Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: clownfish on October 23, 2010, 04:05:09 PM
-
Was fishing today on the Alouette at Alco Park, caught one spring around 6lbs, and when my buddy and I were returning to his truck we saw the CO's in the parking lot. They asked to see our licenses and to look at our gear, "no problem" we said, as we were legal (we figured), and I said to the CO's, "Seeing as you have a pen I can write down my catch, seeing as I lost mine while fishing." They looked at my buddies fishing & driver's lic. and took mine back to their truck. After keeping us waiting way over half an hour, they brought my licenses back and told me they were giving me a $115.00 fine for failure to record my catch immediately. They gave us this spiel about it being a "conservation measure" as there is no stocking program for springs, and how they "could have confiscated my gear and my catch" as well as the fine, and they had no way of knowing whether I actually would have recorded my catch. I'm TOTALLY aware of that. What total bullshite! Another fishing buddy of mine has commented numerous times in the past that I'm the most honest fisherman he knows, they have both been with me numerous times in the past when I have told others that the foul-hooked fish they were just ready to bonk has to be released. I WILL be contesting this.
So... word to the wise everyone, even if you try to do everything right, remember, CYA (cover your a$$), and pack two pens, in different pockets.
-
Tough break, I feel for you, but they can't read minds either. For all they know , you might have had no intention of recording your catch, so what are they supposed to do ? Maybe a warning could have been given instead of the fine.
I always have 2 pens with me at all times, in case one doesn't want to work etc. Good luck with the fight, but IMO you don't stand a chance. No matter what your intentions were, either way,at the end of the day, you still violated the law. Again, tough break dude !
-
The write down your catch rule is a silly one imo, but he`s within the law to fine you although it`s a low blow given the fact about what they let fly on the water these days...I never hear the story of the beako who snags fish all day getting a hefty fine but always the honest fisherman who forgot to record his catch on his license or something silly and ultimately meaningless :-\
-
I hear what you're saying....but...you had a spring, and it wasn't written down...
if i never speed, and the one time I do, I get a ticket, I cannot say "I never speed...so I shouldn't get a ticket"...what is there to contest?
-
I hear what you're saying....but...you had a spring, and it wasn't written down...
if i never speed, and the one time I do, I get a ticket, I cannot say "I never speed...so I shouldn't get a ticket"...what is there to contest?
Have to agree as well ... those are the rules, don't really think it's a cash grab, it's their job to enforce the regulations. Hopefully someone else learns from your mistake.
-
a 6lb spring sounds like a jack,and you dont record jacks.
-
So what was I supposed to do?
Write it down in fish blood? My blood? Burn a stick (if I had a lighter) and write it in charcoal?
The fish was caught "clean" and bonked. I'm walking back to the truck with the fish, the CO's have already seen me with it, I figure I've done nothing wrong.
If I was actually guilty of something, then run? or toss the fish in the bush? A little late for either of those, if I ACTUALLY had done something wrong.
-
Depending on what you said to the officer, as it can be used against you, you could always say that after bonking the fish you failed to find your pen that you always carry and immediately went back to your truck to get one or attempted to go to the nearness place to find one. In addition you can have "many" references to support your good nature in court which does help.
Was it over 50cm? Is it really close? that may be another defense.
In the end this is a stupid move on the officers part and is why I don't support them and with the new paper copy's you can print as many copies as you like and retain as many Chinook as you like.
I say fight it!!!!
-
So what was I supposed to do?
Write it down in fish blood? My blood? Burn a stick (if I had a lighter) and write it in charcoal?
The fish was caught "clean" and bonked. I'm walking back to the truck with the fish, the CO's have already seen me with it, I figure I've done nothing wrong.
If I was actually guilty of something, then run? or toss the fish in the bush? A little late for either of those, if I ACTUALLY had done something wrong.
But you did do something wrong dude. You didn't record it immediately after retaining it. Walking to your truck to get the pen isn't good enough, read the regulations, it specifically details this law.
-
But you did do something wrong dude. You didn't record it immediately after retaining it. Walking to your truck to get the pen isn't good enough, read the regulations, it specifically details this law.
But if he had intent to do so then he didn't willingly break the law. It's a honest mistake and not of his control. I lose stuff on the river all the time. I even had my pen blow up and be come unusable, and discovered after I caught my fish.
-
Oh, and if you don't beat the ticket the judge may grant a reduction to help cover your hassle of going to fight it. This depends on income or if the judge kinda hears ya he'll be nice and at least do something. I have friends that have fought tickets and had them reduced as they had a somewhat plausible defense.
But be very respectful and nice to all party's.
Good luck
-
But if he had intent to do so then he didn't willingly break the law. It's a honest mistake and not of his control. I lose stuff on the river all the time. I even had my pen blow up and be come unusable, and discovered after I caught my fish.
Before you commence fishing , you better check to see if everything is in order, if this includes having a working pen or an extra one,then so be it. I know it's a sh!tty law , but it is what it is. Again, the end result was an illegal action, or lack of action for that matter.
-
You got caught and you have to pay the piper even if it was not intetional.
What next, lost your pliers and can't crimp your barb.
I know it sucks but rules are rules.
We all should know them and be prepared.
Not a cash grab in my mind.imo
-
a 6lb spring sounds like a jack,and you dont record jacks.
Thats what I was thinking. Did you have a means of measuring with you? If you are going to be retaining chinook, you probably should so you know if you have a jack or not.
You said you were fishing with a friend. I guess your friend lost his pen while fishing too? Wonder what the odds of both of you losing a pen the same day are?
Doesn't sound like a tax grab to me, sounds like a CO doing there job. Not saying you intentionally were not going to write it down but I have seen so many people not and get away with it. Nice to hear of some enforcment on the river.
-
If you didn't have a pen to record the spring you should have let the fish go.
Not a cash grab.
-
who here actually checks to see if they actually still have their pen on their person just before they bonk their spring? i know i don't. I know i check for my pen when i load my vest into my truck in the morning....
-
It's a cash grab. It was unjust. I'm an ethical angler. I'm a victim. Blah, blah, blah
Whether it was untintentional or not, you broke the law. Suck it up, take responsibiliity for your actions, and buy a clip for your pen.
-
These guys are right you were in the wrong.
Here is something that happened to me a while back. Back when the new law was passed where you couldnt talk on the phone while driving I got a phone call ( work related ) and I didnt have a bluetooth yet. I quickly answered the phone at a red light and told my client I was in my truck and would call back when I could stop. Well I made a right turn at that light and their were police officers there and was told to pull over. They had a guy staged at the light in plain clothes checking for this. I told the officer I was only on the phone for 10 seconds and at a red light. They understood and if it had happened one month earlier they would have given me a warning but they were not allowed to issue warnings anymore. So I took the ticket and didnt fight it because although it sucks I was still breaking the law. I sucked it up.
Their is no grey area in either of our cases. In your case they use the word "immediately" and in my case its" in no circumstances" so suck it up and pay the fine
-
OMG, I just went-off on another thread how I never see CO's :-[
-
take it to court to get a judge to rule on it !
-
How far were you from your truck??? Maybe you had to find something suitable to write on and the truck was your only option (possibly being close) as it may have been raining and/or wet and/or you had nothing suitable to write on in your vest and no where in the immediate area to write on?
If it was only a minute away or in sight that might be another defense too as it is in the immediate area. If it was out of sight or several minutes away then maybe not.
The definition of immediately is not clearly defined. Is it 1 minute, 5 minutes, the second it leaves the water, within a reasonable amount of time?
It is also a great idea to call several different head CO's and get their input into what happened, and get their name and record the time you called. Also call the supervisor of the officer you dealt with and inform him of the situation and why you think it is not justifiable and any other complaints you have. Be very descriptive with times of delay, how the officer acted, and the situation. Some are very nice people and may give advice in how to defend your self if they feel that the situation you described is not qualifying of a ticket. I say this as sometimes when officers are in the wrong their supervisors may also straighten them out for the next guy.
Too many people completely roll over with the law giving them more power than they deserve and fail to keep them in check as they have rules too!!!
I also fish out of a kayak and it is very difficult to record sometimes as the constant wet environment and rain means there are sometime long delays before I can write it down as I can't risk damaging my paper licenses.
You do what you can reasonably do.
-
Oh, and if you don't beat the ticket the judge may grant a reduction to help cover your hassle of going to fight it. This depends on income or if the judge kinda hears ya he'll be nice and at least do something. I have friends that have fought tickets and had them reduced as they had a somewhat plausible defense.
But be very respectful and nice to all party's.
Good luck
--You don't know what the judge will do or else we wouldn't need them... he or she may have heard this in your opinion valid reason or may decide it was a lame excuse ..... thus decide he wants your gear and license as well as the fine.
-
--You don't know what the judge will do or else we wouldn't need them... he or she may have heard this in your opinion valid reason or may decide it was a lame excuse ..... thus decide he wants your gear and license as well as the fine.
They can't do that. ::) ::)
Whats next seize your car for speeding or parking infractions when you decide to appeal??? ::) ::)
Yes I know what the judge will do... he will say pay the full amount or reduce the ticket or cancel the ticket or chose not the hear the defendant. He is only appealing the alleged offense. ::)
They can only seize your gear for certain serious offenses, not minor infractions.
I suggest you learn the law and know your rights as everyone has the right to a fair trial by a judge, NOT officers. And that means the right to appealing an officers decision.
FYI every one also has the right to appeal the cost of the ticket, not the offense as one might not make much money.
I think the cost of this offense is way too high as it is quite easy to willingly keep more than 10 Chinook with re-printable/photo copy licenses, so charging so much for people who make a mistake seems unreasonable.
-
So what was I supposed to do?
Write it down in fish blood? My blood? Burn a stick (if I had a lighter) and write it in charcoal?
The fish was caught "clean" and bonked. I'm walking back to the truck with the fish, the CO's have already seen me with it, I figure I've done nothing wrong.
If I was actually guilty of something, then run? or toss the fish in the bush? A little late for either of those, if I ACTUALLY had done something wrong.
Next time use a sharp instrument (hook, spinner whatever) to make an imprint on your licence as if you are recording your catch. If checked by the CO (or the judge if charged) it shows that you intended to record your catch.
-
Next time use a sharp instrument (hook, spinner whatever) to make an imprint on your licence as if you are recording your catch. If checked by the CO (or the judge if charged) it shows that you intended to record your catch.
It doesn't show the date :-\ :'(
I really wish DFO would produce licenses that have punch outs for the date, but then how do you show locations??? It is possible but "they" don't want to spend the money on doing so.
I support the original licenses that were not re printable but now it is so easy to just reprint or photo copy that this rule is no longer able to do the function it was originally suppose to do. At least the old ones you would have to pay for a copy if you loose it so if you want to keep more than 10 Chinook you would at least pay into it but now you have an infinity limit on Chinook. :'( :'(
Very poor policy making....
Oh, you can now keep an infinity on steelhead too.... ::)
-
Ok so does no one read the regs anymore. There has been a few people on here comment that a 6lbs spring is a jack and does not need to be recorded. Well guys read the regs there is nothing regarding the weight that determines whether it is a jack or not, it depends on how long it is. The co's as well as DFO has been cracking down on this system especially in this area due to the poaching that has been going on. You could of had the opportunity to ask someone there for a pen or simply send one of your friends back to get one. Either way you got off easy compared to others and I hope people have learned a lesson from this.
-
Ok so does no one read the regs anymore. There has been a few people on here comment that a 6lbs spring is a jack and does not need to be recorded. Well guys read the regs for the Alouette on spring retention. There is no such thing as a jack on this system. Any spring over 30cm must be recorded on your license right away. The co's as well as DFO has been cracking down on this system especially in this area due to the poaching that has been going on. You could of had the oportunity to ask someone there for a pen or simply send one of your friends back to get one. Either way you got off easy compared to others and I hope people have learned a lesson from this.
I believe you are wrong. An adult chinook is defined as being over 50cm unless other wise stated.
From dfo:
There is an annual limit of 10 adult chinook from all non-tidal waters. All retained adult chinook must be recorded immediately on the back of your freshwater angling licence. An “adult chinook” in Region 2 is defined as being over 50 cm except in the following areas where an “adult chinook” is defined as being over 62 cm:
A) the Fraser River downstream of the powerline crossing approximately 1 km above the Agassiz/Rosedale bridge from Sep 01 - Dec 31,
B) the Chilliwack/Vedder River (including Sumas River); the Harrison River and the Capilano River.
Heres the link: http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/fresh-douce/region2-eng.htm
-
Ok so does no one read the regs anymore. There has been a few people on here comment that a 6lbs spring is a jack and does not need to be recorded. Well guys read the regs for the Alouette on spring retention. There is no such thing as a jack on this system. Any spring over 30cm must be recorded on your license right away. The co's as well as DFO has been cracking down on this system especially in this area due to the poaching that has been going on. You could of had the oportunity to ask someone there for a pen or simply send one of your friends back to get one. Either way you got off easy compared to others and I hope people have learned a lesson from this.
Not entirely correct.
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/fresh-douce/region2-eng.htm
An “adult chinook” in Region 2 is defined as being over 50 cm except in the following areas where an “adult chinook” is defined as being over 62 cm.
On a related note, in tidal waters, all chinook salmon over the legal size limit, regardless adults or jacks, have to be recorded on the tidal fishing licence immediately when the fish is retained.
15 years ago I was driving from UBC to Richmond just after I got my driver licence. The speed limit changed from 80km/hr to 50km/hr but my speed remained 80km/hr because I failed to notice the sign. I was flagged down by the police. I guess that I should have insisted that I would have slowed down if I saw the sign because I am as honest as a person would get.
Canadian justice system is just so so unfair, my rights are being violated daily by these cash grabbers. Oh the suffering.
::)
-
Ok so I stand corrected. Either way he got off lucky.
-
Ok so I stand corrected. Either way he got off lucky.
What more could have happened???
-
I saw c.o.'s give out a few warnings last sunday at allco, one for not recording a chinook and another was for no salmon stamp. I was there this morning and watched one loser kill two. When I told him hew had to record his fish(after the first one) he just mumbled something in his own language( middle eastern?) and ignored me. Its pathetic how many people are just doing whatever the want. And on another note I've caught 6 jacks on the aloutte this month, all under 50cm 1 - 2 lbs each and seen another 3 caught so they are there definitely in there
Now that is a joke.... give a warning for retaining a salmon with no stamp, which is harmful as they didn't contribute to the salmon, but ticket a guy who has a stamp but lost his pen. ::) ::)
More good examples of poorly directed enforcement. >:(
-
--On advice of my lawyer... I cannot give legal opinion
-
What more could have happened???
I have seen CO's take all gear on this system as well as right a ticket.
-
I saw c.o.'s give out a few warnings last sunday at allco, one for not recording a chinook and another was for no salmon stamp. I was there this morning and watched one loser kill two. When I told him hew had to record his fish(after the first one) he just mumbled something in his own language( middle eastern?) and ignored me. Its pathetic how many people are just doing whatever the want. And on another note I've caught 6 jacks on the aloutte this month, all under 50cm 1 - 2 lbs each and seen another 3 caught so they are there definitely in there
I have caught alot of springs under 50cm this month what I meant to say was that you can only retain one spring over 30cm.
-
Truly, sounds like a bored CO, I mean really, was it a legal catch? If yes, give the guy a warning, (or better yet, lend a pen, are we Nazi's or something?) and let him move on, and look for snaggers, individuals with no licenses. Pathetic
-
tough break, but you can't blame the co's for doing their job...even when it seems they're never around when you need them.
between the two of you, you only had one pen? ???
-
I have seen CO's take all gear on this system as well as right a ticket.
You have seen them seize gear for failing to write down an adult Chinook? That seems very unlikely. ???
I could see it for poaching but not a minor offense like what the OP allegedly did.
--On advice of my lawyer... I cannot give legal opinion
You should fire your lawyer.... You have every right to give a legal opinion, just not advice. ;)
15 years ago I was driving from UBC to Richmond just after I got my driver licence. The speed limit changed from 80km/hr to 50km/hr but my speed remained 80km/hr because I failed to notice the sign. I was flagged down by the police. I guess that I should have insisted that I would have slowed down if I saw the sign because I am as honest as a person would get.
Canadian justice system is just so so unfair, my rights are being violated daily by these cash grabbers. Oh the suffering.
::)
Ok rod, if your car was malfunction and the speedometer was not working properly and the above happened do you still think the ticket should still apply??? You still had the intent to follow the rules but due to things out of your control it didn't happen. Just like the OP he thought he still had a working pen but realized after the fact that it was missing. There was no criminal intent. And the fact you can easily get around it if he did have criminal intent he wouldn't have gotten caught! And road signs have the advantage to pop out in-front of the driver somewhat regularly. how many people check to see if their pen is on hand several times threw-out the day.
I just think that this is something that people can easily get around anyways as you can have have multiple licenses on hand and just record one fish down, go to car/home, and then pull out the other licenses and repeat and appear fully within the law. And DFO just made this 100x easier. >:( This is a cash grab. I could give many more examples of how this new re-printable licenses system has made it so much more easier to cheat the system. DFO really screwed up thinking they saved a few dollars and then proceed to harass otherwise law abiding fishermen.
And most people don't keep springs so his friend may not have had a pen because he don't keep them.
In addition the last few outings I have lost line at my home while picking up my vest, and on the flow moving from run to run. I've also lost many other things in the past.
-
Well DFO had nothing to do with this new system of printable non-tidal licence. This was strickly a provincial government decesion not federal. And yes I have seen them sieze gear for this exact thing on this system. Doja you have no idea how many days I have spent on this river, in fact I pretty much live on the river (no I really do) and have been since 1977.
-
Well DFO had nothing to do with this new system of printable non-tidal licence. This was strickly a provincial government decesion not federal. And yes I have seen them sieze gear for this exact thing on this system. Doja you have no idea how many days I have spent on this river, in fact I pretty much live on the river (no I really do) and have been since 1977.
No offense, but you didn't even know what the rules were. ::) :) :D Maybe you should spend a day reading the regulations? LOL :D (joking...kinda :D) You are no different than the offenders we are talking about... Now do you think you deserve to be taxed? I'd be willing to bet you are a good citizen not deserving of it too and a simple warning/informing did/would do the same job.
The bad guys don't make mistakes.... they darn well know what they are doing!!!
I Still don't believe they did that for a single offense though ... maybe there were other factors at play, maybe history?
DFO, MOE its all the same government that should have the same intentions.... In the end it has a negative effect as the result of government poor policy.
We want good people to support fish enforcers but not when they do injustices to the good people.
-
Hmmm...
For some reason there seems to be some confusion about breaking the law and the intent to break the law. Intent is not a legal defense. If you drive a car and your speedometer is broken and you're speeding, while it may not be your intent to be speeding, it doesn't change the fact that you were in fact going too fast. If you get into a bar fight and the guy you punched in the jaw ends up dead, it probably wasn't your intent to kill him either. It may not be murder (which does have a very strong element of intent, btw) but it could certainly be manslaughter and yes, you could be charged. To put this into perspective from the officer's viewpoint. As a CO, how many times do they come across people poaching (ie: not recording catches on licenses) and I'll bet if people are caught, the very first thing they might say is that I lost my pen or my pen isn't working or some other excuse that tries to justify the lack of compliance with the law. In fact, I know people who get speeding tickets and then challenge it in court knowing that the officer involved won't show up in most cases and then the case (and ticket) is thrown out. No penalty to the speeder and us taxpayers end up footing the bill for the justice system. Going back to the broken speedometer scenario for the moment, it is the responsibility of the owner (yes, the dreaded "R" word) to ensure that their vehicle is operating properly. If it wasn't, I wouldn't want to be driving on the highways with all those big trucks with faulty brakes. As an angler, it is your responsibility to know and follow the rules. And yes rules change. Sometimes often but pleading ignorance is no excuse nor a legal defense. It's also a truism that often people who follow the rules are the only ones who get punished.
One last thing I will say however. I strongly suspect that the CO probably has discretion as to whether or not to issue a ticket for the offense. In this case it appears that he/she chose to exercise that discretion rather than issue a warning. But by the same token this may be the 8th or 15th time he/she had heard that particular reason being given for not recording a catch on a license. In which case, see the bottom line of the paragraph above.
-
Something's wrong. That last post makes way too much sense, the poster must work for the cash grabbers. ;D
-
Amazing how everyone is so pro enforcement except when it comes to themselves getting busted.
Go ahead, fight the ticket. But when the only question that matters is asked "did you record the fish on your licence immediatley". Your answer will be no. GUILTY.
-
Hmmm...
For some reason there seems to be some confusion about breaking the law and the intent to break the law. Intent is not a legal defense. If you drive a car and your speedometer is broken and you're speeding, while it may not be your intent to be speeding, it doesn't change the fact that you were in fact going too fast. If you get into a bar fight and the guy you punched in the jaw ends up dead, it probably wasn't your intent to kill him either. It may not be murder (which does have a very strong element of intent, btw) but it could certainly be manslaughter and yes, you could be charged. To put this into perspective from the officer's viewpoint. As a CO, how many times do they come across people poaching (ie: not recording catches on licenses) and I'll bet if people are caught, the very first thing they might say is that I lost my pen or my pen isn't working or some other excuse that tries to justify the lack of compliance with the law. In fact, I know people who get speeding tickets and then challenge it in court knowing that the officer involved won't show up in most cases and then the case (and ticket) is thrown out. No penalty to the speeder and us taxpayers end up footing the bill for the justice system. Going back to the broken speedometer scenario for the moment, it is the responsibility of the owner (yes, the dreaded "R" word) to ensure that their vehicle is operating properly. If it wasn't, I wouldn't want to be driving on the highways with all those big trucks with faulty brakes. As an angler, it is your responsibility to know and follow the rules. And yes rules change. Sometimes often but pleading ignorance is no excuse nor a legal defense. It's also a truism that often people who follow the rules are the only ones who get punished.
One last thing I will say however. I strongly suspect that the CO probably has discretion as to whether or not to issue a ticket for the offense. In this case it appears that he/she chose to exercise that discretion rather than issue a warning. But by the same token this may be the 8th or 15th time he/she had heard that particular reason being given for not recording a catch on a license. In which case, see the bottom line of the paragraph above.
Intent is a huge legal defense ::) In the above post you say it is not, yet you say in the bar fight it is(wtf). It in fact is, instead of a murder charge or a criminal negligence charge it is a manslaughter charge based solely on intent. That is his legal defense, hello!!!. You just contradicted your self.... ::) ::) ::)
Ever hear of willful blindness??? That is another defense based solely on intent. The defended was unknowingly breaking the law by no fault of his own. That is why we have judges and a court of law. Officers of the law know a little about the law. There not lawyers for a reason. That's why we have crown lawyers.
Driving down the road and no paying attention to road signs is ignorance, no excuse. Now if the speedometer was off by no fault of someone then for all he knows he was following the law and there is nothing he could have done unless it was a large difference in which one should have known.
I'd love to see a case where the judge upheld the charge.
Now, as far as the filling out the licenses, the re-printable ones make a great loop-hole that any poacher should and does use. Anyone who doesn't is most likely not intending to break the law.
Like I said, the bad guys know what they are doing (that's why they don't get caught!) and the honest people who make simple mistakes that have little effect (in this case) get nailed. Well guess what.... I know he will probably have resentment towards the "man" and probably never call RAPP as he now dislikes them.
In the end there is now one less guy who is going to be supportive of the officers and what good does that do???
Remember, it's not about enforcing rules.... It's about have a positive effect in a whole using the rules in certain cases.
But oh well, lets just let the officers chase good guys thinking they are making a difference why the bad guys continue un-touched. And trust me, the poachers rarely get caught as the officers are stupidly chasing the wrong people, and the poachers know how the law works and use it to their advantage..... With the help of paper licenses
Amazing how everyone is so pro enforcement except when it comes to themselves getting busted.
Go ahead, fight the ticket. But when the only question that matters is asked "did you record the fish on your licence immediatley". Your answer will be no. GUILTY.
And what was accomplished??? Nothing poachers are still poaching. I see them all the time and I'm even surprised that I'm seeing them allot more. Oh well, for the most part they are nice people and always give me room so I'm not inconvenienced and have no problem with them.
-
Title should be warning, carry a pen, it's that easy.
First is warning for not recording a chinook, what about not knowing the limit, or wild vs. hatchery, or coho vs. sockeye.
-
Title should be warning, carry a pen, it's that easy.
First is warning for not recording a chinook, what about not knowing the limit, or wild vs. hatchery, or coho vs. sockeye.
I see you didn't even read the OP ::) Nice
He said he lost it which can happen.
-
Irony 101. Posted by clownfish on Jan 20, 2008 "While I'm not saying that you, or anyone else on this thread, had anything to do with any of this, I don't break the rules and regulations of the places that I go to, so anyone that doesn't like our rules and regulations they don't have to come here"
-
You are a martyr, a reminder to us all.
Though you have my sympathies you unfortunately erred and made a mistake.
Would I be pissed? Heck ya, but probably more at myself.
Is it unfair? Given your explanation of the facts (your side of the story though there is another side) Quite possibly.
Hopefully, if you fight it, you will at least have your fine reduced.
Just remember if you do fight it There's the time and possibly lost wages you will incur (I don't believe they meet you for lunch).
I personally wouldn't do it for the money ( I'd lose valuable time and wages) though I might fight a ticket on principle.
and sorry, I can't contribute to your defense fund.
I do believe MERC said it best:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm...
For some reason there seems to be some confusion about breaking the law and the intent to break the law. Intent is not a legal defense. If you drive a car and your speedometer is broken and you're speeding, while it may not be your intent to be speeding, it doesn't change the fact that you were in fact going too fast. If you get into a bar fight and the guy you punched in the jaw ends up dead, it probably wasn't your intent to kill him either. It may not be murder (which does have a very strong element of intent, btw) but it could certainly be manslaughter and yes, you could be charged. To put this into perspective from the officer's viewpoint. As a CO, how many times do they come across people poaching (ie: not recording catches on licenses) and I'll bet if people are caught, the very first thing they might say is that I lost my pen or my pen isn't working or some other excuse that tries to justify the lack of compliance with the law. In fact, I know people who get speeding tickets and then challenge it in court knowing that the officer involved won't show up in most cases and then the case (and ticket) is thrown out. No penalty to the speeder and us taxpayers end up footing the bill for the justice system. Going back to the broken speedometer scenario for the moment, it is the responsibility of the owner (yes, the dreaded "R" word) to ensure that their vehicle is operating properly. If it wasn't, I wouldn't want to be driving on the highways with all those big trucks with faulty brakes. As an angler, it is your responsibility to know and follow the rules. And yes rules change. Sometimes often but pleading ignorance is no excuse nor a legal defense. It's also a truism that often people who follow the rules are the only ones who get punished.
One last thing I will say however. I strongly suspect that the CO probably has discretion as to whether or not to issue a ticket for the offense. In this case it appears that he/she chose to exercise that discretion rather than issue a warning. But by the same token this may be the 8th or 15th time he/she had heard that particular reason being given for not recording a catch on a license. In which case, see the bottom line of the paragraph above.
-
Amazing how everyone is so pro enforcement except when it comes to themselves getting busted.
Go ahead, fight the ticket. But when the only question that matters is asked "did you record the fish on your licence immediatley". Your answer will be no. GUILTY.
well said.
-
well said.
indeed.
be a man, pay the fine, and stop whining...
everyone makes mistakes. deal with it. and dont forget next time.
-
Ok so I stand corrected. Either way he got off lucky.
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/fresh-douce/region2-eng.htm (http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/fresh-douce/region2-eng.htm)
-
sad to say but this is B.C. and you must prove you are not guilty.......and that takes money, more than likley you will miss a day of work to fight the ticket ,if you win you still loose. but I have seen many people fight this type of ticket and loose.
thats why I carry 4-5 pens.....just a bit of advice , they dont take up much room in my vest. and they work better than advil (they save you head-aches)
-
You deserved the fine. Carry a fine felt marker and you will always be set.
-
Irony 101. Posted by clownfish on Jan 20, 2008 "While I'm not saying that you, or anyone else on this thread, had anything to do with any of this, I don't break the rules and regulations of the places that I go to, so anyone that doesn't like our rules and regulations they don't have to come here"
Yeah, that is ironic. Even more so as this was the first spring I have ever got in all the years I have fished. I certainly wont make the same mistake when I finally catch my first steelhead. But I am going to fight this none the less.
My buddy did have a pen, in his truck, which I did use to record the fish after I had been given the ticket. He thought that it would have been fine to record after we got back to his truck. If he had been wearing his other vest, we would have had a spare pen available, but we still might not have recorded immediately, but not with intent to never record it, nor to record and then make a new copy of the license without any entries. However the CO's could have still afforded me the benefit of the doubt, loaned me the pen, and there definately would never be another time where I would not have had a spare pen on me. Also, there is NO history of any fishing related offense(s), for either of us, which is the ONLY thing that should be considered in relation to this situation, particularly since the CO's would know this to be the first time this happened with me when they called it in. I have never fished without a license, never kept over quota (if I was lucky enough to catch anything at all, don't remember where I heard or read this "ten percent of the fishermen get ninety percent of the fish), have always bought salmon AND steelhead tags, never kept a foul hooked fish.
So yeah, excuse me if I feel that this is more than a little unjust!
-
In 1995, which was the first year when I fished in BC, I thought it was ok to use two lines in the Tidal Fraser River after reading the regulations. Two DFO officers handed me a $120 fine during my first week of fishing. I guess that I should have fought the ticket instead of saving any embarrassment by paying the fine immediately. After all, I bought a licence, I had intended to follow the rules, I did not have a history of violations and I was only 18. Like you, who thought "immediately" means it's ok back at the vehicle, I interpreted the regulations incorrectly. It was simply so unjust now that I think about it.
Canadian justice system is just so so unfair, my rights are being violated daily by these cash grabbers. Oh the suffering.
::)
-
Different sceneio but similar in the fact i was careless.
Last year i moved to New West from Richmond. About the same time our auto insurance was up for renewal. Because I moved I did not get the renewal notice.
Short version: cop spotted me and our plate was expired (2 days over)....almost $600 fine.
I paid it as it was MY fault for being careless.
I had no intention of being a lawbreaker but I was therefore i got dinged.
-
Clownfish, you ask "what was I supposed to do?!?!"
Easy. If you don't have a pen, don't keep your catch. You didn't need to kill it... it wasn't a survival situation... so why the excuses?
We all make mistakes. I haven't fished with one guy who hasn't uninentionally screwed up on the regs by accident, whether its missing a barb, failing to record a catch, fishing with the wrong license in hand, etc. Man up and admit your mistake. Taking it to court.... come on... how many times do you think a judge has heard the "I usually don't do this" story????
-
besides if u take it to court, think o much tax dollars it is costing the rest of us :P
-
besides if u take it to court, think o much tax dollars it is costing the rest of us :P
So it is ok for government officials to "waste" tax dollars (and they do hugely) but not a general member of the public? What a lame response.
Every person has the right to fight the alleged offense and the dollar amount stated.
As jetboatjim said, most won't win. Although this depends on your defense and the circumstances surrounding it. Most don't have a strong defense but some very well might. If you have a better defense than it may be likely that a reduction in costs is even more easily attainable and depending on work/school/income/location of court, it may be in your interest to fight the amount of the ticket instead.
I know people who have gotten reductions (1/2) simple because they had a good defense, even though they made insane amounts of money and the courts knew it by their own admission.
I'm not positive if one can fight the cost of a fishing violation but I'd be surprised if one could not.
-
So it is ok for government officials to "waste" tax dollars (and they do hugely) but not a general member of the public? What a lame response.
no its not. my father use to work for the city, trust me, i know how much money is wasted.
but this guy is clearly in the wrong, he broke the rules, he should pay. imo there is nthing to argue here. so dont waste even more tax dollars. save the fights for the issues that matter.
-
You should have told the CO they were your pet fish...and in case you per wondering... 3rd post down in the following thread
http://www.fishingwithrod.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=24975.msg235139#msg235139
-
Intent is a huge legal defense ::) In the above post you say it is not, yet you say in the bar fight it is(wtf). It in fact is, instead of a murder charge or a criminal negligence charge it is a manslaughter charge based solely on intent. That is his legal defense, hello!!!. You just contradicted your self.... ::) ::) ::)
Ever hear of willful blindness??? That is another defense based solely on intent. The defended was unknowingly breaking the law by no fault of his own. That is why we have judges and a court of law. Officers of the law know a little about the law. There not lawyers for a reason. That's why we have crown lawyers.
Driving down the road and no paying attention to road signs is ignorance, no excuse. Now if the speedometer was off by no fault of someone then for all he knows he was following the law and there is nothing he could have done unless it was a large difference in which one should have known.
I'd love to see a case where the judge upheld the charge.
Now, as far as the filling out the licenses, the re-printable ones make a great loop-hole that any poacher should and does use. Anyone who doesn't is most likely not intending to break the law.
Like I said, the bad guys know what they are doing (that's why they don't get caught!) and the honest people who make simple mistakes that have little effect (in this case) get nailed. Well guess what.... I know he will probably have resentment towards the "man" and probably never call RAPP as he now dislikes them.
In the end there is now one less guy who is going to be supportive of the officers and what good does that do???
Remember, it's not about enforcing rules.... It's about have a positive effect in a whole using the rules in certain cases.
But oh well, lets just let the officers chase good guys thinking they are making a difference why the bad guys continue un-touched. And trust me, the poachers rarely get caught as the officers are stupidly chasing the wrong people, and the poachers know how the law works and use it to their advantage..... With the help of paper licenses
And what was accomplished??? Nothing poachers are still poaching. I see them all the time and I'm even surprised that I'm seeing them allot more. Oh well, for the most part they are nice people and always give me room so I'm not inconvenienced and have no problem with them.
Intent or Mens Rea in the bar fight example above was used to crudely show that even if your intent is not to break the law there are consequences for the eventual result if a law end up being broken.
If you want to bring up wilful blindness, you really need to look at what it means. Here is the most recent Supreme Court decision regarding wilful blindness. R. v. Briscoe, 2010 SCC 13
In it you will see that one judge had determined that Mens Rea (intent) was not component of an accused mind set and was therefore acquitted. At appeal, the judge determined that the previous finding of acquittal was erroneous because the previous judge had not considered wilful blindness. Wilful blindness simply is a decision that a person chooses to not find out that what he or she is doing is wrong when they strongly suspect it might.
Criminal code of Canada makes one reference:
(5) It is not a defence to a charge under this section that the accused believed that the complainant consented to the activity that forms the subject-matter of the charge if
(a) the accused’s belief arose from the accused’s
(i) self-induced intoxication, or
(ii) recklessness or wilful blindness; or
That section is in relation to sexual exploitation (section 153.1 if you're really interested).
As to seeing people breaking the law, there is the RAPP line (1-877-952-7277). They may not come every time you call but they will start responding when there is a pattern of calls coming in. Rodney would probably have more info.
-
Ask yourself the question, did you do it, in reference to the alledged offence. There are two possible answers, yes or no. We already know the answer.
Answering, I didnt have my pen, my pen died, I lost my pen, I usually dont do this, I have never done anything like this is only trying to minimize and justify the situation. Intent need not be proved, this is not a criminal case. When it comes to Wildlife Act, Motor Vehicle act etc, intent does not matter, did you do it is what matters.
Its a small fine, it could have been worse. Man up, pay the fine, and learn from it.
-
MERC, everything has context and circumstances.
Here's a fact. I beat a criminal indictment for a very serious charge just recently based solely on willful blindness. This is a fact! I won't go into detail but the charge was dropped as it would lead to a not guilty. Many people thought I was screwed but I didn't. I believed in the system and knew I had no intent. My good history also backed that up. I fought for what I belived in and won. :P
Now what you reference is an exception to a particular charge. If there is no exception then it may be a valid defense, of course there are circumstances/facts that may weaken or strengthen that defense.
-
Ask yourself the question, did you do it, in reference to the alledged offence. There are two possible answers, yes or no. We already know the answer.
Answering, I didnt have my pen, my pen died, I lost my pen, I usually dont do this, I have never done anything like this is only trying to minimize and justify the situation. Intent need not be proved, this is not a criminal case. When it comes to Wildlife Act, Motor Vehicle act etc, intent does not matter, did you do it is what matters.
Its a small fine, it could have been worse. Man up, pay the fine, and learn from it.
What if while steelheading your pen froze??? This happens to me at work and I could see it happening on the river too. You could have a whole pack of pens but you would be guilty. ::) I think that would be a valid defense as I don't know where to obtain freeze prof pens.
GLX, If you look at the new topic I posted you will see that while one can be fully within the law they can be also charged as well.
I said earlier that while fishing from my kayak I cannot record immediately sometimes as the heavy and sideways rain will destroy my license. I recorded as soon as I can reasonbly do so and I bet a call to DFO would support this.
It is also illegal to posses female crabs. So when you pull your trap and dump them out on the boat deck you are now breaking the law.... NOT as your intent was not to retain them, BUT If you read the rule it says posses not retain. There for every crabber is breaking the law. ::)
-
What if while steelheading your pen froze??? This happens to me at work and I could see it happening on the river too. You could have a whole pack of pens but you would be guilty. ::) I think that would be a valid defense as I don't know where to obtain freeze prof pens.
GLX, If you look at the new topic I posted you will see that while one can be fully within the law they can be also charged as well.
Bad example as you could prove that your pen is frozen and I am sure that any CO would excuse that. In this case the original poster did not have a pen on his possession making him guilty.
-
I said earlier that while fishing from my kayak I cannot record immediately sometimes as the heavy and sideways rain will destroy my license. I recorded as soon as I can reasonbly do so and I bet a call to DFO would support this.
It is also illegal to posses female crabs. So when you pull your trap and dump them out on the boat deck you are now breaking the law.... NOT as your intent was not to retain them, BUT If you read the rule it says posses not retain. There for every crabber is breaking the law. ::)
[/quote]
--I believe this is where discretion comes into play.
--Strictcly enforced comes to mind... generally doing a few KM over the speedlimit in a 100 k zone is not strictly enforced however doing a few Km over the speedlimit in a school zone is strictly enforced.
--I noticed in travels in USA recently some states have big signs on the highway... speedlimit strictly enforced... they also have electronic signs which give your speed so no speedometer not working excuse... I also noticed that they nailed guys that went over the speedlimit and the majority of people adhered by the law in these ..strictly enforced areas.
-
-
Skaha we have some of those electronic signs here in the lower mainland. We had one here in Maple Ridge but for some reason it was recently taken down.
-
Skaha we have some of those electronic signs here in the lower mainland. We had one here in Maple Ridge but for some reason it was recently taken down.
Probably stolen by some low life bum.
-
usually have them near construction zones where the limit is strictly enforced during working hours i believe
-
from the regs:
section 22. Catch Records
22. Where a licence holder catches and retains a lingcod or a chinook salmon, the licence holder shall immediately record the catch in ink on the licence.
This thread got me reading. I saw this in the fishing regs and was wondering - legally speaking does that mean it's a violation if your buddy with a pen writes down in your license that you caught a fish? Would that then not be a violation of the act if someone else writes it down?
-
Anyone notice the original poster is no longer a member of this site? Think it has something to do with this thread?
-
He was offended by my sarcasm and requested to have the account removed.
-
--clownfish:
--if you're still monitoring this as a guest.... hope you reconscider and rejoin the discussion.
--I think this is a valuable discussion and some will have strong views however when you put up this kind of post you have to have thick skin.
-- One of the reasons I appreciate this discussion forum is they do allow a fair amount of latitude before raining in or closing a discussion... other forums are sanitized to the point of not allowing anything of controversy.
-
No one ?
from the regs:
section 22. Catch Records
22. Where a licence holder catches and retains a lingcod or a chinook salmon, the licence holder shall immediately record the catch in ink on the licence.
This thread got me reading. I saw this in the fishing regs and was wondering - legally speaking does that mean it's a violation if your buddy with a pen writes down in your license that you caught a fish? Would that then not be a violation of the act if someone else writes it down?
-
Man, I always joked around saying I'd need to find a lawyer to determine if I was actually legally fishing, the BC fishing regulations, like some other provincial laws and rules, are nothing short of bullsh!t.
I'd be pissed too if I got a fine for not marking down my spring 10 seconds after I bonked it. As with everything though, there is usually two sides to the story..... who knows what was said and how the situation realistically presented itself. If you feel strongly that you were falsely accused, it's your right as a Canadian (assuming your Canadian) to fair trial and contesting the ticket.
-
No one ?
In the "one-in-a-million" chance that you would actually get a ticket for that, I personally would give up fishing and take up golf.
Legally, I do believe it the responsibility of the license holder to mark down the information as it pertains to the harvest of his fish.
-
In the "one-in-a-million" chance that you would actually get a ticket for that, I personally would give up fishing and take up golf.
Agreed, however the reason is that if your buddy messes up and incorrectly writes it down it don't matter as it is your responsibility, no one elses.
EDIT: I don't think there is a infraction that would apply. Just you would get the ticket if someone else made a mistake. If all is ok then there is no problem.
you are just taking a risk he did it right.
Too bad the OP ran away.... ::)
I suspect that he feels like such an injustice has been done that this incident will undoubtedly effect his mental state.... In a not so positive way.
Like I said earlier, no good will ever come of this incident.... :-\ But with the direction of society, this is par i guess.
-
Man, I always joked around saying I'd need to find a lawyer to determine if I was actually legally fishing, the BC fishing regulations, like some other provincial laws and rules, are nothing short of bullsh!t.
so very true...
-
This isn't Perry Mason...just a small fine ticket for violating a fishing regulation. He could file a dispute of the ticket but if his written explanation has as many holes as his landing net, it probably won't get past the administration. We all agree to the regs when we buy our licence to particpate in the fishery and if we bend the rules, we take a small risk. It just sucks to be the one caught bending them. Something good probably came out of it though......I bet a dozen members reading this thread just put a new pen in their fishing kit!
-
Intent is important. Had the OP made every effort to acquire a pen after realizing it was missing/not working the CO/judge would rule in his favor. We make an effort to remind each other to record the catch before commencing fishing cause in the excitement it is easy to forget. Nobody has a working pen, make a walk to the vehicle to get one, record, then walk back for the Spring.
doja> Get a space pen, it'll write in any human sustainable conditions. Of course being the argumentative type you'll state it won't write on wet paper so don't fall or get kicked into the river.
Sensationalizing the title is just asking for sarcasm.
-
--for those that say they don't take a pen because they catch and release only
--I get a shuswap conservation stamp every year... even though I've haven't kept one so far.
--The reasons... I intend to release however might get a bleeder and keep
--and the perception of guilt , why make it more difficult than need be for those checking and hey.. when you see someone that you perceive may not record you can always offer them the pen.
-
--for those that say they don't take a pen because they catch and release only
--I get a shuswap conservation stamp every year... even though I've haven't kept one so far.
--The reasons... I intend to release however might get a bleeder and keep
--and the perception of guilt , why make it more difficult than need be for those checking and hey.. when you see someone that you perceive may not record you can always offer them the pen.
You can release a bleeder as well. If it dies than something else will eat it or it will provide nutrients to the system ( or it may just live ). I would not bring home a fish if it would just end up sitting at the bottom of my freezer for a year. Better off it dies in its habitat.
-
Posts: 186
Re: Warning, cash grab by conservation dept.
« Reply #70 on: October 25, 2010, 07:21:42 AM »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
from the regs:
section 22. Catch Records
22. Where a licence holder catches and retains a lingcod or a chinook salmon, the licence holder shall immediately record the catch in ink on the licence.
This thread got me reading. I saw this in the fishing regs and was wondering - legally speaking does that mean it's a violation if your buddy with a pen writes down in your license that you caught a fish? Would that then not be a violation of the act if someone else writes it down?
NO.
The holder of the license is responsible for recording the catch.
It's not a signature it's a date and area
As long as it's recorded (hopefully properly) at that time and before fishing resumes it's all good.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a DFO that anal retentive to make a deal out of it.
If I was bleeding like a stuck pig from an errant hook in the palm of my hand and my buddy marks my license I'd need a lawyer?
Strongly doubht it.
Like I can't record my kids catch?
The blind fellow I had on my boat once trying to write on such a small line?.
I think we're geting a little too nit-picky
-
NO.
The holder of the license is responsible for recording the catch.
It's not a signature it's a date and area
As long as it's recorded (hopefully properly) at that time and before fishing resumes it's all good.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a DFO that anal retentive to make a deal out of it.
If I was bleeding like a stuck pig from an errant hook in the palm of my hand and my buddy marks my license I'd need a lawyer?
Strongly doubht it.
Like I can't record my kids catch?
The blind fellow I had on my boat once trying to write on such a small line?.
I think we're getting a little too nit-picky
x2
-
NO.
The holder of the license is responsible for recording the catch.
It's not a signature it's a date and area
As long as it's recorded (hopefully properly) at that time and before fishing resumes it's all good.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a DFO that anal retentive to make a deal out of it.
If I was bleeding like a stuck pig from an errant hook in the palm of my hand and my buddy marks my license I'd need a lawyer?
Strongly doubht it.
Like I can't record my kids catch?
The blind fellow I had on my boat once trying to write on such a small line?.
I think we're geting a little too nit-picky
we maybe getting nitpicky - writers of posts on a forum - but I doubt the DFO is. They seem to define nitpicks lol.
My buddy was fishing the cap..he pinch the barbed back and the DFO came by and did a "sweater" test...dragged the pinched barb along and saw "fibres". Buddy got a ticket for $160.
Another friend was fishing thurston. He was gearing up. DFO comes by and issues him a warning for not having a barbless hook BEFORE he actually started fishing. The warning is significant because unlike a violation you cannot fight it...it's like a black eye in their records and they check even harder the "next time".
I wonder how many steelhead or wild coho caught in drifnets and killed in the chuck equal one pinched back barb? Nice work, eh.
-
Depending on what you said to the officer, as it can be used against you, you could always say that after bonking the fish you failed to find your pen that you always carry and immediately went back to your truck to get one or attempted to go to the nearness place to find one. In addition you can have "many" references to support your good nature in court which does help.
Was it over 50cm? Is it really close? that may be another defense.
In the end this is a stupid move on the officers part and is why I don't support them and with the new paper copy's you can print as many copies as you like and retain as many Chinook as you like.
I say fight it!!!!
I agree 100%. This is the perfect opportunity to bring it to the legal community's attention that the new licencing system is flawed. The new loop hole of unlimited licences makes the
regulation absolutely pointless. It will only affect people like clownfish that honestly forget their pen or to write it down while to poachers will readily abuse the system without ever risking getting caught. I have brought this to the attention of John Thornton whom is in charge of the licencing and told him how to fix the problem and he simply said they cannot afford to implement the necessary changes even though he agreed with everything I said. I recommended implementing a plastic tag system like they do for hunting where anglers could pick up their 10 tags for Chinook and 10 tags for steelhead for the year at a tackle shop and still be able to purchase a fishing licence online to keep the system accessiblity for other fisheries. After having them refuse to do anything about the matter I have considered refusing to write down my spring in protest so as to challenge this grossly large loop hole in the system. I implore clownfish to contest the fine and bring this matter to the attention of a judge in hopes to set a presidence. I also urge people to call Mr. Thornton and the fisheries minister to harass them until they do something about it. I contacted the minister but never got a response...
John Thornton
Manager, Data and Licensing
Fish and Wildlife Branch, Ministry of Environment
250 387-9776
The Honourable Gail Shea
House of Commons
Minister of Fisheries and Oceans
Parliament Buildings, Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K1A 0A6
min@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
-
I agree 100%. This is the perfect opportunity to bring it to the legal community's attention that the new licencing system is flawed. The new loop hole of unlimited licences makes the
regulation absolutely pointless. It will only affect people like clownfish that honestly forget their pen or to write it down while to poachers will readily abuse the system without ever risking getting caught. I have brought this to the attention of John Thornton whom is in charge of the licencing and told him how to fix the problem and he simply said they cannot afford to implement the necessary changes even though he agreed with everything I said. I recommended implementing a plastic tag system like they do for hunting where anglers could pick up their 10 tags for Chinook and 10 tags for steelhead for the year at a tackle shop and still be able to purchase a fishing licence online to keep the system accessiblity for other fisheries. After having them refuse to do anything about the matter I have considered refusing to write down my spring in protest so as to challenge this grossly large loop hole in the system. I implore clownfish to contest the fine and bring this matter to the attention of a judge in hopes to set a presidence. I also urge people to call Mr. Thornton and the fisheries minister to harass them until they do something about it. I contacted the minister but never got a response...
John Thornton
Manager, Data and Licensing
Fish and Wildlife Branch, Ministry of Environment
250 387-9776
The Honourable Gail Shea
House of Commons
Minister of Fisheries and Oceans
Parliament Buildings, Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K1A 0A6
min@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
For someone that is intent on breaking the law, why would a tag system be any more effective at deterring someone from either not writing down your catch, or reprinting your license when the first one is filled up?
-
An angler would only get ten tags per year and those tags would be zap straps that must be tightened down near the tail so they cannot be reused.
-
An angler would only get ten tags per year and those tags would be zap straps that must be tightened down near the tail so they cannot be reused.
So if someone was intent on breaking the law they just wouldn't attach their zap strap to the fish.... same idea as not writing it down. Only thing is they could now plead that they had forgotten their tags at home rather than that they had forgotten their pen at home.
The point is; the only way you will start to deter lawbreakers is by providing more enforcement on the rivers. Of course as soon as there are more incidences of CO's checking fishermen the more complaints we'll hear of cash grabs and how unfair the CO's are..... ???
-
While fishing the Vedder this fall I encountered numerous anglers catching and killing adult chinook. I did not see a single angler record his catch. More enforcement is required and I don't have any
sympathy for those who conveniently don't have a pen in their vest. A lot of anglers know the score but continue to take their chances.
-
So if someone was intent on breaking the law they just wouldn't attach their zap strap to the fish.... same idea as not writing it down. Only thing is they could now plead that they had forgotten their tags at home rather than that they had forgotten their pen at home.
The point is; the only way you will start to deter lawbreakers is by providing more enforcement on the rivers. Of course as soon as there are more incidences of CO's checking fishermen the more complaints we'll hear of cash grabs and how unfair the CO's are..... ???
alwaysfishn, currently you can appear legal by writing down your catch of steelhead, chinook, and trout from some areas of the shuswap. Then when you reach your quota you can simply reprint another licenses and star over and over, and over and over....
Therefor poachers will employ this tactic with no fear of the law as it now has no teeth. Now the majority of people they now catch will most likely be innocent(with out intent) and made nothing more than a simple mistake or in general aren't hurting the systems.
The old money paper licenses and other systems like tags would be something people can't really get around besides not recording, and therefor ticket. Today this no longer apply's and this law is really a money grab.
Remember... The law was created to prevent excess damage from being done by creating limits. As it stands now this law increases the damage and over fishing that can be done while appearing fully legal. This is a huge step backwards! Enforcing a law that now does nothing and has no merit is simply enforcing a rule just cuz it's a rule. That's not right!
And really people.... How many keep more than 10 Chinook a year.... probably very few. The more one thinks about this law, it really is a cash grab as the government is not worried about this loophole being exploited, so then it would appear there is no problem and we're simply being taxed!!! BS
-
alwaysfishn, currently you can appear legal by writing down your catch of steelhead, chinook, and trout from some areas of the shuswap. Then when you reach your quota you can simply reprint another licenses and star over and over, and over and over....
Therefor poachers will employ this tactic with no fear of the law as it now has no teeth. Now the majority of people they now catch will most likely be innocent(with out intent) and made nothing more than a simple mistake or in general aren't hurting the systems.
The old money paper licenses and other systems like tags would be something people can't really get around besides not recording, and therefor ticket. Today this no longer apply's and this law is really a money grab.
Remember... The law was created to prevent excess damage from being done by creating limits. As it stands now this law increases the damage and over fishing that can be done while appearing fully legal. This is a huge step backwards! Enforcing a law that now does nothing and has no merit is simply enforcing a rule just cuz it's a rule. That's not right!
And really people.... How many keep more than 10 Chinook a year.... probably very few. The more one thinks about this law, it really is a cash grab as the government is not worried about this loophole being exploited, so then it would appear there is no problem and we're simply being taxed!!! BS
Your Honor...... I rest my case. :D
-
Old paper license system is same as online system. Just online system you can reprint at home, old paper system you get it re-issued at a tackle shop. Still can be done.
-
Old paper license system is same as online system. Just online system you can reprint at home, old paper system you get it re-issued at a tackle shop. Still can be done.
For a fee.... At least they pay into it. :-\ And every time you "loose" your licenses it is also recorded. Also when checked if you have a near full licenses it too "should" be recorded. the current paper system you can reprint after 1...
It at least makes it difficult. :-\
Currently it is so easy it makes the law useless.
-
A fee for replacement? You got that wrong. If a licence is lost or accidentally destroyed, a replacement licence can be acquired at no cost from any licence vendor.
Since the hard copy was either 'lost' or 'destroyed' no one can prove or disprove if you have any retained catch on your 'original' licence.
Like I said, the only difference between old 'offline' and the new 'online' licence system is just one you can do at home, while the other you have to be at a vendor's place.
-
A fee for replacement? You got that wrong. If a licence is lost or accidentally destroyed, a replacement licence can be acquired at no cost from any licence vendor.
I thought you had to pay a $10 fee for a replacement if going through a vendor, but free if online......idunno ???
I've never lost or had my license destroyed before. I know where it is at all times, same with my hunting license, so never had to worry about it.
-
BwiBwi is correct, doja is wrong.
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/index-eng.htm#Replacement_licences (http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/index-eng.htm#Replacement_licences)
Replacement licences
If a licence is lost or accidentally destroyed, a replacement licence must be obtained prior to resuming fishing, and can be acquired at no cost from any licence vendor. The vendor will ask you to complete and sign a Statement of Loss describing the disposition of the original licence. It is illegal to hold more than one licence.
-
BwiBwi is correct, doja is wrong.
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/index-eng.htm#Replacement_licences (http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/index-eng.htm#Replacement_licences)
Replacement licences
If a licence is lost or accidentally destroyed, a replacement licence must be obtained prior to resuming fishing, and can be acquired at no cost from any licence vendor. The vendor will ask you to complete and sign a Statement of Loss describing the disposition of the original licence. It is illegal to hold more than one licence.
Kewl 8)
What, doja is wrong :o ;D
-
Kewl 8)
What, doja is wrong :o ;D
How could that be??? ;D :o
-
How could that be??? ;D :o
First for everything i guess ::) ;D
-
No doubt dude will flame the injustice of it, the misIntent of the complete system and spin it to another travesty of justice. Let the fun begin. :D
First for everything i guess ::) ;D
-
No doubt dude will flame the injustice of it, the misIntent of the complete system and spin it to another travesty of justice. Let the fun begin. :D
Boy or boy, your asking for an " Indubitably Incorrect" from the tenacious Lord of the threads himself by saying that burnaby. ;D ;D
-
BwiBwi is correct, doja is wrong.
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/index-eng.htm#Replacement_licences (http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/index-eng.htm#Replacement_licences)
Replacement licences
If a licence is lost or accidentally destroyed, a replacement licence must be obtained prior to resuming fishing, and can be acquired at no cost from any licence vendor. The vendor will ask you to complete and sign a Statement of Loss describing the disposition of the original licence. It is illegal to hold more than one licence.
This is only true for a Tidal licence. For a non-tidal Licence all that is required is your angler number, phone number and your birthdate. You do not have to sign any statement of loss for a non-tidal and a vendor can charge you for a reprint if they want.
-
Actually... ::)
Prior to the introduction of the online freshwater angling licence two years ago, if you lost your freshwater licence, you'd have to pay $10 for a replacement licence. In addition, you need to purchase new conservation surcharges because the replacement licence simply covers the basic licencing.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3106/2326672905_6c8268e011_o.jpg)
-
WOW, the above is a good read..... ;D ....... In fact........ priceless!
But for the record, I am wrong just like everyone else from time to time too and know what crow tastes like. ;) But I do learn from my mistakes. 8)
PS, I use to sell licenses too... :)
OK, back on track.....
-
PS, I use to sell licenses too... :)
Might want to think about getting that job back, as your doja Vu Seminar aint paying too good while guest appearing "live on FWR" ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D
So it was 10 bucks eh ? Thought so !! I guess you would have to keep up on a real important issue like this, to know year by year ::) ::)
-
--A cop buddy once told me... "We don't catch the smart ones"... but there's enough dumb ones out there to keep us busy.
--I would think that those who print multiple licenses to catch more than their recreational share must be selling or bartering their catch to others. Hopefull they will come across a potential client who will turn them in or will blab to someone on the water or in a bar about how successful they have been.
--I am currently fishing an area of river that is closed to fishing as part of a research project... We have a collection permit and each designated fisher is listed on the permit and must carry the permit with them... This area is in open view to the highway and along a walking path which many people use... We explain to as many people who ask what the project is and display our permit... This has been ongoing for a week and a few more weeks to go.
--What amazes me is that in all this time only one person has actually come up to me to inform me the river is closed and to my knowledge there have been no calls into tip lines or MOE.
--I was concerned when we started the project that we would be often challenged so each person had a cell phone and phone number of the project supervisor and MOE contact so that if anyone wished to check it out they could call... also to show to people who do not know the regulations and saw us fishing and decided to fish without checking to see if the area was open to fishing. This has already happened on two occasions people showed up with rod in hand to fish beside us and we informed them of the regulation and they left without confrontation or line in the water.
--I would like to see a more visual program like the many River Watch Programs .. where participants wear the river watch patch thus people fishing near them know.. they better tag or release their fish as appropriate and follow the intent of the regulations.
-
I always thought a poster board with current regs near parking lots on rivers would be a good idea. ie.stave river parking lot with big sign saying "NO CHUM SALMON RETENTION" between so and so date.... or at certain popular bars briefly explaining "NO WILD COHO/TROUT RETENTION" might be added insurance as to help explain ignorant fisherman the rules.....although I could see these postings being vandalised or what not....even just signs with c/o's/ dfo's phone # on it if witnessing suspicious activities.
-
I always thought a poster board with current regs near parking lots on rivers would be a good idea. ie.stave river parking lot with big sign saying "NO CHUM SALMON RETENTION" between so and so date.... or at certain popular bars briefly explaining "NO WILD COHO/TROUT RETENTION" might be added insurance as to help explain ignorant fisherman the rules.....although I could see these postings being vandalised or what not....even just signs with c/o's/ dfo's phone # on it if witnessing suspicious activities.
I do work for a hatchery on one of the rivers in my area and we post laminated signs on the head of every trail that goes to the river that state the regs for that river.
-
Kanaka Creek is the only river I've seen with poster of retention qty at very much every access point.
-
I do work for a hatchery on one of the rivers in my area and we post laminated signs on the head of every trail that goes to the river that state the regs for that river.
And that river is seeing lots of poaching already this year. Its Brutal.
-
And that river is seeing lots of poaching already this year. Its Brutal.
Yes it is brutal. The good thing is that both DFO and the local CO's have a good discription of the vehicles as well as the name of one person. There will be more enforcement around this year as well.
-
That's a tough one but I have been fishing the Alouette a fair amount recently. Many times we have called the DFO and the Parks people because this year there have been insane people fishing this beautiful little gem. It used to be you could avoid all the idiots (please I am not saying you are one of these... I am only commenting on what I have seen for myself this year... and it has been disgusting!) by heading to this small gem of a river. This year I have personally felt like the DFO when I have been out fishing at Alllco... seriously people banging Chum because they think no one is watching... caught another family with over 5 Black as Coal Springs in their cooler... AND NOT ONE recorded... they didn't even know they had to till I showed them... and then they borrowed a pen to record them. Seriously... I think DFO needs a head shake... but I also think they should make a few of the people who care "Deputies at Large" or something because the people at Allco this year have been killing a great fishery that is fun and so close to home!
-
--sometimes like dealing with .. I don't know what... we're fishing an area of river that is closed to recreational fishing as part of a sanctioned research project. I'm getting to know what CO's have to go through... people continue to come to this section of river that is closed fishing gear in hand. .. we go over and explain to them the area is closed and show them the letter of permission we have.
--the usual response is they didn't know the river was closed... this is not a special closesure this section of the river is always closed at this time of year. they explain how sorry they are and immediately pack up explaining how happy they are we told them as they are really law abiding ethical fishers... then I see the guy has attached to his line a treble barbed hook...even when the river is open it is clearly stated single barbless. so now I'm not so sympathetic about the didn't read the regs section or the law abiding part.