Council Votes Bottomfish Closure

black magic · 11-06-2003, 06:42 AM

The PFMC, at their meeting in San Diego this week, voted on Wednesday for an in-season closure of bottom fishing from Canada to Mexico. California will be closed from 0-200 fathoms. Oregon and Washington will be closed outside of 27 fathoms. Their will be no retention of canary or lingcod. This reaction was caused by highly contentious MRFFS data showing huge groundfish catch rates for California skiff fishermen. This will go into effect somewhere around Nov. 16 to the end of the year if it is not overturned by the end of the day on Friday.

OceanBlue · 11-06-2003, 07:32 AM

Oh, but to pay for the sins of others.

I still don't understand the reasoning behind closing the entire west coast if the problem is primarily in California. What? Did they suddenly find that these fish are highly migratory? Is populaton explosion here in the NW going to bring back the stocks in CA?

corrirod · 11-06-2003, 07:35 AM

FOR SALE:

<ul type="square">[*]1996 Bayliner Trophy[*]120 hp Force outboard[*]Radar, GPS, FF[/list]
Excellent for fishing the EAST COAST or will make a great PLANTER BOX FOR FLOWERS ON THE WEST COAST!

Thank you PFMC for thinking this one all the way thru!

[ 11-06-2003, 08:36 AM: Message edited by: corrirod ]

Miss B Haven · 11-06-2003, 07:41 AM

:depressed: :depressed: :depressed: :depressed: [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

OceanBlue · 11-06-2003, 07:43 AM

John, What would it take to overturn this decision tomorrow?

Jennie@ifish · 11-06-2003, 07:48 AM

Let me know if there is anything I, or we can do.
This is tragic. :depressed:

Jen

puffins crew · 11-06-2003, 08:33 AM

Am I reading this correctly? They want to give the ocean a break from bottom fishing for 45 days outside of 160 feet of water for bottom fish in Oregon?

I dont think that is such a bad idea this time of year, but, I do not own a boat. And none of the folks I fish with go out in the ocean this time of year.

Are they setting precedence for future in season closures? I think I have missed something here.

Anyone have any more info??

Peace, Tom

Mark Mc · 11-06-2003, 09:10 AM

A lot of follow-up on this on the coastside fishing club website. If you can get into this site, click on "fishing/political" at left.
coastside

Like John says, the data they based this on was hotly debated. In fact, Coastside presented their own survey data that contradicted the other data. Recreational reps Daryl Ticehurst and Roger Thomas both voted against the closure, but it wasn't enough.

edit/add: some good info from allcoast:
http://www.allcoastsportfishing.com/...8/12694.html#5

Here is a note on the PFMC website about these "in season adjustments"

http://www.pcouncil.org/bb/2003/1103/exd5.pdf

[ 11-06-2003, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: Mark Mc ]

craigc · 11-06-2003, 09:36 AM

Question: How easy and expensive is it for a CA commercial fisherman/operation to get a license to fish commerically in OR or WA ?

..I would speculate that one of the reasons why OR and WA have been sucked up with the CA commercial fishing for $$ is that a CA commercial fishing operation can move up northward... this is my speculation, but would there be any truth in it ? [ there's going to be a lot of CA fishing operations that will be loosing money next year. I bet they'd move to OR/WA if at all possible ]

_Craig

Mark Mc · 11-06-2003, 09:53 AM

Craig, it depends on what fishery you're talking about.

For the nearshore live fishery, ODFW put a cap on the number of participants. So they nipped that one before it got worse.

For what is known as "open access" hook & line rockfishing, they just put a limited entry system in place. If you did not have a certain level of commercial landings as of some past cutoff date, you can not enter that fishery.

For both of these, someone could sell their permit but good luck on finding any willing to sell.

For the trawl fishery, well that one is so restricted now they're talking buybacks.

That's it (as far as I know) for the rockfish-type fisheries. Other than that it's things like salmon, black cod, halibut, tuna, and crab.

Salmon trolling is limited entry permit but those can be bought readily. The other permitted fisheries (not tuna) are very expensive to get into.

black magic · 11-06-2003, 09:58 AM

I'll try to answer a few questions here:

Jen (ocean blue)- There is nothing I know of to change this decision tomorrow outside of a presidential order or one by the secretary of commerce. Fishery management policy does not happen overnight and this decision is a result of policy relating to the use of harvest caps that has been in place for a long time.

Jennie (Ifish)- There is some things you might consider. First it might be useful to try a forum entitled 'Fishing Political'. This would be a place to post information about fishery management issues, etc. Another item would be to
post occasional requests for financial support for the groups that are involved in ocean fisheries politics. Right now the only group that I know of that represents Oregon recreational saltwater anglers is Oregon Anglers. We only have two people doing this and recieve very little support from private anglers, even though Oregon Anglers is a PAC which means that $50 per person is a state tax credit. With two big threats to ocean fishing, no-take reserves and overfishing, I would hope that our efforts would be worthy of some support similar to that given hatcheries. The Recreational Fishing Alliance is a good national group to support as well.

Tom (Puffin's Crew)-The closure in WA and OR only has to do with the fact that the entire west coast is treated as a single entity for many reasons that I don't have time to go into.
They are definitely setting precedence for in-season closures. It happens all the time with commercials. There are allocations for various species and when they are reached, that fishery stops, either for that species and/or the area in which it lives depending on biology.

fish assassin · 11-06-2003, 12:49 PM

OK, a few things about MarkMc's post ...

"for what is known as "open access" hook & line rockfishing, they just put a limited
entry system in place. If you did not have a certain level of commercial landings as of
some past cutoff date, you can not enter that fishery."

Yes and No ... The limited entry permits that will go into affect next year
will only be for black and blue rock fish (commonly known as "sea bass").
Ling Cod and Cabazon will still be "open access".

"For both of these, someone could sell their permit but good luck on finding
any willing to sell."

For the new limited entry permits for blacks and blues the licenses will not
be transferable from one fisherman (or one boat) to another with the acception
that if you HAVE a permit (or qualify for one) and you *OWN* two boats you would
be permited to move the license from one of your boats to another. I will qualify
because of landings on my Dory (Fish Assassin) and will transfer it to my Catamaran
(Pacific Mistress) as soon as I am able. Until that time I am *required* to own
both boats ... and all the headaches that entails!

Tuna is also fished under the "open access" liscense. No special permit is
required to fish for them at this time ... however, the time is coming *very*
soon when that will also be on a limited permit system. They've been talking about
it for the last couple of years and to qualify for one of the limited permits you will
have to have landed TONS of fish in the qualifying years ... :depressed: If no acception is
made for the smaller "day boats" we will all be thrown out of that fishery, too.

-assAssin-

fish assassin · 11-06-2003, 01:02 PM

BTW, CraigC,

It wouldn't make economic sense for a Calif. hook and line bottom fisherman
to come to Oregon to fish. We are so limited in the numbers of fish that we
can catch per day/per month that they would not be able to afford to bring their
boats up here to fish.

(open access)
Ling Cod, 300 lbs/month
Sea Bass, 200 lbs/day, 2000(?) lbs/month
Canary and Yelloweye *closed*

Limited entry:
We shouldn't even discuss that, since there are only a few liscenses available
and nobody can get their hands on one, anyway!

-assAssin-

WildHawg · 11-08-2003, 07:02 AM

It has come to pass. Check out the link to the article in my post above, "When the Whip Comes down".
Very unfortunate turn of events, and I fear only the beginning in a new wave of management that will threaten sport and commercial fishermen alike.
Science my BUTT! How does overfishing in California effect bottomfish off Oregon?

king wacker · 11-08-2003, 11:16 PM

Hi everyone , I have been reading some of your posts concerning the bottom fish closure. I attended the meetings in san diego.And I agree the data used to establish calif recreational catch is flawed. but in defence of the pfmc they were bound by law to accept it,this same mrfsd is used in developing stock assesments,and the problem being if its good eneough to determine how many fish are out there ,they couldn't discount it for use in determining how many were caught. lawsuits would follow if they had. The reason oregon was affected by calif, catch was the numbers of canary caught in calif was almost the entire recreational quota for all 3 states, their ling cod numbers almost took the entire quota for all fisheries, comercial and recreational. we were very fortunate that nmfs did not go hard line on us or all our fisheries would have been completly closed.
the worst thing about it is that 2004 regulations have already been adopted . this year calif was basically closed for the first half of the season ,next year they have a lot more liberal season ,if this happens again we could see problems a lot earlier . lets hope not

corrirod · 11-09-2003, 07:51 AM

Thanks for the insight Wayne and welcome to the Salty Dogs.

black magic · 11-09-2003, 06:08 PM

Hello Wayne,
Thanks for the post. It's always better to have an insider on the Groundfish Advisory Panel to explain an issue. Much appreciated.

Lovestafish · 11-12-2003, 01:24 PM

Hmmmmm... Well, I may be off base here, but I get real nervous hearing about "temporary" or "one time" events. I've worked for the USFS, been in the USN & have worked for the State for 18+ years, which is why I get nervous. Example: back in the day you could drive any forest road, park anywhere (as long as it was safe to do so)hike & camp on public land anywhere you wanted to. Then roads started getting blocked off, using the 'green dot' system, gates & barriers. I know, there were good reasons for it. Next, you were suppossed to register before going into, for example, the Jefferson Wilderness Area. We started paying to park at trailheads. Say that with me please; we have to PAY to park in our National Forests. I may as well pay to park at home! Now we have to get, in advance, permits (only so many can go in.....) before we go into the Wilderness area. And yes, I know there are good reasons for it all. Still, I can't help but feel that one chip at a time, we're losing opportunities, and paying twice for things (wood, mushrooms, parking, etc.)
Sorry, I got going a little bit on this one....
This is just my two cents worth, & yes, I do have feelings about this.

Bill Monroe · 11-12-2003, 04:49 PM

Story in the paper tomorrow...takes effect Nov. 21. Inside 27 for ORegon, three miles for Washington, which manages its offshore a little differently, but is still about the same thing. Washington lingcod is already closed. Lingcod in Oregon will be inside jetties and off the rocks as well. Rules go back to normal (whatever that is) on Jan. 1. Still all right inside 27 for black sea bass and greenlings, etc...