California Marine Reserves Collection and Fishing Regulations

[monty]

There seems to be some debate between the two DFG people... I wonder if the one I got email from just didn't think about the "animal must be killed" requirement, or if it doesn't apply to invertebrates? I'm almost positive that molluscs and crustaceans can be taken alive with a sport license (I'm thinking bivalves, abalone, crabs, and lobster, primarily.) But perhaps this is wishful thinking.

Anyone feel like scouring the regulations to see what the sport fishing section actually says? I've only read the aquarium collection permit section of the code.

edit: here's a place to start: http://law.onecle.com/california/fish/index.html

edit2: this says there's a specific tidal invertebrate permit: http://law.justia.com/california/codes/fgc/8500.html which sounds like it applies to collection of bimacs the way most people do it (although they live in places other than tidal areas, too)

edit3: I can't find anything in the code about having to kill animals before leaving the water, but I may have missed something... I looked mostly through the 7000 and 8000 sections.

 

[Animal Mother]

Here is my letter just received:

Dec 2, 2008

Hi Eric,

It is not legal for you to collect any of those animals or fish to keep as pets. Everything collected under a sportfishing license must be killed before leaving the water where taken. The only way to collect these animals would be under the authority of an Aquaria Collectors Permit, and they are quite pricy. These permits are intended for people collecting fish and animals for the aquarium/pet store trade. In 2009, they will run $391.00 and you can see the details at:
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/commercial/commdescrip.html
Sorry for the bad news!

Carrie


^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
< > <
Carrie E. Wilson
Associate Marine Biologist
California Outdoors Q&A Columnist
Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game
[email protected]

How geigh.

 

[SanClementeEric]

Here's The Thing...

I have gone over this issue from both sides for many years. See, I am also a fisherman. I've communicated with Ed Roberts directly on transporting live animals and it's a no-no.

You cannot transport live lobsters for sure! (Although it's hard because they don't die on their own for days!!!)

I see no debate between what you've posted and what I've posted. I think your interpretation of what's in your letters is what is in question.

There's a fine line between what is regulated and what's enforced.

Take sport fishing for muscles, crabs (even sand crabs) and lobsters for example. They are not to be transported live (nothing can be) yet they are usually never dead when you leave. The main gist of the law is to prevent fish from being put into foreign waters, so a DFG warden probably won't cite you for having a live lobster, providing you have all the necessary permits and report cards to take it.

From what I read in your letter from Ed, there are two species of octopus that you CANNOT take (Octopus
bimaculoides and O. bimaculoidoides) and any others can only be taken with a marine aquaria collector's permit, as repeated in my letter from Carrie.

So, no debate.

 

[SanClementeEric]

How geigh.

I know! That means I was breaking the law when I was a ten-year old collecting salamanders, minnows and "crawdads"!

 

[SanClementeEric]

There may be a way to get a Scientific Collecting permit. That might be something to research further!

 

[monty]

From what I read in your letter from Ed, there are two species of octopus that you CANNOT take (Octopus
bimaculoides and O. bimaculoidoides) and any others can only be taken with a marine aquaria collector's permit, as repeated in my letter from Carrie.

So, no debate.

I don't see how you can interpret this passage from Ed's letter that way:

So, these two species of octopus may not be taken legally for the California marine aquaria trade.

These two species of octopus can be taken under the authority of a sport fishing license. There are no regulations that would prohibit you from displaying live specimens of O. bimaculatus and O. bimaculoides in your home aquarium for your hobby. You may run into problems if your intent is to supply specimens for fellow hobbyists or businessess.

particularly given that the letter was specifically in response to a query about people collecting for their own use. I'm not saying Ed is right and Carrie is wrong, just that Ed seemed to explicitly say it was OK for personal use as long as you don't give the octo to anyone else... Ed's response was specifically in regards to a question about "suppose I wanted to collect a live bimac for my own aquarium?" so I'm fairly confident in reading that as "there's no problem with catching a live bimac with a sport fishing license and displaying it in your own home aquarium."

Perhaps it would be best to ask them what they meant rather than argue among ourselves; I don't know much at all, but until you reported the information from Carrie, I thought Ed's letter was pretty unambiguous in saying it would be OK. I don't want to get anyone in trouble by telling them it's OK to collect their own bimacs if it isn't, but I also don't want to tell people it's illegal until we're sure that it is, since it seems like something a number of California TONMO folks would be interested in taking advantage of if it is allowed.

 

[monty]

I sent an email to Ed Roberts and Carrie Wilson asking them to look at this discussion and clarify, so, perhaps we can get some more clarification. I hate to bug professionals, but I hope that if we can get an unambiguous answer once and for all we'll be able to point people at the answer here without having to bother the DFG in the future.

 

[SanClementeEric]

That will be great!

 

[DHyslop]

I sent an email to Ed Roberts and Carrie Wilson asking them to look at this discussion and clarify, so, perhaps we can get some more clarification. I hate to bug professionals, but I hope that if we can get an unambiguous answer once and for all we'll be able to point people at the answer here without having to bother the DFG in the future.

I'd prefer not have further clarification! Ed's original email was rather unambiguous. I could produce that email with clear conscience if I was challenged while collecting.

Now, given that; I don't recall seeing this "murder clause" in there, either. Honestly, I'd trust Ed--a specialist--over the Outdoors Q&A Columnist. Used to dealing with John Q. Public, she might even be stretching because she doesn't want you to go out and start grabbing octopuses.

Dan

 

[monty]

I'd prefer not have further clarification! Ed's original email was rather unambiguous. I could produce that email with clear conscience if I was challenged while collecting.

Now, given that; I don't recall seeing this "murder clause" in there, either. Honestly, I'd trust Ed--a specialist--over the Outdoors Q&A Columnist. Used to dealing with John Q. Public, she might even be stretching because she doesn't want you to go out and start grabbing octopuses.

Dan

Yeah, I was a bit feeling like I would have preferred to stick with the answer I *liked* the most, but making sure we don't misrepresent the laws to people is probably more important. Carrie sent me a nice email saying she's looking into it in more detail, so keep your fingers crossed that she finds out it's OK...

Also, she's an Associate Marine Biologist in addition to a columnist, although I imagine there's not anyone who's "Chief Officer in charge of Octopus Matters" or anything...