Siuslaw 10/18/14: A beast and a poacher!

[xltom]

for trolling the Slaw, I use a 7' MH Cabela's Tourney Trail® EVA Split Grip Casting Rod, TTESGC705, the whole Tourney Trail line of IM7 rods was just on sale 50% off in Springfield (these rods are always going on sale), I picked up an 8.5' M for Siltcoos coho (TTT864-T) for $34 (but I would not mind hooking a chinook on this rod).

I think a rod rating for chinooks something like this is about right: MH, Line: 10-17, Lure Weight: 1/4 to 3/4 or 1oz.
coho: M, Line: 8-15, Lure: 1/4-3/4.

Wow those are some light rods. I have the cabelas tourney.. exact same but mine is a spinning rod. I just assumed I needed a rod with a line weight the same or larger than the line used(40lb). Is this # not relative to the breaking strength of the rod itself? Thanks for all the great tips roger!

 

[rogerdodger]

Uhh, yeah if you are asleep you are definitely not attending your rod, very ticketable. Good thing u just admitted it for everyone to read

I do not agree. until I discuss with a Trooper and get an exact answer from them, my opinion is that closely attended is a combination of distance and attentiveness.

dozing OFF while close to your rod on a small boat is closely attending. dozing OFF in a chair on the bank a couple feet from your rod is closely attending.

some people wide awake have slower reactions than some of us have while dozing. if you want to read some funny threads on this, go over to cry-fish....

sleeping in your truck with a rod propped up on the bank is not closely attending. sleeping in the berth/bed up front in a 34" cabin cruiser with a rod trolling out the back is not closely attending.

that is my opinion. roger

 

[rogerdodger]

Wow those are some light rods. I have the cabelas tourney.. exact same but mine is a spinning rod. I just assumed I needed a rod with a line weight the same or larger than the line used(40lb). Is this # not relative to the breaking strength of the rod itself? Thanks for all the great tips roger!

everything I have found says the line rating is out dated and meaningless. probably it goes back to mono line long ago that had poor flexibility...don't know.

 

[CoastieFlo]

Laying down to sleep in a boat, while you still have a rod out is not closely attending.

If you dont agree thats fine , I tried to help. You assume I dont know what im talking about I guess

I do not agree. until I discuss with a Trooper and get an exact answer from them, my opinion is that closely attended is a combination of distance and attentiveness.

dozing OFF while close to your rod on a small boat is closely attending. dozing OFF in a chair on the bank a couple feet from your rod is closely attending.

some people wide awake have slower reactions than some of us have while dozing. if you want to read some funny threads on this, go over to cry-fish....

sleeping in your truck with a rod propped up on the bank is not closely attending. sleeping in the berth/bed up front in a 34" cabin cruiser with a rod trolling out the back is not closely attending.

that is my opinion. roger

 

[rogerdodger]

Laying down to sleep in a boat, while you still have a rod out is not closely attending.

If you dont agree thats fine , I tried to help. You assume I dont know what im talking about I guess

Actually, I assumed that you were sharing your opinion and interpretation, which is what I have been doing, since you have not identified yourself as a Trooper and have not referenced an exact definition from enforcement authorities on what "closely attending" means to them.

 

[jamisonace]

In all seriousness, i would be curious to see any info you have to support your claim. I suspect that writing regulation for this would be unlikely due to enforcement difficulty and the fact (err opinion) that it's ridiculous to think that a person cannot rest while fishing.

I might do a little research (in this case "might" means probably will not) but I think it's actually distance from your rod and not vigilance that determines rod attendance.

Laying down to sleep in a boat, while you still have a rod out is not closely attending.

If you dont agree thats fine , I tried to help. You assume I dont know what im talking about I guess

 

[upperroguepirate]

I remember a few yrs back while fishing from my boat on the Cowlitz, when i lived in Longview, for springers, the coffee wasn't helping and it was a long day and i was patiently waiting. I didn't pick me up a red bull total Zero (in the grey can) that juice right there will make your clock tic all night. Anchored and having my herring spinning in the zone....I had dozed off with my rod of course close by and in the heat of the day wham, my drag clicker went off and that nice 18 lb springer was headed somewhere fast. The drag just sizzled. I landed it more than a few hundred yards down river below the castle rock bridge. Didn't have a net and lifted it into the boat. talk about an adrenalin rush. I was only using 1 rod. it's all you need. Anyone putting out 2 rods when u can only keep 2 kings seems pretty desperate

 

[jhop111]

I agree with jamisonace that distance should have a larger part to play. If we're wrong then plunking is pretty much illegal and all those nice older guys I fish with for winter steelhead are the biggest group of outlaws I've seen. Also bells should be considered as evidence in future court cases..perhaps my reclining chair falls into the paraphernalia category as well. From now on I'm standing and drinking red bull . To heck with a warm fire and even pole holders lol.

 

[rogerdodger]

ponder this: 3 people on say a 20' boat trolling in windy/choppy water with other boats around and a rock wall nearby, something like the Siuslaw jaws on a normal day.

3 rods deployed out the back, 2 people sitting on the bench seats (P1 awake, P2 taking a nap, sunglasses on, cap pulled down eace: ), the other person is fully engaged with safely driving the boat from up in the drivers seat. A rod buries, P1 is 'on the rod' and grabs it and starts fighting the fish. P2 wakes up/jumps up and reels in Rod 2 and then P2 reels in Rod 3 and then gets the net up in the air to alert boats nearby that a fish in on.

Did P2 commit 2 violations (not closely attending a rod followed by fishing with more than 1 rod) by reeling in the gear on both no fish rods? Does that mean P2, after reeling in one rod, should have traded places with the person driving the boat so that the driver could then reel in Rod 3?

Either way, was the person driving the boat "closely attending" a rod? The driver was farther from the rods and focused on safe boat operation, clearly unable to get to a rod quickly, such that P2, despite snoozing, would seem to have been more closely attending a rod, so much so that Person 2 potentially committed the opposite infraction by fishing with more than one rod....opcorn:

 

[jhop111]

A perfect scenario . I'm going to just chalk up the initial though that provoked this discussion to a case of either trolling (pun intended) or good old fashioned opinion. Either way it's turned a bit one sided with no further information to enlighten us.

 

[billfisher]

p1 and p2 don't have boat driving permits. So Driver can't fish! lol

 

[rogerdodger]

p1 and p2 don't have boat driving permits. So Driver can't fish! lol

that was the extra credit part of the scenario, so you get the bonus points!

 

[billfisher]

 

[DrTheopolis]

Yeah, because it's not like it's in the General Regulations... under Rule #1.

"No, Boss, really -- I was 'closely attending' my desk!"

 

[rogerdodger]

Yeah, because it's not like it's in the General Regulations... under Rule #1.

"No, Boss, really -- I was 'closely attending' my desk!"

I think there has never been a question about it being under Rule#1, the question is how it is or should be applied/interpreted.

Q: is someone driving the boat in conditions requiring their attention for safety and not able to quickly get to the back and attend their rod allowed to have a rod out trolling?

 

[DrTheopolis]

Q: is someone driving the boat in conditions requiring their attention for safety and not able to quickly get to the back and attend their rod allowed to have a rod out trolling?

Regardless of any enforcement officers' interpretation,I think The People have spoken on that issue. And he's wide awake(or so his passengers hope), sitting within a few feet of his rod.

 

[rogerdodger]

Regardless of any enforcement officers' interpretation,I think The People have spoken on that issue. And he's wide awake(or so his passengers hope), sitting within a few feet of his rod.

just so I am clear, the guy driving the boat, say 14 feet away from a rod, and unable to leave the seat for safety reasons until someone else arrives to take over, he is more attending to a rod than a guy sitting right beside a rod, a foot away, with is cap pulled down and dozing...just wondering the logic, since it seems obvious to me which person can more quickly attend the rod if it buries and the reel starts screaming...

now I might be biased about dozing off as I did sleep through many lectures during grad school but was never accused of not 'attending' them, I was however often blamed for 'ruining the curve' after final exams...

 

[troutdude]

Here is another theoretical supposition (although for all practical purposes; has been known to literally occur at various intervals)...

I'm out doing some "social" trout fishing. Two lines are in the drink; with their respective counterparts placed carefully in their holding devices. Ding Ding! Rod number one goes down. Fish On! My attention immediately becomes entangled (pun intended for dramatic flare)--and ergo--said attention, is deprived from rod #2 (still waiting for a tug, from a hungry creature from the depths). Am I then in peril of a visit from a ticketing agent of doom; for "ignoring" rod #2?

In our next scene; both lines are out and tips are up. There's not much action. The sun is out; and its a lazy day. So, I gently drift into a sub-conscious state in my lawn chair. Am I not "closely attending" my rods; because I'm half asleep (okay...maybe really out cold)? I would be LIVID, if I was cited for such an "OFFense"!!! I would fight such a "charge", tooth and nail.

All of this to say that the exact wording, in the reg book, is open to WIDE interpretation. Perhaps ODFW needs to consider, a more precise description. Then, maybe we can all get back to catching some fish.

Tight lines and happy trails...

and don't forget the write-in campaign...

Pat McManus for President!!!

 

[JeannaJigs]

 

[coyo7e]

lol, "fish-on, fish-on!"

Where DO poachers go?