throwinmetal,

They can hassle you for having a box full of barbed flies, but I'm pretty sure LilWhippersnapper is right that they can only cite you if your flies in the water have barbs on them. 

The only way they can cite you for anything is if they catch you red handed. They can't assume anything.

Yep, there's been many times where I wished I was using barbless hooks. Especially before I was a fly fisherman. These little size 20 hooks don't have much of a barb, and will usually come out pretty easily.

Hell no... I found it on Google Images. lol. It's actually a painting. I thought it was a great pic, better than my crappy reel pic.

LilWhippersnapper wrote:

---

No. they can only cite you if you actually have them on your line, and your line is in the water.

---

That's probably right, but might be worth asking a warden sometime. If you are hunting waterfowl which requires nontoxic shot, you can get cited for just having lead ammo in your pocket without it even being in your gun.

sorry brian, but this is california. There is no intent to use rule here.

I would question whether or not the DFG has the right to search a person's fly box, or anything else on their person.  I would think their rights are limited to what they can see.

Anyone know for sure?

JL

In some cases it seems the regulations are left vague.  In those situations the warden gets to interpret the law.

JT,

I agree laws are often written in a vague manner, or more commonly so complicated anyone without a law degree can't understand them. However, law enforcement officers are not empowered to interpret the law. True, a warden may enforce (issue a citation/arrest) the law as he/she understands it. The court is the only body with the authority to interpret and render judgements on the law.

If I were to get tagged with a citation for possessing, but not using a barbless hook I would most likely go to court and challenge the citation, most certainly if my license and/or equipment were confiscated. Law enforcement sometimes gets away with questionably issued citations because the fines are much cheaper than paying an attorney to challenge the infraction so people take the least expensive path to resolution. However, when people challenge questionable enforcement of the law and win, the enforcement agency will start to get the message from the court and either change their citation/arrest procedures or seek a legislative action to alter the law.

SCM,

I should have been more clear.  You are right that wardens do not have the right to "interpret" the law.  That is up to the courts.  But how many people actually challenge the wardens "interpretations" in a court of law?  I've been in those situations before where the fine was cheaper than the fight to challenge the citation in court (not fishing related--actually it had to do with skateboarding).  Anyway, when you don't have the resources, the warden is the law.

You also brought up a good point about the method of inspection.  I've also heard of wardens using cotton balls to check hooks for barbs.  A pinched down barb will most likely fail such a test.  A hook with rust on it can also fail such a test.  It would be nice if they used a standardized test that we could use to test our own flies at home. 

I have had three separate game wardens inspect whether the flies were barbless. Once on the Yuba, once on the Owens and once on Putah. First they pull out a magnifying glass and inspect the fly. If they don't like what they see they poke the fly into a piece of cloth to see if it will come out easily. All three times the flies did not release easily from the cloth. One was a size 22 elk hair caddis!!! I thought it was ridiculous. I looked in the reg book, but didn't see anything about testing barbless hooks, so I don't know how they came up with the test.

One more very important thing. Make sure you pass the attitude test when talking to the wardens. If you agree with everything they say they will generally let you go. If you start arguing with them about the test they can go as far as confiscating all of your equipment. Luckily no tickets for me.

I am fairly sure the only flies they can check are ones that the warden sees you using on your line in the water.

I have to admit there are times when I tie on a fly and forget to crimp down the barb. It's not intentional, just kind of a space cadet that way so its something I better get a handle on.  I'd be interested in finding out what works best for others for crimping down a barb, I have a pair of forceps attached to my vest  but find that it can be really really tough to get the barb pressed flat on tiny hooks.  I would guess that 95% of mine would fail the cottonball test, depending on what the pass/fail criteria was (example, cotton shreds vs a few individual filaments catch and pull off vs cotton slips off easily without catching).

I'd never argue with a game warden because I'm sympathetic to their cause, the risks they face and the lunatics they are likely to encounter in the course of a day, but I'd be frustrated if I got tagged because a filament of cotton hung on a microscopic burr on a size 22 hook.

Yes Windknots the DFG are a great group of people I have now talked to a few of them and they are working very hard to make Putah a better fishery. My post was only to discuss my position on testing barbs. I used to use forceps before my run ins with the man and now use the pliers on my leatherman to pinch barbs. You will not pass the test using forceps to pinch down the barbs. I think I will have to buy pair of flat pliers as it sounds like they may work better.

There was an article about a year ago about another digruntled fly fisher in a fly fishing mag and he didn't pass the attitude test when discussing his "barbless hook". The fisherman swore he pinched down the hook. The case went to court and the judge ruled the fisherman pinched the barb halfway and he decreased the fine in half.

If the barb is smashed flat, broken or crimped and it doesn't stay in a cotton shirt, then how is it not barbless?