There is suppose to be three storm fronts moving in, which probably accounted for the light diver turnout at Terranea Resort.

The water looked a little green and the surf zone had three to four foot swells between the calms.

“It’s rough but doable,” I was told.

Rather than prove that I can make it in and make it out alive, and hopefully not hurt, for a dive that was sure to be low vis, I decided to start debriefing early.

Seven divers, in three teams made it out of The Cove.

Instructor Ed and Crazy Ivan joined me at the Cove for a red cup breakfast.

The first divers emerged, reporting seven to ten feet of visibility.

A couple of free divers entered during our debriefing period.

The tourists felt safe, since I wore my German Police shirt.

The second group emerged from SCUBA diving – “You didn’t miss much, I would say five to seven feet at best..”

There was a skeleton debriefing crew – Crazy Ivan, Instructor Ed, TwinDuct, Eric and me.

We broke out the ghetto grill to cook some spicy sausages, but nobody had any matches.

After 20 minutes of trying to flame tissue paper with a car lighter and rubbing two sticks together, it looked like we were going to go hungry.

I dug down to the third layer of treasures in the Duster’s trunk, and found a book with four matches still in it.

I split them in half giving us eight.

We barbecued at a secret, undisclosed location.

Debriefing wrapped up a little afternoon.

Instructor Ed suggested that we go to the best and friendliest bar in San Pedro – Rebel’s Cocktails.

Instructor Ed tells Eric and TwinDuct how fat I was before he taught me to dive and made them both promise to never quit SCUBA diving.

It is suppose to be stormy all this week – massive rain, thunder and lightning.

It doesn’t sound like I will be getting in much lobster hunting in this month, but I hope to hit the end of the season hard.

The thing is, after all these storms, where are the lobsters going to be?

Deeper, I know, but how deep?

California Court of Appeal smacks down Department of Fish and Game for stopping and searching cars without authority.

The California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District on Tuesday ruled that a state agency may not pull over and search a motorist on a mere hunch that a lobster might be hidden in the vehicle. The court considered the case of Bounh Maikhio, a motorist stopped by Department of Fish and Game Warden Erik Fleet on August 19, 2007 at 11pm. That evening, Fleet had been spying through a telescope on the Ocean Beach pier in San Diego when he saw Maikhio put something into his bag.

Fleet testified that he did not “necessarily” suspect Maikhio of a crime because he had no way of knowing whether the man had been fishing legitimately or not. Regardless, Fleet waited until Maikhio had driven away from the pier to stop him. While searching through his car. Fleet found Maikhio’s bag, which contained a spiny lobster. Maikhio was handcuffed and cited for lobster possession during closed season.

The case is of particular interest because California Attorney General Jerry Brown argued that a state warden has the right to stop any driver “without reasonable suspicion that he committed any crime.” Maikhio, in contrast, could not afford to hire an attorney and was represented by the public defender’s office which argued no such authority existed. The appeals court agreed, citing a 1944 attorney general’s ruling. The court argued that wardens could enforce the law without harassing motorists.

“It may be fairly implied from sections 1006 and 2012 that a DFG warden generally has the implied power to stop people who are fishing on a pier to demand they exhibit their catch and to inspect their receptacles (e.g., tackle boxes, pails, etc.) in which fish may be stored,” Justice Alex C. McDonald wrote for the majority. “However, contrary to the people’s conclusory assertion, it cannot be fairly implied from the DFG’s express statutory powers that its wardens have the power to stop a specific vehicle on a public street and detain its occupants to make a section 2012 demand and conduct a section 1006 inspection.”

The court went on to explain that because the warden had no individualized suspicion that Maikhio had been involved in criminal activity, the stop was just as unconstitutional as setting up a roadblock to search every passing vehicle for lobsters.

“Although the people argue Fleet’s method of using a spotting scope to observe fishing activity and then stop vehicles on public streets to check compliance with fishing laws and regulations is the most effective means of promoting the government’s interest in protecting fish, the fact that a certain method of promoting a government interest is the most effective does not necessarily make it reasonable under Fourth Amendment, particularly if a less intrusive method exists,” McDonald explained.

Justice Patricia D. Benke disagreed, arguing that Constitutional protections do not apply to motorists who may also be hunters or fishermen.

“Because of the highly regulated nature of hunting and fishing and the consequent diminished expectation of privacy of hunters and fisherman, there is no requirement in our statutes or under the Constitution that a game warden believe that any crimes have been committed or that any game regulations have been violated before exercising his or her powers of inspection,” Benke wrote in her dissent.

The court documents can be found here.

The original story can be found here.