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.