FISH AND GAME COMMISSION INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR REGULATORY ACTION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FISH AND GAME COMMISSION
INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR REGULATORY ACTION
(Pre-publication of Notice Statement)

Amend Sections 1.90, 27.60, 28.15, 28.27, 28.28, 28.29, 28.54, 28.55, 28.65,
112, 120, 120.3 and 195, Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR);
Add Sections 27.67, 27.82, 27.96, 28.26, 28.57, 28.58,
150.1, 150.6, 150.8, 150.9, 150.10, 150.16, 150.17 and 150.18, Title 14, CCR;
and Make Inoperative Fish and Game Code Sections 8395 and 8586

Re: Shelf Groundfish, Nearshore Fish Stocks and Fisheries,
Surfperch, California Halibut, California Sheephead, Lingcod, Cabezon,
Kelp and Rock Greenlings, California Scorpionfish, Rockfish, Sanddabs, Ocean Whitefish,
Season, Size, Bag, Catch/Landing, and Gear Limits,
Species Requiring a Nearshore Fishery Permit, Nearshore Fishing Groups,
Management Areas and Area Closures,
Transport of Recreational Finfish Through Restricted Fishing Areas,
Industry Cooperation with Department Field Observers,
Commercial Fish Transportation Receipts and Shrimp and Prawn Trawling.

I. Date of Initial Statement of Reasons: September 25, 2000

II. Dates and Locations of Scheduled Hearings:

(a) Notice Hearing: Date: August 25, 2000
Location: Oakland, CA.

(b) Discussion Hearing: Date: October 19, 2000
Locations: San Diego, CA.

III. Description of Regulatory Action:

(a) Description of Problem or Condition that Regulation Change is Intended to Address:

Changes in regulations governing the amount, manner, and timing of the take of depleted stocks of federal- and state-managed continental ÒshelfÓ (shelf) groundfish species are needed to maintain stock rebuilding schedules and restore sustainable fisheries. Also, regulations are needed to help stabilize and sustain recreational and commercial fisheries for ÒnearshoreÓ species of groundfish and other associated species until more comprehensive management strategies can be developed as part of a Nearshore Fisheries Management Plan (Nearshore FMP). The Fish and Game Commission (Commission) is required to adopt a Nearshore FMP on or before January 1, 2002.

Proposed regulatory options for shelf groundfish fisheries, and federal actions on those options, have significant management implications for, and direct impacts on, management of nearshore fish stocks and fisheries. Primarily for this reason, a decision was made to join these two suites of regulatory proposals in this rulemaking.

Groundfish is a large group of generally bottom dwelling fish (over 80 species). They are managed principally by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council), in cooperation with the states of California, Oregon, and Washington under policies and standards of the federal Sustainable Fisheries Act (Public Law 94-265), and provisions adopted pursuant to the federal Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (Groundfish Plan). Under the authority of Fish and Game Code Section 7652, the Director of Fish and Game may adopt regulations necessary to conform state law or regulations to a federal fishery management plan or plan amendment, including making statutes or regulations inoperative. Section 189, Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR) provides that commercial groundfish regulations and routine management measures, identified as catch restrictions intended to keep landings within the harvest levels, adopted by the Council will be incorporated into state regulations. The Council is currently considering a number of regulations affecting the commercial groundfish fishery (Department of Fish and Game, August 15, 2000, Memo), and is scheduled to adopt regulations in early November 2000. All regulations regarding commercial fishing proposed in this rule-making are in addition to those that are expected to be adopted by the Council. The Council will be asked to adopt recreational and commercial groundfish regulations in federal waters (3-200 miles offshore) to compliment the Commission regulations.

Groundfish identified within the Groundfish Plan include over 50 species of rockfish (Genus Sebastes) that are currently categorized by the Council as ÒnearshoreÓ, ÒshelfÓ, or ÒslopeÓ species based on three assemblages of fish that tend to be caught together over shallow, mid-depth, or deepwater habitats, respectively. The depths of these three habitats are generally defined as encompassing nearshore waters from 0-40 fathoms (0-240 feet), shelf waters from 40-100 fathoms (240-600 feet), and slope waters of 100+ fathoms (600 feet out to the abyssal plain). Economically important species of groundfish being dealt with by the Commission in this rulemaking include rockfish in general as well as bocaccio, canary and cowcod rockfishes, lingcod, cabezon, kelp and rock greenlings, and California scorpionfish.

Bocaccio, canary rockfish, cowcod and lingcod are shelf groundfish that have been actively managed in the past with harvest guidelines set annually by the Council. Other groundfish species, including nearshore rockfishes, cabezon, greenlings, and California scorpionfish, have not received this level of attention until very recently. Bocaccio, canary rockfish, cowcod and lingcod have suffered substantial declines during the past decade due to fishing and poor juvenile recruitment. These declines have resulted in the Council and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) completing stock assessments and declaring these fish stocks to be overfished and in need of rebuilding pursuant to approved rebuilding plans that include reduced annual harvest levels to meet rebuilding goals (Butler et al. 1999, Butler and Barnes 2000, Jagielo 1999, Methot et al. 1999, Methot 1999, MacCall et al. 1999, MacCall, 1999, PFMC Attachments G.2.b. & G.2.c. November 1999). In the past, most reductions in fishing were directed at the commercial fisheries for these species. Today, however, the total allowable harvest for these species has reached such low levels that it is also necessary to restrict recreational fisheries to meet rebuilding objectives for the stocks. Therefore, several regulatory options are being considered for recreational and commercial fisheries together to seek a combination that can maintain harvests within the limits of optimum yields consistent with the CouncilÕs rebuilding goals (Department of Fish and Game, August 15, 2000, Memo).

With regard to nearshore fish stocks and fisheries, the Marine Life Management Act of 1998 (MLMA) (Chapter 1052, Stats 1998) declares that it is the policy of the state to ensure the conservation, sustainable use, and, where feasible, restoration of CaliforniaÕs marine living resources for the benefit of all the citizens of the State. Fish and Game Code Sections 7071 and 8587.1 authorize the Commission to adopt regulations as it determines necessary, based on the advice and recommendations of the Department of Fish and Game (Department), to regulate nearshore fish stocks and fisheries. The Commission also regulates the taking and possession of all fish for sport purposes (Fish and Game Code Sections 200 and 205). New regulations, and amendments to existing regulations, are proposed to comply with these policies and directives and to foster the rebuilding of federally managed groundfish stocks.

Fish and Game Code Section 8585.5 establishes the LegislatureÕs concern for the status of nearshore fish stocks off California, particularly rockfish (Sebastes spp.), cabezon (Scorpaenichthys marmoratus), greenlings (Hexagammos spp), California sheephead (Pimelometopon pulchrum), and California scorpionfish (Scorpaena guttata), which are the target of both recreational and commercial fisheries. Regulatory measures are needed to stabilize the fisheries for nearshore fish stocks until a fishery management plan is completed and implemented.

This rulemaking deals with an unusually large number and variety of proposed management options for CaliforniaÕs shelf and nearshore finfish fisheries. This broad array of management options is necessary to provide management flexibility that will help assure that regulations adopted by the Commission and the Council will be in place for the 2001 fisheries, will result in harvests that meet federal groundfish rebuilding plan levels, and will stabilize nearshore fisheries until a Nearshore FMP is completed. Also, the proposed regulatory changes will serve to assure that current regulatory measures conform with contemporary State and federal policies and guidelines calling for sustainable resources and fisheries and equitable allocation of management measures among fishery stakeholders.

The regulations and options being considered are listed below. They are consecutively numbered and identified by bold text. The sections of Title 14 (CCR) that would be amended, added or deleted are in parenthesis. Fish and Game Code sections that would be made inoperative are identified.

Bag and Possession Limits for Sport Fish: Existing sportfishing regulations currently provide for a daily sport bag and possession limit of 10 rockfish per day within the overall daily bag and possession limit of 20 finfish in combination of all species (subsections 27.60 (a) and (b), Title 14, CCR). All 10 rockfish in the daily bag and possession limit may be of the same species except for bocaccio, canary rockfish, and cowcod, for which the daily bag and possession limits are three, three, and one respectively, with a boat limit of two cowcod per boat (Section 28.55, Title 14, CCR). Under existing law, cabezon, kelp and rock greenlings, California scorpionfish, ocean whitefish, and California sheephead are regulated by the standard 10-fish daily bag and possession limit (Section 27.60, Title 14, CCR). As part of the CommissionÕs current efforts to identify options and adopt regulations for ÒshelfÓ rockfish that conform to federal groundfish fishery management rebuilding guidelines, and for nearshore finfish that are affected by shelf rockfish management, the following reductions in bag limits are being considered.

Proposed Options for Daily Bag and Possession Limit for Sport Fish:
Rockfish (all species): reduce the daily bag and possession limit from ten fish per day to between nine and three rockfish per day (27.60 and 28.55).
Bocaccio: reduce the daily bag and possession limit from three fish per day to two or one fish per day (27.60 and 28.55).
Canary Rockfish: reduce the daily bag and possession limit from three fish per day to two or one fish per day (27.60 and 28.55).
Cowcod: reduce the daily bag and possession limit from one fish per day to zero fish per day, and reduce boat limit from two fish per boat to one or no fish per boat (27.60 and 28.55).
Lingcod: reduce the daily bag and possession limit from two fish per day to one fish per day (27.60 and 28.27).
Cabezon: reduce the daily bag and possession limit from ten fish per day to between nine and zero fish per day (27.60 and 28.28).
Kelp and Rock Greenlings: reduce the daily bag and possession limit from ten fish per day to between nine and zero fish per day (27.60 and 28.29).
California Sheephead: reduce the daily bag and possession limit from ten fish per day to between nine and zero fish per day (27.60 and new section 28.26).

() Reductions in Cowcod Harvests: Existing regulations restrict the sport take of cowcod to one fish per angler and two fish per boat (Sections 27.60 and 28.55 Title 14, CCR). Current state and federal law restricts the sport and commercial take of rockfish and lingcod south of Cape Mendocino during specified times of the year (Sections 28.27, 28.55 and 189, Title 14, CCR). Fish and Game Code Section 8833 prohibits the possession of trawl nets in District 19 unless authorized by the Commission. Current regulations authorize commercial shrimp and prawn trawling in five zones, including zones 4 and 5 that lie south of Point Arguello, Santa Barbara County with the potential for taking cowcod incidental to shrimp and prawn (Section 120.3, Title 14, CCR).

A number of measures are proposed to help meet the goals of the cowcod rebuilding plan. The first proposal (a., below) is to allow zero retention of cowcod by recreational fisheries south of Cape Mendocino. The Council is considering the same regulation for commercial groundfish fisheries. The second proposal (b., below) is to designate two cowcod closure areas in southern California: a large area offshore from Huntington Beach south to the Mexican border, and a smaller area off of San Diego (Department of Fish and Game, August 15, 2000, Memo). Within the cowcod closure areas, two options are being considered. Under Option 1 (c., below), recreational bottom fishing for rockfishes, lingcod, cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, sanddabs, California sheephead, California halibut, and ocean whitefish would be prohibited. The Council is considering prohibiting commercial bottom fishing for all federal groundfish species (including rockfishes, lingcod, cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish and sanddabs) in the cowcod closure areas. California sheephead, California halibut, and ocean whitefish are not federal groundfish. To create similar regulations for commercial and recreational fisheries, the Commission would need to adopt regulations to prohibit commercial fishing for California sheephead within the cowcod closure areas (d., below). The Commission does not have the authority to regulate the commercial take of California halibut or ocean whitefish in these areas. Option 2 (e., below) is the same as Option 1 except that it allows the take of nearshore rockfish (black, black-and-yellow, blue, brown, calico, china, copper, gopher, grass, kelp, olive, quillback, and treefish), cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, sanddabs and California sheephead. The Council is considering a similar regulation for commercial groundfish fisheries. The final proposal (f., below) is to prohibit trawling for shrimp and prawn in the two cowcod closure areas to prevent the incidental take of cowcod in trawl gear.

Proposed Options for Reducing Cowcod Harvests:
Prohibit recreational fishing for and retention of cowcod south of Cape Mendocino (27.60 and 28.55).
Define Cowcod Closure Areas: Area 1 - The area bound by 118%50' west longitude, 33%50' north latitude, 120% west longitude, and 32%20' north latitude. Area 2 - The area bound by 117%50' west longitude, 32%50' north latitude, 118% west longitude, and 32%30' north latitude. (new sections 27.82 and 150.6).
Cowcod Area Closure Option 1 (recreational fishing): Prohibit recreational bottom fishing (fishing for species that inhabit the bottom) year round for rockfish, cabezon, lingcod, greenlings, California scorpionfish, sanddabs, California sheephead, California halibut, and ocean whitefish in the cowcod closure areas. (28.15, new section 28.26, 28.27, 28.28, 28.29, 28.54, 28.55, new section 28.57, new section 28.58).
Cowcod Area Closure (commercial fishing): Prohibit the commercial take of California sheephead in the cowcod closure areas (new section 150.16).
Cowcod Area Closure Option 2 (recreational fishing): Prohibit recreational bottom fishing (fishing for species that inhabit the bottom) year round for California halibut, ocean whitefish, lingcod and rockfish other than nearshore rockfish (black, black-and-yellow, blue, brown, calico, china, copper, gopher, grass, kelp, olive, quillback, and treefish) in the cowcod closure areas (28.15, 28.27, 28.55, new section 28.58).
. Prohibit commercial trawling for shrimp and prawn in the cowcod closure areas (120 and 120.3).

() Reduction in Number of Hooks for Sport Take of Rockfish and Lingcod: Under existing law, fish may generally be taken in ocean waters under authority of a recreational fishing license with any number of hooks and lines. Specific exceptions to the use of any number of hooks and lines exist, including a restriction that anglers may not use more than three hooks and one line when taking rockfish and lingcod (sections 28.27 and 28.55, Title 14, CCR) or when rockfish or lingcod are aboard or in possession (Section 28.65, Title 14, CCR).

The proposed amendments would reduce the number of hooks that recreational anglers may use when fishing for rockfish or lingcod. This is intended to reduce the likelihood that anglers will catch more than a limit of bocaccio, canary rockfish, cowcod, or lingcod on any particular drop of their fishing line to the bottom.

Proposed Options for Reducing the Number of Hooks for Sport Take of Rockfish and Lingcod:
. Rockfish (all species): Reduce the number of hooks that may be used to take rockfish from three to two or one (28.55 and 28.65).
Lingcod: Reduce the number of hooks that may be used to take lingcod from three to two or one (28.27 and 28.65).

Rockfish and Lingcod Closures: Regulations currently restrict the sport take of rockfish and lingcod from a vessel or by spearfishing during the months of January and February in ocean waters south of 36 degrees north latitude (Lopez Point, Monterey County), and during the months of March and April in ocean waters from Lopez Point to 40 degrees 10 minutes north latitude (Cape Mendocino, Humboldt County) (sections 28.27 and 28.55, Title 14, CCR). These closures apply to recreational fishing from vessels and by spear fishing and do not apply to fishing from shore or man-made structures. Existing federal regulations have the same closures for commercial fisheries. The Council will consider changes to the rockfish and lingcod closures this fall, and the Department may adopt them for conformance (Fish and Game Code Section 7652 et seq., and Section 189, Title 14, CCR).

The proposed amendments would (1) change the location of the management line; (2) extend the closures by two months for recreational fishing from vessels and by spear fishing; and (3) prohibit recreational fishing for and retention of lingcod statewide from November through April. The Council is considering the same regulations for commercial groundfish fisheries. The proposed amendment to change the location of the management line would move the line from Lopez Point in Monterey County to Point Conception in Santa Barbara County. This would place Avila and Morro Bay in the northern management area and would be consistent with the statistical area boundary used by the federal Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistical Survey (MRFSS). It would also allow vessels fishing from the ports of Morro Bay and Avila to continue to fish to the north of Morro Bay, where they traditionally fish, during the southern closure period.

The proposal to extend the closure periods for the sport take of rockfish and lingcod would change the closure period in the southern area (either south of Lopez Point or south of Point Conception) from January and February to either November through February or January through April, and change the closure period in the northern area (Cape Mendocino to Lopez Point or to Point Conception) from March and April to either January through April or March through June. The proposed extensions of the closure period will be needed if the current regulations are not effective in limiting the bocaccio and lingcod catches to less than 100 metric tons and 130 metric tons, respectively, for the combined sport and commercial fisheries south of Cape Mendocino.

An additional closure is proposed for lingcod. The closure would apply statewide to recreational fishing from a vessel and by spear fishing during the six-month period from November to April. It would overlap with the proposed four-month rockfish and lingcod closures; it would result in a six- month closure for lingcod for the southern area options and Option 1 for the northern area, but it would result in an eight month closure for Option 2 for the northern area.

Other proposed amendments which would prohibit fishing for and retention of cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, sanddabs, California sheephead, and ocean whitefish in the rockfish and lingcod management areas during the closure periods are described in III(a)(5), below. Those proposals for nearshore fish stocks shall apply to commercial and recreational fishing that is conducted from vessels, shore, or man-made structures.

Options for Rockfish and Lingcod Closures:
Move the rockfish and lingcod management line to Point Conception, Santa Barbara County (new sections 27.82 and 150.6).
Southern Area Option 1- Extending the Rockfish and Lingcod Closure Period: Change from January and February to November through February for recreational fishing from vessels or by spear fishing (28.27, 28.55 and new sections 27.82 and 150.6).
Southern Area Option 2 - Extending the Rockfish and Lingcod Closure Period: Change from January and February to January through April for recreational fishing from vessels or by spear fishing (28.27, 28.55 new sections 27.82 and 150.6).
Northern Area Option 1 - Extending the Rockfish and Lingcod Closure Period: Change from March and April to January through April for recreational fishing from vessels or by spear fishing (28.27, 28.55 new sections 27.82 and 150.6).
Northern Area Option 2 - Extending the Rockfish and Lingcod Closure Period: Change from March and April to March through June for recreational fishing from vessels or by spear fishing (28.27, 28.55 new sections 27.82 and 150.6).
Prohibit recreational take of lingcod from a vessel or by spear fishing during the six-month period from November through April. This prohibition would be in effect statewide. (28.27).

Prevent Shift of Effort to Nearshore Fish During Rockfish and Lingcod Closures: Existing state and federal regulations restrict the recreational and commercial take of rockfish and lingcod during the months of January and February in ocean waters south of 36 degrees north latitude (Lopez Point, Monterey County), and during the months of March and April in ocean waters from Lopez Point to 40 degrees 10 minutes north latitude (Cape Mendocino, Humboldt County) (Sections 28.27, 28.55 and 189, Title 14, CCR). Existing regulations do not include in those closures species closely associated with shelf and nearshore rockfishes, including ocean whitefish, cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, sanddabs, and California sheephead.

The proposed closures are intended to prevent a shift in fishing effort from shelf fisheries to these nearshore species, and prevent increased bycatch and discards of shelf rockfish if fishermen target other species during the rockfish and lingcod closure periods. Proposed amendments to the rockfish and lingcod closures are being considered (see III(a)(4), above); these amendments would extend the closures to four months and would change the management line. While the recreational closures for rockfish and lingcod apply to fishing from vessels and by spear fishing and do not apply to fishing from shore or man-made structures, the closures proposed for nearshore fisheries apply to all modes of fishing (all gears, all methods, and all locations including from vessels, shore, and man-made structures). The commercial closures also apply to all modes of fishing. The Commission has the authority to regulate the recreational take of sanddabs and ocean whitefish, but not the commercial take of those species. The Council will be asked to adopt these same regulations for cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, and sanddabs for both recreational and commercial fisheries in federal waters.

Other proposed amendments which would prohibit fishing for and retention of cabezon and greenlings during the nesting periods are described in III(a)(13), below.

Proposed Options for Preventing Effort Shift:
Prohibit the commercial take of cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, and California sheephead during the rockfish and lingcod closures south of Cape Mendocino (new section 150.16).
Prohibit the recreational take of cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, California sheephead, sanddabs and ocean whitefish during the rockfish and lingcod closures south of Cape Mendocino (new section 28.26, 28.28, 28.29, 28.54, and new sections 28.57 and 28.58).

() Transport of Recreational Finfish Through Restricted Fishing Areas: Existing regulations do not provide for the transport of recreational finfish on private vessels or commercial passenger fishing vessels (CPFVs) through restricted fishing areas. Existing regulations state that unless otherwise specified by the Fish and Game Code or in Title 14 (CCR), the Department shall charge a fee of $30 for any permit issued pursuant to Title 14 (CCR).

The commercial passenger fishing vessel industry expressed concern that CPFVs were unable to fish in an open area and then legally transit (cross through) a closed area with their customers and their catch to return to their home port. The proposed amendment would allow transit of finfish through restricted fishing areas by all recreational vessels either under an annual permit issued by the Manager of the DepartmentÕs Marine Region with an annual permit fee of $30, or by filing a declaration with a filing fee of $7.50 on each occasion.
.
Proposal for Authorizing Transport of Recreational Finfish Through Restricted Fishing Areas: Provide for the transport of recreational finfish through restricted fishing areas under terms and conditions specified in a permit that may be issued by the Manager of the Marine Region for an annual fee of $30, or by filing a declaration with a filing fee of $7.50 on each occasion (new section 27.67).

() Observers on CPFVs: Existing regulations do not require that CPFVs operators carry and cooperate with Department or federal fishery observers. At-sea fishery observations are required in the CPFV fishery to verify logbook entries and to determine the species of fish in the catch. CPFV operators have increasingly denied fishery observers access to their fishing trips in recent years. The proposed regulation would require that the operators of CPFVs carry and cooperate with observers collecting biological data for Department or federal fishery managers on trips when space is available and at no charge to the sponsoring agency. Where an observer is refused access to the vessel trip, the operator in charge may be required to provide in writing the reason for a refusal within 15 days of the DepartmentÕs request for an explanation.

Proposal for Requiring CPFV Operators to Allow Observers on Trips: Require owners and operators of Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessels to carry and cooperate with observers collecting data for the Department of Fish and Game or other fishery agencies on trips when space is available and at no charge to the sponsoring agency. If observer coverage of a trip is denied by the owner or operator of a vessel, the Department may require an explanation in writing be submitted to the Department within 15 days of the DepartmentÕs request for an explanation. (section 195).

Definition of Nearshore Fish Stocks and Nearshore Waters: Under existing state law, nearshore fish stocks are defined as black-and-yellow rockfish, China rockfish, gopher rockfish, grass rockfish, kelp rockfish, California sheephead, greenlings of the genus Hexagrammos, cabezon, and California scorpionfish, and may include other species of finfish found primarily in rocky reef or kelp habitat in nearshore waters (Fish and Game Code Sections 8586). The federal Groundfish PlanÕs list of nearshore rockfish includes eight species that are not in the state definition of nearshore fish stocks (black, blue, brown, calico, copper, olive, quillback, and treefish rockfishes). Nearshore waters are defined in Fish and Game Code Section 8586 as the ocean waters of the state extending from the shore to one nautical mile from land, including one nautical mile around offshore islands. Under existing state law, a nearshore fishery permit is needed for the commercial take of any species of nearshore fish stock (Fish and Game Code Section 8587). Fish and Game Code Section 8587.1 authorizes the Commission to make inoperative any fishery management statute relevant to the nearshore fishery.

The proposed regulations would (1) make Fish and Game Code Section 8586 inoperative effective January 1, 2001; (2) add species to the definition of nearshore fish stock; (3) expand the definition of nearshore waters to include waters from shore to a depth of 40 fathoms; (4) retain the definition of nearshore fisheries currently in Fish and Game Code Section 8586; and (5) require a nearshore fishery permit only for the commercial take of those species listed in Fish and Game Code Section 8588 on January 1, 1999. Fish and Game Code Section 8586 defines nearshore fish stocks, nearshore fisheries, and nearshore waters; the proposed regulations would make that section inoperative and create a new section of Title 14 (CCR) and modify the definitions of nearshore fish stocks and nearshore waters. The new definition of nearshore fish stocks would add the eight species of rockfish defined as nearshore by the Groundfish Plan but not included in the current state definition, and add other species which occur in nearshore waters and are of concern (surfperches of the family Embiotocidae, starry flounder, leopard shark, and monkeyface eels). No regulations are proposed for starry flounder, leopard shark, and monkeyface eels at this time. The new definition of nearshore fish stocks is not intended to expand the list of species that can only be taken for commercial purposes under the authority of a nearshore fishery permit; the proposed regulations state that the permit is required only for those species on the original list (in Fish and Game Code Section 8588 on January 1, 1999). Under the proposed definition, nearshore waters would extend from the shore to one nautical mile from land (including the mainland shore, and offshore rocks and islands), or from the shore to 40 fathoms depth whichever is the greater distance from land. The definition of nearshore fisheries includes the take of nearshore finfish stocks by all fishing modes (all gears, all methods, and all locations including from vessels, shore, or man-made structures).

Proposals for Definitions of Nearshore Fish Stocks and Nearshore Waters:
Make Fish and Game Code Section 8586 inoperative effective January 1, 2001, and replace it with a new section of Title 14 (CCR) which defines nearshore fish stocks, nearshore fisheries, and nearshore waters (new section 1.90).
Define nearshore fish stocks as black rockfish, black-and-yellow rockfish, blue rockfish, brown rockfish, calico rockfish, China rockfish, copper rockfish, gopher rockfish, grass rockfish, kelp rockfish, olive rockfish, quillback rockfish, treefish, California sheephead, greenlings of the genus Hexagrammos, cabezon, California scorpionfish, surfperch of the family Embiotocidae, starry flounder, leopard shark, and monkeyface eels. (new section 1.90).
Define nearshore fisheries as the commercial or recreational take or landing of any species of nearshore finfish stocks (new section 1.90).
Define nearshore waters as the ocean waters of the state extending from the shore to one nautical mile from land, including one nautical mile around offshore rocks and islands, or to a depth of 40 fathoms whichever is the greater distance from land (new section 1.90).
Specify that a nearshore fishery permit is required only for those species listed in Fish and Game Code Section 8588 when it first became effective, January 1, 1999. (new section 150.1).

() Increase Size Limits for Cabezon and California Sheephead for Recreational and Commercial Fisheries: Under existing law, species of nearshore rockfishes, cabezon, and California scorpionfish are subject to commercial and sport minimum size limits, and California sheephead are subject only to commercial size limits (Fish and Game Code Section 8588, and Sections 28.27, 28.28, 28.29, and 28.55, Title 14, CCR). Cabezon and California sheephead are two of the principal species targeted by the commercial nearshore fisheries and are also highly sought after by the recreational fisheries (anglers and divers). The proposed increased minimum size limits are more consistent with available information about the size at first maturity for cabezon, and the size at which a minimum amount of protection would be provided to newly developed male California sheephead that change from females to males at approximately this size. In addition, increased size limits can be used as a tool for reducing the overall take of cabezon and California sheephead and achieving a selected optimum yield.

Proposed Options for Increasing Size Limits for Cabezon and California sheephead for Recreational and Commercial Fisheries:
Cabezon: Increase the recreational and commercial minimum size limits from 14 inches total length to 15 to 18 inches (28.28 and new section 150.16).
California sheephead: Increase the commercial minimum size limits from 12 inches total length to 13 to 14 inches, and establish a sport minimum size between 12 to 14 inches total length (new sections 28.26 and 150.16).

() Area Closures for Nearshore Fishing: Existing law prohibits the commercial use of fishing lines, except for the take of California halibut and salmon, within a mile of shore on weekends and holidays from the entrance of Humboldt Bay (Humboldt County) to Pigeon Point (San Mateo County) (Fish and Game Code Section 9029.5). Existing law also prohibits the use of commercial finfish traps from the Mendocino-Sonoma county line to Pigeon Point (San Mateo County).

Four potential area closure options are provided. Area closures can be used as a tool for reducing the overall take of nearshore fish and achieving selected optimum yields. Area closures can also be used as a tool for separating commercial and recreational fisheries. The options are listed below.

Proposed Options for Area Closures:
. Close the nearshore commercial fishery to all gears within one mile of the mainland shore along the entire length of the California coast (new section 150.6).
Close the nearshore fisheries to all gears within a radius of one to three miles around major fishing ports (Crescent City, Trinidad, Humboldt Bay, Shelter Cove, Noyo Harbor, Tomales Bay, Bodega Bay, San Francisco Bay, Princeton, Santa Cruz, Moss Landing, Monterey, Morro Bay, Port San Luis, Santa Barbara, Ventura, King Harbor, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Newport Bay, Dana Point, Oceanside, Mission Bay, and San Diego). Option 1: close the areas to all nearshore recreational and commercial fisheries (new sections 27.82 and 150.6). Option 2: close the areas only to the nearshore commercial fishery (new section 150.6).
Close the nearshore commercial fishery to all gears within one mile of the mainland coast on weekends and on state recognized legal holidays (new section 150.6).
Close the nearshore commercial fishery to all gears within one mile of the mainland coast from sunset on Wednesday to sunset on the following Sunday and on state recognized legal holidays (new section 150.6).

() Elimination of Current Exceptions to Commercial Hook Limits within One Mile of Shore: For nearshore fish stocks, current laws limits commercial vessels to not more than 150 hooks, with not more than 15 hooks per line within one mile of the mainland shore except for two areas of coastline: from Point Bolinas to Point Reyes, Marin County, and from Gitchell Creek to False Cape, Humboldt County (Fish and Game Code Sections 9027 and 9027.5). The proposed regulation would eliminate these two exceptions to the current restrictions on numbers of hooks and lines that may be used within one mile of the mainland shore.

Proposal for Elimination of Current Exceptions to Commercial Hook Limits within One Mile of Shore: When fishing for or in possession of nearshore fish within one mile of the mainland shore, not more than 150 hooks shall be used per vessel and not more that 15 hooks per line (new section 150.17).

() Surfperch Seasonal Closure: Existing law prohibits the commercial take of barred, redtail, and calico surfperch south of Point Arguello; it also restricts the commercial take of surfperch, except shiner perch, May 1 through July 15 (Fish and Game Code Section 8395). Existing law does not restrict the recreational take of surfperch during the time when they release their young. The current commercial seasonal closure does not restrict the commercial take of surfperch during the entire period when the fish are inshore to release young. The proposed regulations would make Fish and Game Code Section 8395 inoperative, and would prohibit the commercial take of surfperch, except shiner perch, from April 15 through July 31. The proposed regulation would continue to prohibit the commercial take of barred, redtail, and calico surfperch south of Point Arguello. Two options are provided for recreational fisheries: (1) prohibit the take of all surfperches except shiner perch from April 15 through July 31; and (2) prohibit only the take of barred, calico, and redtail surfperch from April 15 through July 31. These proposed changes would enhance protection for surfperch when they are most vulnerable to capture.

Proposed Options for Surfperch Seasonal Closure:
. Make Fish and Game Code Section 8395 inoperative effective January 1, 2001 (112).
Recreational Fishery - Option 1: Establish a seasonal closure for surfperch, except shiner perch, during the same period proposed for the commercial fishery, April 15 through July 31 (new section 27.96).
Recreational Fishery - Option 2: Establish a seasonal closure for barred, calico and redtail surfperch during the same period proposed for the commercial fishery, April 15 through July 31 (new section 27.96).
Commercial Fishery: Expand the current seasonal closure by one month, thus prohibiting the commercial take of surfperch, except shiner perch, from April 15 through July 31. Continue to prohibit the commercial take of barred, redtail, and calico surfperch south of Point Arguello (112).

() Seasonal Nest Guarding Closures for Cabezon and Greenling: Current regulations do not provide for seasonal closures when cabezon or greenlings guard their nests and eggs (which may be lost if the male is removed from the nest). Cabezon and greenlings are vulnerable to take by divers and hook-and-line gear during nesting periods. The proposed regulations would provide protections from sport and commercial fishing for cabezon and greenlings during their respective nesting seasons. Cabezon and greenlings do not have swim bladders and may be safely released following capture without undue mortality to the fish. Two options are provided for the area of the closures: statewide or south of Cape Mendocino.

Other proposed amendments which would prohibit fishing for and retention of cabezon, and greenlings in the rockfish and lingcod management areas during the nesting periods are described above in III(a)(5). In combination, the closures could prohibit the take of cabezon and greenling for as long as eight months.

Proposed Options for Seasonal Nest Guarding Closures for Cabezon and Greenling:
Cabezon (recreational fishing): Prohibit the sport take of cabezon during the six-month period from October through March. Option 1: statewide. Option 2: south of Cape Mendocino. (28.28).
Cabezon (commercial fishing): Prohibit the commercial take of cabezon during the six-month period from October through March. Option 1: statewide. Option 2: south of Cape Mendocino. (new section 150.16).
Greenlings (recreational fishing): Prohibit the sport take of kelp and rock greenling during the four-month period from September through December. Option 1: statewide. Option 2: south of Cape Mendocino. (28.29).
Greenlings (recreational fishing): Prohibit the commercial take of kelp and rock greenling during the four-month period from September through December. Option 1: statewide. Option 2: south of Cape Mendocino. (new section 150.16).

() Fishing Groups for the Commercial Nearshore Fishery: Nearshore permit holders could be divided into fishing groups to reduce the fishing effort, and provide a mechanism that could allow fishermen to continue to participate in the fishery during periods of regulated reductions in harvests of nearshore fishes. Existing regulations do not provide for fishing groups in the nearshore fishery. The proposed regulation provides for two fishing groups based on the commercial fishing license number of the permit holder; all permit holders with odd-numbered licenses would be assigned to one fishing group and all permit holders with even-numbered licenses would be assigned to another fishing group. The proposed regulation also provides two options for fishing periods. Under the first option, all permit holders with odd-numbered licenses could fish only in January, March, May, July, September, and November, and all permit holders with even- numbered licenses could fish only in February, April, June, August, October, and December. Under the second option, all permit holders with odd-numbered licenses could fish only from the first day through day 15 of each month, and all permit holders with even-numbered licenses could fish only from day 16 through the last day of each month.

Proposal for Establishing Fishing Groups for the Commercial Nearshore Fishery:
A person holding a valid nearshore fishery permit would be assigned to a fishing group based on his or her commercial fishing license number (new section 150.9).
Fishing Period - Option 1: All permit holders with odd- numbered licenses can fish in January, March, May, July, September, and November, and all permit holders with even- numbered licenses can fish in February, April, June, August, October, and December (new section 150.9).
Fishing Period - Option 2: all permit holders with odd- numbered licenses can fish from the first day through day 15 of each month, and all permit holders with even-numbered licenses can fish from day 16 through the last day of each month (new section 150.9).

() Eliminate Transportation Receipt for Nearshore Fishery: Existing law provides that a commercial fisherman or his or her designee, who transports, causes to be transported, or delivers to another person for transportation, any fish, except herring, taken from waters of this state or brought into this state in fresh condition, shall fill out a transportation receipt according to the instructions and on forms provided by the Department at the time the fish are brought ashore (Fish and Game Code Section 8047). The proposed regulation would prohibit the use of fish transportation receipts for landings of nearshore fish stocks, would require that a fish landing receipt be completed at the time of landing. This is expected to improve the accuracy of fish landing data, reduce the amount of paperwork needed by both fishermen and Department employees, and simplify regulations.

Proposal for Elimination of Transportation Receipt for Nearshore Fishery: Prohibit the current authorization for use of a transportation receipt when landing nearshore fish stocks, and require that a landing receipt be completed at the time of the landing (new section 150.8).

(b) Statement of Specific Purpose of Regulation Change and Factual Basis for Determining that Regulation Change is Reasonably Necessary:

Management of shelf and nearshore groundfish and associated species of fish off California is geared to rebuilding overfished stocks of groundfish and stabilizing and sustaining nearshore fisheries and fish stocks. These stocks have been subject to increased fishing pressure and environmental conditions unfavorable to recruitment during the past decade.

Both the Council and Commission are presently considering changes in regulations that will: (1) provide for continued rebuilding of continental shelf species of rockfish and lingcod that have been declared overfished and are subject to approved rebuilding plans, while also allowing fishing for other species; (2) conform state and federal groundfish fisheries regulations to provide for uniform and effective management and enforcement; and (3) result in Commission adoption of interim management regulations for nearshore fisheries that will help conserve the affected fish stocks and keep landings within optimum yields, and provide for stability and sustainability of the nearshore fisheries during the coming year pending completion and implementation of CaliforniaÕs nearshore fisheries management plan (Department of Fish and Game, August 15, 2000, Memo; and Department of Fish and Game, August 16, 2000, Report).

Both sport and commercial fisheries for continental shelf and nearshore fish species are affected by the proposed regulation changes. Continental shelf species of fish that will be affected by the proposed regulation changes include bocaccio, canary rockfish, cowcod, lingcod, sanddabs, and ocean whitefish. Nearshore species of fishes affected by the proposed regulations include 13 species of nearshore rockfishes (blue, black, brown, black-and-yellow, calico, China, copper, grass, gopher, kelp, quillback, olive, and treefish), and associated species that include cabezon, kelp and rock greenlings, California scorpionfish, California sheephead, California halibut, and surfperch.

As a framework for evaluating management options or suites of management options for the nearshore fish stocks, the Department recommends that the Commission select an optimum yield (OY) for cabezon, California sheephead and rock and kelp greenlings, and select management options that will achieve the selected OYs (Department of Fish and Game, August 16, 2000, Report). Optimum yield is the harvest level or the amount of fish that will provide, for the people of California, the greatest overall benefits in regards to food production and recreational benefits, and takes into account the protection of marine ecosystems (Fish and Game Code Section 97). Maximum sustainable yield (MSY) defines the upper limit of OY, but OY is normally set below MSY. The Department recommends that the Commission adopt a precautionary approach to the specification of OY. The precautionary approach requires taking into account uncertainty, and to be more cautious when information is unreliable or lacking. The guidelines for National Standard 1 - Optimum Yield of the federal Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (National Marine Fisheries Service, 1998) and Restrepo et al. (1998) provide guidance in applying the precautionary approach is determining OY. The guidelines recommend that the acceptable biological catch (ABC) for stocks for which there is little available information, such as the nearshore fish stocks in California, be calculated from the average of recent recreational and commercial catches including bycatch. The OY should be set at a level lower than the ABC. In data-poor cases, the guidelines recommend setting the OY at 50% to 75% of the ABC . Should the Commission decide to use this approach or a more conservative approach, it will require the allocation of catch reductions between recreational and commercial user groups (Department of Fish and Game, August 16, 2000, Report; Department of Fish and Game, September 2000).

The numbered options that appear above in section III(a) are repeated below and discussed individually with respect to specific purpose and necessity of the proposed changes.

() Bag and Possession Limits for Sport Fish:
The proposed changes in sportfishing daily bag limit apply to both shelf groundfish species (bocaccio, canary rockfish, cowcod, and lingcod), and nearshore species (cabezon, kelp and rock greenling, and California sheephead). The changes in bag limits are being considered as part of the suite of options considered necessary for keeping total harvests of groundfish and nearshore fishes within their optimum yields.

Until recent years, the Council has allocated reductions in harvest quotas for most groundfish to the commercial sectors which were the principal harvesters of rockfish and lingcod. However, during the past several years, the Council has been forced to cut the commercial harvests of shelf rockfish and lingcod to the extent that little or no targeted commercial fishing is presently allowed for these species, resulting in the entire commercial share of these species being allocated to nontargeted bycatch in other fisheries. This places an added responsibility on recreational fisheries to bear future harvest reductions to achieve the harvest quota or required reduction in total harvest. This is one of the principal reasons for considering reductions in bag limits for all rockfish in the aggregate, and for lingcod and canary rockfish, as well as increased seasonal restrictions for the take of rockfish and lingcod (see III(b)(3), below), and the cowcod closure areas (see III(b)(2), below).

Specific reductions proposed in bocaccio and cowcod bag limits are needed to help meet harvest goals for these species next year. This need is based on current projections that total harvests for bocaccio, lingcod and cowcod this year will exceed the CouncilÕs authorized harvest levels (100 metric tons for bocaccio, 130 metric tons for lingcod south of Cape Mendocino, and 5 metric tons for cowcod) for achieving rebuilding goals. The current projections of harvest in 2000 recreational fisheries are: 167 metric tons of bocaccio, and 325 metric tons of lingcod. Reductions in the total rockfish bag limit are also needed, because such reductions are expected to result in reductions in the take of bocaccio (Wilson-Vandenberg 1999).

The option of reducing the sport bag limits of cabezon, California sheephead, and greenlings, is proposed to help maintain or reduce harvests. Bag limits are a tool that could be used to prevent a rise in recreational landings of nearshore fish due to the anticipated shift of fishing effort from the deeper water shelf rockfish and lingcod to nearshore cabezon, greenlings, and California sheephead following broadened seasonal and area closures being proposed in this rulemaking to reduce harvests of shelf groundfish species. If sport fishing vessels are not authorized to fish for shelf rockfish and lingcod species in deeper water, and are restricted from large offshore areas such as those proposed under the area closures to protect cowcod, these anglers can be expected to move to shallower waters and exert greater fishing pressure on nearshore fish stocks already being heavily exploited. At current fishing levels, the cabezon and greenling bag limits would need to be lowered to two fish or less to have much impact on the recreational take of cabezon or greenling; it is estimated that recreational cabezon landings would decrease by 16% and greenling landings by 20% if the bag limits for those species were set at two fish (Department of Fish and Game, September 2000). A suite of management measures (including seasonal closures and reduced bag limits) may be needed to achieve the overall harvest goals. The Council will be asked to adopt similar reductions in bag limits for groundfish species (rockfish, lingcod, cabezon, and greenlings) in federal waters to ensure their conformance and the ability to enforce the regulations.

() Reductions in Cowcod Harvests:
These proposed options are needed to meet stock rebuilding goals for this species which has been determined to be overfished by the Council. A rebuilding plan has been approved for cowcod by NMFS. It is currently estimated that it will take 98 years to rebuild the stock. Last year recreational limits were reduced from ten to one cowcod per person and a boat limit of two cowcod per day. Recent estimates of recreational and commercial cowcod catches have determined that this yearÕs measures have not achieved the protection needed to rebuild the stock. Even with a total prohibition on the take of cowcod, the incidental take of cowcod in other fisheries is excessive. Therefore, two areas off of southern California are proposed to be closed to the take of all groundfish and other bottomfish commonly taken with cowcod, as well as shrimp and prawn trawling. Ocean whitefish are included due to their being a component of the bottomfish complex and are commonly taken with shelf rockfish (bocaccio and cowcod) resulting in the need to ensure fishermen donÕt target ocean whitefish and take a bycatch of cowcod and bocaccio. The shrimp and prawn bottom trawl fisheries restrictions are also needed to avoid the incidental take and discard of cowcod and bocaccio in trawl gear to further the recovery of these stocks.

In summary, the need to reduce directed harvests and bycatch of cowcod and bocaccio has reached the point that it is necessary to consider a prohibition on other species with sport and commercial value that simply occupy the same areas because a shift of fishing effort to these other species during the closures will result in an unacceptable take of the stocks of species that need rebuilding.

() Reduction in Number of Hooks for Sport Take of Rockfish and Lingcod: This is intended to reduce the likelihood that anglers will catch more than a limit of bocaccio, canary rockfish, or cowcod on any particular drop of the fishing line to the sea floor, and the subsequent need to discard those fish dead. Rockfish have a swim bladder that expands when the fish is brought to the surface, generally resulting in the fishÕs death following its release. A reduction in the number of hooks is expected to reduce the discarding of dead bocaccio, canary rockfish, or cowcod that may otherwise be caught by anglers in excess of the daily bag and possession limit using the current authorized three hook gangions. Ocean whitefish are often caught at the same time and place as shelf rockfish (bocaccio and cowcod) and lingcod, but are seldom specifically targeted by anglers. Restrictions on the number of hooks and lines that may be used to take ocean whitefish do not presently exist and, therefore, are needed to avoid anglers circumventing the rockfish hook limits by claiming to be fishing for ocean whitefish.

() Rockfish and Lingcod Closures:
Moving the current seasonal closure boundary from Lopez Point, Monterey County to Point Conception, Santa Barbara County, will place the ports of Morro Bay and Avila, and commercial passenger fishing vessels that fish from those ports, in the northern California management area. This proposed change is consistent with the statistical area boundary used by the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistical Survey that gathers information from CPFVs for use in stock assessment and fishery management recommendations. Moving the boundary from Lopez Point to Point Conception is appropriate because this point is an important biogeographic boundary that marks significant changes in CaliforniaÕs marine flora and fauna (an assemblage of fish and invertebrates associated with the warmer waters to the south of Point Conception). These resources and associated fisheries can require management strategies unique from those to the north and, therefore, it is beneficial to have discrete data for each area.

These proposed expansions in the current seasonal closures, which were first adopted last year, are needed to reduce the total bocaccio, cowcod, and lingcod catches to less than 100, 3, and 130 metric tons, respectively, for the combined sport and commercial fisheries. All three species of fish (and also canary rockfish) have been determined to be overfished by the Council and in need of rebuilding pursuant to adopted rebuilding plans. Current harvest levels are determined by the CouncilÕs scientific advisory panel on groundfish following extensive review of existing data. The current two month closures are not expected to achieve the required reductions in catches of bocaccio, lingcod, and cowcod. Therefore, the additional two month seasonal closures south of Point Conception, Santa Barbara County, and from Point Conception north to Cape Mendocino, Humboldt County are proposed in consort with the several other regulatory changes to achieve the needed savings.

() Prevent Shift of Effort to Nearshore Fish During Rockfish and Lingcod Closures: These closures are needed to prevent a shift in fishing effort from shelf fisheries to nearshore species during the rockfish and lingcod closure periods, and to minimize bycatch of rockfish and lingcod that may occur when fishing for these species. It is expected that these closures would result in an overall decrease in the take of these species, The amount of the decline would depend on the time periods selected for the closures. For example, estimates of recreational and commercial take of greenlings during the three proposed closure periods each ranged from 16% to 32%. The Council will be asked to adopt these same regulations for cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, and sanddabs for both recreational and commercial fisheries in federal waters.

() Transport of Recreational Finfish Through Restricted Fishing Areas:
The management regime for rockfish and lingcod adopted last year and implemented in year 2000 called for different seasonal closures to the take of rockfish and lingcod north and south of Lopez Point in southern Monterey County. These area closures did not provide for CPFVs and other recreational vessels home-ported in closed areas to travel to open areas, catch fish, and return to port in the closed area with fish aboard. The current prohibition against transiting a closed area with fish aboard is an aid to enforcement of the closures; however, it has had a negative impact on some CPFVs in the ports of Morro Bay and Avila. Several letters were written by representatives and operators of CPFVs asking for a change in the sport regulations to allow for their transport of passengers and legally taken fish through restricted areas. The Department is proposing that a permit or declaration procedure be authorized that would provide for the transport of finfish through restricted fishing areas by recreational vessels. It is expected that this proposal will slightly increase fishing effort.

() Observers on CPFVs:
The Department and federal fisheries managers need to collect accurate and reliable fisheries information to assess fisheries impacts and strategies for sustainable use of fisheries resources. In recent years, some CPFV operators have increasingly denied state or federal fishery observers (i.e., observers collecting data for state or federal agencies either as employees or under contract) permission to ride their boat to collect needed fishery data at sea (species and size composition of catch, area and discard data, etc). Cooperation of CPFV operators in allowing observers aboard is needed because the data collected is vital to verifying logbook data (Fish and Game Code Section 7923), and estimating species composition. This information is vital to assessing the health of fishery resources and establishing catch levels to ensure sustainable resources and fisheries. While federal observers are required to be taken aboard in some coastal fisheries, existing laws and regulations do not require the CPFV operators to cooperate with observers (allow them to accompany the vessel if space is available and to collect biological and fisheries data), a situation that needs to be changed to provide for effective management of affected fish stocks and fisheries. The requirement will not reduce the number of anglers such vessels will carry, or affect the associated income of such vessels, because the regulation only requires cooperation on a Òspace availableÓ basis. The regulation states that the Department may require a CPFV owner or operator to submit a written explanation for the reason observer coverage was denied. The written explanation must be submitted to the Department within 15 days of the DepartmentÕs request for an explanation. The reason needs to be submitted to the Department within 15 days to ensure that the Department can correct problems quickly and to ensure that the Department can assess the impacts of the fishery in a timely manner.
() Definition of Nearshore Fish Stocks and Nearshore Waters:
The Department proposes adding the following fish to the definition of nearshore fish stocks: black, blue, brown, calico, copper, olive, quillback, and treefish rockfishes, and surfperches of the family Embiotocidae, starry flounder, leopard shark, and monkeyface eels. Adding these fish to the definition assures the CommissionÕs ability to act to protect these stocks. This is particularly important because of the immediate and potential increases in fishing pressure in the nearshore. As shelf fisheries are further constrained by management measures directed at rehabilitating shelf fish stocks, increased fishing pressure is expected on nearshore fish stocks. Also, the addition of the above rockfish species to CaliforniaÕs current list of nearshore fishes is needed to bring CaliforniaÕs list of nearshore rockfish into agreement with the CouncilÕs list. This will assist fisheries managers should the Council adopt measures affecting all nearshore rockfish and California needs to conform its regulations to federal regulations. In addition, this will help ensure that the state is better prepared to assume management responsibility for nearshore rockfishes should the Council decide to turn all management for nearshore rockfish over to the State, as is presently being discussed.

The Department proposes expanding the definition of nearshore waters to include waters from zero to 40 fathoms in depth. Depth has greater biological significance to fish than distance from shore, and thus, the definition will improve our ability to develop ecosystem-based management measures. In addition, depth is often easier to enforce, while at sea, than distance from shore.

The new definition of nearshore fish stocks is not intended to expand the list of species that can only be taken for commercial purposes under the authority of a nearshore fishery permit; the proposed regulation states that the permit is required only for those species on the original list. The Commission has adopted a moratorium on the issuance of new permits, and has set a control date for restricted access in this fishery.

() Increase Size Limits for Cabezon and California Sheephead for Recreational and Commercial Fisheries: Cabezon, along with California sheephead, are two of the principal species targeted by the commercial nearshore fisheries and are also highly sought after by the recreational fisheries (anglers and divers). Increased commercial and sport minimum size limits for cabezon, and an increased commercial and new sport minimum size limit for California sheephead, would assist in protecting sub-adults and young adults of these species so that additional numbers reach maturity to replenish these population. Minimum size can also be used as a management tool to reduce take.

Commercial landings of cabezon increased from 25,000 pounds in 1989 to 83,000 pounds in 1994 to 372,000 pounds in 1998, followed in 1999 by the first decline in commercial landings in 10 years. Sport landings of cabezon also declined in 1999. The increase in minimum size limit for cabezon is being proposed as a range of sizes between 15 and 18 inches. The proposed increase in size limit would reduce the catch of immature cabezon and allow at least 50 percent of the females to reach sexual maturity before being retained in the catch. If fishing methods stayed the same, changing the minimum size from 14 inches to 15, 16, 17, or 18 inches would result in declines in recreational take of 16%, 37%, 49%, and 66%, and in commercial take of 28%, 54%, 69%, and 81%, respectively.
The proposed changes for California sheephead would provide protection for newly developed male California sheephead (California sheephead are protogynous hermaphrodites that change from female to male at approximately 14 inches). If fishing methods remained the same, increasing the commercial minimum size limit from 12 inches to 13 inches or 14 inches would reduce the commercial take by 20% and 43%. If the recreational limit was set at 13 inches or 14 inches, rather that 12 inches, there would be a 4% or 9% decline in take.

() Area Closures for Nearshore Fishing:
Four potential closure options are provided. One or a combination of these options could be used alone or in conjunction with other management measures to reduce fishing pressure on nearshore finfish stocks. Some of the options would also separate recreational and commercial fisheries. The proposed closure of the entire coast would eliminate the commercial nearshore fishery. Closures of waters a specified distance around ports (termed bubble closures) would protect stocks close to port from harvest. The proposal to close the coast to commercial fishing on weekends would separate the fisheries on weekends, and would reduce commercial take by 25% if effort was not increased on weekdays. The proposed Thursday through Sunday closure would reduce commercial take by 55% if effort was not increased on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.

() Elimination of Current Exceptions to Commercial Hook Limits within One Mile of Shore: The proposed regulation would eliminate two exemptions to the current restrictions on the number of hooks and lines that may be used within one mile of the mainland shore. It is expected that the proposal would decrease effort in the two areas. The proposal would make the regulation consistent throughout the state, and would improve understanding and enforcement of the regulation.
() Surfperch Seasonal Closure: A recreational seasonal closure and a one- month extension to the current commercial closure is needed as a minimal measure to help protect these fish when they move into shallow waters to release their young. Catches, average size, catch-per-unit-effort and other measures of abundance of surfperch have experienced significant declines (Karpov, et al. 1995; Karpov et al. 2000). Surfperch have low fecundity, making them particularly vulnerable to overharvest. Twenty-five percent of the recreational catch occurs during the proposed closure. The proposed one month expansion of the current commercial seasonal closure and the creation of a seasonal recreational closure are an interim measure that will be reevaluated and possibly expanded as more is learned of the current status of surfperch stocks which have been in decline for decades.

() Seasonal Nest Guarding Closures for Cabezon and Greenling:
Nesting and nest guarding seasonal closures for cabezon and greenlings would provide protection for adult males during the time they guard the nest and eggs. The eggs and young typically are lost if the male is removed from the nest. Cabezon and greenlings are vulnerable to take by divers and hook-and-line gear during these periods because they do not retreat from divers and tend to aggressively attack objects such as hooks if they enter the area of the nest.

The proposed closure for cabezon is expected to reduce the recreational take by 40% and the commercial take by 26%. The proposed closure for greenlings is expected to reduce the recreational take by 38% and the commercial take by 34%. These seasonal closures could be used as a tool for reducing take. Other proposed amendments which would prohibit fishing for and retention of cabezon, and greenlings in the rockfish and lingcod management areas during the nesting periods are described above in III(a)(5). In combination, the closures could prohibit the take of cabezon and greenling for as long as eight months.

() Fishing Groups for the Commercial Nearshore Fishery:
Fishing groups of nearshore fishermen are needed as a potential mechanism for providing fishermen with the continued opportunity to participate in the nearshore fishery during periods of regulated reductions in commercial fishing effort and harvests of nearshore fishes. Assigning opportunities for fishing during blocks of time may provide a means for continued participation by persons in the fishery. The herring fishery in San Francisco Bay successfully uses a system of fishing groups and fishing periods to spread the fishery that occurs in the confined area of the Bay between approximately 400 permit holders.

() Eliminate Transportation Receipt for Nearshore Fishery:
Elimination of the authorization to use fish transportation receipts for nearshore fishes is needed due to concerns for the non-reporting of fish. Elimination of the fish transportation receipt for nearshore fisheries and requiring that a fish receipt be completed at the time of landing will improve the accuracy of fish landing data, cut down on the amount of paperwork needed by both fishermen and Department employees, and simplify regulations.

Authority: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 215, 220, 240, 710.7, 711, 1050, 7071, 7923, 8395, 8587.1, 8588 and 8842, Fish and Game Code.

Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 209, 210 215, 220, 221, 240, 710.7, 711, 1050, 5517, 7050, 7051, 7055, 7056, 7058, 7060, 7923, 8043, 8047, 8140, 8395, 8585.5, 8586, 8587, 8587.1, 8588, 8842 and 9001.7, Fish and Game Code.

(d) Specific Technology or Equipment Required by Regulatory Change: None

(e) Identification of Reports or Documents Supporting Regulation Change:

Butler, John, and Tom Barnes, 2000, Cowcod Rebuilding, Pacific Fishery Management Council, Supplemental Attachment D.12.a. to the June 2000 Agenda.10pp.

Butler, John L., et al., 1999, Stock Assessment of Cowcod, Post STAR Panel Draft. 7pp.

Department of Fish and Game, September 2000, Data summaries and calculations of Acceptable Biological Catch and Optimum Yield.

Department of Fish and Game, August 16, 2000, Report to the Fish and Game Commission, Nearshore Fishery Regulation Alternatives, for California Fish and Game Commission Meeting of September 25, Oakland California, 15pp. and attached Appendices/Supporting Data.

Department of Fish and Game, August 15, 2000, Memo to Fish and Game Commission, and Summary of Recreational Fishery Options Affecting Shelf Rockfish and Lingcod, 7pp.

Department of Fish and Game, August 2000, Closures for Nest Guarding Species, a paper by Marine Region Staff, Department of Fish and Game. 3pp.
Department of Fish and Game, Marine Region, August 2000, Summary of Nearshore Finfish Management Options Workshop, July 18, 2000, Sacramento, California.

Department of Fish and Game, 2000, Justification for a 14- Inch Total Length Minimum Sport and Commercial Size Limit for California Sheephead, A paper in support of management alternatives provided to the Fish and Game Commission in August of 2000. 4 pp.

Department of Fish and Game, 2000, Status of California Recreational Catches of Bocaccio and Lingcod through April 2000, A paper in response to the Pacific Fishery Management Council, 12pp.

Jagielo, Tom, 1999, Lingcod Rebuilding, Analysis for preliminary estimate of harvest constraints for lingcod rebuilding under the requirements of the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Management Act, 5pp.

Karpov, K., Hieb, K., and Collier, P., 2000, Suggested interim management changes for perch, seaperch and surfperch - collectively designated as surfperch, 3pp.

Karpov, K.A., Albin, D.A. and Van Buskirk, W.H., 1995, The Marine Recreational Fishery in Northern and Central California, Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin 176, 192 pp.

MacCall, Alec D., 1999, A Preview of Bocaccio Rebuilding, A Paper for the Pacific Fishery Management Council

MacCall, Alec D., 1999, Bocaccio Rebuilding, Bocaccio Appendix to STAR Panel Report, Attachment G.2.c., 8pp.

MacCall, et al., 1999, Bocaccio, Technical Evaluation of Assessment, STAR Panel Report, 4pp.

Methot, Richard, 1999, Groundfish Productivity and Target Harvest Rates Introductory Comments. 3pp.

Methot, et al., 1999, Cowcod Rockfish, STAR Panel Report, Southwest Fisheries Center,3pp.

National Marine Fisheries Service, 1998, National Standard 1 - Optimum Yield. Federal Register 63(84): 24212 and 24229-24233.
PFMC, 1999, Draft Lingcod Rebuilding Plan, Attachment G.2.b. PFMC Meeting of November 1999, 3pp.

PFMC, 1999, Overview of the Rebuilding Analysis of Lingcod in the U.S. Vancover-Columbia Areas, and Preliminary Assessment of Management Measures Capable of Achieving Harvest Targets, Prepared for the Allocation Committee Teleconference, August 25, 1999

PFMC, 1999, Report of the Ad-Hoc Allocation Committee on Options for Allocating Lingcod and Bocaccio Rockfish, Attachment G.9.a. January 21-22, 1999, PFMC Meeting of April 1999, 5pp.

Restrepo, V.R., et al., 1998, Technical guidance on the use of precautionary approaches to implementing National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS- F/SPO, prepared for the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Wilson-Vandenberg, D., 1999, Analysis of the Effects of Rockfish Bag Limit Reductions, An analysis of RECFIN catch estimates. 4pp.

Wilson-Vandenberg, D., 2000, One graph and Tables depicting 50 percent Maturity for Female Cabezon. 4pp.

Wilson-Vandenberg, Deborah, and Robert Hardy, 2000, Cabezon, History of the Fishery, Status of Biological Knowledge, Status of Population, Management Recommendations, 3pp.

IV. Description of Alternatives to Regulatory Action:

(a) Major Alternatives to Regulation Change:

Generally, most alternatives available to the shelf rockfish and lingcod, and nearshore interim management proposals are already included in the regulatory proposals presented above as options for Commission consideration. This was done at the request of the Commission which asked to consider a broad array of alternatives in order to maintain the maximum flexibility in selecting regulatory measures that meet both the rebuilding requirements for federal shelf groundfish stocks, and interim management goals for nearshore fish stocks. These alternatives were also selected in an effort to reconcile the overlapping jurisdiction and management responsibilities of the state and federal fisheries management authorities for shelf groundfish and nearshore fish stocks, and to maintain consistency with state and federal fishery management guidelines.
The principal alternative to the options already being considered (the no change option is discussed below) is the total elimination of all fishing for shelf groundfish and/or nearshore fishes. This would promote rebuilding of overfished shelf groundfish stocks and serve to protect nearshore stocks from expected shifts in commercial and sport fishing to the nearshore areas due to offshore (shelf) closures. However, total elimination of fishing for shelf and nearshore groundfish and associated species is not justified at this time, and would ignore the responsibility of the state to seek less onerous options to meet the MLMA goal of long term sustainable use. In the cases of bocaccio and cowcod, directed commercial fishing has already been largely curtailed, with effort now directed at reducing their bycatch in other commercial fisheries, and reducing sport take to remain within stock rebuilding parameters. Also, efforts to protect these and other species (lingcod and canary rockfish) have already resulted in reduced fishing access to other important species during the seasonal closures adopted last year, and proposed for expansion this year. However, a total closure would result in the elimination of fishing for all species and stocks that remain viable, and for which efforts are being made to maintain a reasonable use.

Another alternative is to defer action for a year to await completion of the Nearshore Fisheries Management Plan required by the MLMA. However, the MLMA directs the Department and Commission to utilize the best available information towards the goal of sustainable use, and to act expeditiously with that information available. That is what the Department and Commission are attempting to do by proposing expanded season and area closures now, along with other size, bag, and gear limitations that can achieve rebuilding and conservation goals without closing the fishery. To defer action would be to invite further declines in shelf and nearshore fish stocks, placing additional resources in jeopardy of being reduced to the same depressed condition as bocaccio, cowcod, canary rockfish, and lingcod.

The following is a discussion of alternatives to specific areas of proposed regulation changes:

Bag limit reductions: Bag limit reductions are proposed for rockfish in general, bocaccio, cowcod, lingcod, cabezon, and California sheephead. The numbers of fish in these reduced bag limits is proposed as a range, from the current bag limit for each species, down to zero. The only alternative to the proposed range of bag limit reductions is not reducing the bag limit (raising the limit is not considered a viable option at this time). The effort associated with this proposal is to reduce the total number of fish taken by sport fishermen. To avoid lowering the bag limits the commercial take of these fish would need to be further curtailed. As indicated above for bocaccio and cowcod, the directed commercial take of these species has already been severely curtailed and sport savings in fish are being sought to reduce total landings. For other shelf groundfish species, the Council has also discouraged any commercial targeting through gear restrictions (prohibited rollers on trawl foot ropes) to prevent trawling over shelf rockfish habitat, and by establishing reduced trip limits on rockfish. Therefore, the proposed sport bag limit reductions will share the groundfish reductions with the recreational segment of the fisheries. Not reducing the bag limits for cabezon and California sheephead was considered as an alternative. However, reductions in bag limits are one of the less severe restrictions being considered along with other options, and if found to achieve the sport fishing OY for these species could lessen the need for expanded seasons and area closures also being considered for these species.

Minimum size limits: Increased commercial minimum size limits are proposed for California sheephead, and cabezon, while an increased sport minimum size limit is proposed for cabezon, and a new sport minimum size limit is proposed for California sheephead. Size limits are generally imposed to protect sub-adult and young adult fish, but can also serve to reduce the catches to meet optimum yields set for the species. The use of size limits (and bag and season limits) can adjust harvest levels without designating a specific harvest allocation, which avoids the difficulties of monitoring catches against a fixed quota, but may not be effective in staying within the OY. Size limits are generally applied to fish that either have no swim bladder (are not susceptible to barotrauma related death upon release back to the water) or that occupy shallow water. Alternatives to minimum size limits to protect sub-adult fish are seasonal spawning closures. These are being considered for cabezon and greenlings because they guard their nests and are vulnerable to capture during this period. Also, smaller size limits and no size limits were considered. The use of size limits has proven effective in protecting sub-adults and in reducing catch rates for several marine species. Data indicate that a large proportion (more than half) of cabezon and California sheephead being taken by the commercial fisheries are at or below the size at which 50 percent of females are mature. Recreational anglers generally prefer the larger fish while commercial fishermen seek smaller fish for the premium fish market. The current size limit for cabezon was first applied to the commercial fisheries in 1999, and then to sport anglers this year.

Extension of seasonal closures: Alternatives to a proposed two month extension of the seasonal closures to the sport and commercial take of shelf rockfish and lingcod (to achieve rebuilding goals for overfished bocaccio, lingcod, and cowcod), and nearshore groundfish species south of Cape Mendocino, Humboldt County), in addition to some associated species that are taken with shelf groundfish (sanddabs and ocean whitefish) are not expected to be as effective in reducing the take of overfished stocks to the required levels. The overfished stocks are taken in association with other groundfish (primarily rockfish) and unless all fishing is prohibited for a time in an area they will continue to be taken with other groundfish species and discarded dead, thereby, frustrating efforts to reduce harvests.

The proposed seasonal closures allow fisheries managers to reduce the harvests by an expected amount based on historic sport and commercial catches during those months. The need for reduced harvests of bocaccio and cowcod next year are anticipated based on tracking of current harvests, and thus alternatives to the two month extension are permanent area closures and individual quotas for vessels. Area closures are already a part of the current seasonal closure proposal (two distinct areas of the coast would be closed for four month periods). Under the current harvest rates, area closures do not need to be permanent to achieve reductions in harvest that meet rebuilding goals. A permanent area closure can be applied where complete protection of a stock (such as cowcod) is required but it prevents access to other resources that may be healthy and supporting viable uses. A large area closure is being proposed in this rulemaking for next year off southern California to protect cowcod, and with that extensive area closure there may not be the need for an extension of the seasonal closure there. This is still being reviewed by groundfish scientists. The use of individual quotas generally assumes the ability to undertake in-season monitoring of the commercial and recreational landings and close the fishery when the quota is reached. A quota on certain groundfish is being applied to this fishery in addition to the seasonal closure.

Individual quotas [most often applied as individual transferable quotas (ITQÕs)] are one method of allocating a set harvest guideline or quota among fishermen, where each participant is entitled to a specified share of the total amount of fish determined available for harvest. While this alternative is of interest to fisheries managers, the Congress has placed a moratorium on its use in federal fisheries such as the groundfish fishery for the present time, making it unavailable to the Council in this instance. The Commission could consider the use of ITQs for the nearshore commercial fisheries.

One alternative being considered with the extension of the seasonal closure, is to exclude nearshore rockfish and associated species from the seasonal closures. However, concerns also exist for a shift of fishing effort from shelf species to nearshore species during this extended seasonal period and, therefore, this alternative is not be in the best interests of sustainable management of nearshore resources.

Area closures: At least six area closure options (alternatives) are already being considered by the Commission [(1) a closure of all bottom fishing in two areas of ocean off southern California to sport and commercial fishing to reduce the take of cowcod, (2) prohibit the harvest of nearshore fish stocks within one mile of the entire mainland coast, (3) within 1-3 miles around ports, (4) during weekends and holidays within one mile of the mainland coast, (5) eliminate current exceptions to commercial hook and line limits in two coastal areas off northern California (Gitchell Creek to False Cape, Humboldt County, and Point Bolinas to Point Reyes, Marin County), and (6) The two areas south of Cape Mendocino where existing two-month closures are proposed to be extended to four-months.

An alternative being considered in the cowcod closure areas is to exempt the take of nearshore species of bottomfish from the closure that would allow continued fishing for nearshore rockfishes, cabezon, kelp and rock greenlings, California scorpionfish, and California sheephead. This alternative is one of the proposals provided to the Commission and is being considered as a possible exception to the total prohibition on take of bottomfish in the two closure areas being proposed for protection of cowcod. This alternative will also create enforcement problems in the closure area, and could result in increased mortality of these nearshore species if a shift in fishing effort occurs from the deep parts of the closure areas to the nearshore and shallow bank habitats occupied by the nearshore species.

The one-mile coastwide commercial closure, the weekend and the Thursday through Sunday closures, one- to three-mile near-port closures, and elimination of two exceptions to the hook-and-line closure areas are all alternatives being considered to reduce fishing pressure and further protect nearshore fish stocks. Other alternatives considered are delaying consideration of adopting area closures until completion of the Nearshore Fishery Management Plan that is due to be completed by January 1, 2002. This alternative was rejected because the Commission asked to have the widest possible array of options before it in order to adopt those that best dealt with the needs of the slope groundfish fishery and nearshore fish stocks. Also, other alternatives that were considered and rejected involved potential area closures that may be considered as a part of current efforts to identify areas to close in response to recent marine protected areas legislation and efforts to reach agreement on protected areas at the Channel Islands.

(b) No Change Alternative:

Some of the alternative measures that are proposed above will likely not be adopted in favor of other proposed options provided. However, generally, the no change alternative is not realistic or viable under current federal and state fishery management policies and directives, and the current state of several fish stocks. Policies require that efforts at rebuilding be undertaken when stocks reach specified levels, and that stocks be managed for sustained use. Real declines in fish stocks (bocaccio, cowcod, canary rockfish, lingcod) are apparent that must be dealt with by regulatory means in order to address and reverse the observed trends in abundance. Without regulatory action the fisheries will continue to overharvest nearshore and shelf stocks of groundfish and associated species and drive additional stocks to an overfished condition. Therefore, a suite of options must be adopted that adjust current fishing practices to maintain catches within the limits established for rebuilding and sustainable use.

In the case of the nearshore fisheries, the no change option is not acceptable given the rapid growth of the fishery from a recreational fishery to a recreational and growing commercial fishery, and the current declining trends in catches of some nearshore species. The nearshore fisheries exploits fish stocks which have a narrow range of habitats (limited amount and carrying capacity) and life history characteristics (slow growth, older age at maturity, limited fecundity, nest guarding in some) that make them inherently susceptible to overfishing.

(c) Consideration of Alternatives: In view of information currently possessed, no alternative considered would be more effective in carrying out the purposes for which the regulation is proposed or would be as effective and less burdensome to the affected private persons than the proposed regulation.

V. Mitigation Measures Required by Regulatory Action:

The proposed regulatory action will have no negative impact on the environment; therefore, no mitigation measures are needed.

VI. Impact of Regulatory Action - Economic, Jobs, Local Agencies, State Agencies, Housing Costs and School Districts:

The Commission has assessed the potential for significant adverse economic impacts that might result from the proposed regulatory action and it has made the following determinations relative to the required statutory categories:

(a) Significant Adverse Economic Impact on Businesses, Including the Ability of California Businessmen to Compete with Businesses in Other States:

Both sport and commercial fisheries for continental shelf and nearshore fish species are affected by the proposed regulation changes. Management of shelf and nearshore groundfish and associated species of fish off California is geared to rebuilding overfished stocks of groundfish, and stabilizing and sustaining nearshore fisheries and fish stocks during the coming year pending completion and implementation of CaliforniaÕs nearshore fisheries management plan. The short term loses to businesses are expected to be offset, to some degree, in the long term by improvements in the status (abundance and size) of groundfish and nearshore fish stocks. The length of time for such improvements to occur is not known, but is expected to take decades for some species of shelf rockfish.

The economic impacts for nearshore species will depend on the overall harvest levels the Commission selects, the apportionment of those levels between the recreational and commercial sectors, and the management options selected to achieve the harvest levels. As compared to 1999 catches, the harvest levels being considered ranging from a 32% to an 88% decrease for cabezon, from a 30% increase to a 69% decrease for greenlings, and from a 12% increase to a 75% decrease for California sheephead. The impacts of specific proposals are discussed below.

(1) Impacts of Bag Limits and Gear Restrictions on Recreational Fisheries:

General information:
For recreational fisheries, adoption of the proposed reduced bag limits and hook limits are expected to have its greatest initial economic impacts on owners and operators of CPFVs that fish for rockfish and nearshore finfishes. These impacts are of generally unknown proportion and are very difficult to estimate because they largely depend on individual anglersÕ choices, and alternative uses to which CPFV owners/operators may put these vessels. The magnitude of fiscal impacts on CPFVs due to the bag and number of hook reductions will depend on the degree to which anglers elect to forego fishing aboard CPFVs due to the regulatory changes. This is a personal choice for individual fishermen that depends on their expectation of what constitutes a reasonable return on their recreational investment.

In the longer term, continued depletion of shelf and nearshore rockfish, and associated stocks, in the absence of regulatory change to improve the health of those stocks, could result in even greater angler dissatisfaction that could result in reduced ocean sport fishing. The proposed changes are expected, in the long term, to increase angler satisfaction and participation by assisting with a rebuilding of stocks of shelf rockfish (particularly bocaccio, canary rockfish and cowcod), and lingcod, and stabilizing nearshore stocks of cabezon, greenlings and California sheephead.

Basis for CPFV estimates
A rough estimate of average fiscal impacts to CPFV vessel owners/operators is attempted based on reported trip numbers, costs and boats targeting rockfish. Assumptions regarding reductions in angler participation in fishing aboard CPFV trips resulting from the proposed regulations are speculative and may vary in magnitude by port.
Costs reported for CPFV trips vary, but are reported to average about $58.00 and $67.50 respectively in southern and central/northern California (Van Buskirk, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, pers. comm). These costs included fees for gear and bait ($10.00), daily fishing license if not in possession of an annual license ($6.05 and $6.55 respectively in central/northern and southern California), and boat and parking fees ($42.00 - $51.00 respectively in southern and central/northern California). These fees do not include transportation and food costs that vary by distance traveled and port. Also, food purchased aboard a vessel and payment for fish filleting services are not reflected in these costs.

Bag limits
A survey of attitudes and preferences of saltwater anglers in southern California conducted for the Department in 1989 indicated that Ònot getting enough bites or catching enough fishÓ is a very, if not the most, important factor in angler satisfaction. This may not equate precisely with catching a ÒlimitÓ of fish. However, many anglers place a high priority on capturing their limit of fish, particularly when paying to fish from a CPFV for rockfish. Rockfish fishing trips are often termed Òmeat tripsÓ or Òfreezer tripsÓ involving efforts by anglers to capture the most and largest rockfish and associated species (primarily lingcod) possible. The expectation by many of these anglers of taking home fish to eat may overshadow other enjoyments of the fishing trip and often is viewed as compensation, in part, for the cost of the fishing trip.

Another factor that may influence continued participation in fishing for rockfish is the degree to which anglers reconcile the difference between their desire to catch a limit of rockfish and the number of rockfish that they actually catch on average. While most anglers actively seek to capture a daily limit of rockfish when they go fishing aboard a CPFV, most anglers seldom take the currently authorized 10 rockfish per day. Based on CPFV catches reported to the Department in 1997, the average number of rockfish per angler ranges from about 3.6 rockfish per angler at San Diego County ports, to a high of 14 rockfish per angler at the San Luis Obispo County ports. Based on these data, the overall average number of rockfish per angler for southern and central/northern California, respectively, is five and 10 rockfish per angler. Therefore, the impact of the regulation change may depend partly on the degree to which anglers bring their expectations into line with average catches and the need for implementing additional rockfish conservation measures.

CPFV: The number of fishing trips reportedly directed by CPFVs at rockfish, including bocaccio, during 1997 are 860 from southern California ports, and 2,443 trips from central and northern California ports. Trips directed at rockfish generally are also trips that are directed at lingcod in shelf waters, and, while not specifically directed at cabezon, greenlings, and California scorpionfish, they are frequently taken on the same trips.

If there is a 10 percent loss in CPFV revenues in rockfish-directed trips due to angler dissatisfaction, it is estimated that the loss in southern California would be $124,700 or $1,039 per vessel, and the loss in central and northern California would be $145,310 or $5,689 per vessel. These estimates are based on the assumption that CPFVs carry an average of 25 paying customers each trip (the actual range appears to be from six to 22 passengers per trip depending on the port), and use the number of CPFVs that conducted fishing trips directed at rockfish in 1997 (120 in southern California and 73 in central/northern California).

If the per-vessel loss in passengers is 20 percent instead of 10 percent, then these estimates could be expected to double to $2,078 and $11,378 for CPFVÕs targeting rockfish in southern and central/northern California, respectively. Obviously, at some point if passenger loads become too small, a vessel cannot operate at a profit.

Other factors influencing the validity of the above estimates include the degree to which a CPFV targets only rockfish (or targets other species such as salmon, halibut, striped bass or other game fish). Some CPFV operators specialize in ÒrockcodÓ (rockfish) fishing trips and are likely to experience a greater fiscal impact than other vessels that depend on other species. Therefore, vessels that target only rockfish and associated fishes, and that carry fishermen conditioned to catching limits of rockfish, will likely experience a greater reduction in passengers. However, the actual and total severity of losses to individual businesses with respect to their continued viability is unknown.

Other Businesses: Impacts are expected to be less or nonexistent for businesses associated with the support of private boat and shoreline fishing operations.

Reduction in the number of hooks
The reduced number of hooks may require anglers spend more time in capturing a limit of fish. This may not affect angler satisfaction, but it would increase the cost to CPFV operators and private skiffs. However, if the rockfish bag limit and bag limits for other species are reduced to very low limits, then a limit of fish may be caught in the same amount of time with no fiscal impact.

(2) Impacts of Cowcod Zero Bag Limit and Area Closures on Recreational and Commercial Fisheries:

Prohibition on fishing for or retention of cowcod

CPFV: The proposed zero bag limit for cowcod, by itself, is not expected to have a major fiscal impact on the CPFV fishery. The bag limit was reduced last year from 10 fish to one fish per angler. CPFV passengers consider cowcod a real trophy species, but rarely target them due to their rarity, even when the daily bag limit was 10 fish. They are primarily taken incidental to other rockfish. There are few trips specifically directed at cowcod by CPFV vessels in the closure area.

The proposed cowcod closure areas, which would close thousands of square miles of ocean off southern California to fishing for bottom fish to protect cowcod, could have a significant economic impact on CPFVs. The proposed restrictions within the cowcod closure areas are directed at fishing only for bottom species (rockfish, lingcod, ocean whitefish, etc.) that are found in conjunction with cowcod. Therefore, any trips that are typically made to waters in the proposed cowcod closure areas and directed at surface species (surface trips) such as tunas, marlin, yellowtail, and other pelagic and/or surface species are not affected by the proposed closure. Many of the trips reporting bottom fish from the proposed closure area are surface trips that may opportunistically take advantage of the availability of bottom fish at some of the banks that they frequent for surface species. Vessels excluded from bottom fishing in the cowcod closure areas, may redirect their fishing effort to surface fishing in the cowcod closure areas (at least during that time of year when surface species are available there) or to other areas. This could mitigate some or all of the estimated fiscal impact.

Data collected from the CPFV logbooks submitted by these vessels in 1999 indicate that 14,901 anglers fished aboard 95 CPFVs on 712 trips within the catch blocks being proposed for closure. Of this total number of CPFV anglers and trips, a total of 7,124 anglers (48% of total) and 329 trips (46% of total) were directed at bottom species. Another 1,945 anglers went on 93 mixed trips (directed at both bottom and pelagic fish) where more that half the catch was bottom fish. If the CPFV trips directed at bottom fish and the trips with more than half the catch was bottom fish were unable to be redirected to fishing in other areas, the total estimated fiscal impact to CPFV owners/operators is estimated to be $526,002 or $6,744 per boat.

Commercial Fishing: Most of the economic impacts to the commercial fishing industry will be due to actions taken by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) which is proposing prohibiting commercial bottom fishing for all federal groundfish species. The Commission is considering prohibiting the take of bottom fish that are not designated federal groundfish and that the Commission has authority to regulate (California sheephead). Only the impacts of the CommissionÕs proposed actions are estimated here. The ex-vessel value of California sheephead caught in the cowcod closure areas with either hook-and-line gear or traps was approximately $81,500 in 1999. The prohibition of shrimp and prawn trawling in the cowcod closure areas is expected to result in the loss of approximately $300,000 ex-vessel to five boats ($60,000 per boat). The degree to which commercial fishermen may relocate their commercial fishing operations to other areas open to commercial fishing and still harvest fish in marketable quantities, is uncertain. Some ability to shift fishing areas and practices exists, but this is expected to be more difficult for commercial fishing operations than for sport fishing operations that rely on providing a satisfying fishing experience rather than obtaining marketable poundage and value of fish sold. The ability to shift fishing areas and species will be influenced to varying degree by the other options that the Commission may adopt, such as other area closures to protect nearshore rockfish and associated species.

Other Businesses: The impact on businesses that provide supplies and support services to recreational anglers or the commercial industry cannot be quantified.

(3) Impacts of Seasonal Closures on Recreational and Commercial Fisheries:

Extension of the rockfish-lingcod closure period: For recreational fisheries, adoption of the proposed closures is expected to have its greatest initial economic impacts on owners and operators of CPFVs that fish for rockfish.
CPFV: The same basis was used to estimate the economic impact of the proposed closures on CPFV as is described in (1)b., above. The number of fishing trips reportedly directed by CPFVs at rockfish, including bocaccio, during 1997 are 860 from southern California ports, and 2,443 trips from central and northern California ports. Trips directed at rockfish generally are also trips that are directed at lingcod in shelf waters. The actual amount of the loss to individual CPFV owners will depend on their ability to shift to other fisheries during the closed periods. The estimates depend on the months selected for the closures. The following estimate uses the average number of rockfish trips in a two-month period during 1997, and an average of 25 anglers per trip. The estimated losses in southern California are $207,350 (or $1,728 per vessel) and the estimated losses in central and northern California are $691,900 (or $9,478 per vessel). If a vessel is unable to meet cost of operation with a reasonable profit due to the extended seasonal closure (cannot find alternative profitable uses for the vessel), then the CPFV may not be able to continue operations and the business fails.
Other Businesses: The impact of the proposed regulation on other modes of recreational fishing will depend on the ability of those anglers to shift to other species. The closures are expected to have a moderate, but unquantifiable, impact on businesses that supply goods and services to recreational anglers.

Prohibit the recreational take of lingcod from November through April: Few recreational trips are only targeting lingcod. Instead lingcod are caught in association with rockfish. This additional prohibition in itself is not expected to have a significant economic impact on recreational fisheries.

Prohibit the take of cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, sanddabs, and California sheephead during the rockfish-lingcod closure period: The purpose of these regulations is to prevent increased effort on nearshore fish stocks during the rockfish and lingcod closures. Enacting these regulations will limit the ability of recreational anglers, CPFV operators and commercial harvesters to shift to alternate fisheries. The actual impact will depend on the four-month periods selected for the closure. The impacts on CPFVs and businesses supplying goods and services to recreational anglers are unknown, but thought to be moderate. It is estimated that the commercial nearshore fishery will be reduced by more than 30%, resulting in an estimated loss in ex-vessel value of $1.0 to $1.2 million.

Seasonal closures for nest guarding species: cabezon and greenlings: The proposed six-month closure is expected to result in a 40% decrease in recreational take of cabezon and a 26% decrease in the commercial take of cabezon. The proposed four-month closure for greenlings is expected to result in a 38% decrease in recreational take of greenlings and a 34% decrease in the commercial take of greenlings. Generally, CPFVs do not have directed trips for cabezon and greenlings; instead, they are caught in association with other targeted species such as rockfish. The proposed closures are not expected to have an economic impact on CPFV operations. The estimated loss to commercial harvesters is $320,000 ex-vessel value for cabezon and $42,000 ex-vessel value for greenlings.

Expand commercial seasonal closure for surfperch and create a recreational seasonal closure for surfperch: Surfperch are primarily caught from shore. This proposal would have no impact on CPFV operations. A new three-month closure is proposed for the recreational take of surfperch, and it is expected to reduce the recreational take by at least 25%. This is not, however, expected to have a significant impact on businesses supplying goods and services to anglers who fish for surfperch. The commercial fishery already has a two-month closure; the proposal extends the closure by one month. This is expected to reduce the total ex-vessel value of surfperch landings by approximately 8% or by $9,000, based on 1998 landings.

Impact of Size Limits on Recreational and Commercial Fisheries

Recreational: As with bag limits, the economic impacts are impossible to estimate, because they depend on angler satisfaction and changes in fishing behavior in response to size limits. Increasing the size limit of cabezon to 15, 16, 17, or 18 inches is expected to reduce the recreational take by 16%, 37%, 49% and 66%, respectively. Increasing the size limit on California sheephead is expected to have a small impact on recreational take (a 4% reduction is expected if the size limit is set at 13 inches and 9% reduction if the size limit is set at 14 inches).

Commercial: The impacts will depend upon the size limit. For cabezon, the commercial take is expected to be reduced by 28% with an estimated loss of $343,000 (ex-vessel value) if the size limit is set at 15 inches, by 54% with an estimated loss of $661,000 (ex-vessel value) if the size limit is set at 16 inches, by 69% with an estimated loss of $885,000 (ex-vessel value) if the size limit is set at 17 inches, and by 81% with an estimated loss of $991,000 (ex-vessel value) if the size limit is set at 18 inches. For California sheephead, the commercial take is expected to be reduced by 20% with an estimated loss of $80,000 (ex-vessel value) if the size limit is set at 13 inches and by 43% with an estimated loss of $173,000 (ex-vessel value) if the size limit is set at 14 inches.

Impacts of Area Closures for Recreational and Commercial Fishing

Close commercial take of nearshore fish stocks within one mile of the mainland shore:
A total prohibition on the commercial take of nearshore fish stocks within a mile of the mainland shore would involve both hook-and- line and trap fisheries with a combined take off California of nearshore fish worth approximately $3 to $4 million in recent years. Because the total take and value of these fish includes the Channel Islands, which are not included in this proposed closure, the economic impact to the commercial nearshore fishery would be somewhat less than the $3 to $4 million value for the entire fishery. This is the most expensive option in terms of economic impact to commercial fishermen.

ÒBubble closuresÓ around major fishing ports for recreational and commercial fishing:
The fiscal impact of a prohibition on nearshore fishing within a one- to three-mile radius of fishing ports (bubble closures) is difficult to estimate because of the manner in which CPFV data and commercial landings and value data is reported (by square catch blocks that are 10 nautical miles by 10 nautical and do not conform closely to the bubble closures) and the manner in with recreational data is collected.

The economic impact to the CPFV fleet is thought to be minimal. The closures might prevent private skiffs from using some ports. This could result in a significant economic loss to business in those ports that cater to recreational skiffs.

A very rough estimate indicates that commercial fisheries harvest about 135,000 pounds of nearshore fish worth about $400,000 in the bubble closure areas. This option provides fishermen with a continued opportunity to fish nearshore fish stocks from all ports outside the bubble closure areas. The operational overhead costs of fishing could increase slightly over current costs if fishermen needed to travel farther from port to the fishing grounds. Also, because the fishery is conducted in part from small boats (skiffs), bubble closures may make commercial fishing impractical for some small vessels on the north coast during months of inclement weather. At the same time, several ports do not have viable fishing grounds within one to three miles of port and must already travel farther from port to conduct nearshore fishing. Also, comments by many sport and commercial fishermen indicate that where suitable nearshore habitats for targeted nearshore fishes exist, it is generally already necessary for commercial fishermen to travel greater distances from port to catch marketable quantities of nearshore fish. Therefore, areas near ports that are not suitable habitat or already depleted of fish would not currently be profitable fishing grounds. Therefore, the economic impact should be mitigated to the extent that vessels can fish beyond the one- to three-mile proposed bubble closure areas.

Commercial closure on weekends or on Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday:
The economic impact would depend upon the amount of effort that is shifted to waters beyond one mile and the amount of effort that is shifted to days of the week other than Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday. In 1999, approximately 25% of the commercial nearshore catch was landed on Saturday and Sunday, with additional 30% landed on Thursday and Friday (or a total of 55% for a Thursday through Sunday closure).

The proposed closure might require developing better but more costly technology to keep fish alive longer after capture if the weekend demand is greater than at other time of the week. The proposed closure would serve to reduce fishing pressure on the nearshore resources, and would serve to separate recreational and commercial fishermen.

Remove exemption from hook-limitation in sections of Districts 7 and 10: The economic impact of eliminating the current exceptions to limits on numbers of hooks and lines in the two areas off northern California is difficult to estimate, as indicated above, due to the manner in which the landings and values are reported. Current rough estimates indicate about five boats made 33 trips and landed 1,746 pounds of fish worth $4,039 pounds (ex-vessel value) using hook-and-line gear during 1999 in the southern of the two areas from Point Bolinas to Point Reyes, Marin County. In the northern of the two areas, landing records indicate that 22 boats made 55 trips in the area and landed 21,968 pounds of fish worth $32,646 in 1999. This equates to an average of about $808 and $594 per boat on average. It is uncertain how much of these landings and value are made using gear with greater than 150 hooks and 15 lines per boat, but based on the small amount of fish taken on average, and pounds landed in the fishery conducted elsewhere where hook and line limits apply, the long term impacts to fishermen in should not be great if the exceptions to the hook and line limits are repealed. Fishermen may continue to fish in these areas under limits applied in all other areas of the coast.

Commercial Fishing Groups and Fishing Periods:

The proposed creation of fishing groups and fishing periods would reduce fishing effort by 50% and spread effort throughout the year. The ex-vessel value of commercial nearshore fish has been about $3 to $4 million in recent years. The economic impact is estimated to be from $1.5 to $2 million.

Items Not Expected to Have Significant Adverse Economic Impact:

The following are not expected to result in significant adverse economic impact to businesses: changing the location of the rockfish-lingcod management line, the transport of recreational finfish through restricted fishing areas, the requirement for CPFV operators to allow observers on their boats, the prohibition on the use of transportation receipts for nearshore fish and the requirement that all landings be immediately documented with a landing receipt, and the definitions of nearshore fish stock, nearshore waters and nearshore fisheries.

(b) Impact on the Creation or Elimination of Jobs Within the State, the Creation of New Businesses or the Elimination of Existing Businesses, or the Expansion of Businesses in California: None

Economic Impact on Private Persons: None

(d) Fiscal Impact on Public Agencies, Including Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Costs/Savings in Federal Funding to the State: None

(e) Involve Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies: None

(f) Mandate Programs on Local Agencies or School Districts: None

(g) Impose Costs on Any Local Agency or School District that is Required to be Reimbursed Under Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4: None

(h) Affect on Housing Costs: NoneInformative Digest (Plain English Overview)

CaliforniaÕs sport and commercial fishing laws and regulations currently provide for the take and possession of nearshore and continental shelf species of finfish, shrimp, and prawns in ocean waters off California under laws enacted by the California Legislature, and regulations adopted by the California Fish and Game Commission (Commission) and the federal Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council). Existing laws and regulations governing sport and commercial fishing include: season, size, and bag limits; closed seasons and areas; restrictions on fishing gear; permit requirements and conditions; reporting requirements for fish catches and landings; monitoring requirements; and use of transportation and landing receipts.

The Commission is considering changes to ocean sport and commercial fishing regulations affecting nearshore fishes including several rockfish species, lingcod, cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, California sheephead, California halibut, surfperch, sanddabs, starry flounder, leopard shark, and monkeyface eels. The Commission is also considering changes to sport and commercial fishing regulations for continental shelf species of finfish including lingcod, rockfishes, and ocean whitefish. Many of these nearshore and shelf species are also managed by the Council pursuant to the federal Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan and federal Sustainable Fisheries Act. The Council is currently considering regulatory changes, based on Department recommendations, that will compliment the Commission regulations.

A wide range of options is being considered by the Commission to adequately address issues that are interrelated or unique to the nearshore and shelf groundfish fisheries. For the nearshore fisheries, interim management measures are being considered in an effort to stabilize nearshore fish stocks. These measures are interim to the extent that they may be replaced by regulations adopted in conjunction with CaliforniaÕs Nearshore Fishery Management Plan on or before January 1, 2002. For the shelf groundfish fishery, management measures are being considered to help keep harvest levels of shelf groundfish species in line with levels needed to achieve rebuilding goals for overfished stocks of lingcod, bocaccio, canary rockfish and cowcod. The options being considered provide for a variety of ways to achieve management goals, both biological and allocative. The following is a summary of the specific regulatory options being considered.

Reduce recreational bag and possession limits for the following nearshore and shelf species: all rockfishes in aggregate, bocaccio, canary rockfish, cowcod, lingcod, cabezon, kelp and rock greenlings, and California sheephead.
Reduce the take of cowcod by prohibiting fishing for and retention of cowcod south of Cape Mendocino, or by establishing two cowcod closure areas in southern California and prohibiting bottom fishing for specific species of finfish within the closure areas and prohibiting commercial trawling for shrimp and prawns within the closure areas.
Reduce the number of hooks that recreational anglers may use when fishing for rockfish or lingcod.
Reduce the take of shelf rockfish and lingcod by (a) extending the seasonal rockfish and lingcod closures by two months to a total of four months south of Cape Mendocino; (b) prohibiting fishing for and retention of lingcod statewide from November through April; and (c) changing the location of the southern rockfish and lingcod management line.
Prevent a shift in effort on nearshore fish stocks due to reductions in the take of shelf groundfish by prohibiting the take of cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, sanddabs, California sheephead, and ocean whitefish south of Cape Mendocino during the rockfish and lingcod closures.
Authorize sport vessels to transport recreational finfish through restricted fishing areas either under an annual permit issued by the Department for a fee of $30 (Permit for Transit of Recreational Finfish Through Restricted Fishing Areas, FG 672 (new 09/00)) or by filing a declaration (Declaration for Transit of Recreational Finfish Through Restricted Fishing Areas, FG 673 (new 09/00)) with a $7.50 filing fee on each occasion.
Improve data collection and monitoring by requiring owners and operators of Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessels to carry and cooperate with observers collecting data for the Department of Fish and Game and other fishery agencies on trips when space is available and at no charge to the sponsoring agency, and by requiring that owners and operators of Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessels submit a written explanation to the Department within 15 days of the DepartmentÕs request for an explanation if observer coverage of a trip is denied.
Expand the list of species of nearshore fishes to better reflect those in need of current and future management.
Define nearshore fish stocks as black rockfish, black-and-yellow rockfish, blue rockfish, brown rockfish, calico rockfish, China rockfish, copper rockfish, gopher rockfish, grass rockfish, kelp rockfish, olive rockfish, quillback rockfish, treefish, California sheephead, greenlings of the genus Hexagrammos, cabezon, California scorpionfish, surfperch of the family Embiotocidae, starry flounder, leopard shark, and monkeyface eels, and specify that a commercial nearshore fishery permit is required only for those species listed in Fish and Game Code Section 8588 when it first became effective, January 1, 1999.
Define nearshore fisheries as the commercial or recreational take or landing of any species of nearshore fish stocks.
Define nearshore waters as the ocean waters of the state extending from the shore to one nautical mile from land, including one nautical mile around offshore rocks and islands, or to a depth of 40 fathoms, whichever is the greater distance from land.
Increase minimum size limits for the commercial take of cabezon and California sheephead. Increase the minimum size limit for the recreational take of cabezon, and establish a minimum size limit for the recreational take of California sheephead.
Consider area closures for nearshore fishing including: (a) closing the nearshore commercial fishery to all gears along the entire length of the California coast within one mile of the mainland shore; (b) closing the nearshore commercial and recreational fisheries to all gears within a radius of one to three miles around major fishing ports (Crescent City, Trinidad, Humboldt Bay, Shelter Cove, Noyo Harbor, Tomales Bay, Bodega Bay, San Francisco Bay, Princeton, Santa Cruz, Moss Landing, Monterey, Morro Bay, Port San Luis, Santa Barbara, Ventura, King Harbor, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Newport Bay, Dana Point, Oceanside, Mission Bay, and San Diego), or, as an alternative, closing only the commercial fishery in these areas; (c) closing the nearshore commercial fishery to all gears within one mile of the mainland coast on weekends and on state recognized legal holidays; and (d) closing the nearshore commercial fishery to all gears within one mile of the mainland coast from sunset on Wednesday to sunset on the following Sunday and on state recognized legal holidays.
Reduce the number of hooks allowed in the commercial nearshore fishery in two areas of coastline that are currently exempt from the 15-hooks per line provision: from Point Bolinas to Point Reyes, Marin County, and from Gitchell Creek to False Cape, Humboldt County.
Expand the current commercial seasonal closure on surfperch, except shiner perch, by one month to include April 15 through July 31. Establish a recreational seasonal closure (April 15 through July 31) either for all surfperch, except shiner perch, or for barred, calico, and redtail surfperch.
Establish closures during the nesting season for cabezon (October through March) and greenlings (September through December).
Establish fishing groups (waves) and fishing periods for commercial nearshore fishery permit holders as a tool for reducing effort.
Prohibit the use of a transportation receipt when landing or transporting nearshore fish stocks, and require that a landing receipt be completed at the time of the landing for any landing that includes nearshore fish stocks, pursuant to Section 8043 or 8047 of the Fish and Game Code.
Make inoperative Fish and Game Code Sections 8395 and 8586.
REGULATORY LANGUAGE

(1) Section 1.90 is added to Title 14, CCR:

1.90. Nearshore Fish Stocks, Nearshore Fisheries, and Nearshore Waters Defined.
(a) Under the authority of Section 8587.1 of the Fish and Game Code, Section 8586 of the Fish and Game Code is made inoperative effective January 1, 2001.
(b) ÒNearshore fish stocksÓ means any of the following:
(1) black rockfish (Sebastes melanops),
(2) black-and-yellow rockfish (Sebastes chrysomelas),
(3) blue rockfish (Sebastes mystinus),
(4) brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus),
(5 ) cabezon (Scorpaenichthys marmoratus),
(6) calico rockfish (Sebastes dallii),
(7) California scorpionfish (sculpin) (Scorpaena guttata),
(8) California sheephead, (Semicossyphus pulcher),
(9) China rockfish (Sebastes nebulosus),
(10) copper rockfish (Sebastes caurinus),
(11) gopher rockfish (Sebastes carnatus),
(12) grass rockfish (Sebastes rastrelliger),
(13) greenlings of the genus hexagrammos,
(14) kelp rockfish (Sebastes atrovirens),
(15) leopard shark (Triakis semifasciata),
(16) monkeyface eel (Cebidichthys violaceus),
(17) olive rockfish (Sebastes serranoides),
(18) quillback rockfish (Sebastes maliger),
(19) treefish (Sebastes serriceps),
(20) starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus), and
(21) surfperch of the family Embiotocidae.
(c) "Nearshore fisheries" means the commercial or recreational take or landing of any species of nearshore finfish stocks.
(d) "Nearshore waters" means the ocean waters of the state extending from the shore to one nautical mile from land, including one nautical mile around offshore rocks and islands, or ocean waters of the state extending from the shore to a depth of 40 fathoms whichever is the greater distance from land.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 8585.5 and 8586, Fish and Game Code.

(2) Section 27.60, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

27.60. Limit.
(a) General. No more than 20 fin fish in combination of all species with not more than 10 of any one species, may be taken or possessed by any one person except as otherwise provided. (See Sections 27.70 through 28.62 for minimum size limits and poundage restrictions for certain species.)
(b) Within the overall bag limit of 20 fish the following special limits apply: Rockfish (rockcod)--10 (nine-three) fish, all of which may be of the same species, except as provided for bocaccio in Section 28.55 which is three (two-one), cowcod in Section 28.55 which is one per person and two per boat zero, and canary rockfish in Section 28.55 which is three(two-one); lingcod--two one fish; cabezon in Section 28.28 which is (nine-zero) fish; California sheephead in Section 28.26 which is (nine-zero) rock greenling in Section 28.29 which is (nine-zero); kelp greenling in Section 28.29 which is (nine-zero); salmon--two fish, except as provided in Section 27.80; trout taken from ocean and bays--three fish; white seabassÐthree fish, except as provided in Section 28.35; sturgeon--one fish; striped bass--two fish; California halibut--five fish, except as provided in Section 28.15; Pacific halibut--one fish; giant (black) sea bass--zero fish, except as provided in Section 28.10; broadbill swordfish--two fish; marlin--one fish; garibaldiÐzero fish; gulf grouper--zero fish; broomtail grouperÐzero fish; leopard shark--three fish; blue shark--two fish; thresher shark--two fish; shortfin mako shark--two fish; soupfin shark--one fish; sixgill sharkÐone fish; sevengill sharkÐone fish; white shark--zero fish.
(c) There is no limit on the following species: Albacore, anchovy, bluefin tuna, grunion, jacksmelt, topsmelt, petrale sole, Pacific butterfish (pompano), queenfish, sanddabs, shiner surfperch, skipjack, jack mackerel, Pacific mackerel, Pacific staghorn sculpin, starry flounder, round herring, Pacific herring and Pacific sardine.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, and 215, and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 215, 220, and 5517, and 8585.5, Fish and Game Code.

(3) Section 27.67 is added to Title 14, CCR:

27.67. Transport of Recreational Finfish Through a Restricted Fishing Area.

Alternative 1

The Department may authorize recreational vessels that have finfish in possession that were taken in waters open to sport fishing, to transport those finfish through waters closed at that time to sport fishing. Permission shall be granted on an annual permit signed by the Regional Manager of the Department of Fish and GameÕs Marine Region. To apply for a permit, an owner or operator of a vessel required to obtain a commercial passenger fishing boat license, or a recreational angler shall submit an application for Permit for Transit of Recreational Finfish Through Restricted Fishing Areas (form FG 672 (new 09/00) which is incorporated by reference herein), and an annual fee of $30.00. The permit shall be onboard the vessel when transiting waters closed to sport fishing.

Alternative 2

The Department may authorize recreational vessels that have finfish in possession that were taken in waters open to sport fishing, to transport those finfish through waters closed at that time to sport fishing. Permission shall be granted for a single trip on a declaration signed by the Regional Manager of the Department of Fish and GameÕs Marine Region. To file a declaration, an owner or operator of a vessel required to obtain a commercial passenger fishing boat license, or a recreational angler shall submit a Declaration for Transit of Recreational Finfish Through Restricted Fishing Areas (form FG 673 (new 09/00) which is incorporated by reference herein), and a fee of $7.50. The declaration shall be onboard the vessel when transiting waters closed to sport fishing.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 7071, 7923 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 7923 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.

(4) Section 27.82 is added to Title 14, CCR:

27.82. Management Areas Defined; Closure Periods Defined.
(a) Cowcod closure areas means both Area 1 Ð the area bound by 118% 50' W. long., 33%50' N. lat., 120% W. long., and 32%20' N. lat. and Area 2 Ð the area bound by 117%50' W. long., 32%50' N. lat., 118% W. long., and 32%30' N. lat.

Alternative 1 -subsection (b)

(b) Rockfish and lingcod management line means a line extending due west magnetic from the mainland shore at 36% N. lat. (near Lopez Point, Monterey County). The northern rockfish and lingcod management area means ocean waters between 40%10' N. lat. (near Cape Mendocino, Humboldt County), and 36% N. lat. (near Lopez Point, Monterey County). The northern rockfish and lingcod closure means (January through April) or (March through June). The southern rockfish and lingcod management area means ocean waters between 36% N. lat. (near Lopez Point, Monterey County) and the U.S.-Mexico border. The southern rockfish and lingcod closure means (January through April) or (November through February).

Alternative 2 - subsection (b)

(b) Rockfish and lingcod management line means a line extending due west magnetic from Point Conception, Santa Barbara County, (at 34%27' N. lat.). The northern rockfish and lingcod management area means ocean waters between 40%10' N. lat (near Cape Mendocino, Humboldt County) and Point Conception, Santa Barbara County (at 34%27' N. lat.). The northern rockfish and lingcod closure means (January through April) or (March through June). The southern rockfish and lingcod management area means ocean waters between Point Conception, Santa Barbara County, (at 34%27' N. lat.) and the U.S.-Mexico border. The southern rockfish and lingcod closure means (January through April) or (November through February).

(c) The recreational take of nearshore fish stocks as defined in Section 1.90, Title 14, CCR, is prohibited within a (one - three) mile radius from the center of the entrance to the ports of Crescent City, Trinidad, Humboldt Bay, Shelter Cove, Noyo Harbor, Tomales Bay, Bodega Bay, San Francisco Bay, Half Moon Bay/Princeton, Santa Cruz, Moss Landing, Monterey, Morro Bay, Port San Luis, Santa Barbara, Ventura, King Harbor, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Newport Bay, Dana Point, Oceanside, Mission Bay, and San Diego.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215, 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 206, 215, 221 and 8585.5, Fish and Game Code.

(5) Section 27.96 is added to Title 14, CCR:

27.96. Surfperch.
Alternative 1

Open Season and Area: Statewide, surfperch shall not be taken or possessed during the period of April 15 through July 31, except shiner surfperch (Cymatogaster aggregata) which may be taken at any time.

Alternative 2

Open Season and Area: Statewide, barred surfperch, calico surfperch, and redtail surfperch shall not be taken of possessed during the period of April 15 through July 31.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 206, 215, 221 and 8585.5, Fish and Game Code.

(6) Section 28.15, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

28.15. Halibut, California.
(a) Limit: Five in waters south of a line extending due west magnetic from Point Sur, Monterey County, and three in waters north of a line extending due west magnetic from Point Sur, Monterey County. California halibut shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas.
(b) Minimum size: Twenty-two inches total length.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206 and 220, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 209, 215 and 220, Fish and Game Code.

(7) Section 28.26 is added to Title 14, CCR:

28.26. California Sheephead.
(a) Open Season and Area: Open all year except California sheephead shall not be taken or possessed in the northern rockfish and lingcod management area during a northern rockfish and lingcod closure, or in the southern rockfish and lingcod management area during a southern rockfish and lingcod closure. and/or California sheephead shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas.
(b) Limit: (Ten-zero).
(c) Minimum size: (12-14) inches total length.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215 220 and 7071, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 215 220 and 8585.5, Fish and Game Code.

(8) Section 28.27, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

28.27. Lingcod.
(a) Open Season and Area: Open all year except lingcod shall not be taken or possessed by a person aboard a vessel, or by spear fishing during the months of November through April statewide,(and/or) and January and February in the northern rockfish and lingcod management area during a northern rockfish and lingcod closure, or in the southern rockfish and lingcod management area during a southern rockfish and lingcod closure.(and/or) Lingcod shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas. January and February in ocean waters south of 36_00' N. lat. at Lopez Point, Monterey County, and during the months of March and April in ocean waters from Lopez Point, Monterey County, north to 40_10'N. lat at Cape Mendocino, Humboldt County.
(b) Limit: Two One.
(c) Minimum size: Twenty-six inches total length.
(d) Method of take: Not more than three (two-one) hooks and one line. For purposes of this section, a hook is a single hook, or double or treble hook with multiple points connected to a common shank.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215 and 220, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 215 and 220, Fish and Game Code.

(9) Section 28.28, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

28.28. Cabezon.
(a) Open season: All year, except that cabezon shall not be taken or possessed in the northern rockfish and lingcod management area during a northern rockfish and lingcod closure, or in the southern rockfish and lingcod management area during a southern rockfish and lingcod closure. and/or (Cabezon shall not be taken or possessed during the period October through March. or Cabezon shall not be taken or possessed south of Cape Mendocino during the period October through March.) (and/or) Cabezon shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas.
(a)(b) Limit: Ten (Nine- Zero).
(b)(c) Minimum size: Fourteen (15-18) inches total length.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215, 220, 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 210, 8585.5 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.

(10) Section 28.29, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

28.29. Kelp Greenling. Rock Greenling.
(a) Open season: All year, except that kelp greenling and rock greenling shall not be taken or possessed in the northern rockfish and lingcod management area during a northern rockfish and lingcod closure, or in the southern rockfish and lingcod management area during a southern rockfish and lingcod closure. and/or (Kelp greenling and rock greenling shall not be taken or possessed during the period September through December. or Kelp greenling and rock greenling shall not be taken or possessed south of Cape Mendocino during the period October through March.)(and/or)Kelp greenling and rock greenling shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas.
(a)(b) Limit: Kelp Greenling: Ten (Nine - Zero). Rock Greenling: Ten (Nine - Zero).
(b)(c) Minimum size: Twelve inches total length.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215, 220, 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 210, 8585.5 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.

(11) Section 28.54, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

28.54. California Scorpionfish (Sculpin).
(a) Open season: All year, except that California scorpionfish shall not be taken or possessed in the northern rockfish and lingcod management area during a northern rockfish and lingcod closure, or in the southern rockfish and lingcod management area during a southern rockfish and lingcod closure.(and/or) Also, California scorpionfish shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas.
(a)(b) Limit: Ten.
(b)(c) Minimum size: Ten inches total length.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215, 220, 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code. Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 210, 220, 8585.5, 8586 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.

(12) Section 28.55, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:
28.55. Rockfish (Sebastes).
(a) Open season Seasons and areas:
(1) All year, except that rockfish, including bocaccio, cowcod, and canary rockfish, shall not be taken or possessed by a person aboard a vessel, or by spear fishing during the months of January and February in ocean waters south of 36%00' N. lat. at Lopez Point, Monterey County, and during the months of March and April in ocean waters from Lopez Point, Monterey County, north to 40%10' N. lat. at Cape Mendocino, Humboldt County.in the northern rockfish and lingcod management area during a northern rockfish and lingcod closure, or in the southern rockfish and lingcod management area during a southern rockfish and lingcod closure.

Alternative 1 - subsection (a)(2)

(2) Rockfish shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas.

Alternative 2 -subsection (a)(2)

(2) Rockfish, except rockfish that are defined as nearshore fish stocks pursuant to Section 1.90, shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas.
(b) Limit: Ten (Nine - Three)in any combination of species, except: bocaccio - three (one- two); canary rockfish - three(two-one); cowcod - (one per person but not more than two per boat (zero). or one per person but not more than twoone per boat).
(c) Size limit: None, except no bocaccio may be taken or possessed that is less than 10 inches in total length.
(d) Method of take: Not more than three (two-one) hooks and one line. For purposes of this section, a hook is a single hook, or a double or treble hook with multiple points connected to a common shank.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215, and 220, and 7071, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 215, and 220, and 8585.5, Fish and Game Code.

(13) Section 28.57 is added to Title 14, CCR:

28.57. Sanddabs.
Open Season and Area: Open all year, except that sanddabs shall not be taken or possessed in the northern rockfish and lingcod management area during a northern rockfish and lingcod closure, or in the southern rockfish and lingcod management area during a southern rockfish and lingcod closure. and/or Sanddabs shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas.
NOTE.
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215 and 220, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 215 and 220, Fish and Game Code.

(14) Section 28.58 is added to Title 14, CCR:

28.58. Ocean Whitefish.
Open Season and Area: Open all year, except that ocean whitefish shall not be taken or possessed in the northern rockfish and lingcod management area during a northern rockfish and lingcod closure, or in the southern rockfish and lingcod management area during a southern rockfish and lingcod closure. and/or Ocean whitefish shall not be taken in the cowcod closure areas.
NOTE.
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215 and 220, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 215 and 220, Fish and Game Code.

(15) Section 28.65, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

28.65. General.
Except as provided in this article, fin fish may be taken only on hook and line or by hand. Any number of hooks and lines may be used in all ocean waters and bays except:
(a) San Francisco and San Pablo bays between the Golden Gate Bridge and the west Carquinez Bridge, where only one line with not more than three hooks may be used.
(b) On public piers, no person shall use more than two rods and lines, two hand lines, or two nets, traps or other appliances used to take crabs.
(c) When rockfish (genus Sebastes) or lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus) are aboard or in possession, where only one line with not more than three (two - one) hooks may be used pursuant to sections 28.55 or 28.27, respectively.
(d) No gaff hook shall be used to take or assist in landing any fin fish shorter than the minimum size limit. For the purpose of this section a gaff hook is any hook with or without a handle used to assist in landing fish or to take fish in such a manner that the fish does not take the hook voluntarily in its mouth. No person shall take fin fish from any boat or other floating device in ocean waters without having a landing net in possession or available for immediate use to assist in landing undersize fish of species having minimum size limits; the opening of any such landing net shall be not less than eighteen inches in diameter.
(e) North of Point Conception (34%27'00" N. lat.), where only one rod and line may be used by each angler fishing for salmon, or fishing from any boat or floating device with salmon on board.
(f) Mousetrap gear prohibited: It is unlawful to use, assist in using, or to possess aboard any vessel, hook-and-line gear commonly termed Òmouse trapsÓ constructed of a hook(s) or lure(s), attached to one end of a line that is attached to a float, or floats at the other end, and that when fished, is not attached directly to a person or vessel. Possession of such gear aboard a vessel shall be prima facie evidence that the gear is being used in violation of this regulation.
(g) North of Point Conception to Horse Mountain, Section 27.80(a)(3) applies to each angler fishing for salmon or fishing from any boat or floating device with salmon on board.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 200, 202, 205, 215, 220, and 240, and 7071, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 200, 202, 205, 206, 215, 220, and 240, and 8585.5, Fish and Game Code.

(16) Section 112, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

112. Surfperch,: Sale, or Purchase, Season and Area: South of Point Arguello.
(a) Under the authority of Section 8587.1 of the Fish and Game Code, Section 8395 of the Fish and Game Code is made inoperative effective January 1, 2001.
(b) Surfperch of the family Embiotocidae shall not be taken during the period of April 15 through July 31, except shiner surfperch (Cymatogaster aggregata), which may be taken, sold or purchased at any time. Surfperch may be sold or purchased only between August 1 and April 24. South of a line drawn east and west through Point Arguello, barred surfperch, redtail surfperch, and calico surfperch shall not be taken for commercial purposes.
(c)Surfperch of the family Embiotocidae of the following species: barred surfperch; redtail surfperch; and calico surfperch, taken during the open season north of a line drawn east and west through Point Arguello may be shipped south of said line and sold or purchased subject to the following regulations:
(a)(1) All such fish shall be individually tagged by the permanent attachment of tags inscribed "California Department of Fish and Game-Surfperch" before shipment south of said line. Possession of such fish south of said line without attached prescribed tags is unlawful for commercial purposes.
(b)(2) Tagging shall be conducted only by licensed wholesale fish dealers, their agents, or employees designated by the department. Said designated dealers are defined as those signing receipts for tags delivered to their place of business by department employees at cost. Designated dealers shall be required to produce official receipts for all said species of surfperch in quantities consistent with and corresponding to the number of tags requested.
(c)(3)It shall be unlawful to transfer, transport or possess unused tags at any location other than the designated dealer's licensed place of business.
(d)(4) The possession of unused surfperch tags, or any surfperch tags not attached to surfperch is unlawful in any place where fish are sold south of said line.
(e)(5) A fee of $10 for each tag order shall be paid to the department to cover administrative costs.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 7071, 8395, and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 8395 and 8585.5, Fish and Game Code.

(17) Subsection (e) of Section 120, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

120. Prawn or Shrimp Trawling.
(e) Permit Areas. Only one permit will be required to possess trawls for the taking of shrimp or prawns in any areas described below. Trawling for shrimp or prawns shall be permitted only in those waters of Fish and Game Districts 6, 7, 10, 17, 18, and 19, lying not less than three (3) nautical miles from the nearest point of land on the mainland shore, all offshore islands and the boundary line of District 19A, except that in waters lying between a line extending due west from False Cape and a line extending due west from Pigeon Point, trawling is allowed within two (2) nautical miles from the nearest point of land on the mainland shore. However, no trawling shall be conducted in the cowcod closure areas defined in Section 150.6, Title 14, CCR.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 1050 and 8842, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 1050, 8140 and 8842, Fish and Game Code.

(18) Subsection (d) of Section 120.3, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

120.3. Golden Prawn (Penaeus Californiensis), Spot Prawn (Pandalus Platyceros) and Ridgeback Prawn (Eusicyonia Ingentis) Trawling.
(d) Permit Area. Trawling for golden, spot and ridgeback prawns shall be permitted in waters not less than 25 fathoms in depth and lying not nearer than three nautical miles distance from the nearest point of land on the mainland shore, and from all offshore islands. No trawling shall be conducted in the cowcod closure areas defined in Section 150.6, Title 14, CCR. Also, Ttrawling shall not be conducted within District 19A which shall include a line from Malibu Point (34o01.8'N., 118o40.8'W) to Rocky Point (Palos Verdes Point) (33o46.5'N., 118o25.7'W.).
(1) Trawling Zones.
(A) Trawling Zone 1: Includes waters between the California-Oregon border and a line extending due west from False Cape (Lat. 40o31').
(B) Trawling Zone 2: Includes those waters between a line extending due west from False Cape and a line extending due west from Lopez Point (Lat. 36o).
(C) Trawling Zone 3: Includes those waters between a line extending due west from Lopez Point and a line extending due west from Point Arguello (Lat. 34o35').
(D) Trawling Zone 4: Includes those waters between a line extending due west from Point Arguello and a line extending due west from Point Dume (Lat. 34o0').
(E) Trawling Zone 5: Includes those waters lying between a line extending due west from Point Dume and the California-Mexico boundary, excluding Fish and Game Districts 19A, 19B, 20, 20A and 21.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 710.7, 711 and 8842, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 710.7, 711, 8140 and 8842, Fish and Game Code.

(19) Section 150.1 is added to Title 14, CCR:

150.1. Nearshore Fishery Permit Required.
Notwithstanding Section 8587 of the Fish and Game Code, a nearshore fishing permit is required only for the commercial take of the following species of nearshore fish stocks: black-and- yellow rockfish, gopher rockfish, kelp rockfish, California scorpionfish, greenlings of the genus Hexagrammos, China rockfish, grass rockfish, California sheephead, and cabezon.
NOTE
Authority cited: Section 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Section 8587, Fish and Game Code.

(20) Section 150.6 is added to Title 14, CCR:

150.6. Management Areas Defined; Closure Periods Defined.
(a) Cowcod closure areas means both Area 1 Ð the area bound by 118% 50' W. long., 33%50' N. lat., 120% W. long., and 32%20' N. lat. and Area 2 Ð the area bound by 117%50' W. long., 32%50' N. lat., 118% W. long., and 32%30' N. lat.

Alternative 1 -subsection (b)

Alternative 2 - subsection (b)

Alternative 1 - subsection (c)
(c) The commercial take of nearshore fish stocks as defined in Section 1.90, Title 14, CCR, is prohibited within a (one - three) mile radius from the center of the entrance to the ports of Crescent City, Trinidad, Humboldt Bay, Shelter Cove, Noyo Harbor, Tomales Bay, Bodega Bay, San Francisco Bay, Half Moon Bay/Princeton, Santa Cruz, Moss Landing, Monterey, Morro Bay, Port San Luis, Santa Barbara, Ventura, King Harbor, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Newport Bay, Dana Point, Oceanside, Mission Bay, and San Diego.
Alternative 2 - subsection (c)
(c) The commercial take of nearshore fish stocks as described pursuant to Section 1.90, Title 14, CCR, is prohibited within one mile of the mainland shore.

Alternative 3 - subsection (c)
(c) The commercial take of nearshore fish stocks as described pursuant to Section 1.90, Title 14, CCR, is prohibited within one mile of the mainland shore from (sunset on Friday - sunset on Thursday - sunset on Wednesday) until sunset on the following Sunday and during State recognized holidays.
NOTE.
Authority cited: Sections 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 8585.5 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.

(21) Section 150.8 is added to Title 14, CCR:

150.8. Prohibit Use of Transportation Receipts for Nearshore Fishery.
Notwithstanding Section 8047(c) of the Fish and Game Code, nearshore fish stocks shall not be transported under the authority of a transportation receipt. Nearshore fish stocks shall be transported only after the completion of a landing receipt pursuant to Section 8043 or 8047 of the Fish and Game Code.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 8043, 8047 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.

(22) Section 150.9 is added to Title 14, CCR:

150.9. Nearshore Fishing Groups and Fishing Periods.
(a) A person possessing a valid nearshore fishery permit shall be assigned to a fishing group based upon his or her commercial fishing license number.

Alternative 1 - subsection (b)
(b) A person possessing a valid nearshore fishery permit and an odd-numbered commercial fishing license shall only take and possess nearshore fish stocks as defined in Section 1.90 for commercial purposes in the months of January, March, May, July, September and November. A person possessing a valid nearshore fishery permit and an even-numbered commercial fishing license shall only take and possess nearshore fish stocks as defined in Section 1.90 for commercial purposes in the months of February, April, June, August, October and December.

Alternative 2 - subsection (b)
(b) A person possessing a valid nearshore fishery permit and an odd-numbered commercial fishing license shall only take and possess nearshore fish stocks as defined in Section 1.90 for commercial purposes from the first day of each month through day 15 of each month. A person possessing a valid nearshore fishery permit and an even-numbered commercial fishing license shall only take and possess nearshore fish stocks as defined in Section 1.90 for commercial purposes from day 16 of each month through the last day of the month.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 7056, 8585.5 and 8587, Fish and Game Code.

(23) Section 150.16 is added to Title 14, CCR:

150.16. Commercial Take of Nearshore Fishes.
(a) Cabezon, greenlings, California scorpionfish, and California sheephead shall not be taken in the northern rockfish and lingcod management area during a northern rockfish and lingcod closure, or in the southern rockfish and lingcod management area during a southern rockfish and lingcod closure.
(b) California sheephead shall not be taken in the cowcod closure area.
(c) (Cabezon shall not be taken during the period of October through March. or Cabezon shall not be taken south of Cape Mendocino during the period of October through March.)
(d) (Kelp greenling and rock greenling shall not be taken during the period of September through December. or Kelp greenling and rock greenling shall not be taken south of Cape Mendocino during the period of September through December.)
(e) Notwithstanding subsection 8588(b) of the Fish and Game Code, minimum size limits (total length) are as follows:
(1) Black-and-yellow rockfish (Sebastes chrysomelas) ................. 10 in.
(2) Cabezon (Scorpaenichthys marmoratus) ................................. (14 - 18in.)
(3) California scorpionfish or sculpin (Scorpaena guttata) ............. 10 in.

(4) California sheephead (Semicossyphus pulcher) ....................... (12 -14in.)
(5) China rockfish (Sebastes nebulosus) ....................................... 12 in.
(6) Gopher rockfish (Sebastes carnatus) .......................................10 in.
(7) Grass rockfish (Sebastes rastrelliger) ...................................... 12 in.
(8) Greenlings of the Genus Hexagrammos (Hexagrammos spp.) .. 12 in.
(9) Kelp rockfish (Sebastes atrovirens) ........................................ 10 in.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 7071, 8587.1 and 8588, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 8585.5, 8587.1 and 8588, Fish and Game Code.

(24) Section 150.17 is added to Title 14, CCR:

150.17. Limitations on Number of Hooks and Area.
Notwithstanding Fish and Game Code Sections 9027, it is unlawful to use more than 150 hooks on a vessel, or to use more than 15 hooks per line, to take nearshore fish stocks for commercial purposes in ocean waters within one mile of the mainland shore.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 7050, 7051, 7055, 7060 and 8585.5, Fish and Game Code.

(25) Section 195, Title 14, CCR, is amended to read:

195. Report of Fish Taken, to Be Made by Owner of Barge or Vessel for Hire, and Accommodation for and Cooperation with State and Federal Observers.
(a) Records required by Sections 7923 and 8026 of the Fish and Game Code shall be made on a form (Skipper's Log Book-Marine Sportfishing, DFG 195 (10/89), see Appendix A) provided by the department.
(b) The owner or operator of each vessel required to obtain a permit under Sections 7920, 7921 and 7923 of the Fish and Game Code shall post a notice in a prominent place on the vessel giving information to fishermen on license requirements, bag limits, and other pertinent information. This notice shall be furnished by the Department of Fish and Game.
(c) Both the vessel owner and operator shall be responsible for keeping accurate records and complying with these regulations, even though the task is delegated to others.
(d) No fish may be taken or possessed by any person, including the owner or operator of any vessel licensed under Section 7920, 7921 and 7923, on any such vessel in excess of the limits prescribed for a person acting under the authority of a sportfishing license.
(e) Owners and operators of vessels and barges subject to these provisions shall carry and cooperate with department and federal fishery observers, and observers collecting data for the department on trips when space is available, at no charge to the sponsoring agency. If observer coverage of a trip is denied by the owner or operator of a vessel, the department may require an explanation in writing by the owner or operator be submitted to the department within 15 days of the departmentÕs request for an explanation.
NOTE
Authority cited: Sections 7923, 7071 and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.
Reference: Sections 7923, and 8587.1, Fish and Game Code.