Ling Cod in danger... I dont think so.....

[Jaksonbrown]

So im sure you have all heard about the morons out there in the government and the treehuggin community knocking spearfishing. Well, here in the PNW, this movement is on steriods. Spearfishing has all but been eliminated in Puget sound. All we have left is a 3 week Ling season, and even that is under fire. I was banned from a local Scuba board around here for daring to defy the notion that spearing was "decimating" the ling cod population. Well, I have news for all the anti-spearos, tree huggin, owl kissin jackasses out there. There are TONS of lingcod here. We went out on a charter just off the coast of Westport wa. In an hour and a half our boat (18 people) managed to catch 42 lingcod. Our limit. They did the same thing the previous 4 trips. It was insane! What a blast!!! And these were all large mature fish. So all of you spearo haters out there... Get your facts straight. This one boat probably accounts for more ling in a week than the entire spearfishing harvest for the year! And there are dozens and dozens of boats fishing for ling.
What a blast! Ohh.. we also limited the boat on halibut...

 

[Rhone Man]

I have no dog in this fight, but on my (rare) dives in the PNW one thing I always seem to see is a hell of a lot of Ling Cod.

 

[rjack321]

Cory I don't know where you think this massive no-lingcod tree-hugger pressure is coming from. We've had a 3 week ling season for spearos for 15+ yrs. That's exactly because it is so easy to limit out.

The slot limit was a new effort at ensuring "equity" between spearing and hook and line. So beetch to the hook and line people who thought you guys were taking "their" fish.

Oh what the hell you just wanted to rant anyway.

 

[AbyssalPlains]

It takes a bit more than personal observation and spending a morning on a boat to really know whether a fish population is in danger or not. That's why we have scientists. If we left decisions that affect future generations to anecdotal evidence, personal experience and fishermen, take a look at history and see how well that worked out. Many of the folks that write off as treehuggers actually know stuff that everyone should know before they weigh in on complex issues like these. Important stuff. Such as how deceiving personal observation can be. shifting baselines, for example: several studies done in the sea of Cortez have shown that if you ask the current generation of fishermen about what they consider a large grouper, they will answer with a size that is a fraction of what groupers would be were they not overfished. When you ask those fishermen's grandfathers the same question, they will answer with a much bigger size. Their grandsons may even laugh and write it off as old mans yarn, but there are historic photos that prove their grandfathers right.

So what does this tell us? It tells us that even the personal observation of someone who fishes for a living doesn't necessary know what it takes to make sustainable decisions about natural resources.

The standard reaction of fishermen in the past has always been the same: fish and take and exploit while you still can and when the fish are gone, whine and blame the government. Then move on to different species. Repeat as necessary. To prevent this from happening the fish need treehuggers. Because even though they may not always be a hundred percent right a hundred percent of the time, at least they try their best to conserve a resource that deserves to be here when your kids are old enough to spearfish.

Otherwise, better get used to the idea that your grand children will look at your spearguns and say to their friends: "that looks like fun! But there are no fish left to spear. Our grampa and his generation were so greedy they killed them all."

 

[Kiwi303]

What I dislike is when limits are imposed on rec fishermen who take maybe 5% of the catch but the commercial guys with 95% of the take are left to go drag as many as they like out of the water to sell.

For the volumes taken it makes a hell of a lot more sense to chop the commercial catch quota by 10% than to put a total rec fishing ban on an area but let the commercial catchers carry on as usual!

 

[Thalassamania]

I suspect that you'll find the recreational line fisherman were at the bottom of this one.

 

[RoyN]

Ice package me a good fillet and I'll use my grandma's secret receipe to cook

 

[VooDooGasMan]

jacksonbrown knows more than you think abyassal, he also knows were killed by the Indians, they come in at 99 cents a # for salmon to albertsons, our other commercial can not compete, govenor says thats the way it is, we took there land, they get the fish.

On the other hand dive everyday and spear my two cabbys, and fish my one ling, and get my butt, four great fish every day, most the time hali is not open all week. In 9 days in front of my house I have 246 pound of fish in the freezer, legally.
Yes its fish fridays at the clubhouse.

There are so many ling out there, but I like the rules except the indians, they need less, so it super easy for me to get my spear on.

Jackson go to la push and spear ling there its just as much fun and is an awesome area.


Happy Diving

 

[spoolin01]

It takes a bit more than personal observation and spending a morning on a boat to really know whether a fish population is in danger or not. That's why we have scientists.

From what I've observed in recent years, it takes quite a bit more than scientists as well, or a least the scientists who get referenced.

I don't know what it's like in AZ but last I checked, there aren't many scientists on the Fish and Game Commission in California, or the PFMC. It's a political process fundamentally, and the 'science' we'd like to have such faith in is contentious and weak at best, if it plays much of a driving role at all.

Science doesn't have much to offer for the question of who should get the nod to catch how much of one species. I have confidence that science will one day understand fisheries very well - I don't think it's all that close at the moment.

By the way, you don't really mean to claim that most treehuggers know or care anything about the science, do you? I got a good laugh out of that.

Lots of lings? Love it - fish on!

 

[Bob DBF]

It takes a bit more than personal observation and spending a morning on a boat to really know whether a fish population is in danger or not. That's why we have scientists.

It depends on whether the scientists are even interested or consulted for their opinion. A lot of fish and game laws have more to do with political pressure than any scientific study.

Up here on the north coast I quit spearfishing for 15 or so years because I didn't see the number and size fish that used to be prevalent, lately I have taken a few because they seem to be coming back. During this time the F&G limits have been essentially the same.

Abalone, on the other hand have been unnecessarily restricted. That is another longer story.

Spoolin01 - Better said than I, and I wish I could type faster.

Bob
----------------------------------
I may be old, but I’m not dead yet.