DFW Commission and lobster recomendations

[Saba Slayer]

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) will make a brief presentation on these recommendations at the California Fish and Game Commission (FGC) meeting on December 11, 2013. No decisions will be made at this Commission meeting. The formal regulator process will not start until 2014. For detailed information regarding FGC meetings please visit the FGC website.
Visit this website to get the complete PDF...
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/lobsterfmp/committee.asp

The meeting will take place in San Diego.
December 11, 2013, 8:30 a.m.
Hilton San Diego Mission Valley 901 Camino del Rio South, San Diego

Here is a cut and paste version of the recreational proposals...
Jim / Saba Slayer

Recreational Lobster Fishery Management Recommendations

Consensus achieved at August 15 and September 11, 2013 LAC Meetings
The LAC reached consensus on five recreational management measures, including a tail-¬‐cutting proposal, a limitation on the use of mechanized pullers, a new season opener time, a clarification of the diver prohibition on carrying hooked devices (spear guns to be allowed), and a proposal to mark hoop net floats. A broad majority of the LAC supported a proposal to set a seasonal limit (70) for the recreational fishery and a proposal to ban the use of conical hoop nets. Opposition from two recreational members prevented consensus on each of these proposals. Of note, neither of these members offered an alternative proposal to address commercialization (the intent of the seasonal limit) or to address problems associated with the rapid rise in the use of hoop nets in recent years. Each recommendation below describes the relevant issue, the introduced proposal and the LAC action following discussion, deliberation and, in most cases, refinement of the original proposal.
3
Issue: Lobster caught by recreational fishermen is being sold in the commercial market place. Requiring sport fishermen to clip or punch the center tail flap makes it possible for law enforcement to identify lobsters caught in a recreational fishery that end up in the market and take appropriate legal action. This proposal will give law enforcement a tool to address buyers and markets that purchase lobster from recreational fishermen.
Proposal: Recreationally caught lobsters are to be tail-¬‐clipped (removing the bottom half of the central tail flap) or tail-¬‐punched in the central tail flap (Australia requires a 10 mm minimum hole). Additional details will be worked out with LED (e.g. clipped when landed?).
LAC Action: The LAC achieved consensus on the tail-¬‐clipping proposal above. The LAC did not achieve consensus on a seasonal limit as a tool to reduce illegal commercialization.
Issue: Use of mechanized pullers has made it easier to rob from commercial traps.
Proposal: Restrict the use of mechanized pullers only to persons in possession of proof of disability/medical (Disabled Mechanized Hoop Net Puller Permit). This restriction would only pertain to power driven mechanized pullers and not hand operated davits with single pulley systems.
Clarification: This restriction only applies to individuals targeting or in possession of lobster, not persons solely targeting crab.
DFW Disabled Mechanized Hoop Net Puller Permit Form:
The following conditions must be met to qualify for issuance of a Disabled Mechanized Hoop Net Puller Permit: “For the purposes of this permit a disability means a permanent loss, significant limitation, or diagnosed disease or disorder, which substantially impairs an individual’s ability to physically pull by hand and retrieve a hoop net for the purpose of targeting lobster.” A medical physician must sign the permit application form.
LAC Action: The LAC achieved consensus on the mechanical puller restriction proposal above. Some members noted that the broad wording of the disability option could render the management measure ineffective and suggested that the LAC work with DFW Enforcement to ensure the new rule has “teeth” when it is applied.
Issue: The midnight opener creates a “rush” mentality that fuels conflicts between recreational users and poses a safety risk. The current lobster opener date and time can be difficult to understand (confusion regarding when the season actual “starts”) and constituents are having trouble following the law. DFW has been asked to consider an alternate start time.
Proposal: Make the lobster opener 6:00 a.m. on Saturday instead of 12:01 a.m. on Saturday.
Key discussion points
• New time is workable for DFW Enforcement
• Proposal improves safety conditions
• Regulatory change has no impact on the resource
• Commercial season dates would not change
4
LAC Action: The LAC achieved consensus on the lobster opener proposal above. The group acknowledged concerns regarding the economic impact this proposal may have on some dive charters.
Issue: Marking hoop net floats will improve accountability and safety among recreational fishermen, and may help reduce illegal commercialization.
Proposal: Hoop net floats should be marked with unique ID (DL, Go ID, etc. — details to be worked out with LED).
LAC Action: The LAC achieved consensus on the marked hoop net proposal above. A second element of the original proposal, that hoop net floats be “closely attended”, did not receive full group support due to concerns over enforceability challenges.
Issue: Spear fisherman have been harassed or cited for carrying a spear gun while in the pursuit of lobster. Constituents have asked for clarity on the definition of a “hooked” device.
Proposal: Keep change simple. Ensure regulatory language focuses on how lobster can be taken (i.e. “skin and scuba divers may take lobsters by hand only”) and not how it cannot be taken; remove “hooked device” term from current regulations. The proposal allows for possession of a spear gun or pole spear underwater while hunting lobsters. Misuse of this equipment to take lobster (lobster can only be taken by hand) would remain illegal.
LAC Action: The LAC achieved consensus on the hooked device proposal above.

[wiredantz]

thanks for the post.

they are trying to ban concicle nets, and making us hole punch our lobster.

and make the opener start at 6am.



next thing, you know they are going to tell us to hole punch our fish

[danjor]

So if conical nets get banned will I be receiving a check for my 10 very expensive nets and rigging that will be rendered useless by the new law.... If the law passes I don't mind switching net styles but I feel I should get reimbursement for being forced to change. Net plus rigging kit is roughly $50 a net if you get them on sale and I just bought 7 new nets before the session this year 5 of which are still new....

[Saba Slayer]

THIS IS MY OPINION AND DOES NOT REFLECT THE OPINION OF THE DFW OR OTHER LAC MEMBERS...!!!
The conical net phase out was presented at the last meeting...90% of the LAC and the Department is made up of divers and they all backed this proposal. The two hoopnet reps were made aware that this proposal would be brought up at the last meeting and we were warned about it only a few days before the meeting. 4 hoopnet reg changes were proposed by the ALTERNATE diver rep at the last meeting and he did not give any of the other recreational reps a heads-up about his proposals, nor did he propose any viable restrictions on the divers...?!?! Not very good politics if you are really looking for some constructive ways of cutting the recreational consumptive effort.
If you are upset about this STUPID proposal please step up to the mic and say so at the Commission Meeting.
An old creel survey was being used as proof of the excessive number of hoopers compared to divers...80% hoop 20% dive.
This number is way off...a creel survey only questions the folks returning to a boat launch area...This is ridiculous as most hoopers launch a boat then go out and set their nets, while most divers i know walk out from shore or have a boat in a slip. These divers would never come in contact with a DFW creel survey.
If you look at the report card returns for the last few years you'll see that the real ratio is closer to 60% hoop and 40% dive.
This years report card data should be the best yet with the new seasonal card and the new non-return fee (32% RETURNS last season and this season should be well over 50%) ...IF THE DFW staff AND the COMMISSION IS SMART, they will wait until the new data comes out before they make any new regulation proposals.
Just as a reminder...if any of these regulation changes are adopted, I believe they won't go into effect until the 2016-17 season.
During the two years of meetings there were many recreational and commercial reg. proposals brought forward and they were voted down for various reasons...yet the so called "independent" moderater hired by the DFW felt it was important to include this bit of info on the seasonal limit and the conical nets..."A broad majority of the LAC supported a proposal to set a seasonal limit (70) for the recreational fishery and a proposal to ban the use of conical hoop nets. Opposition from two recreational members prevented consensus on each of these proposals. Of note, neither of these members offered an alternative proposal to address commercialization (the intent of the seasonal limit) or to address problems associated with the rapid rise in the use of hoop nets in recent years."
He also failed to mention that 2 Commercial Reps abstained from the vote on the seasonal limit...INHO he was a biased moderator and is looking out for his own welfare and another FMP job with the DFW...If the Department has their act together on the next FMP they will find someone who is open minded and has a neutral position.
THE WHOLE DAMN THING SMACKED OF THE MLPA process and left me with a bad taste for the whole DFW political system...no one argued the commercial reg changes except the commercial guys, yet all the LAC felt they had to jump on the hoop netters and help reduce our effort or numbers.
Jim / Saba Slayer

[wiredantz]

The war between Divers and Hoop Nets.

(sigh)


Thanks for the information Jim.

[Saba Slayer]

I'm not advocating a war with divers...some of my best friends and boat owners are divers...I'm advocating a fair and equitable share of the burden for the recreational consumptive lobster catchers. As with all groups there are a few bad apples in every bunch.
Jim / Saba Slayer

[Tman]

Transparency at its finest...

The MLPA BS started with 'volunteers' asking kayakers where they fish most often, telling them that they were doing the 'survey' to ensure their preferred locations would not be affected...ya right. Some kayakers fell for it, and the enviro nutjobs swooped in like vultures and claimed those areas were being overfished.

Now, new cards will give them the same info, and will be used accordingly, just as with the MLPA BS...and again, it will be the recreational hoopers who will be most affected, since the big boys have the $ to fight them, and they know it.

And changing opening times from midnight to 6 am??? WTF! Might as well change the opener time to 6 pm. I can see why from a safety standpoint, but I doubt many bugs will be crawling at 6 am.

Same shit, different species...and I bet, no, guarantee, that the idiotic diver who claimed at the MLPA BS that LJ had no fish will be on hand to claim that he doesn't see any lobster when he dives...

[danjor]

Trust me I would like to go to the meeting and voice my opinion but with this stupid job there's no way I can make the meeting on the 11th.
Once again thanks for the information and clarification on there "politics" some of I'm not against but some of it is stupid like getting rid of conical nets, but if they want me to hole punch my bugs tail to different it from commercial ones I have no problem not that it will change that people abusing recreational fishing and selling them from just not hole punching them which is the whole reason why there doing it.... now if they required commercial bugs to have tags like shellfish that's a idea that would work to keep illegal selling down, a simple tag that says where its caught and when by what commercial licence # and what # tag it is and just issue the tags to commercial with there licence that makes a lot more since than hole punching bugs on the recreational side..... its a lot harder to forge a tag than to not hole punch a bug....

[Fiskadoro]

THE WHOLE DAMN THING SMACKED OF THE MLPA process and left me with a bad taste for the whole DFW political system...no one argued the commercial reg changes except the commercial guys, yet all the LAC felt they had to jump on the hoop netters and help reduce our effort or numbers....


Yeah the whole thing is like a sick joke. The commercials take more then ever before to satisfy their new huge market exporting to China. The DFW get's concerned that they are being over harvested. They stack the Lobster advisory committee with with people that want to cut back consumption. They then bring up the red herring of the commercialization of the recreational fishery, paint us as the bad guys, while the Commercials are presented as playing by the rules even though their take is up and they are shipping our lobsters out of the country, and then at the last minute divide the few recs on the committee by getting the divers to support bans on hoop nets.

Commercials get preferential treatment because they are for profit business. Divers get preferential treatment because the Enviro's like the idea of Eco Dive tourism. Every single proposal targets recs but most of them directly target hoonetters, and that is what happened because that was what they wanted from the start.

[blitzburgh]

First off...Thank you for all you do for us Jim! If these jag-offs were truly interested in the "public's" comments, you would think they'd schedule these meetings at a more, work-friendly time. We all know they have not, nor will ever care about us. They have their agenda and are executing it flawlessly. :banghead:

[makobob]

These are California Spiny Lobster, they were born here and they should stay HERE.

[danjor]

These are California Spiny Lobster, they were born here and they should stay HERE.

But unfortunately most of them are shipped to Asian country's and not consumed here. Other than point loma seafood I have not come across them anywhere in a consumer market. If I ever saw them on a menu I would order them and I'm sure most people would if they even knew they existed since IMO they taste a lot better than east cost bugs.

[PapaDave]

For all the time, cost and effort put in by hoop netters, why the heck would we be selling them? The statement that recreational bugs are ending up in stores is rediculous. What kind of store or restraunt would depend on sport caught lobster to stock it's shelves/freezers? I think they made that one up.

[makobob]

But unfortunately most of them are shipped to Asian country's and not consumed here. Other than point loma seafood I have not come across them anywhere in a consumer market. If I ever saw them on a menu I would order them and I'm sure most people would if they even knew they existed since IMO they taste a lot better than east cost bugs.

You have to go to MEXICO to find them.
If Asia wants lobster let them farm them.
California lobster for California!

I am done.

[jorluivil]

Bob, I thought the same thing about these halibut that I saw at Costco, they weren't even close to being legal. If they are a product of California I would have to assume they are definitely illegal

I'm still trying to understand the description of the fish:
Fresh Wild 'California' Halibut, Product of 'Mexico'

Maybe a California halibut crossed the border into Mexico, got pregnant while in Mexico and that's where these baby Halibut were born



https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-ZveNM4UsBA8/Uo7XgYVBa0I/AAAAAAAAFZ4/4fJRk9ssE74/w709-h532-no/20131121_191900.jpg

[danjor]

Bob, I thought the same thing about these halibut that I saw at Costco, they weren't even close to being legal. If they are a product of California I would have to assume they are definitely illegal

I'm still trying to understand the description of the fish:
Fresh Wild 'California' Halibut, Product of 'Mexico'

Maybe a California halibut crossed the border into Mexico, got pregnant while in Mexico and that's where these baby Halibut were born



https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-ZveNM4UsBA8/Uo7XgYVBa0I/AAAAAAAAFZ4/4fJRk9ssE74/w709-h532-no/20131121_191900.jpg

I don't even know what to say about this. Undersized illegal alien halibut?
Did you take that pic if so which Costco?

[jorluivil]

I don't even know what to say about this. Undersized illegal alien halibut?
Did you take that pic if so which Costco?

Costco in Norwalk

[danjor]

Costco in Norwalk

Forwarded photo to cousin who is scientific advisor for DFW I'll see what he says.

[jorluivil]

When I showed it to the boys We were debating whether or not these are even halibut.

[danjor]

When I showed it to the boys We were debating whether or not these are even halibut.

They look like large sand dabs but the difference between sand dabs, pacific halibut, and California halibut in fish that size is so miniscule plus there's no head its hard to tell other than its for sure a flat fish. If it is a sand dab who would even think of poaching bugs when there charging that for what could easily be a sand dab. Lol Not that I would even sell any there too damn tasty!

[StinkyMatt]

Isn't California a type of Halibut? Like Pacific halibut?


It's a California halibut caught under Mexican laws in Mexico.

Exported to another country.



What's the problem?





Gorge, can you please pick up some toilet paper while you are Costco? We are running low.
:D

[bubblehide]

This whole issue turns my stomach. First and foremost, per DFW, the fish and game of this state belong to this states residents. It is DFW's job to manage OUR game for OUR benifit... Way back in the 1800's, during the Gold Rush days, commercial hunting was permitted, so that all the subsequent workers of the mining operations could be fed. This commercial hunting resulted in declines in game animals, espically deer and elk, to the point were they were endangered, Tule Elk was thought to be extinct, until a single breeding pair was discovered in the central valley in the mid 1800's.

As far as fishing goes, there have been long lines, gill nets... that have resulted in the demise of many species. All were commercial fishing related practices that resulted in population drops that threatened OUR fishery. The lobster fishery, traditionally, had been small, mostly family operations. those small operations are pretty much a thing of the past. The commercial lobster fishery has now gone corporate. As such, they are now working larger and larger ships, in OUR waters. They are now stacking permits to one vessel... The result is that they can now carry almost uncountable traps; they can fish waters that were traditionally out of range of small operations, or un-fishable with the smaller traditional vessels. With the larger vessels of today, today's technology... the commercials are making record breaking catches, that continue to grow year after year. How long can OUR lobster fishery take this kind of unprecedented harvest? To top if off, as has been previously mentioned, these commercials, are shipping the vast majority or their harvest, OUR (as in the residents of CA) lobsters, overseas to foreign markets; which does not benefit the residents of Ca; but it sure does line the poctets of those corporate commercials, and those they sell to, all way up the line to those foreign markets.

The commercials, bring a false argument of the commercialization of recreational lobstering. They claim that recreational anglers are pulling their traps from the depths, and stealing their lobster. Well, I've spent some time at the docks, I have never seen a recreational boat with a puller capable of pulling a commercial trap. The fact is that recreational pullers are not even close to being capable of pulling a commercial trap. So if we assume that someone actually is pulling commercial traps and stealing their lobster, it is clearly being done by another commercial lobster boat operator.

Sure a few people poach lobster. and sell their poached lobster. This will always happen, as when there is money to be made, some people just don't care about the laws they break. The changes proposed will do nothing to lessen this.

So what are the commercials really after out of all of this? They want to restrict the depth of water that recreational fishermen can hoop in. Why, because it gives them the best areas of production all to themselves, the deeper water. They want their season extended, why, because there is current research about the migration patterns of lobster, so that if they get their season extended, they will be able to continue to harvest lobster, far after the current season, and increase their current unprecedented record harvests, while making recreational anglers out to be the bad guys, again.

I for one, feel that, as the fish and game of this state belong to the states residents, DFW, have not only strayed from their mission in this case, they have completely lost their way. The only question I have is, how long will it be before lobster go the way of abalone. After all, they have way more in common when it comes to gestation of their young, then this process is different, i.e., Both abalone and lobster larva float the currents for months. And we know that the commercial will put a trap in every possible viable location, as they have done in the past; the only difference now, is that the areas they can cover, has grown exponentially with their ships, as has the number of traps they can carry.

[bubblehide]

...


What's the problem?
...
:D


Please read my post above; I could be wrong, but I think it spells it out pretty well.

[StinkyMatt]

Please read MY post and the post prior to it that I was replying to. I think it spells it out pretty well...

[LawDog]

As far as the halibut go, California Halibut is a species of butts. The name does not necessarily mean they live in California. the CA Hali live as far south as in the Sea of Cortez. Im not sure what Mexicos legal size is but if they sell em in large stores here in the states, I would assume legal size in Mexico is much smaller than here. The reason they are being sold here is because people are buying. CA Halibut is also much cheeper than Pacific Halibut. next time you see some Pacific Hali on the shelf look at the price per pound. I think its somewhere around $15.

[wiredantz]

Bob, I thought the same thing about these halibut that I saw at Costco, they weren't even close to being legal. If they are a product of California I would have to assume they are definitely illegal

I'm still trying to understand the description of the fish:
Fresh Wild 'California' Halibut, Product of 'Mexico'

Maybe a California halibut crossed the border into Mexico, got pregnant while in Mexico and that's where these baby Halibut were born



https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-ZveNM4UsBA8/Uo7XgYVBa0I/AAAAAAAAFZ4/4fJRk9ssE74/w709-h532-no/20131121_191900.jpg


That is just plain wrong!!!!






I would like to welcome everyone to the land of America.

Where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.


In terms of kayak fishing:


Where the people full of money get more fish while the people with no money get less fish, and the poor fisherman can not even buy the rich people fish.

[Saba Slayer]

The meeting is on Wednesday at 8:30am...
Jim / Saba Slayer

[MrM]

The meeting is on Wednesday at 8:30am...
Jim / Saba Slayer

Thanks Jim. I appreciate your hard work with this, it's not always easy to be the messenger.. and fighter, for that matter. :cheers1:

I really hate that they do these meetings on weekdays. At the very least if these were held in the evening, the 8-5'ers could have a chance at attending. It doesn't do the recreational community, as a whole, much justice.

[Saba Slayer]

You can always make written comments to the DFG Commission.
Jim / Saba Slayer

[danjor]

You can always make written comments to the DFG Commission.
Jim / Saba Slayer

Where do we send them?