Solutions for bottomfish

corrirod · 03-12-2005, 08:47 AM

Well, we all know the problems with our bottomfish here on the coast so let's not rehash them for a minute and focus on ideas and solutions to combat these problems.

That is the intent of this thread. I really want this thread to be a brainstorming, out-of-the-box, creativity thread where we can generate some ideas to possibly pursue further.

Leave no idea untold. Good, bad, or don't know if it's a good idea, DOESN'T MATTER, just put it out there. That said, lets all be courteous and not slam someone's idea. If you don't like someone's idea then you can either suggest some changes to it or a complete alternative but don't just slam it and leave. Anyone can slam an idea but I'm looking for the people that can make an idea work.

Maybe, with some luck, we'll have a few that we can analyze in more detail and perhaps, god forbid, actually come up with a solution?

So let's stick to one theme for now, "how can we help our bottomfish?"

kamloops · 03-12-2005, 09:05 AM

I kind of liked the bottom fish punch card point system.
You start the season with 100 points. Each y.e. gets hit for 20points, black and blues 5 points, widow 10 points.
You get the picture, once your done--your done period.

OR

Switch the debth restriction, <40 catch and release only on blacks-blues. Over 40fathom open season but institute the
punch card point system.

I tried to get this idea going last season when we got shut down on everything up here, bottoms and butts.

boater · 03-12-2005, 09:13 AM

since its a quota system and sports are allowcated a certain tonage and with an 8 fish limit it gets closed early i would reduce the bag limit and make the season last longer.

pnwcoast · 03-12-2005, 09:17 AM

User fee to pay for research.

corrirod · 03-12-2005, 09:19 AM

First, I admit that I have not had time to research this idea at all for feasibility but I will.

In my mind, rather than try to manage the target areas where bottomfish are located and figure out a way to keep those specific stocks alive and well, perhaps we should create new fish elsewhere to take the pressure off those areas.

We supplement our rivers with hatchery salmon and steelhead to help maintain a fishery. Perhaps it's time we do the same with our rockfish, only rather than create hatcheries with "scientific fish" let's create new habitat for fish to populate naturally.

There are miles and miles of ocean out there that, to my knowledge, are basically sandy wasteland. Why couldn't we, and for that matter why shouldn't we, setup some habitat in these areas and transplant some fish to start their own stocks?

I have a hard time believing with all the waste we humans produce that some of it couldn't be used as fish habitat. Obviously the material has to last a significant amount of time, has to be non-toxic, and yada, yada, yada, but there has to be some out there. If you've ever been scuba diving you'll notice that even the smallest chunk of rock will be used by some ocean creature.

I'm just imagining all the everyday things we throw away that could possibly be used and there seems to be a million of them.

I'm sure the red tape to be able to put stuff on the ocean floor is probably as deep as Crater Lake but maybe with enough positive data we could get thru it?

When I think of the benefits I can't imagine why it would be a bad thing.

<ul type="square">[*]Adding habitat for fish to habitate, and in turn as the stocks grow it would add places to fish.[*]You would be allowing the fish to increase "naturally".[*]You would be finding a new and useful place to hide some of our waste products.[*]The more habitat you add the better it gets.[/list]
Again, I don't want the ocean to become a dump site for just anything. It would have to be non-toxic materials and completely regulated by ODFW.

That's one idea, let's hear some more.

jacksalmon · 03-12-2005, 09:29 AM

1. Private sport boats should only take what they will eat before going out the next time. No fishing for the neighbors.

2. Charter boats are not sportfishers and they should have their own poundage quotas because, due to the size of their boats, they get to go out more often.

3. Crew members on charter boats don't get to catch fish. Let them go out on their own or on the charter boat as a sport boat, but no catching fish when the customers are present. There is no reason for this take.

4. Voluntary reduction of the numbers of fish caught, whether by charters or sports, is hard to deal with because no one charter captain, in a competitive world, will tell his customers he is limiting their take to six for the sake of the season/fish. They will simply go to another boat. So, that is why I suggest giving them a separate quota. This will involve a big squabble in deciding how to split what is now given to sports (which presently include sport and charter boats) between the sports and the charters, but tougher decisions are made every day. Just do it and people will have to live with it. As it is, I would be curious to know how the quota is split between charters and sports in terms of what is actually caught by the two groups, but, at least, early in the year I bet the charters take more than their share. Who knows what happens as the ocean flattens out in the summer.

5. Get people to catch more yellow tail than blacks by getting the word out on how to catch them, and, if they are just as tasty, emphasize that to lessen the pressure on the blacks.

rojo · 03-12-2005, 10:09 AM

When Tom brought up the card system I supported it and still do. Why do we not have artifical reefs off our coast?....Roger

Smily · 03-12-2005, 10:30 AM

What about the ideas of artificial reefs? Years ago I remember fishing with this guy and he told be we are fishing on an artificial reef. Here is some sites on the subject. http://www.calreefs.org/maps.html
Here is one on what they used.
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mrd/artificialreef.pdf#search='Artificial%20Reef%20in% 20california'

Just an idea.

skein · 03-12-2005, 11:09 AM

Once salmon season begins, limit the take to 10 fish, no more than two of which may be salmon and lingcod.

A charter going out cannot catch a limit of salmon, then load up on full limits of lings and rockfish on the way in. Ten fish total, so if a guy catches two salmon he has 8 more fish to catch. If he catches two lings, then his take of rockfish can be no more than six.

It still allows the charters to "sweeten the pot" when they take a load out, but not hammer three complete limits in one trip.

If I were making the rules, I would make that an eight fish limit with the same basic breakdown.

Skein

Fishplay · 03-12-2005, 01:02 PM

I think a punch card for bottom fish species would work and be fair.

Basicly it gets us the same place Kamloops is taking us but less complicated. No one has to remember how many points a cabizon is worth.

We get 20 salmoniods, 5 stugeon, 6 halibut.

Why not limit everyone to X number of blacks, lings, yellows ect.

They would only have to do it for the stocks that are being hit hardest.

This would put an end to supplying the Hood or local Cafe.

Everyone shares equally in the cause.

Most of us would probably never tag out. Being single I don't ever fill a tag. I don't even buy the hatchery tag.

My boat didn't land 8 blacks all year. The most TUNA I took on one occassion was 6.

For me this sport is about fishing, catching, and keeping; in that order. I do not want to see the closure we saw last year.

Rod your idea is good and has been shown to work. It is long range though and we need something imeadiate.

We now need to convince the sandle wearers to build artificial reefs with there money and quit trying to just shut everything down.

Ni! · 03-12-2005, 01:44 PM

The artificial reef idea is a good one. The key here is to think big, when thinking about junk. Decomissioned commercial airplanes, naval destroyers, etc. It's much less expensive to scuttle one of those than to cut it up for scrap.

Here's a link to a group in B.C. that's creating reefs for divers, and here's a FAQ about using decomissioned naval vessels. These things require some fund raising, but they're being done elsewhere, and I've never quite figured out why it's not being done here.

Ni!

HOGGEMIN · 03-12-2005, 02:08 PM

In the Puget Sound they have quit a few reefs artifically made, I think there is one by the Edmonds pier and now you can catch salmon and bottom fish right from the pier.

skein · 03-12-2005, 02:23 PM

Quote:

I think there is one by the Edmonds pier and now you can catch salmon and bottom fish right from the pier.

Yep, and on the other side is a dive park where you can make an easy shore dive out and around the reef. It's pretty cool.

But I think Rod is talking about some deep-water reefs to create habitat for YE and Canary and other deep-dwellers.

And yes, Canada has several sunken ships up along Vancouver Island, so there's lots of precedent AND criteria for getting a ship ready to sink. Not only that, but the whole scenario turns into a (positive) media event that gets lots of coverage worldwide.

Let's do it. Rod's probably already bought the ship and has it hid in his garage.

Skein

Fishplay · 03-12-2005, 03:33 PM

Remember those stalagtite thingy-majigs we had as kids?

You drop them in a glass and they would grow. Came in different colors.

We need some of that. Very LARGE chunks of that.

HOGGEMIN · 03-12-2005, 04:38 PM

Hey Greg I thought we want to help bottom fishes here not raise Sea Monkies.........

Sorry I couldn't resist my self I will go to my room now..............

Tacklebuster · 03-12-2005, 04:45 PM

As my last official post on the Salty Dog board and as a Salty Dog, I will throw my words out to the public.

I think whatever is chosen or implemented, it is something that everybody can do without feeling like there is a double standard. The double standard I am refering to is when the rule book states one thing and then you get ripped apart for doing so by others that choose to do another. With that said, a lot of us Dogs get the fishery information from this board. Some of us, myself included, work afternoon shifts and have weird hours and days off so they can not rub elbows at the meetings or attend the TA meetings to really meet the senior Dogs that are telling us the info. Whatever you guys choose to try and do, make it consistant so everyone is on the same page without trying to live a double standard.

I like the idea of a punch card. I think it is a fair and easy way to preserve our fishery. Put a lot of thought into this if this is the route you take. Let the "legal" number of punches be accepted without fear of being left out in the ocean all alone and all the other junk that was thrown out on the table on the last thread. Statements like that completetly tear down what the term "Salty Dog" used to mean to me.

Let's get some good data, even if it means racking up the price a tad bit on the tags. Let's decide if a catch and release fishery for these rock fish is allowed and accepted on shallower inshore reefs.

I also really like the idea of habitat. I really like the idea of combining the two. I have learned a lot from this site both sweet and sour. Hats off to the fine folks that have the time to donate to help the cause. My wife works days and I work swing. The only day off we both have together is Saturday and I have a young daughter as well that I try and do my best to raise when we have a "phone call" relationship for most of the week cause she is in school. The time I do have free I spend with my family on the water but would like nothing more than to be more active in the cause you guys promote. Maybe someday....

Keep up the good work.
TB out...

Gundog · 03-12-2005, 05:00 PM

I for one hope that is not your last post Tacklebuster.

How about no more than two limits in any one week or some number of the fish in question. That would stop the overfishing by deck hands. Or no more than say four or five limits per month that way if you went on vacation for a week you could fish while you are there.
Mike

pnwcoast · 03-12-2005, 05:36 PM

I can, at the very least, second the fact that working odd shifts and/or having days off when most others are at work, really makes it tough to contribute in any realistic way.

One feels out of the loop to say the very least.

tracker · 03-12-2005, 06:20 PM

Overfish the popoulation and then all fishing will be stopped and then there will be no reason to have this boat that is costing me sooooooo much money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sling Blade · 03-12-2005, 06:39 PM

Tacklebuster,

I too hope that this is not your last post. Your input has always been valuable here. Maybe you do work odd hours or split shifts, but you can write and ask questions. Any answers we get from someones digging efforts are worth while.

Corrirod,

I like the idea of artificial reefs. This is done along coastlines of other states all the time. Why not Oregon? I would also be up for a reduced limit. 4 or 5 blacks/blues? What about a seperate limit on other spieciess of rock fish, such as Yellowtail? We have one on Lingcod...

I also think that ODFW needs to involve more people in the process of gathering scientific data. Other states utilize their sportfishers and train them in the required techniques needed and multiply their efforts a hundred fold.

Just my .02s.

Salty Walty · 03-12-2005, 06:56 PM

If any of you are duck hunters this should sound familiar. The daily limit of Rockfish is 8. Of which no more than 4 can be black/blue. This would keep the pressure off the black/blue rockfish. It would also encourage the charters to go and target yellow tail and other deep water fish to get their precious 10 fish limit without pounding the blacks.
The Depoe Bay and Newport Charters accounted for 70% of the total harvest of blacks last year. Charters do take sportfishers on their boats but one charter can take in one week what a commercial boat is allowed in a year. Some food for thought.

BLACK TORNADO · 03-12-2005, 09:23 PM

DO THE MATH 340 MC TON 250 LIMITS EACH DAY 365 DAYS A YEAR

baltz526 · 03-12-2005, 09:45 PM

as an outsider looking in, at this thread on rock fish,what i see is everyone wants to fish all year, and everyone seems willing to reduce harvest, the harvest cards look like a realistic idea to regulate the numbers of each threatened fish type.duck hunters follow these split harvest rules and have for years. a weekly card that is turned in when you buy the next weeks card if you fish and any card turned in at the end of season would give great harvest data.to show sport fishing impact on the fishery.another thing is the way people fish,and the number of hooks on the line its been nearly 30 years since i was rock fishing but i bet it is still done the same way,16oz lead,3 hook bait or jig setup 50lb mono and a winch for a real, the pole a 1/2" dia.stick. i did not think this was fishing at the time,just harvesting.is it still done this way on the charters?

WP · 03-12-2005, 09:47 PM

The off working times do create some issues. I work Weekend nights, 12 hour shifts. I rarely fish weekends and do miss a lot of Salty activities. I have hopes that TB will be back. I too have "left" because of what I percieved as insensitive responses from others here. After a while I get over it and move on (come back to the dogs). I think think the value here is greater than the irritation (though I still have one regular on ignore :depressed: ) The point is to get to your personal comfort place and give and take from the board as it works for you. As far as leaving someone out there by themselves, I can not believe that anyone would seriously consider that! I, and all I know, would not leave anyone out there on their own. I would always respond to requests for information, even when I wonder why the person doesn't know before they go, or help. Fishing information I am generally free with but I might be a little reluctant to be completely free with a complete starnger who was being a bit intrusive or inappropriate. Bottom line, I have recieved a lot of help and have given some in return, I still owe more so I will continue. I hope TB will give me a call when we are sharing the blue, and the same goes for all of you!
Dave (WP)

corrirod · 03-13-2005, 06:06 AM

O.k., we've got some really good ideas being generated on this thread lets keep them coming.

The "other thread" is the just the other thread. We all get a little emotional now and again(not me of course but everyone else

), and it's understandable because this is our passion and we get upset when we see things happening to it that we don't like.

Please keep this thread on course for new ideas and let that other thread work itself out. We're all family here and occasionally we have a little spat but most of the time, and that includes this time, we work it out and all is well again with time.

NOW GET BACK TO THINKING OF NEW IDEAS!!

After a little more time I'll create a new thread to summarize all the ideas and that will be the time we can hash them out and prioritize them. Hopefully everyone, not just the people who have posted ideas, will be doing their own research on these ideas so that when the time comes we can decide if they are feasible and perhaps present them to people that can implement them.

BLACK TORNADO · 03-13-2005, 07:16 AM

Ten years ago we used "Shirmp Flies" and we caught fish all day long. Now most real fisherman use single hooks and trout poles.

The one thing that was interesting was that you seem to think that there is a shortage of bottom fish, when the ocean was closed to Salmon fishing the only thing to fish for was bottom fish and if there was going to be a shotage it would have been then. Now I fish every week-end through the summer from Newport to Garibaldi and I can tell you that the fish are there in more impressive numbers then I have seen since the Seventy's.

I was at the ODF&W Meeting and went befor the Board and made my points to them about education to the public as to the so called " Scientific Studies" We need people to remember that if there was a real study done on the numbers to the bottom fish I would have no problem hearing that there is a shortage, that is simply not the case.

Remeber folks that extreamests are dangerous no matter what side of the fence they stand on.

Good Day.

8knots · 03-13-2005, 08:35 AM

I read recently that they are sinking the ORISKANY 20 miles off Pensacola, FL as a dive and fish site. Happens to be the aircraft carrier my dad served on so it caught my eye. I wonder how expensive it is to clean a huge ship like this in order to have it ready to be a reef? There is a place north of Oakland, CA where there is a ship graveyard with lots of ships anchored.It would be nice if they could sink them as reefs rather than wait to some day cut them up for scrap.

ron m · 03-13-2005, 07:46 PM

Good idea, but not new. Artifical reefs have been used off Fla and other places on the east coast for a long time. I think some individuals in Fla even made their own for lobster (crawfish) and they worked. I think this is a good idea, it's one of the reasons ships are sometimes sunk off the coast. Works well and I don't think we'd have to "transplant" fish, they'd show up pretty soon on their own. We could work on this idea and it might pay huge dividends.

wthr4d · 03-13-2005, 07:49 PM

Okay so now we have an idea...How do we inplement it? who do we need to talk to in order to get it done? How do we fund it?

Paul

8knots · 03-14-2005, 06:01 AM

How deep is the half of the New Carrisa that they sank a few years back? Wonder how many fish are holding on that now?

Threemuch · 03-14-2005, 07:06 AM

Artificial reefs are a great idea, not new, and have been implemented to some extent down in southern CA.

However, does anyone really think our problem is lack of habitat? We have TONS of reef structure off our rocky coast. Imagine the effort to create a structure like Stonewall Banks. Not to say it couldn't be done, but I don't think that is the crux of the problem.

The problem is that we have treated a very slow-replenishing resource as a cheap and easy source of food for too long. The days of solid fiberglass rods, and six shrimp flys per person are not that far back, that was my first salty experience on the north pacific 13 years ago.

The ideas of species bag limits and punch cards are good ones, but don't really work unless these fish can be released. Unlike duck hunting, you don't have a choice about pulling the trigger on these fish. And it takes a fairly savvy angler to know how to avoid species of rockfish, and for many you can't do it. For instance, if the yellowtail are holding close to the bottom, how do you keep the canary and yelloweye off? Guess what, you can't.

The bottom line is that until we have solid data on the survivability of these fish when relesed at depth, we will just have to settle for a limited take. It might mean a shorter season, it might mean lower limits. Both of those are OK IMHO, as long as we work towards that release data, that punch card or tag, that species specific bag limit.

And guess what? We are looking at that release data. During the last Sportfish Advisory Council meeting of the ODFW, a presentation was made that was very promising, and there was discussion about a tagging program and maybe even radio telemetry. Troy Buell is coordinating the Rockfish Tagging Studies at the ODFW and there was some talk of opportunities to volunteer. I know you guys would be into that.

corrirod · 03-14-2005, 07:46 AM

Keep the ideas coming. This thread is less than a week old and I know some of you are anxious to "implement" but we need to keep the ideas coming.

This thread is for ideas and not for critique. The details will get worked out in other threads. I want anyone with an idea to be able to speak out without fear of being criticized. In other words, keep adding to the pile not taking away from it.

No matter how small or large of an idea you have please tell us. Your idea may spawn another idea by someone else. Long term, short term, doesn't matter just get it out in the open otherwise it really is worthless.

Let's be proactive instead of reactive. Leaders not followers. Salty Dogs not sheep!

KChookem · 03-14-2005, 07:50 AM

Recreational anglers might be able to help ODFW and Federal research. I believe some in OCEAN have discussed this a bit, but I do not know the details, if any.

My examples: (1) After ODFW training in how to ID-tag fish, I catch and release a fish, noting the species, time, date, location, depth, how released (over the side of the boat, or by a decompression technique). An internet based form could be used to report the tagging results.

I could also document if the landed fish was previously tagged, either with a visual tag, or if I were properly equipped, scan for an internal tag.

(2) Purchase of fish ID tags could be done via a grant, or a tax-deductible donation by the angler. This concept could be done whether I'm participating in research mentioned above, or just as a supportive angler.

BTW - I get dibs on naming my tagged fish "George"; kinda like George Foreman does with his children, I'll have George I, George II, etc).

Abalone · 03-14-2005, 10:46 AM

One thing that makes sense to me is:

When do Lings and Black Rockfish spawn ?
I am no Biologist but I think the Spawning season should go unmolested. If we have to have some sort of Closure then the Winter months would be the way to go rather then the end of the Season in August. I believe Febuary is the month that Lings Black Rocks etc. move to shallow water area to do their reproductive thing. So why not refraine from fishing these months ? Allow the females to lay their eggs rear their young before destroying them ?

flapbreaker · 03-14-2005, 11:06 AM

Corrirod can we put the reef close to shore for a shorter run?

How about an annual limit on rockfish per angler. That way a person can go out and get 8 blacks and have an efficient day but just can't do it everyday or they will be done for the year. I don't know what would be a reasonable annual limit though.

8knots · 03-14-2005, 12:28 PM

Kurt, as always, lots of good information. As far as rocky structure goes, I agree OR has a good share of it, unlike where I grew up fishing in So. Cal and Texas. The exception might be north of Seaside, the CR area in particular. The area of rocks offshore of Seaside is a fairly long haul from most CR ports which is probably why it is good fishing.

Threemuch · 03-14-2005, 02:15 PM

Not much in the way of nearshore reefs around Winchester bay, I hear. Artificial reefs certainly wouldn't hurt, and may open up new fishing opportuntities, but probably won't go far to change a species harvest cap especially any time soon.

rojo · 03-14-2005, 02:28 PM

Manmade reefs could be part of a long term solution. There are maybe 5 or 6 places where they might help. I think that once established they could take some pressure of natural reefs and maybe they could be fished say every other year..Roger

Threemuch · 03-14-2005, 04:05 PM

Manmade reefs may also be a good option if all our best natural reefs get made into no take parks.

Jsail · 03-14-2005, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Let's be proactive instead of reactive. Leaders not followers. Salty Dogs not sheep!

Is this another jab at SHEEP; baaaaaaaaaaaad

The pukers won't like this but ......
I think they should cut the limit from 8 to 5 or 6 on boats fishing more than 4 rods. The boats with more rods are taking a bigger percentage per trip. In doing so they are making a bigger impact to each location they visit.
Another idea would be to regulate where the boats fishing more than 4 rods can fish. If inside 40 fathoms is being hit to hard then remove or at least regulate the ones that make the highest impact.

BLACK TORNADO · 03-14-2005, 06:08 PM

Fisherman And good Ol'Salty Dogs,

I think that the main solution would be to put the energy that has been displayed lately concerning the Blacks Rockfish towards the FED to get a real study done.

Think about it. If all of us who are so passionate about the subject would e-mail or call the Senators to push the matter into a forum that "Solutions " could be Scientific and fact that win or lose to where you stand in this we could all at least have some sort of facts.

Now I realize that the Goverment is questionable in who or how much we should trust them, but it wouls aleast be a start.

What is more concerning is it seems that We all love the ocean, be careful about getting this website is starting to sound like "Greenpeace, and The Sirra Club."

Mark Mc · 03-14-2005, 09:10 PM

Jsail, it was probably a "brainstorm" idea you had there, but trust me.....the ODFW Commission will never, not in 100 years anyways, create laws & limits around 2 classes of sportfishers (those with their own boat and those who go on a charter boat). You are talking about an entire structure that is divided between sportfishing, and commercial fishing. All sportfishers buy the same license and play by the same rules; I just can't see that changing.

BTW, good info here on ODFW sportgroundfish program:

http://nrimp.dfw.state.or.us/MRP/def...portgroundfish

Refer to the two links at left on "harvest cap"

KeyWest · 03-15-2005, 05:11 AM

To quote a local charter captain at one of the ODFW Halibut meetings last year:

"Charter fisherman and private boat owners are the same people - they just have a different mode of transportation".

I don't believe we should be advocating different rules for different modes of transportation to the fishing grounds. Would we recommend different rules for private boats over 30' than those under 30'? It's pretty much the same question IMHO.

baltz526 · 03-15-2005, 06:44 AM

as a data collecting point; if the odfw issued harvest cards valid for 6 weeks, then the purcheser would return this completed card with all fish caught to track all rod caught bottom fish. with a split season regulated like this, year round starting jan.1,season open 6 weeks, closed two weeks to turn in harvest cards and pick up new card. 6 weeks open two weeks closed, all year long. this would allow the odfw to very closely track all fish being caught and with a few years data they would have a very good idea what is out there,when it is out there,and in what numbers it is there.purchase the first card,then each additional card would be issued when the last 6 week card is returned.limit all fishing to one bait/lure. note, i never go rock fishing, but i just bought a boat that is near shore capable and was planning to give it a try.so i do not have a real, dog in this issue, except future fishing plans.

BentMetal · 03-15-2005, 12:14 PM

Here is a crazy idea from someone who fishes in the ocean about once a year. This idea I don't know if it would even work at all or not . . . and it may even border on the stupid.

Charter boat passengers get a reduced allowable limit per person - 2 fish, maybe 4 fish, maybe 6 fish, who knows. But say they get to go out and catch their 10 fish limit of which they get to keep their reduced limit. The remainder of their catch goes to the charter boat company who can sell it to local seafood restaurants, fish markets, the sportsman who originally caught the fish, etc.

Benefits:

For the Sports fishers: Reduced cost on fishing trip, instead of paying 60 bucks for the charter trip, the charter could make half their money on admission and half on fish sales (60-40, 70-30, whatever). Not getting stuck with a full 20 lbs of Rockfish fillets to get put in the freezer and possibly later throw away.

For the Charter Boats: Able to self regulate upset, no making paying customers upset by making them throw fish back, you just have to catch them two or four fish for their take and they'll be happy. If I pay 60 to 80 bucks, and only catch a couple fish, I might be mildly disappointed . . . even mad; I pay 30-40 bucks, catch 2 fish, see a whale or two . . . good time on the water. Also helps diversify where their money comes from.

For the community - I always remember a Frasier episode where Frasier goes to a Belize Coastal Resort and wants to order some seafood, and they offer him a New York Strip Steak and Maine Lobster. This is how I sometimes feel on the Oregon Coast. Local selectively caught fish caught that very morning . . . you might be able to find a niche market based on the environmental aspects, yada, yada yada. Get the Monterey Aquarium to sign off on it with their list and their you go, niche market.

For the fish - this where my plan breaks down . . . your still catching a bunch of fish no matter who eats them. You'd have to find a way to replace fish caught one way (say, trawl fishing, which probably isn't happening in close any more) with a fish caught another way (Sports gear). And then the sports gear method could be controlled.

Basically, its another way to commercial fish. It might pit trawlers against charters

, but thats my idea and I am sticking to it. It also only looks at one side of the equation . . . the charter boats as the sports guys buy a $30K sled and a bunch in operating expenses might not like a four fish limit.

Abalone · 03-15-2005, 12:34 PM

I must admit ! I have thought that it's all the fault of those Cattle boats fishing the same reefs day after day.
It never made sense to me that Dorymen would go out to sea a catch Bottom fish for a living when the price was so low.

The people that go out on Charters aren't to blame. Lots of guys and gals I know only go out once per year and they pay lots of money to do it. Many people go on Charters as some kind of tradition, like people that work together etc.

It wouldn't be fair to deny them their pleasure.

It's just a sign of the time that to stocks are depleted.

Like it or not we have to live with it.

Have you noticed Open land is getting hard to come by too.

I miss the good ole days.

OceanBlue · 03-15-2005, 12:48 PM

From the Marine Resources pages...

"The next stock assessment of black rockfish is not currently scheduled; however, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife plans to propose that an assessment be made during the next round of assessments. If the proposal is approved, black rockfish would be assessed in 2007 for the 2009-2010 federal fishery management period."

Although I know that they are conducting some black rockfish studies now.

23 species are on the list to be assessed this year. Any one of them could make things miserable for 2007-2008 seasons.

Pilar · 03-15-2005, 01:12 PM

I don't think they know for sure. Rockfish are live birth spawners. They release thousands of fry which become part of the free drifting plankton until they settle out on what becomes their new home turf, a process called recruitment. Some species spend a short time free drifting and some can do this for a year. When you read the textbooks by Milton Love ... the times of year and age at first spawn are given in probabilities. For example it says something like '50% of fish are mature at 10 inches and 9 years'.

They give the time of year the same way. For the most part the rockfish seem to favor winter for spawning. December to May mostly.

Lings nest in the spring. The female lays eggs in a rocky area and she is swarmed by males which then guard the nest. This usually occurs near shore in shallow rocky areas.

The idea I keep seeing and think alot of is an annual limit. What we really need is yet another harvest card, right? But if you limited annual take of rockfish to so many a person you could reduce the harvest. Also the tags could be recovered for info on who caught what and where. I realize that they do dock checks but those guys are nowhere to be seen when I come in late.

This would work for charters because every angler would get a harvest card as they do now with the daily license.

Another thing to do is to impose daily limits on charters. Maybe discourage the repeat trips to the nearshore reef in one day. Just thinking out loud here. I know that one would go over big with those guys. It is pretty clear to me that most ocean fishers do not specifically target rockfish on every trip. They have other reasons to be out there. On many boats I have fished on, rockfish is a sort of consolation prize. When you can't do anything else .. rockfish is what is for dinner.

Charters on the other hand have a real gravy train going with rockfish. They can take 'dudes' out for short duration trips and have great success which ensures repeat business. The problem is that they do this every day and sometimes several times a day.

The 40 fathom restriction has really pushed the effort inshore. As a result the black rockfish are being taken in ever higher numbers.

Annual limit IMHO is the way to go. When you run that out you are done. Maybe 50 blacks a year, landing any restricted species and you lose your tag for the year. Or maybe allow one or two of the restricted fish per tag to reduce the waste that goes on when the floater hatch breaks out offshore.

Good effort Rod .. and many good ideas here.