Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 21, 2025, 05:19:43 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Recent Topics

[Today at 04:05:23 PM]

[October 31, 2025, 03:49:10 PM]

[October 24, 2025, 06:43:12 PM]

[October 14, 2025, 10:14:18 AM]

by [WR]
[October 12, 2025, 11:41:58 PM]

by [WR]
[October 12, 2025, 11:37:09 PM]

[October 01, 2025, 04:23:31 PM]

[September 23, 2025, 01:30:32 PM]

[September 23, 2025, 01:29:36 PM]

[September 20, 2025, 02:16:06 PM]

[September 19, 2025, 06:43:49 PM]

[September 16, 2025, 09:06:41 PM]

[September 13, 2025, 04:55:06 PM]

[September 08, 2025, 08:30:37 PM]

[September 04, 2025, 03:31:25 PM]

Picture Of The Month



Guess who's back?
jed with a spring Big Mack

Topic: WA bottomfish rule changes  (Read 2763 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

no_oil_needed

  • Lingcod
  • *****
  • Location: Lake Washington
  • Date Registered: May 2013
  • Posts: 256
Relax. You'll live longer.


Northwoods

  • Sturgeon
  • *******
  • Formerly sumpNZ
  • Location: Sedro-Woolley, WA
  • Date Registered: Nov 2011
  • Posts: 2308
I guess I'm OK with the cutback in retention limits if the black rockfish really are being pressured more than they can handle.  I'm not so happy about axing the minimum length on ling cod.  Though, I guess, more people keeping the small ones will leave the bigger ones (that are more often females) to breed. 

Personally, I still probably won't keep a ling under 22" as even at that length they are almost not worth the effort to fillet.  Especially knowing the bigger ones are out there.
Formerly sumpNZ
2012 ORC 5th Place