Co.).
Saturday preceding Memorial Day through the last day in February
0 fish bag, artificial lures with barbless hooks

Statewide Regulation (section 7.0)
Fishing districts—section 7.00(a) through (g)—for trout waters only (lakes, reservoirs, and streams that are not accessible to fish migrating from the ocean; “non-anadromous”) will be replaced by a statewide trout angling regulation. Waters that are not located in the proposed table of changes, or stated as “move to 7.0 statewide reg”, will have the following regulation:
Open year-round, 5 trout bag, 10 trout possession limit, no gear restrictions.


I wonder what the definition of "No gear restrictions" is? does it mean you can use any means to catch fish (nets, spear, arrows, dynamite?) or does it mean something else like artificial flies, lures or bait is okay? Not sure how to take that. Does anyone know?

Regards

Tim C.

Tim,

I got clarification on this but a week or so ago but then life got in the way. "No gear restrictions" should be interpreted as follows:

Barbed hooks, doubles and trebles are OK, lures and flies with multiple hooks are OK and bait is allowed.

[tcorfey]

Jeff, thanks for checking on that.

I hope everyone let the DFW know about your concerns it only takes a few minutes.

Regards,

Tim C.