bottom fish

Discussion in 'Saltwater' started by Tyler Speir, Feb 27, 2006.

  1. Smalma

    Smalma Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,472
    Likes Received:
    1,786
    Location:
    Marysville, Washington
    IBN and FFNB -
    Did either of you suggest changes in the rockfish limits to WDFW the last go-around with for regulations changes?

    Tight lines
    Curt
     
  2. Jeff Hale

    Jeff Hale B.I.G.F.F.

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    698
    Likes Received:
    121
    Location:
    Bainbridge Island, WA
    My rule of thumb is DON'T freeze fish. If you can't eat it in the next 48 hours fresh, then don't kill it. Like IBN said, a couple rockfish make a fine beach dinner, but who the hell needs 10 of the damn things? I don't want to fillet that many, anyway. They're good, but not that good. It reminds me of when I was a kid, and I would bait fish for trout off the dock at a local lake, and see the old timers coming in with limit after limit everday, and then at the end of the year talk about having to "clean out the freezer" from last years trout to make room for some "fresh ones". Ignorance. Jeff
     
  3. mr trout

    mr trout Trevor Hutton

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2003
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Yakima, WA, USA.
    This brings up a good point about possession limits. Technically, you shouldnt have more than the posession limit in your freezer, and could get busted for it if you were caught for something else and had reason to inspect your freezer. Most people have no idea and just pile fish in their freezer like its going out of style... then most just gets thrown away anyway....
     
  4. Tyler Speir

    Tyler Speir Artist

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Messages:
    744
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Home Page:
    I just got a 16' lavro drift boat. Will that work out in the sound with a 5hp motor? Or do I need to use somthign else? This will be a first time for me.
     
  5. snbrundage

    snbrundage Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    seattle, wa
    speir61

    Many years ago I owned a Lavro with a motor well. Launched it in the Columbia at Ringold Springs one day with a five horse long shank honda attached. Went accross the river and a little downstream. We almost didn't get back because the flow was greater than our best speed. If I was you I would go stand on a few beaches and see what you think, after trying the boat in still water. Personally I would not launch my old boat, say in the narrows. I will be interested to hear what others say in this regard.

    Steve
     
  6. ibn

    ibn Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2002
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    17
    Location:
    Federal Way
    Home Page:
    Curt,

    I have not, I have no idea how to even go about doing something like that. I'd like to think that WDFW has people working for them that have a grasp on what's going on, afterall that is their job, right?

    I'd love to talk to someone about a regs change, or at least voice my concern, just not sure who and where to do that.
     
  7. Roger Stephens

    Roger Stephens Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    1,396
    Likes Received:
    908
    Location:
    .
    Speir61:

    The wind can sometimes start blowing fairly quickly on the Sound. Before I would invest money in a 5 hp motor for your drift boat, I would fine out from some knowledgeable people how a drift boat would handle while motoring into +5-10mph wind chop. It would probably be a pretty uncomfortable, dicey ride since it has a flat bottom and is not able to cut through the waves. If you have to cross some open water during windy conditions to get back the boat ramp rather being able to hug a shoreline, it could get "down right" dangerous.

    When I fish on the Sound, I like to cover a lot of water. A 5 hp motor would probably limit your ability to check out a lot of fishing spots each trip.

    To be safe and have a good ride, a 14' or larger full V or semi-V hull boat is the way to go for fishing on the Sound.

    Roger
     
  8. alpinetrout

    alpinetrout Banned or Parked

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Messages:
    4,050
    Likes Received:
    270
    Location:
    Hiding in your closet
    Not to advocate filling freezers with fish to freezer burn and throw away, but what you said isn't true. Possession limit is defined on page 21 of the regs as "The number of daily limits allowed to be kept in the field, or in transit". What you have in your home doesn't apply to your possession limit.
     
  9. Tyler Speir

    Tyler Speir Artist

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Messages:
    744
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Home Page:
    Thanks for the info.

    So what I need to do is get one of you guys to take me out on your boat. heh.
     
  10. Chris Bellows

    Chris Bellows Your Preferred WFF Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    2,172
    Likes Received:
    1,465
    Location:
    The Salt
    of course, i have discussed the issue with a few of the biologists but have never put a formal proposal through. honestly, i had three reasons. first, there were "bigger fish to fry" when it comes to the fishery at neah bay. with the dramatic reductions in season length in regards to the halibut fishery and the time spent trying to craft as long of a coho salmon season during north of falcon, bottomfish just weren't on my radar. not that i didn't care, but the reductions i mentioned are places i just don't fish anymore (i always felt my clients deserved more than just fishing around the entrance, and i loved trying new places far from any other pressure).

    second, any bottomfish limit reductions would face enormous public displeasure. from the charter operators to the hotel and marina, i would have been almost alone. without strong biology, intense public pressure would sink any proposal to reduce bottomfish limits on the coast. most regs that biologists don't favor need strong public pressure to pass, and this is one that just isn't going to fly.

    also, hindsight is a wonderful thing. seeing how the changing halibut and salmon seasons impact secondary species is not something that is easy to predict (i may not even be right). but i have seen the huge numbers of halibut fishermen with brand new ocean boats... and they are going to fish for something when halibut is closed and/or the ocean is too rough. the bottomfish in the strait are going to take the brunt of that pressure imo. unfortunetely, i haven't seen wdfw management take into consideration additional pressure when making decisions (they might, but i haven't seen it).

    as for complaining about "mis-management" without doing anything... i think that is a cop out. with the few numbers of fly anglers fishing for bottomfish in area 4... education is the first thing that has to happen if any future reductions in the limit are to take place (hopefully before they are biologically necessary). i think making the assertion that if you don't propose changes that you shouldn't talk about fishery issues is a bit unfair.

    the ocean fishery is dominated by commercial interests (both sport and commercial) and that means any changes in regards to bag limits are hard to change. it's easy when quotas are big, but when quotas are reduced such as last season... any changes in historical bag limits can be tricky.

    chris
     
  11. cabezon

    cabezon Sculpin Enterprises

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,066
    Likes Received:
    706
    Location:
    Olympia, WA
    Hmmmm, the generous limits for rockfish in the outer straits and coasts may well prove shortsighted for the long-term health/sustainability of commercial and recreational fishing in these areas. Just take a look at what overharvest has done to fishing for these species in other areas. First, overharvesting of rockfish along the Pacific coast, primarily by commercial fishing, has already resulted in severe restrictions on fishing, including reduced seasons, reduced bag limits, increased mimimum sizes, in Oregon and California. Previous overly generous limits for rockfish in Puget Sound through the 80's led to a crash on local rockfish populations and imposition of severe limits. [The habitat is still fine as seen by the rebound in numbers and sizes of rockfish living in marine reserves.] From marine areas 5 to 13, the daily limit for rockfish is ONE fish (closed totally in Hood Canal), the first fish caught, regardless of size. What makes folks think that the outer coast is immune to the patterns seen to the south and east?? How long can one expect to overharvest fishes which live as long as we do and which show limited recruitment? Wouldn't it be better for the longterm financial health of commercial and recreational fisheries along the coast to accept reduced harvest now, to the point where harvest rates are sustainable, rather than face emergency closures when the fishery falls off the proverbial cliff??
     
  12. Smalma

    Smalma Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,472
    Likes Received:
    1,786
    Location:
    Marysville, Washington
    Cabezon -
    There is no question that over fishing has seriously impacted species like yelloweye rockfish. These are long lived species with maximum ages of more than 100 years and it may take 20 or more years for 1/2 of the population to reach sexual maturity. However that doesn't necessarily mean that species like the blacks are as vulnerable. While they do not live as long; max. age of about 50 years, they do mature at a much younger age with 1/2 of the poulation reaching sexually mature at 6 or 7 years of age.

    The Puget Sound/inner strait fish were also clearly over fished though you have to admit that those populations were much more confined and accessible to anglers than the ocean populations. As a result they apparently experienced a much higher (excessive exploitation rates).

    Now don't get me wrong - I'm not defending the current generous bag limits; off the top of my head I would thing something like a 2 or 3 fish limit would be more than adequate though I suspect that would be a minority opinion in the angling community. Of course my thinking is undoubtly influenced by general conservative nature and the lack of a desire to eat more than an occassional rockfish.

    One of the reason that I would encourage concern anglers to think about submitting regulation change ideas is that often in the process of developing ones ideas you end up learning a fair amount about the species of interest which may either address or increase your concerns. Also hopefully the agency response to your ideas should supply additional information and the biological support for the current regulations. It never hurts the resource to have informed anglers caring about it.

    Tight lines
    Curt