Anybody commenting proposed trout regulations for CA?

[Fishtopher]

Since I derailed this thread with a dissenting opinion I will add my comment to CDFW:

I applaud CDFW's efforts to increase fishing opportunities for all user groups with these new regulations. I believe having more fishing opportunities will greatly benefit all citizens of California. I trust CDFW's professional judgment to determine fishing seasons, gear types, and amount of harvest based on available science in order to protect the long-term viability of our fisheries.

I also applaud CDFW for reevaluating regulations. I was very supportive with lengthening trout season before and am fully supportive of this effort as well. Adaptive management is crucial in fisheries management and this is one of the critical steps within the adaptive management loop. I fully support CDFW revisiting many of our fishing regulations in order to determine their effectiveness and improve as needed. Status quo is rarely the best option when it comes to fishery management.

[mogaru]

Don't feed the "water boys" ciber soldiers, moles, gophers etc. Their only goal is to kill the fish. Hey Bill, put the trap out to catch the varmint !

[OceanSunfish]

Lew,
I don't need you to tell me what to do or how to think. To me you reek of conspiracy theorist. This thread is filled with armchair experts who think they know better than the people that dedicate their entire careers to. I work with these people and I can tell you the scientists that study this kind of stuff do it because they care about the resource. Politics does hijack management but all management is based on science.

I agree our trout fisheries are what they are because of regulation but regulations need to be reevaluated from time to time. These regulations aren't opening everything up to mass slaughter. It's a bunch of pretentious fly fishermen who want to exclude other user groups. This is why everyone hates fly fishermen.

I don't see myself as an elitist "Flyfisherman" and I do not like the "fly fishing" only waterways either............ And, I detest those that say, "oh, I fly fish" to me, as I am holding my casting rod and reel. IMO, the angling method of fly fishing is a convenient methodology/regulation that still allows angling by a perceived organized user group that is closer to practicing conservation vs other user groups, otherwise, the waterway would be even more restricted or closed altogether.

Same socio-economic elements applies to sportfishing as with most things in this state that are being trampled over by 40 million people.

It's all about culture. IF fishing were the culture it was 40-60 years ago, different story. Instead, we now have a culture that is happy that they can purchase a tray of small fish (bait) to eat at the market (tray bait to some) in lieu of purchasing a dime bright fresh Chinook off a back of a commercial boat in HMB. Do you think the culture and citizens of Texas would tolerate their State Agencies to mismanage Lake Fork or Toledo Bend the same way California mismanaged the treatment of Davis Lake or allow the marginalization of the Chinook fishery?

Sorry that I have contributed to the derailment of this thread. But I'm tired of arguments at a level that is so far down the river from the root cause.

[Fishtopher]

IMO, the angling method of fly fishing is a convenient methodology/regulation that still allows angling by a perceived organized user group that is closer to practicing conservation vs other user groups, otherwise, the waterway would be even more restricted or closed altogether.

It doesn't matter that one user group is more in tune with conservation than other user groups. The state holds the fish populations in public trust meaning it should be equally available to all user groups. If fishing mortality is of significant concern, the fishing regulations should reflect that. What I see in this thread is blind adherence to catch and release and fly-only waters as the solution to everything (it isn't) which inevitably leaves out a significant portion of the user base.

It's all about culture. IF fishing were the culture it was 40-60 years ago, different story. Instead, we now have a culture that is happy that they can purchase a tray of small fish (bait) to eat at the market (tray bait to some) in lieu of purchasing a dime bright fresh Chinook off a back of a commercial boat in HMB. Do you think the culture and citizens of Texas would tolerate their State Agencies to mismanage Lake Fork or Toledo Bend the same way California mismanaged the treatment of Davis Lake or allow the marginalization of the Chinook fishery?

I agree, culture has changed. We've greatly altered the environment in California, of course our fish populations have suffered. Don't blame the agencies for mismanagement when society has decided fish populations aren't all that important. To me CDFW is handcuffed. They can't fix the fish populations because it is impossible with current conditions. They are doing their best with the resources they have. The Chinook population isn't crap because of mismanagement by CDFW. In fact I'd argue the Chinook population would likely be extinct, or close to it, in the Valley if not for CDFW and federal hatcheries. CDFW has not allowed the marginalization of the Chinook fishery, society has. I've been avoiding the salmon issue because its an apples and oranges comparison to the resident trout fisheries.

I believe our resident trout fisheries are relatively healthy and the fact that CDFW has proposed to liberalize the fishing regulations is evidence of this. There is no way they could institute these changes without at least modelling the effects of these changes. Like I said before, its relatively straightforward if you have some baseline data (which they do). These conspiracy theories that CDFW wants to kill all the fish are absolutely ridiculous and need to stop.

[mogaru]

The CDFW new proposed regulations are evidence that have been influenced by the "water boys". Extending fishing seasons, increasing fish limits and opening decent fisheries to bait fishing will have a terrible impact in our depleted rivers. The CDFW fishing regulations are critical for our fisheries to survive. Unfortunately, they are just being used by the "water boys" and corrupt politicians who are using them to pass new regulations to harm the remaining fisheries. Their new tactics consist of extending fishing seasons to increase pressure on fish, increasing daily bags, and opening to bait fisheries to deplete them of fish. What a shame !!!!!!

[mogaru]

I don't see myself as an elitist "Flyfisherman" and I do not like the "fly fishing" only waterways either............ And, I detest those that say, "oh, I fly fish" to me, as I am holding my casting rod and reel. IMO, the angling method of fly fishing is a convenient methodology/regulation that still allows angling by a perceived organized user group that is closer to practicing conservation vs other user groups, otherwise, the waterway would be even more restricted or closed altogether.

Same socio-economic elements applies to sportfishing as with most things in this state that are being trampled over by 40 million people.

It's all about culture. IF fishing were the culture it was 40-60 years ago, different story. Instead, we now have a culture that is happy that they can purchase a tray of small fish (bait) to eat at the market (tray bait to some) in lieu of purchasing a dime bright fresh Chinook off a back of a commercial boat in HMB. Do you think the culture and citizens of Texas would tolerate their State Agencies to mismanage Lake Fork or Toledo Bend the same way California mismanaged the treatment of Davis Lake or allow the marginalization of the Chinook fishery?

Sorry that I have contributed to the derailment of this thread. But I'm tired of arguments at a level that is so far down the river from the root cause.

Correction, there are no "fly fishing only" in california. There are artificials with barbless hooks.....so you can fish with your spinning outfit too. FYI this is a fly fishing blog.........

[WLREDBAND]

Correction, there are no "fly fishing only" in california. There are artificials with barbless hooks.....so you can fish with your spinning outfit too. FYI this is a fly fishing blog.........

You are not correct. There are two fly fishing only waters in CA, Hot Creek, and the Trinity River above Lewiston Bridge.

[mogaru]

You are not correct. There are two fly fishing only waters in CA, Hot Creek, and the Trinity River above Lewiston Bridge.

The point was all are open to fishing with a spinning outfit if you don't want to fly fish as long as you doing artificial (lures or flies) and barbless and fishing regulations do not discriminate.

[Lew Riffle]

Sigh...................

[tcorfey]

Mogaru is correct you do not need a fly rod to fish flies. tight line nymphing, nymphing with an indicator and bobber, casting heavily weighted streamers, trolling streamers, casting drys and emergers with a bubble are all viable methods of fishing flies without a fly rod. It may not be considered "Fly Fishing" in its truest sense but it is fishing with flies none the less. Flies can appear to represent bait such as worms, eggs, insects, baitfish but it does take someone that is willing to invest more time to be knowledgable on the subject. So if a piece of water is designated artificial flies only it is not the same as being designated "Fly Fishing only". Everyone with a fishing rod being it spinning, casting, tenkara, fly rod whatever is invited to participate. It is not an exclusive restriction however, it may seem that way to people with less knowledge.

Regards,

Tim C.