!!!MLPA reserve process coming to SoCal in 2008 - Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge

Handymansd · 12-19-2007, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psudocromis

No love from Arnold....

Wow, talk about a lame form letter!!

I am nowhere near a politician, but even I could have come up with a better "P.C." dismissal than that!

aguachico · 12-20-2007, 05:29 AM

The capacity of the California Department of Fish and Game and other state agencies must be further enhanced to ensure successful implementation of the MLPA and other marine policies. Budget appropriations in 2006 provide an increased budget for DFG, but needed human resources must be developed, and additional budget increases will be required as subsequent study regions are completed. The MLPA Initiative report Estimated Long-Term Costs to Implement the Marine Life Protection Act (April 2006) provides a useful basis for discussion of needed budget increases. As the California Department of Parks and Recreation and State Water Resources Control Board also have roles in implementing the MLPA, attention should be given to ensuring that they also have resources needed to implement the MLPA.

Handymansd · 12-20-2007, 02:48 PM

A DFG officer stopped me at the launch when I came in today and asked me to complete a sort of survey about the fishing habits of kayakers out of La Jolla. She asked for target species, frequency of fishing trips, distance out, time actually fishing, how often I catch fish (ya right), etc. They seem to realize that we have very special needs that need to be addressed with the implementation of the MLPA process. She said that it is not very likely that they will close La Jolla to Kayak fisherman. She said that they will probably implement a type of situation where kayaks could not fish past the three mile point, allowing us to fish only within the three mile point... Interesting thought.

I wonder if they would allow the sport fishing boats or other PB within those limits as well...

madscientist · 12-20-2007, 03:01 PM

Yeah, I got "measured" by that chick as well.

Funny thing, DFG officer pulled up as we were talking to her. We both had licenses so all was cool, but it made me wonder if the DFG has it's priorities straight. Wasting an officer's time to check a half dozen kayakers for licenses seems kind of silly for an agency that is contantly crying about budget shortfalls.

ski · 12-21-2007, 09:44 PM

I wish that those of power would implement stricter measures to prevent the pollution of our waters from sewerage. IMO, it is total bullshit that something isn't done besides throwing up orange warning signs

Smaller creel limits and increasing the legal take size would increase the quantity and quality of the fish in our pond

ericbach · 01-20-2008, 01:44 PM

Maybe we should all just boycott the DFG Officers at the launch sites when they ask us all these questions about how the fishing was. They will just use this info as ammunition against all of us. Just say you did not see any action and let them think we never catch anything anyway.

psudocromis · 01-20-2008, 11:48 PM

Slot limits slot limits slot limits,

All the MLA process does is save fish in one area and force people to fish in other areas. at least slot limits would preserve the breeding stock, increese the amount of fish released and improve the fishery all around.

For example current DFG regs limits catch size to the age of the fish for beeding size to allow them to breed atleast once.

Bass 12in make slot limit 14-17in
Halibuts 22in make slot 24-28in
WSB 28in make slot 30-38in
YT 26-32in (not sure what breeding YT size is)

Lets the fish get to breeding size, and saves the older breeding fish. this reg can also be counter acted by reducing catch size.... do you really need to keep 10 bass and 5 hali's in one trip?

12-20-2007, 02:48 PM	#3
Handymansd Ancient Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: On The Water Posts: 935	A DFG officer stopped me at the launch when I came in today and asked me to complete a sort of survey about the fishing habits of kayakers out of La Jolla. She asked for target species, frequency of fishing trips, distance out, time actually fishing, how often I catch fish (ya right), etc. They seem to realize that we have very special needs that need to be addressed with the implementation of the MLPA process. She said that it is not very likely that they will close La Jolla to Kayak fisherman. She said that they will probably implement a type of situation where kayaks could not fish past the three mile point, allowing us to fish only within the three mile point... Interesting thought. I wonder if they would allow the sport fishing boats or other PB within those limits as well... __________________ All men are equal before fish. -Herbert Hoover

12-20-2007, 03:01 PM	#4
madscientist Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 1,906	Yeah, I got "measured" by that chick as well. Funny thing, DFG officer pulled up as we were talking to her. We both had licenses so all was cool, but it made me wonder if the DFG has it's priorities straight. Wasting an officer's time to check a half dozen kayakers for licenses seems kind of silly for an agency that is contantly crying about budget shortfalls. __________________

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

12-20-2007, 05:29 AM	#2
aguachico Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 719	The capacity of the California Department of Fish and Game and other state agencies must be further enhanced to ensure successful implementation of the MLPA and other marine policies. Budget appropriations in 2006 provide an increased budget for DFG, but needed human resources must be developed, and additional budget increases will be required as subsequent study regions are completed. The MLPA Initiative report Estimated Long-Term Costs to Implement the Marine Life Protection Act (April 2006) provides a useful basis for discussion of needed budget increases. As the California Department of Parks and Recreation and State Water Resources Control Board also have roles in implementing the MLPA, attention should be given to ensuring that they also have resources needed to implement the MLPA.

12-21-2007, 09:44 PM	#5
ski Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: El Cajon Posts: 273	I wish that those of power would implement stricter measures to prevent the pollution of our waters from sewerage. IMO, it is total bullshit that something isn't done besides throwing up orange warning signs Smaller creel limits and increasing the legal take size would increase the quantity and quality of the fish in our pond

01-20-2008, 01:44 PM	#6
ericbach Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2	Maybe we should all just boycott the DFG Officers at the launch sites when they ask us all these questions about how the fishing was. They will just use this info as ammunition against all of us. Just say you did not see any action and let them think we never catch anything anyway.

01-20-2008, 11:48 PM	#7
psudocromis Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 16	Slot limits slot limits slot limits, All the MLA process does is save fish in one area and force people to fish in other areas. at least slot limits would preserve the breeding stock, increese the amount of fish released and improve the fishery all around. For example current DFG regs limits catch size to the age of the fish for beeding size to allow them to breed atleast once. Bass 12in make slot limit 14-17in Halibuts 22in make slot 24-28in WSB 28in make slot 30-38in YT 26-32in (not sure what breeding YT size is) Lets the fish get to breeding size, and saves the older breeding fish. this reg can also be counter acted by reducing catch size.... do you really need to keep 10 bass and 5 hali's in one trip?