Judge Rules the CA Rockfish to Remain Open

Nofish · 11-20-2003, 06:33 PM

...at least for now. I thought I would share this with group. Cheers...Bob

DFG News Release 03:109 Nov. 20, 2003 for Immediate Release

Contact:
Chamois Andersen, Information Officer, (916) 657-4132
Carrie Wilson, Marine Region, (831) 238-2044

Judge Rules Rockfish Fisheries Will Remain Open Until Further Notice

A ruling by San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Tangeman late Thursday will keep California's rockfish fisheries open until further notice, the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) has announced.

The fisheries had been scheduled to close on Friday, Nov. 21.

Until further notice by DFG, Judge Tangeman's ruling will allow the continued take under state law of recreational nearshore rockfishes, shelf rockfishes, California scorpionfish (sculpin), and lingcod in all state waters.

The judge's order striking DFG's previous action closing the above fisheries was based on what the court concluded was insufficient notice.

The Department originally took action to close these fisheries due to harvest limits being met and following federal action taken by the Pacific Fishery Management Council. The implementation of federal closure regulations as soon as Nov. 21 (pending filing in the Federal Register) could close commercial and recreational fishing for groundfish in federal waters as well as commercial fishing for groundfish in state waters. Recreational groundfish fisheries in state waters are under the jurisdiction of DFG, and will close in December after proper notification by the Department.

In addition, fishing for ocean whitefish and groundfish species (for a list log on to www.dfg.ca.gov/mrd/) not included in the federal closure (once in effect) in state waters will remain open unless emergency state regulations are adopted to effect the closure.

DFG will release any new information on these slated closures when available. For additional information, log on to www.dfg.ca.gov/mrd/.

###

Pilar · 11-20-2003, 06:49 PM

Jeezum crow batman ... the greedy buggers catch too many fish causing the coastwide shutdown and now they dodge the closure?

How does that work exactly?

Can someone please explain this to me?

Nofish · 11-20-2003, 07:50 PM

Pilar,
I am really not up to speed on all the fine points of this...but I believe it boils down to the good old argument that the commercials are harvesting the bulk of the fish while the sport folks are receiving the "punishment". I had heard that the statewide closure was coming and it came as no surprise to those close to this issue. My understanding was that the closure was only until the end of the year (at least off the NoCal coast). I really didn't think it was that big of a deal.

Deepslayer · 11-20-2003, 08:09 PM

Pilar it's just another example of Judge's making law!! They keep turning over the legislators and the will of the people everywhere! :depressed:
,Ed

RFA Janice · 11-21-2003, 08:57 AM

Court action won't affect commercial closure.

Recreational fishery inside three miles is controlled by state. The CA Commission couldn't get its act together to give adequate notice of the closure which is an emergency action. Evidently they met by telephone on the 18th to pass on a closure to take place on the 21st to conform to expected publication of the closure in the Federal Register. Minimum notice in CA is 10 days. The sports took DFG to court and got a restraining order.

Why didn't DFG close it in September when they first got a look at the unacceptable data? No. They fixed us so that we all had to be closed because they went on fishing in September, October, and November. Not cool. Janice

OceanBlue · 11-22-2003, 08:50 AM

Okay, I heard about this and thought "holy crow! How on earth can they do that!?" Sure made me

The closure through the end of the year is not that big of a deal, as here in the NW we'll be lucky to get out on the bay in the winter, let alone the ocean. It's the precedent I don't like. The fact that CA can overfish and we pay for it.
[img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

But here's the bright spot folks... as Janice pointed out, the SPORTS are the ones that got this overturned in CA... The sportfishers! Remember, we're the ones with "no voice", "no organization", "no chance"

HA!

[ 11-22-2003, 11:16 AM: Message edited by: OceanBlue ]

RFA Janice · 11-22-2003, 08:17 PM

What we will try to arrange in the future is that if Calif. overfishes one year, it will payback the next year, and leave us out of it. After all, where the overfishing took place is where the conservation is needed

not up here in Oregon where we behaved ourselves--and/or paid for good port sampling data.

Deepslayer · 11-23-2003, 10:48 AM

Janice it seems like there is probalby ajudge who would feel that Oregon should not have to pay for California's lack of control. Since it is the PMFC it would have to be a federal judge IMHO.
,Ed

RFA Janice · 11-23-2003, 07:42 PM

Nope. We have closed our nearshore down already, as an emergency action. It is a done deal here, and done properly [which we can't say for California].

Dave's not here · 11-23-2003, 08:19 PM

California Dept of Fish and Game has made a lot of mistakes tht has hurt us Californians. First is not inforceing laws equaly. I have called Caltip several times turning in Asians poaching and get no results. Wardens let alot slide with these people. We cannot hunt Mountain Lions here. They have killed off alot of Deer,Antalope and a couple of joggers. If comercial fishings insidental catch wasn't wasted we wouldn't be in as much of a mess as we are in now. The estimates D.F.G. uses are just a guess. If you ask a question to ten biolagests you will get ten answers and all are based on guesses.