Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: Vancouver_2010 on August 24, 2021, 11:03:09 AM
-
Question regarding tidal boundaries:
A few friends and I were fishing for pinks at a river mouth this weekend (I'll leave the river unnamed, though I'm sure some of you can guess where it is) that does not have a specified tidal boundary, and that is closed in the non-tidal portion to any salmon fishing. This particular river has a large estuary and tidal flats section then moves up to a channel that is clearly tidal influenced before hitting what I think most reasonable people would consider the river proper.
4 DFO officers did a spot check on us, and in speaking with three of them separately while the others checked licenses etc, each had a different definition of the tidal boundary:
1) First one (youngish guy) stated it was a particular structure (clear landmark) along the aforementioned channel leading to the river
2) Second essentially said, "just be reasonable - we don't get a clear definition either, and it makes it hard for us to enforce. Basically just don't be obviously fishing in the river, respect the resource, etc".
3) Third (most senior) was the most confident with his definition: When the tide is low, the boundary is where the river ends, then the boundary essentially shifts up river as the tide comes in. This seemed like it leaves it up to a complete judgement call, but it does seem to match up a bit with the DFO definition: "Unless otherwise specified, the tidal boundary is a straight line drawn between the two most seaward points of land located on either side of the mouth of a river or stream"
We were really erring on the side of caution where we were fishing so it didn't really matter in the end, and overall it was a positive interaction. It did really make me feel for these guys who have to try an enforce the constantly changing and vague regulations.
So basically, my question is: has anyone ever heard of a "moving" tidal boundary like this before? Secondly, is there a reason they don't just throw up a white triangle on every river to mark the tidal boundary and make life easier for everyone?
-
I think the information may buried deep in the Pacific Fishery Management Area Regulations, 2007 (SOR/2007-77) under SCHEDULE 2 (Sections 1 to 3 and 5) Management Area Boundary Descriptions.
Look for the relevant Management Area and there will be a description of the boundaries and Lat Longs that you can put into Google maps.
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2007-77/page-3.html#docCont
However, based on the location I suspect you are talking about, the document only provides lat/long for two points that define the southern limit of the management area and I could not see the northern limit where the estuary is located, which is what I believe you are trying to determine.
-
If the people tasked with enforcing the regulations don't know, then how can they expect the recreational fishermen to know.
-
......try page 21 of the freshwater regs...
-
Tidal water boundary
Unless otherwise specified, the tidal boundary is a straight line drawn between the two most seaward points of land located on either side of the mouth of a river or stream. A tidal boundary may also be designated by a fishery officer by placing a triangular sign near the mouth of a river or stream. Maps and descriptions of other specified tidal boundaries are at the back of this guide.
from the DFO glossary of Sport Fishing terms
https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/definitions-eng.html
In common law the seaward points of land would be defined by the natural high water mark. So the tidal boundary is the straight line drawn between the most seaward high water marks on the points of land either side of the river mouth. These used to be commonly marked. If Maritime Law differs from this I am not aware of it.
Oh and I wanted to mention this doesn't clarify in my mind at least if in a river with no salmon retention or no fishing for salmon if that regulation applies or does not apply when the river is running over exposed tidal flats as DFO tends to restrict rivers to such regulations without that consideration. It's a grey area for me.
-
from the DFO glossary of Sport Fishing terms
https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/definitions-eng.html
In common law the seaward points of land would be defined by the natural high water mark. So the tidal boundary is the straight line drawn between the most seaward high water marks on the points of land either side of the river mouth. These used to be commonly marked. If Maritime Law differs from this I am not aware of it.
Oh and I wanted to mention this doesn't clarify in my mind at least if in a river with no salmon retention or no fishing for salmon if that regulation applies or does not apply when the river is running over exposed tidal flats as DFO tends to restrict rivers to such regulations without that consideration. It's a grey area for me.
Great answer Ralph, doesn't get more direct than that
-
Question regarding tidal boundaries:
A few friends and I were fishing for pinks at a river mouth this weekend (I'll leave the river unnamed, though I'm sure some of you can guess where it is) that does not have a specified tidal boundary, and that is closed in the non-tidal portion to any salmon fishing. This particular river has a large estuary and tidal flats section then moves up to a channel that is clearly tidal influenced before hitting what I think most reasonable people would consider the river proper.
4 DFO officers did a spot check on us, and in speaking with three of them separately while the others checked licenses etc, each had a different definition of the tidal boundary:
1) First one (youngish guy) stated it was a particular structure (clear landmark) along the aforementioned channel leading to the river
2) Second essentially said, "just be reasonable - we don't get a clear definition either, and it makes it hard for us to enforce. Basically just don't be obviously fishing in the river, respect the resource, etc".
3) Third (most senior) was the most confident with his definition: When the tide is low, the boundary is where the river ends, then the boundary essentially shifts up river as the tide comes in. This seemed like it leaves it up to a complete judgement call, but it does seem to match up a bit with the DFO definition: "Unless otherwise specified, the tidal boundary is a straight line drawn between the two most seaward points of land located on either side of the mouth of a river or stream"
We were really erring on the side of caution where we were fishing so it didn't really matter in the end, and overall it was a positive interaction. It did really make me feel for these guys who have to try an enforce the constantly changing and vague regulations.
So basically, my question is: has anyone ever heard of a "moving" tidal boundary like this before? Secondly, is there a reason they don't just throw up a white triangle on every river to mark the tidal boundary and make life easier for everyone?
4 dfo at the mouth of the cap? I'd have taken a picture for historical precedent lol.
Did you hook any pinks.
-
Never got past the unnamed river or its location.
-
4 dfo at the mouth of the cap? I'd have taken a picture for historical precedent lol.
Did you hook any pinks.
I doubt he's referring to the cap since it has a clearly defined tidal boundary (train bridge)
-
I doubt he's referring to the cap since it has a clearly defined tidal boundary (train bridge)
ah missed that...
-
from the DFO glossary of Sport Fishing terms
https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/definitions-eng.html
In common law the seaward points of land would be defined by the natural high water mark. So the tidal boundary is the straight line drawn between the most seaward high water marks on the points of land either side of the river mouth. These used to be commonly marked. If Maritime Law differs from this I am not aware of it.
Oh and I wanted to mention this doesn't clarify in my mind at least if in a river with no salmon retention or no fishing for salmon if that regulation applies or does not apply when the river is running over exposed tidal flats as DFO tends to restrict rivers to such regulations without that consideration. It's a grey area for me.
Thanks RalphH, I was not aware of that definition, however as you elude to, it does not help in many instances, where the tidal fluctuations can occur over a significant distances.
Taking the Capilano as an example, if the boundary was not defined by the bridge or the presence of the Squamish reserve, based on the most seaward high water marks, I would surmise that the tidal boundary would be approximately 400 m upstream of the rail bridge and close to the next bridge (crossed by Taylor Way). Is my logic correct?
-
Taking the Capilano as an example, if the boundary was not defined by the bridge or the presence of the Squamish reserve, based on the most seaward high water marks, I would surmise that the tidal boundary would be approximately 400 m upstream of the rail bridge and close to the next bridge (crossed by Taylor Way). Is my logic correct?
that would be upstream of the mouth. The definition refers to points of land (not areas exposed below the highest tides) at the mouth.
-
Taking the Capilano as an example, if the boundary was not defined by the bridge or the presence of the Squamish reserve, based on the most seaward high water marks, I would surmise that the tidal boundary would be approximately 400 m upstream of the rail bridge and close to the next bridge (crossed by Taylor Way). Is my logic correct?
I confused as to why you would think that, among other things, you would think that the most seaward point of land is 1/2 km inland? If you have look on Google Earth it is pretty easy to estimate where the most seaward points of land is by locating patches of greenery. And I’m also interested how the Reserve comes into your computations?
-
Interesting definition regarding the seaward high water points. I have always interpreted the boundary unless otherwise marked or defined as being where the tidal influence can be observed. And that also moves with the river level. A river in flood will have tidal influence far upstream from the same river during a drought.
I have fished rivers where the tidal boundary is not explicitly described in the public regulations but is marked with fisheries boundary markers mentioned in the regulations. Unfortunately the boundary markers installed years earlier are often fallen down or covered with trees so as to be no longer visible leaving you in a quandary if unfamiliar with that specific stream.
-
I honestly feel that pinks should be left alone in the tidal section of the river as long as the non-tidal portion is closed to fishing due to conservation concerns.
Fishing below an arbitrarily set tidal boundary makes it legally acceptable, but is it ethical to do it when you know that those fish are headed towards the non-tidal section?
I've been struggling with that concept during the last couple of returns.
Maybe I'm just getting old and should give up fishing altogether.
-
Appreciate all of the responses.
I think I understand the "seaward land" definition, but it still seems like a far from optimal way of evaluating where the boundary is. I agree with Knn, where that definition does no good in a scenario where the tidal fluctuations occur over significant distances. Try looking at the Nanaimo River on Google Maps as an example.
That being said, the "seaward land" definition was not specifically used by any of the DFO officers, so who knows how this is being evaluated..
Milo, I agree wholeheartedly, though I will say this particular river most certainly has no shortage of returning spawners.
-
the definition for a river as terminating at the farthest land ward point at the mouth is the same in non-tidal water. In that way the current push into the lake is governed by the regulations for the lake not those for the river.
Tidal influence can go many miles above where tidal boundaries are designated. Pitt Lake, the Vedder Canal and Dewdney Slough are local examples.
As I think the definition I provided from the DFO list of fishing term definitions comes out of court cases and that how the courts defined it. It's the usual way to distinguish them in common law. The other definition such the BCR Train Bridge on the Cap' and the CPR bridge at Mission on the Fraser are by statute... they are specified in the Fisheries Act. Otherwise the seaward points of land definition applies.
*********
I just re-read the 3 responses you said you got and 2 of them essentially said the same thing while the other was a generalized answer I have heard from other COs and FOs which is they are mostly out to ticket the more flagrant offenses so just be reasonably in line with the spirit of the regulation. I don't think you need worry about it given the response you got. Just don't fish above the tidal boundary be a specified landmark like a bridge or the points of land definition.