Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: cdjk123 on March 10, 2017, 12:05:28 PM
-
Last year, I got my PAL (Possession and Acquisition Licence) and I was required to take a half day course on safe gun handling, types of firearms, etc. It was immensely helpful in teaching me about firearm safety, types of firearms, ammunition, etc. It is also required if you wish to purchase a firearm in Canada.
In BC, you can just purchase a licence and go fishing. You are told and encouraged to read up on regulations, fish handling techniques, ethical practices, etc, but often many people do not bother. This is evidenced by things like the googan festival on the Vedder River each fall.
Often you'll see anglers mishandle fish, dragging fish onto the bank, holding them out of the water too long, treating certain species of fish worse than other kinds, holding them by the gills, snagging fish, etc. The list could go on forever.
While it's difficult to witness anglers acting unethically, I believe that in many cases, it's simple ignorance that leads to unethical angling practices. Often, anglers are given misinformation, or have misguided perceptions about fishing practices which leads to their unethical angling.
Like the PAL course, I would like to see a mandatory education program whereby anglers are required to attend a short, 2-3 hour course on ethical angling practices, styles of fishing techniques, benefits of catch and release, species of fish, etc. It could also end with a test, just like the PAL. Completion of this course would be a requirement to purchase a licence.
I believe an mandatory course like this could help alleviate an ever growing problem in the angling community of ignorance, that simply stems from misinformation.
What are your thoughts?
-
It's been brought up here in the past. Do a forum search and you'll find the discussions.
There are grey areas in the regulations. People have differing opinions of what is ethical and what is not. Many people fish the way they were taught in this country or from their home land and it doesn't matter where you come from, people are not programmable robots so everyone has an opinion of what they consider appropriate for the situation.
What is ethical? Is netting ethical on a small river or right at a mouth of a river? Some say it's our right, some say if it's strictly for sustinance it's okay, some say no bloody way. Is fishing with a 10' leader okay on a lake but not on a river? Is fishing with two rods on a boat okay but only one if you stand in the same water. So many ifs and so many opinions I'm not sure that a manditory course on fishing ethics is practical to administer.
Hunting is different because the tools you use to hunt with are lethal to humans is used carelessly. Just like vehicles. Fishing rods tend not to kill humans so there is no urgency to spend money administering a program that doesn't directly impact human safety.
That's my take - I could be off - wouldn't be the first time I was wrong and I guarantee it won't be my last.
-
I agree with your sentiments and would also like to see some way of reducing the level of ignorance and bad practices out there. You will never change the bad habits or ethics of poachers or my friend-hats. However as you suggest I also believe there are a lot of folks out there (particularly when the pink mist descends) that are misguided or have not taken the time to do enough research or read the regulations.
I believe there is a desire (but not sure who by) to increase the size of the recreational fishery and to encourage more people, particularly youngsters, to take up fishing. However, if there were a mandatory training session, as per the PAL, this would likely put a lot of people off getting a license and/or going fishing. Maybe that would be a good thing, I do not know. I know I would take such a course but I am already an addict.
The number of people that mandatory training would put off would likely be proportional to the difficulty of doing the coarse. There may be a happier middle way in which people could only get the license by correctly answering 18 out of 20 multiple choice questions, which contained links to the correct answers when they got them wrong. This way the new angler would know they could not fail and are gently encourage to have read or understand key parts of the regulation. It could all be done on-line as part of the application process and apart from the set up would not cost any more to administer and would not cost the angler any more apart from having to spend a few more minutes of time in the comfort of their homes.
-
One way would be to introduce it in our education system at a reasonable early stage - maybe Grade 7. I remember we had the CORE course in PE one time some 40 years ago. Sure its a different concept but if you educate anew generations at an early stage you'll get so culture change.
-
I think it should be mandatory keeping what you hook regardless snagging or anything. reach the limit and you have to leave. Then nothing to argue.
-
I think it should be mandatory keeping what you hook regardless snagging or anything. reach the limit and you have to leave. Then nothing to argue.
the dumbest thing adviced I read on this forum .
-
the dumbest thing adviced I read on this forum .
Last pink season, two guys float fishing beside me at Squamish river. They Very skillful snagged fish on every cast. Standard float, standard leader length. In one afternoon, they hooked more than fifty fish and enjoyed it. What do you think?
Many of you enjoy fishing, more care about meat in the salmon season. Why frustrate both sides
-
Last pink season, two guys float fishing beside me at Squamish river. They Very skillful snagged fish on every cast. Standard float, standard leader length. In one afternoon, they hooked more than fifty fish and enjoyed it. What do you think?
As this was such a blatant act of poaching and you had a clear view and up close account of the poaching, we can assume that you did the right thing and did a RAPP report?
-
the dumbest thing adviced I read on this forum .
X2
-
I think it should be mandatory keeping what you hook regardless snagging or anything. reach the limit and you have to leave. Then nothing to argue.
Not everyone wants to drive an hour just to fish for 15 mins and bring home 4 fillets
-
I think it should be mandatory keeping what you hook regardless snagging or anything. reach the limit and you have to leave. Then nothing to argue.
And you just destroy any remaining wild steelhead runs in the process. Good show.
-
Wow so quickly derailed to so many levels of fail? Although the trolling has been pretty successful. Any chance we can get back on topic and maybe identify some useful suggestons like Riebers ?
-
I think the big danger would be a course would potentially reduce license sales - though a curmudgeon like me may see that as a positive.
Is a course needed? Would it make any difference? People who are going to snag and/or poach are just as likely to do so regardless..
If people haven't noticed a good % of anglers out there are ESL or even have little or no English language ability so the course would have to be provided in several languages.
What about non-resident, foreign anglers?
Would everyone have to take a course every year. Applying it just to new anglers is pointless IMO.
An alternative that just popped into my head was to have anglers sign or acknowledge a statement of ethics or a statement of principles rather than a course. Easily ignored as well but it may avoid at least the 1st downside. It could be brief and cover:
- limits
- no snagging
- proper handling of fish that must be released
- identifying species
- respect selective angling guidelines when appropriate
on the water etiquette
- doing your best to educate yourself on the the above.
...and so on.
-
An alternative that just popped into my head was to have anglers sign or acknowledge a statement of ethics or a statement of principles rather than a course. Easily ignored as well but it may avoid at least the 1st downside. It could be brief and cover:
- limits
- no snagging
- proper handling of fish that must be released
- identifying species
- respect selective angling guidelines when appropriate
on the water etiquette
- doing your best to educate yourself on the the above.
...and so on.
I think this may be the best idea. Similar to what they made hockey parents on the island do. The fact that they give you absolutly nothing when buy a fishing license online is a bit of an issue. No guidance on where to find or how to apply the regs in your area. Still there only fish in the end how much feelings do they have?
-
--would rather see a voluntary course...maybe an incentive like a reduction in first year license fee if the course is taken
--should be available at events and on line with qualified instructors... maybe Freshwater fisheries paid staff.
--join a club that publicly displays and demonstrates ethical angling
--have different types of identification... like a hat or patch or sticker for boat or vehicle with ethical angler logo for those who take the course. the reason being that others will know that anyone displaying the identification will likely RAPP or at least be some one that could be asked about best practices when fishing.
--expand the angler ambassador program... again with identification so others know it is OK to ask and get credible information
--My view is compliance and demonstrating best practices is more effective than enforcement.
-
--would rather see a voluntary course...maybe an incentive like a reduction in first year license fee if the course is taken
--should be available at events and on line with qualified instructors... maybe Freshwater fisheries paid staff.
--join a club that publicly displays and demonstrates ethical angling
--have different types of identification... like a hat or patch or sticker for boat or vehicle with ethical angler logo for those who take the course. the reason being that others will know that anyone displaying the identification will likely RAPP or at least be some one that could be asked about best practices when fishing.
--expand the angler ambassador program... again with identification so others know it is OK to ask and get credible information
--My view is compliance and demonstrating best practices is more effective than enforcement.
I like this concept. Very good.
-
I think a combination of a couple of ideas would be best , Knnn's idea of a multiple choice questionnaire followed by Ralph's idea of an acknowledgement of ethics
Any mandatory in house course would be a logistical nightmare , as well as financial nightmare , and any voluntary course would be preaching to the converted anyways
-
There is a new App by Sport Fishing Institute called FishingBC for Iphone. Just downloaded it and its a huge step in the right direction.
-
There is a new App by Sport Fishing Institute called FishingBC for Iphone. Just downloaded it and its a huge step in the right direction.
I like this app, a freshwater version would be great. Link to the app. https://fishingbcapp.ca
-
Still there only fish in the end how much feelings do they have?
Im hoping I am just missing something with this portion of your comment... ???
-
In the end a lot of people would take the course and still go out to the river and snag, drag fish on the rocks and fish unethically. I've found the people that don't know what they're doing is wrong respond well when you give them tips but the majority of people know what they're doing is wrong so why would a course won't change anything? Enforcement is the only way to get to them.
-
In the end a lot of people would take the course and still go out to the river and snag, drag fish on the rocks and fish unethically. I've found the people that don't know what they're doing is wrong respond well when you give them tips but the majority of people know what they're doing is wrong so why would a course won't change anything? Enforcement is the only way to get to them.
What do u guys think of DFO installing cameras in high use runs on the vedder. They make comercial guys install deck cams, seems only fair.
-
How to they power, store or send video, identify the anglers with rain gear and polarized glasses on?? Sure the lower and even some mid river areas, the power wouldn't be a huge issue, but the cost of equipment and transmission of video signal that would be high enough quality to be of any use would be simply not be cost effective.
-
Big brother is most everywhere already.
They don't have the manpower to be a steady presence on any of the systems let alone having someone monitor video screens and dispatch the the thread bare staff.
But I'm sure there are a number of areas that are under video surveillance.
They just ain't looking for the guy who forgot to pinch a Barb or kept a tail hooked fish.
-
What do u guys think of DFO installing cameras in high use runs on the vedder. They make comercial guys install deck cams, seems only fair.
Cameras increasingly are everywhere. Was visiting my sister on the Island and we walked a new trail put in last fall and there was a camera. I know cameras are installed on many popular trails, both in Parks and just on Crown Land - so be careful what you do in the bush.
So why not? It might help id who are the really bad offenders and make arrests easier.
-
This is what I do, I work CBA, Correction BC and Corrections Canada for over 23 years, trust me the money that would be required to have the mesh network alone put into place in the remote areas let alone the camera technology that would be required in this application would never be considered. They could hire a CO for every 2kms of river on a 24hr basis and still save money
-
How to they power, store or send video, identify the anglers with rain gear and polarized glasses on?? Sure the lower and even some mid river areas, the power wouldn't be a huge issue, but the cost of equipment and transmission of video signal that would be high enough quality to be of any use would be simply not be cost effective.
Heck, my HD dash cam failed to pick up the license plate of a car that hit and run me (hit and ran?) even though they drove right by. Outdoor cameras, high up on a pole in the rain? Not going to give you the resolution or framerate you need, even if you saved the data inside the camera and skipped broadcasting the video feed :/
-
This is what I do, I work CBA, Correction BC and Corrections Canada for over 23 years, trust me the money that would be required to have the mesh network alone put into place in the remote areas let alone the camera technology that would be required in this application would never be considered. They could hire a CO for every 2kms of river on a 24hr basis and still save money
Interesting. I worked in the same sector. Those cameras provide real time viewing with full motion from remote locations while the typical trail camera does not. I think trail cameras are activated by motion. Street security cameras, highway cams etc provide image capture at less than HD movie quality but have proven important in apprehending offenders or sorting out incidents where neutral observers (sometimes with cellphones) aren't available.
Still you are quite right & make a good point. A cost benefit analysis would have to be done and possible alternatives considered. It may not show cameras would be the best choice. I think the first choice is better enforcement. However it's worth considering and worth acknowledging more should be done.
-
The cameras would be more for getting data on how many people are fishing, what kind of behaviors are happening ect.. Once you have that then you have something you can take to your boss to at least try to justify getting more enforcement but to be honest i could see them shutting down sections before allocated more resources to it. There is already 1 full time officer assigned to the vedder during the summer months I doubt it will get more without some sort of incidents that can be shown on the 6o'clock news.
I am sure some of this has already been attempted in the past
There are a multitude of ways to get funding, even adding a licence surcharge for the vedder system. IMO there should be already some special charge for the vedder.
-
Small world...you mean you worked directly for those agencies or doing the Camera/security applications within that sector? I work in the design, installation/service and commissioning of the systems themselves. And yes the cameras/technology used by say CBA for example are real time full PTZ HD (some UHD now) many equipped with thermal imaging campabilities (which wouldn't be required in this application) but they are able to preform those actions because of the infrastructure (mesh network or otherwise) that is in place. Don't get me wrong there are sections of the river where the possibility of utilizing existing (ie: city of Chilliwack) infrastructure might be feasible but then the man power required to either monitor a live feed or review footage after the fact would still be a huge ongoing cost that imo would be better spent hiring more COs then someone sitting in a office reviewing video.
-
I worked for one of those agencies. FWIW no one in any of the facilities I worked in had a job where they sat in an office and watched a camera feed all day. The camera output was there to 1) help them do their job, 2) provide security and 3) provide an historical record for legal and administrative purposes. Those employees whose job involved watching TVs with the camera feed watched several or had several on at one time.
To be fair to the person who suggested cameras at popular meat holes, the suggestion did not intend or imply the sort of capability that CBA has at border crossings. In fact the mere realization one's actions are recorded for viewing by Peace Officers or security personnel will tend to alter the behaviour of most people towards compliance.
-
Wasn't implying that happened at any of those agencies, I was saying that for it to be effective in this application would require constant viewing/review of all recorded data. As far as the type of capabilities, I agree to a certain extent but would still need that level resolution, low light capabilities as well as pan/tilt/zoom. Without that it would be a pointless costly endeavour. Yes the mere presence of cameras will deter some but that number drops constantly as time goes on as more and more cameras appear everywhere. Without high quality cameras, unless these offenders are "known" to authorities they will never be able to identify anyone and even if they are id'd the video evidence could not be used in any form of prosecution since no images or video under a 960h resolution quaility is admisable in court. Not trying create an argument over it I just know the capabilities of camera technology and what would be required for it to be useful in the type of environment they would be in 24hrs a day 365 days a year
-
Well you've pointed out some possible deficiencies with the idea and thanks for that. It's a suggestion that would need a lot more study for sure.
-
To be fair to the person who suggested cameras at popular meat holes, the suggestion did not intend or imply the sort of capability that CBA has at border crossings. In fact the mere realization one's actions are recorded for viewing by Peace Officers or security personnel will tend to alter the behaviour of most people towards compliance.
This was more my point and less about actually charging someone. The vedder were using as an example because it has the most people there all the time and to seems to have people on here always complaining about illegal and unethical acts. There are a few busy bars on the Fraser that have been problems but they can and have shut fishing down from them (laid law for example).
Dfo does not have the resources or funding to care that much about people that are snagging,kicking fish,using barbed hooks, keeping more above there limit. Sure if there out on the beat they will pinch you for it and even have a few officers assigned to problem areas during the summer (Vedder & Stave) largely because of public outcry in the past.There like the Surrey police you can beat your wife all sunday they ain't coming. Most of there resources are spent dealing with the first nations and bands fighting. When joe puts out his illegal net off the rock by the hope bridge and catches 99% of the fish that go by, the Interior bands get pretty PO'd.
But back to the point I think Relphs point about a multiple choice ethics exam (that you just keep on doing till u get 100%) at the time you get your Licence is reasonable. My point about the cameras was for a discussion not really a case for CSI. I think we have had a pretty good discussion, I think camera's are something that should really be looked into in problem areas
And for the love of god people please stop calling the DFO (Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Fishery officers), CO's. Co's are conservation officers that work for the province and spend 90% of there time trapping and killing black bears.