Decision spurred by request to delay Eastern Sierra Trout Opener
SACRAMENTO – The California Fish and Game Commission (FGC) voted unanimously Wednesday, April 15 in favor of an emergency regulation that authorizes targeted recreational fishing closures and seasonal adjustments through May 31, 2020. State officials characterized the regulation as a surgical approach that stops far short of a statewide closure.
The emergency regulation originated after Inyo and Mono Counties, home of the most popular Eastern Sierra trout fisheries, formally requested the delay of the annual opener popularly known as “Fishmas” in response to the COVID-19 health emergency. Officials including local sheriffs and county supervisors voiced concerns that the expected influx of visitors could spread the virus and overwhelm local health and public safety resources. Those counties had already closed visitor services such as motels, restaurants, campgrounds, RV parks, launch ramps and lake access roads. Inyo and Mono have since been joined by Alpine and Sierra counties in their requests to delay the trout opener.
The approved emergency regulation delegates authority to California Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) Director Charlton Bonham to alter, delay or close recreational fisheries, only through consultation and the approval of FGC President Eric Sklar. The authority to alter hunting seasons and regulations was not included in the emergency regulation. Actual closures will be determined later once the regulation has been approved by the California Office of Administrative Law. As an emergency regulation, approval is expected to be expedited.
. “We are pleased that the state will employ a very measured approach to balancing the mental health benefits of being outdoors with the need to protect the health and safety of communities dependent on outdoor tourism.”</p>
<p>General public comments were overwhelmingly in opposition to the emergency regulation. Some speakers expressed the concern there could be a domino effect if one county after another requested recreational fishing closures for their jurisdictions. Others objected on state constitutional grounds or pointed out that fishing for subsistence while observing social distancing is safer than shopping at a busy grocery store and should not be impeded.</p>
<p>Many public commenters complained about de facto fishing bans imposed by local authorities through the closure of fishing access points including launch ramps and asked for intervention on behalf of anglers. Sklar and Bonham repeatedly advised the public that such local closures are beyond the scope of the Commission’s and Department’s authority.</p>
<p>An<a href=)
earlier attempt to consider the emergency regulation was scuttled due to technical difficulties caused by a crush of public interest that overwhelmed phone lines, as well as some deliberate disruption from members of the public. In the aftermath, the Commission and Department took great pains to argue the intent of the emergency regulation would be surgically applied in limited areas for a short time to end May 31, 2020.