Rockcoddin’ In Monterey — 1977

I ran across some pictures of a “rockcod” trip taken with some friends to Monterey on January 25, 1977. The boat was the “New Holiday” out of Chris’ Fishing and we fished for the most part off of Bixby Creek in pretty deep water. We all limited out on fish but they were not quite the same fish you see today (mostly bigger and some that are no longer allowed to be kept). 

Leaving Fisherman’s Wharf and the waters by Monterey Wharf #2.

We headed down south of Monterey toward the Big Sur coastline and once at our destination began to fish the deep waters. Here’s my friend Del and a nice “rockcod.”

We were fishing in deep water.

My buddy Earl and a nice bag of fish.

John and another and mixed bag of rockcod (rockfish)

More and more fish

Del and a nice bocaccio

A nice yelloweye rockfish (a fish that is now illegal to keep)

A nice mix of rockcod—yelloweye, orange, bocaccio, vermilion, greenstriped, yellowtail, speckled, rosy, China, copper and others — along with a couple of sole and lingcod.

China rockfish

Copper aka whitebelly rockfish

All in all a great day. My totsl for the day, and obviously not all were kept, was 12 orange rockfish, 5 bocaccio (one 6 1/2 pounds), 3 vermilion rockfish (5-6 pounds), 2 yelloweye rockfish (8 and 8 1/2 poounds), 2 greenstriped rockfish, 1 yellowtail rockfish, 1 speckled rockfish, 1 rosy rockfish, 1 starry rockfish, 1 petrale sole and 1 lingcod (12 pounds). Not a bad day. Unfortunately, I was the one taking the pictures and did not get a picture of myself.

Posted in Daily musings... · Tagged , · Leave a comment

Lingcod

Greenlings and Lingcods—Family Hexagrammidae

A small lingcod I caught one day from Citizens Dock in Crescent City

Species: Ophidon elongatus (Girard, 1854); from the Greek words ophis (snake) and odons (tooth), and the Latin word elongatus  (elongate shaped).

Lingcod from the Monterey Coast Guard Pier in 2010 by MBay

Alternate Names:  Pacific cultus, cultus cod, leopard cod, blue cod, gator, ling, greenlinger, green cod and my favorites—slinky linky and lingasaur. Early-day names included buffalo cod, bocalao, card and testoni. Called molva in Mexico.

Identification: Elongate shaped with a long dorsal fin, large pectoral fins, and a large mouth full of canine-like teeth. Their coloring is gray to brown to blue, darker above (although some fish are a bright green and some older fish are a fairly bright yellow). The young are usually blotched.

Size: To 105 pounds in British Columbia. Most lingcod caught off piers are small, generally less than five pounds in weight. The California record fish weighed 56 lb 0 oz. It was caught at Crescent City in 1992.  

Lingcod taken from the Monterey Coast Guard Pier in 2009 by MBay

Range: From Point San Carlos, northern Baja California to the Shumagin Islands, southwestern Gulf of Alaska.

Lingcod taken from the Goleta Pier by Pierhead (Boyd Grant) in 2003

Habitat: South of Point Conception lingcod are typically a deep-water fish; north of Point Conception lingcod will be found from inter-tidal areas out to deep water. The bigger the ling the deeper they tend to live and they’ve been found all the way down to 1,400 feet. Small juvenile lingcod settle into sandy areas at about three inches in length and stay there until they are about 14-inches long. The fish then move out into rocky areas, progressively moving into deeper areas as they age. Many, but not all, migrate into shallower water to spawn during the late fall and winter months. Lings are bottom-dwellers classified as ambush predators whose cryptic (i.e. camouflage) coloration allows them to blend into the background. When prey comes close, they will dart out using the power of their pectoral fins and grab the unsuspecting victim with their large mouth and long, pointed teeth.  They are able to surprise and capture fairly mobile prey.

Lingcod taken by Rock Hopper at the Doran Jetty 

Piers: Most lingcod taken from piers are of one of two types: small juvenile fish just a few inches long or larger adults around keeper-size. In central and northern California, primarily from Avila to Morro Bay, Humboldt Bay and Crescent City Harbor, small juvenile lingcod will often move in around the piers (and sandy areas) during the summer and fall. In Central California, their appearance often will coincide with the arrival of schools of juvenile bocaccio. In Eureka and Crescent City, the young lingcod are often present the same time that juvenile rockfish, mainly small black rockfish, are using the piers as a nursery area. Sometimes the schools are mixed; at other times, it seems the lingcod swim just under the schools of rockfish. Most of these lingcod are small—under a foot—and they are illegal. At piers north of San Francisco, especially those located near rocks or reefs, anglers will see larger lingcod as one of the normal pier species. Most of these lingcod will be around two feet in length but larger fish are caught every year, especially in the fall and early winter. The best pier to catch lingcod is SoCal is probably the Goleta Pier. The best CenCal piers would include the Monterey Coast Guard Pier and the Santa Cruz Wharf. The top piers in NorCal are the Point Arena Pier, Trinidad Pier, and Citizens Dock in Crescent City.

A lingcod from the rocks

Shoreline: One of the main prizes for rocky shore anglers in central and northern California.

Lingcod caught from CenCal rocks by frozendog in 2014

Boats:  A prize for boaters from central California north; a few are taken in deeper waters in southern California. Traditionally, the greatest catch was made out of Monterey and Santa Cruz although substantial numbers were landed on boats from every port north of Morro Bay. In southern California some are taken from deeper waters of the Channel Islands and the Los Coronados Islands. All areas saw a decrease in the ‘90s but the species has been making a tremendous comeback in numbers during the past decade.

Lings caught from boats are generally larger than shore caught lings. This ling was caught by bigunindaboat in 2014.

Lingcod taken on a boat out of Monterey by Jackjack in 2014

Bait and Tackle: Anglers specifically fishing for lingcod need to remember to bring tackle heavy enough for the fish since lings over ten pounds in size are always a possibility. Almost any bait will work although a lively small fish makes the best bait. If live bait is unavailable, try a whole anchovy or a cut sardine or herring. Lings can also be taken on squid, octopus, shrimp, and even fresh mussels but moving bait is almost always better. Lingcod will also hit artificials, especially in the fall and winter months. Lures such as swimbaits and spoons seem to work best.

Lingcod taken from the Pacifica Pier in 1997

Food Value: Excellent, mild-flavored, flaky, and low-fat content meat. Lingcod meat can be prepared in almost any manner but I prefer to fillet it and fry it. Many people like to steak it and broil it, or cook it on a bar-b-cue, but the low fat content means it can dry out somewhat. Remember, low fat content means to add oil as in frying. High fat content means to remove the oil by methods such as broiling.  Sometimes the flesh will be green-blue after filleting; don’t worry, it will turn white after cooking.

Lingcod taken from the rocks by Salty Nick in 2014

Comments: Lingcod are truculent, pugnacious fighters, one of the meanest fish a pier angler will encounter. Remember to watch out for those large, large teeth.  Lings live to at least 20 years of age.

 

Lingcod taken from the Point Arena Pier by Dan and Renee in 2006

Lingcod taken by MBay from the Monterey Coast Guard Pier in 2010

Lingcod taken from the Cayucos Pier in 2003

Lingcod taken from the Trinidad Pier in 2003

Lingcod taken by frozendog from CenCal rocks in 2014

A lingcod that I netted for a guy in Santa Cruz back in the ’70s. He had been seasick all day, got up to fish for ten minutes, hooked this lingcod, brought it up, and I netted it (since the deckhand was busy with another fish). He then proceeded to throw up and quit fishing once again.

A lingcod and a kelp greenling that I caught one day fishing off of Fort Bragg

Another lingcod I caught off Fort Bragg

A tasty double — a lingcod and a sole caught by csmeril at the Cayucos Pier in 2013.

Small, immature “baby” lingcod taken from the Santa Cruz Wharf in 2007

Posted in Daily musings... · Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , · Leave a comment

Spiny Dogfish

Order Squaliformes 

Dogfish Sharks—Family Squalidae

Large spiny dogfish taken at the Cayucos Pier in 2007

Species: Squalus acanthias (Linnaeus, 1758); from the Latin word squalus  (shark) and the Greek word akanthias (spines), or Squalus suckleyi; from the Latin word squalus (shark) and suckleyi honoring George Suckley (1830-1869), a naturalist and Civil War surgeon. Pick A or B—but why the choice? It’s an ichthyologist thing! Squalus acanthias is the scientific name given to the common North Atlantic (or worldwide) dogfish. Squalus suckleyi is a name given to the dogfish found in the north Pacific. These fish are considered a distinct species by some ichthyologists. California Fish & Game Bulletin No. 28, edited by Lionel Walford (early ‘30s), lists the scientific name of spiny dogfish as Squalus suckleyi. California Fish & Game Bulletin No. 91, edited by Phil M. Rodel (1953) lists the name as Squalus acanthias and makes the following statement, “The north Pacific and north Atlantic dogfishes were long regarded as separate species (S. suckleyi and S. acanthias respectively), but Bigelow and Schroeder (1948) found no difference between them. Because the Atlantic dogfish was described first, its scientific name takes precedence.” Since that time the California Fish & Game has used Squalus acanthias as the official scientific name. In Sharks, Rays, and Chimaeras of California by David A. Ebert (2003), perhaps the pre-eminant book on these species, he uses Squalus acanthias and states, “no significant morphological characteristics have been found to separate these species.” Still, if you open ten books you may find five listing one scientific name, five the other.

Spiny dogfish taken at the Ventura Pier in 2002 by Tim Durham

Alternate Names: Dogfish, dog shark, gray shark, grayfish, paloma, spinarola (in Humboldt Bay), pinback shark, mud shark, sand shark, Henle’s shark, and my favorite, green-eyed grinner. The fact that dogfish have an almost worldwide distribution means they also have a plethora of interesting names. On the west coast of America dogfish are called k’aaxada can, q’ad can or kaad (Haida and Tlingit—British Columbia,) and tiburó de Espina or galludo (Mexico). Given their worldwide distribution, dogfish may be the winner of the “Most Alternate Names Award.” Apparently, the common name “dogfish” originated not from looking like a dog, or barking like a dog (although that would be interesting), but from fishermen who described these fish as chasing smaller fish in large dog-like “packs.”

Usually if you catch one dogfish there will be more around

Identification: They have a spine at front of each dorsal fin (the only other shark that has this is the horn shark) but no anal fin. They also have a long, flattened, pointed nose. Their coloring is generally gray or light brown above and white below. Spiny dogfish are sometimes confused with smoothhound sharks but smoothies do not have dorsal spines.

Large catches are not uncommon — all taken at the Ventura Pier in 2003

Size: To slightly more than five feet; those caught at piers are generally less than  four feet in length.

Spiny dogfish at the Cayucos Pier in 2007

Range: Found throughout temperate seas; in the eastern Pacific it ranges from Isla San Martin, southern Baja California, to the Gulf of California, and on to the Bering Sea, coast of Alaska, and the Aleutian Islands. A population is also found in Chile. In the western Pacific, the dogfish occurs from the Bering Sea to New Zealand. Dogfish are found in the western Atlantic Ocean from Greenland to Argentina and in the eastern Atlantic from Iceland and Murmanski Coast (Russia) to South Africa including the Mediterranean Sea and Black Sea. An example of their range (and wandering nature) was seen in a dogfish that was caught on the half-day boat Daily Double off San Diego on September 23, 2013. It had been tagged on July 20, 2010 in Yakutsk Bay in the Gulf of Alaska, 1,847 nautical miles away.

Spiny dogfish from the Cayucos Pier in 2006

Habitat: Generally found in deeper water in southern California and shallower water north of Point Conception. Inshore areas see the best fishing from the spring to the fall; may move offshore during the winter. Typically found in large schools with young, immature dogs found in mixed groups of males and females; older, mature dogs hang with those of a similar sex, males in one school, females in another. How boring.

Spiny dogfish from the Ventura Pier in 2003

Piers: Although many dogfish are caught from piers in Washington and British Columbia, they are of much less importance to piers in California. Nevertheless, a number are caught every year from piers in central and northern California. Best bets: Pismo Beach Pier, Cayucos Pier, Capitola Wharf, Santa Cruz Wharf, Pacifica Pier, San Francisco Municipal Pier, Fort Baker Pier, Fort Mason Piers and the Berkeley Pier. Almost any of the piers in Humboldt Bay can also be labeled excellent. Quite a few have also been reported from the Huntington Beach Pier, Hermosa Beach Pier, and Ventura Pier, all in southern California.

A number of dogfish and one small swell shark from the Cayucos Pier in 2007

Shoreline: Quite a few are caught from shoreline areas in Humboldt Bay.

Boats: A common catch for boaters in Humboldt Bay and occasionally taken by rockcod anglers from central California north,

Bait and Tackle: Most dogfish caught from piers are of moderate size, 18 to 36 inches long. Because of the sharp teeth, a light wire leader or heavy monofilament line should be used. Generally medium tackle is used with hook size 2 to 4/0. Best bait seems to be squid but in San Francisco Bay ghost shrimp and small live fish also work well. Dogfish have a disturbing habit of twisting around the line and are a pain in the proverbial butt to remove.

A spiny dogfish from the Elephant Rock Pier in 2007

Food Value: Considered a fair quality fish that is moderate in fat content. The flesh is firm, moderate in taste, and is generally considered best suited for frying.   The English must agree since have used dogfish for their fish and chips for centuries. However, it is also very popular in Europe as a hot-smoked product, especially in Germany and the Netherlands. It does need to be cleaned properly and kept cool before cooking.

Spiny dogfish from the Newport Pier in 2003

Comments: Like the horn shark, anglers should be very careful when handling dogfish. Watch out for the dorsal spines and the unexpectedly sharp teeth.

The spine of a spiny dogfish taken at the Ventura Pier in 2011 by Yomero

Since dogfish generally swim in large schools, if you catch one there is a good chance that others may not be too far behind. On a trip to Washington back in the ’70s, I learned about their prodigious numbers and schooling nature. In Tacoma there was (and maybe still is) a sportfishing company called Dogfish Charters. Although the boats primarily fished for walleye pollock, rockfish, and Pacific cod, the dogfish were bound to show up. In fact the boat offered a free trip to anyone who failed to catch a dogfish. How did I do? Mixed in with 20+ pollock and copper rockfish were four dogfish. I didn’t earn a free trip—darn!

Another example of their numbers was seen during a doctor’s office visit in 2013. One day I was calmly gritting my teeth and nodding approvingly as my doctor stun-gunned my face and asked if I was OK. The ”this might sting a little” routine had out lived its usefulness but I would show my manliness and toughness by refusing to show the pain (and there was pain). Following the masochist session we talked of fish. She asked if I had ever heard of dog sharks? “Yes, but they are actually called dogfish sharks, so called because they travel in packs like dogs.” She said she had been at the Pismo Beach Pier in August when she had seen 50-60 dog sharks, most around three feet in length, laying on the deck at the end of the pier. Anglers were bringing more sharks up every few minutes. It was dark and as she had looked down into the waters she said she could actually see the sharks massed below. I asked if the anglers had said what they intended to do with the sharks and she said they were going to eat them. “Good thing,” I said, “since I hate to see fish wasted.” No wonder a lot of guys like to fish the Pismo Beach Pier for sharks!

The number of dogfish does seem a little surprising to me. Although the fish can live to be 70-80 years old, females are not mature until about age 35. Though the ladies can produce 70-80 young in a lifetime, how many actually reach maturity? Questions, questions!

A final note! For years dogfish were one of the most common cadavers used by junior CSI’ers cuttin’ up bodies in high school biology (along with da frogs).  Today, some scientists have discovered they can use the cartilage from dogfish spines in a cancer medicine. AEterna Laboratories, a small Quebec company, uses purified spines to produce Neovastat, a medicine that seems to inhibit blood vessel growth in lung and kidney cancer tumors. The result is longer lives and a better quality of life. Although still experimental, results to date are very promising.

The medical uses for dogfish are not new. As described in Some Common Marine Fishes of British Columbia by G. Clifford Carl (1973), “Both the oil from the livers and the flesh were eaten by Indians on the west coast of Vancouver Island and Cape Flattery.” Interestingly, he gives a quote from (Swan, 1870) which gives reference to George Suckley, the doctor used in the scientific name Squalus suckleyi. “Dr. Suckley states that while he was on service as surgeon at the U.S. military station at Fort Steilacoom, he used dogfish oil with great success in pulmonary affections, and considered it, when fresh, equal to cod-liver oil.” So there you have it, the rest of the story.

A dogfish caught at the Capitola Wharf in 2008 by Rusty: picture by anchovinator

Posted in Daily musings... · Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , · Leave a comment

Venice Pier in the 80s

Many, many years ago while visiting the bait shop at the Venice Pier (Los Angeles), I was given a set of pictures showing some of the fish taken at the pier during the warm water years in the ’80s. Some interesting fish highlighted by the only picture of an albacore that I have seen taken a a California pier.

Unfortunately the pictures are not great quality but it is what it is.

Albacore taken at the pier

Triggerfish (probably a finescale triggerfish) taken at the pier

A young giant (black) sea bass

A nice catch of yellowtail and bonito at the pier (although it looks over the limit)

A keeper-size white seabass

Posted in Daily musings... · Tagged , , , , , , , , , , · Leave a comment

Fish Reports in the Modern Age

message board home :: search messages :: archives :: event organizer :: merchandise

Lobsters: Gump, The Internet, and Hypocrisy—

Posted by Ken Jones
on May-3-08 6:28pm

Date: October 5, 2005
To: PFIC Message Board
From: dompfa ben
Subject: Lobsters: Gump, The Internet, and Hypocrisy

I’ve been reading a lot on various message boards about the opening of lobster season. It seems that–with few exceptions–people hooping and diving from a variety of platforms have found the local lobster population to be nonexistent. Only a few folks found them during opening weekend, and most of them went to the Channel Islands to get them.
I feel like a frustrated Forrest Gump, lamenting to Lt. Dan Taylor: “No shrimp!” If you recall the movie, you might remember that it was not until the rest of the local shrimping fleet was wiped out did the BubbaGump Shrimp Corp. become profitable.
Perhaps there’s a lesson here, perhaps not. I’ve seen various arguments lately, each trying to explain the “missing” lobsters. Some claim that the red tide is to blame. Others have suggested that this is part of a cycle, and that like the tides, the nearshore population of lobsters ebbs and flows. Many believe the commercial pressure on local bug stones in deeper water has had a trickle-down effect on the nearshore stocks. Perhaps people ARE catching them, but just being tight-lipped about it? Still others have suggested that the Internet is to blame: the immediate availability of information, the reach of information about certain spots (piers, for example), and the popularization of hooping and diving on message boards have all contributed to the reduced number of lobsters along the coast.
I don’t know which of the above (or combination thereof) it is. A few people have asked me, and, suffice to say, I’m no marine biologist. Speaking anecdotally, there seems to be a lot more people hooping for what seems to be a lot fewer lobsters, at least locally. Mind you, I don’t have empirical data to back this up. I do not have commercial catch records (do they matter anyway?). I just have my hooping logs, a few photos from bugs-gone-by, a hunch or two, a few carapaces hanging from the ceiling of my classroom from seasons passed, …and empty hoops in 2005.
Will they come back? Who knows? (The two lobsters caught and posted below do not a season make…but it is nice to see…even though I heard that there were “hundreds” of hoops in the water at that location for the opener.) The bonito showed in force last year along the coast, but this year, there have only been a few flurries of bonito–and most of that at Catalina. A tonnage of lizardfish seems to have taken residence in 5 to 30 feet of water all along the coast from SLO to TJ. The kayak guys have had one of the slowest years for nearshore halibut in several years. The sand bass made a showing on the Huntington Flats that was later, shorter, and weaker than any in memory. Plenty of bait…and nothing to show for it but dogfish.
What does all this mean? Again…I don’t know. Recently, the question of giving up specifics on a spot–only to see it get heavy pressure, trash, and the like–came up again on this board (again). Similarly themed rants appear on other boards with regularity, notably one recently regarding lobsters, and how the “Internet has ruined hooping.” I’m aware of the irony in that statement vis a vis the medium used to forward that message… It’s like sitting alone in a Chevy Suburban on a gridlocked I-5 while complaining about traffic and air pollution.
Which is to say: “Enter hypocrisy.” I’ve certainly put up my share of lobster reports. I’ve done my part to promote hooping on piers, and Lord knows I will probably make a consistent effort to find a random lobster out there as the season progresses. But (here’s the big BUT) I’m questioning if it is ethical to post reports about “a lobster” caught from a given pier, knowing that the resident population of lobsters at that pier will likely not be able to handle the increased hooping pressure caused by the post? In other words, NO ONE has really connected yet. If someone gets a limit at Oceanside—and posts pictures and the specifics—I wonder how much that influences people to go to that spot. Is there a measurable adverse affect on the resident population? Is it a ding from which the population can recover? I don’t know.
I’m not looking for criticism or compliments, as much as I may deserve both or either. I’m curious to read others’ thoughts regarding this issue of specifics vs. generalities. Unlike a shoreline or a state park, it is a little tough to speak vaguely about a specific pier. Thanks for your time.

Disclaimer

This is not a personal attack on anyone, and for the record, I encourage anyone who wants to try hooping to go have some fun. Call it stream-of-consciousness posting, or whatever. I’ve been mulling this idea since September, and have been hesitant to post a lot about hooping because of it.
If it is construed as such, then let it be me personally attacking myself. Continued good fishing/hooping to all.

Posted by Songslinger

Great Topic Title. The heading alone had me read, and the text fulfills it with more to spare.
I do not fish for lobsters or crabs. Had my fill of live Maine lobsters and Alaskan king crabs for a lifetime. Spoiled, you see.
However, I will say a couple things.
1) In your heart of hearts, if you feel that high impact is the result of shared information–e.g. posts–then you must lean towards the taciturn in order to preserve the species or habitat. This is a wonderful message board but it is also a rather largely populated one. In their eagerness to display their knowledge or in their willingness to help, people can be deleterious without realizing it. It’s our gregarious nature, a source of both joy and pain when it comes to ecology.
2) I’ve been reading reports from all over the Pacific Coast about species being less prevalent or, more to the point, fishing being unusually slow for the time of year. I’m not sure why this is so, but for some reason I doubt it’s a massive die-off of fish and/or crustaceans. A quaint but slightly tenable explanation is the one old-timers (God help me, I guess this applies to me now) are saying: “Things are just happening later this year.” You could attribute it to the weather cycles, possibly to Global Warming, or some weird glitch as our solar system races through the galaxy, but it’s premature to make any dire presumptions about permanence.
Even so, it is never too early or too late to be cautious and protect not only the interests of the environment, but also, perhaps selfishly, our own interests. One cannot enjoy the pursuit of fish or shellfish if there is no room to do so.

Posted by mtzion24

Excellent reading………..I had to break out the dictionary to look up a few words on yours and Songslinger’s post…….Ha…..true none the less………-Ramon

Posted by dcyclenut

Pertinent points all. I feel this topic pertains to the other species reported on, in these forums. I’m a relatively new surf fisherman and would like to see the fishery maintained. The question of the detrimental effects of the information provided in Internet fishing forums is an interesting one. But that goes to an argument that I came in on the tail end of on this forum and don’t want to rehash.:-(

Posted by toejamb

No harm done Dompfa. The lobsters are out there. I know because I dined on some bugs this afternoon, courtesy of a buddy who is a commercial diver. He dives in Santa Monica Bay, and hits all the obvious spots – the MDR breakwater, the various near-shore reefs etc., and he’s gotten his limit the last 4 or 5 times he was out. He tells me that some of the caves he dives into were swarming with the critters.
Perhaps it is a case of “10% of the anglers catching 90% of the fish” as Ronnie Kovach would say, and perhaps the 10 percenters are keeping tight lipped about their spots and methods. Even so, if all the 10 percenters became fruitful and multiplied, I still think, “Life finds a way”, to quote Jeff Goldblum in Jurassic Park.
The responsible and conscientious dissemination of information is a good thing. When it comes from a great teacher, all the better. Keep it up Dompfa.
A postscript regarding the lobster feast this afternoon: As my buddy was boiling up the bugs for me and my co-workers, he noticed that one of the bugs slated for the Jacuzzi was laden with eggs. He asked me to release the gravid bug, which I did. She was driven to the MDR breakwater, where I released her. Hopefully, she will be fruitful and multiply.
Fish on, bug on. Toejamb

Posted by OB Pier Rat

It’s unfortunate but I believe it’s true that the wide distribution of information here MAY leads to overcrowding and over use of some our favorite fishing spots. Am I 100% sure? No. Does it in fact deplete the species and amount of fish available? Who knows, probably not? But I lean on the side of caution now, and I have two specific examples that have lead me to this:
Several years ago, when this board was much smaller, I would routinely advise anglers to try a spot at my home pier, my favorite spot. The first year I didn’t notice a change, but recent years I’ve noticed more and more pressure at that spot. Now that spot is very rarely open. Coincidence? Maybe, but again I’m leaning on the side of caution now.
I also reported on an opaleye hot spot near the OB pier a couple years ago. The following 4 weeks I went to that spot and found someone there every time, different people, and usually behind them was a large bucket with 3-4 dead opaleye floating belly up, some quite large. No report appeared on this board afterward, but I have to assume the information was obtained here. Maybe I’m wrong, possibly another coincidence. But I tend to believe otherwise. We’re talking the middle of February here, chilly wind blowing and cold surf spraying. Never in 30+ years of fishing that area had I seen people fishing that spot every Saturday for a month.
Unfortunately, for every active, conservative minded, information sharing member of this fine community we call PFIC, I believe there are 5 or 10 information sucking, trash leaving, regulation breaking morons, (AKA lurkers) who do not post here but use what they read here for their own selfish reasons. It’s too bad…

Posted by gordo grande

Two points I’d like to make:
1) If the information presented on the Internet (or elsewhere) leads to depleted stocks, why did we have such a good year last year? This board has been here for several years, yet last year we had a banner year for bonito, baitfish, lobster and other species.
2) Isn’t the popularity of Internet fishing sites just a manifestation of the general growth our sport is seeing up and down the coast? Every year I meet people who are new to the sport. Heck, I was new to the sport ten years ago. I think there are a lot of new people fishing, and they get their info from a variety of sources: TV, magazines, newspapers, and yes the Internet, including this board. I don’t think we can single out any one source as causing the problem.
JMHO. Don’t anyone flame me.
Gordo Grande, Support UPSAC!

Posted by jinmon

Quick “yeah, but…” Just wanted to point out that “lurking” is often the first step of participation on Internet message boards, and not a horrible evil in and of itself. If people weren’t meant to have access to this info without being obligated to contribute, they wouldn’t be able to read/search the archives without registering, yes?
-Julie (lurked for 2 weeks, and have my licenses, my gauges, my species field guide, pick up others’ trash and now post reports/comments – so nyeh. ;) And I wanna know where your opaleye spot is on OB Pier! ;) )
PS – about opaleye – talked to a guy who said he hadn’t seen any in a couple years. Is he just not looking, or are they less common now?

Posted by ob pier rat

Apology to lurkers. Now that I’ve heard from some current lurkers (via E-Mail) and former lurkers who didn’t really appreciate my classification of them, I want to clarify that not ALL lurkers are bad, just those who abuse the information they obtain here and adversely affect fishing for the rest of us (of which I still believe there is a large population) To those lurkers who clean up their fishing areas, follow the regs and promote the sport positively, I do apologize! Julie, I will be happy to share tips about fishing for opaleye in OB: just E-mail me at…

Posted by StripeSideChaser

There are definitely two types of lurkers…first is the new guy, lurks for a couple of weeks and then signs up and starts adding some sort of value to this site.
Unfortunately, there is a second type… the guy that just comes here to find out where the fishing is hot… runs down and claims his spot, and never does anything to add value back. I fish, therefore I lie!

Posted by Songslinger

Let’s Not Forget The Impact Of Cell Phones

Posted by StripeSideChaser

No kidding… btw Glenn, what’s your number? ;-)

Posted by Songslinger

1 510 MEPOACH

Posted by StripeSideChaser

Cool, need to call about your sturgeon gaff

Posted by 2d

Not 1-888-KEEPALL?

Posted by Songslinger

That’s My Work Number

Posted by Ken Jones

Lurkers—A message board does of course allow people to choose their preferred method of participation. They can choose to be engaged directly by posting, sharing information, responding to threads, etc. Or, just as some people choose not to speak up in group discussions, people can choose to be silent and not post. That does not mean they are disengaged, it simply means they are not posting. We have over 8,000 up-to-date registered members on PFIC and it is quite obvious that the majority do not post on the board. Yes, I wish more of them would post but it is their choice. The main purpose of this board is educational and if they can watch and learn then that is O.K. with me. And remember, many of these “lurkers” once confident in their newly learned skills and techniques do indeed become “posters.”

Posted by jinmon

Re: Apology to lurkers. No harm no foul. :) I’ll email you sometime – I’d love to chat about catching those guys, heck, I just want to see one – the pix look neat! :) I won’t bug you to be too specific either. :) -Julie

Posted by 5focus

Two Words, RED TIDE.

Posted by epriemel

There were more people than usual tonight on a certain pier, Ben was there too.

Posted by dompfa ben

Darn tootin! Skunked, too. Not even a shortie :)

Posted by corbinaman1

Lots Of Potential Factors…Red-tide, cooler than normal water, overfishing, or possibly just the cyclical nature of fishing? Like others here, I do know that if you post an exact location of a fishing hot-spot, it gets overrun with crowds quickly so I tend to be general in my posts (unless at a pier of course).

Posted by StripeSideChaser

Easy way to find out how posting affects fishing. Go to San Clemente pier today! After the report yesterday, I wouldn’t be overly surprised to see the pier packed solid with hoops. Unfortunately, I learned the hard way, last year on my home pier (and that was just a striper post!) I won’t post exact locations anymore unless it’s an area that can’t be blown out (although I might post a beach report, so I can go see the beach looking like that pic from Japan, yesterday!) I fish, therefore I lie!

Posted by oldmanandthesea

Don’t cry too much. You sound like the little kid who says “I’m taking my ball and going home” If no one is catching bugs this season are you thinking they were fished out last season? I doubt it. Good year vs. bad year, like the surfers say “you shoulda been here yesterday dude”. As to the effect this board has, most of the reports are from people who got lucky or had no luck, sure if someone catches a gangsta and posts about it the next day there will be more people fishing that spot but when they don’t catch one they go away. It’s like grunion hunting, a school comes ashore and everyone within 100 yds comes storming your spot and by the time they get there the school is spooked, gone, and coming ashore 100 yds away where everyone came from. Sometimes they don’t run at all on the beach where you’re at but that doesn’t mean they didn’t run in masses somewhere else. In the old precomputer days when someone caught the first bonito of the season word would spread quick and the pier would be a mad house within a few days. That’s the way it is, word spreads computers or not. You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
I do hope you’ll have buggin’ success soon. It does seem to be a Gumpy year, my mama says hoopin for bugs is like a box of chocolate.
Good luck Ben keep the faith don’t be so sad, this too shall pass, you’ll be all smiles again the night your hoop comes over the rail fully bugged. OMATS.

Posted by dompfa ben

I’m taking my hoop, and I’m going home:) That’s awesome. I hadn’t looked at it that way, either. Thanks to everyone for the viewpoints. I guess I’ll take a wait and see attitude.

Posted by Ken Jones

Father forgive us for we all have sinned! The opening statement on the PFIC web page says “This fishing website is dedicated to the thousands of regulars (a.k.a. pier rats) who fish California’s piers on a weekly or even daily basis.” That statement was true in 1997 when the site was begun and it is still true today. The primary motivation for the site was a perceived need for education—whether it is in angling skills or in the understanding that ours is a brittle and rarely understood (or appreciated) resource.
Initially PFIC was a one-man operation and limited in approach. With Rich’s guidance we added a message board in 1999 and the site took a quantum leap as far as the dissemination of information (some good, some bad). With increased numbers does come the possibility of increased abuse of the resource. Piers traditionally have been crowded and I know personally that favorite spots have been contested as long as I have fished (I still remember getting up at 4 A.M. so that I could get the coveted corner spot at Newport Pier). Adding a message board that spreads the information will indeed lead to greater numbers of people being attracted to the “hot” spots.
But, the same is true of books and their authors who discuss various piers and techniques. It’s also true of the fishing columns in the newspapers, the radio fishing talk shows, the TV fishing shows that stir the blood and the buddies who call with their cell phones as soon as a spot appears to be hot.
We could of course return to the dark ages and prefer to live in silence, ignorant of the world around us. Instead we live in an information age in which we are presented a multitude of resources in which to learn about and get quick information about whatever it is that interests us (in this case fishing).
I will not apologize for giving each of you a forum to spread the information even if it does indeed lead at time to crowded spots. Nor will I apologize for writing a book that might encourage more people to try pier fishing. If education via this web site or my book can open the eyes of some people to the beauty of piers then I will have, in part, achieved one of my goals.
But if guilt must be assigned for crowded conditions or a perceived decrease in fish numbers then I feel we all are at fault. We who spread the information (books, web sites, radio, T.V., message board members who post) and those who simply read the boards and do not post.
If there is a problem it is how the information is used. Regulars at the pier have already studied and know their piers. They know what seasons will see what species and they know the methods necessary to catch the various species. They know that variations do occur both seasonally and yearly and they honor the whims of Mother Nature. They may or may not let their friends know when a “bite” is on.
Newbies and occasional anglers use the modern resources to speed up, perhaps even circumvent the process. They may not have spent the time learning their craft yet they expect to receive tangible rewards “now” by watching the “news” posted on the various sites and in various sources.
Old timers like myself may at times resent this approach but in part it simply reflects the modern age and our modern resources. As a sometimes-certifiable Luddite, it does at times rile the soul but then I turn on my Dylan —

“Times They Are A Changing”
Come mothers and fathers all over this land
And don’t criticize what you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughter are beyond your command
Your old role is rapidly aging
Please get out of the new one if you can’t lend a hand
For the times they are a changing
The line, it is drawn, the curse, it is cast
The slow one will later be fast
And the present now will soon be the past
The order is rapidly fading
The first one now will later be last
For the times, they are a changing

The times have changed and until we learn how to use this wealth of information in a positive manner then we all are at fault and all have sinned— in a manner of speaking.

Posted by cayucosjack

True True True.

Posted by Morone

The bad and the good…. While this board has been an invaluable information resource for both those who respectfully enjoy the resources and those who would selfishly exploit and ruin it, there are some secondary benefits to that exploitation as well. Any time any of us speak of knowledge that poachers, spot rushers, litterers, and other nasties are, in fact, lurkers of this board, then you are exhibiting another kind of knowledge that you have gleaned from PFIC website. At least you know something about who is poaching, and ways to tap into their conscientiousness and get them to think about the consequences of their actions. To alienate lurkers that would otherwise STILL be looking for where the resources are most easily exploited, and STILL finding them, from a place where they have the greatest chance (I know of) to learn the value of resource conservation, fishing etiquette, and other virtues embraced by respected members of this message board and UPSAC, would be tantamount to pushing a junkie out of a rehab clinic… or maybe you can think of a more appropriate analogy, but you get my point. Poachers suck, polluters, jerks, and people who don’t respect nature suck, but lurkers: please read, read, read…and learn!

Posted by Red Fish

Along the lines I was thinking…. and I have deleted a couple things I have written on this revolving topic.
So, some thoughts in list form:
1.) If poachers and litterbugs are the main concern, why don’t people speak up and check them on their behavior when they see it happening? Or are they mysterious creatures that no one ever sees that lurk in the night?
2.) Many must be concerned with over-crowding a spot regardless of any illegal activity going on as a result of publicizing an area.
3.) I don’t have a problem with it so much as I fish many, many locations.

Date: May 3, 2006
To: PFIC Message Board
From: Ken Jones
Subject: Solution? Any improvement? What’s down the road?

Does the overload of available information simply lead to an inevitable degradation of our resources? Is it like visiting the candy shop with a full wad of cash and not knowing when to stop? Where does sense and responsibility come into the picture?

Posted in Daily musings... · Tagged , , , , , · Leave a comment