Gregoire

Having sex while fishing...in a canoe

I think possesion and immediate release both need to be clearly defined in the regs. I find it funny that poss possesion and immediately are put in bold in the regs, meaning that they are important terms for understanding the document, yet both terms are not clearly defined. Apparently the MNR does not live up to the same expectations as the Department of Education, as every textbook that I have read has a clear definition of terms that are in bold, generally both in the text and at the end of a document in a glossary.

Getting info on fishing an area that is easily accesible to millions of people on an online forum may be tough. I have done a bit of shore fishing in the GTA in the past. I did online searches and did a lot of footwork before I even experienced moderate success. If you are willing to go out and experiment on a regular basis you will eventually have some success, but you will have to work for it. Another way is to find someone with experiece and go out with them.

At least in some states immediate release is defined (apparently MN is one). I do not think that it would be too much to ask the MNR to include a definition of immediate release in the regs that allowed time to remove the hook, identify, measure and take a picture of the fish. I do not think that doing so would cost a huge amount of money, or require the regs to be re-written. I am not overly worried about this issue, and I definitely would take a pic of myself with a 48' kawartha musky or a 50' ski from LOTW. Having said that I think this topic is of more concern for a musky angler, as some like to keep accurate records with photos of the fish that they have landed.

Apparently there is a CO working in Ontario that interprets the rules quite literally and will fine anyone who he catches taking a undersized fish out of the water. I got this information from another board. While it is very unlikely that you would run into that CO at the exact time that you are taking a pic it is possible. It is for this reason that I think the regs need to be clarified. I think that this type of variation in enforcement of the regs is wrong.

I'm going to stop responding to comments posted on this thread as I want it to stay open so that I can get others opinions on the topic. Thank you for sharing your thoughts so far.

I do not think that it would require re-writng the regulations, rather it would invovle clarifying the issue on what possesion means. In terms of cost and use of resources I imagine a clarification of this issue would be much less coslty than a court case challenging what possesion means.

I asked for opinions about what the legal implications are regarding taking a picture of a fish that is technically not legal, and engaged in conversations about clarifying the regulations. At no point did I ask for your opinion about whether you though this thread was relevant or not. Why you felt a need to express that latter is beyond me, I just wanted to let you know that I did not appreciate it. By stating this is a stupid thread you are insinuating that I am stupid for starting the thread, and I do find that insinuation somewhat offensive.

agreed

If you don't like the thread don't read it or comment on it. I started it because I have a genuine interest and I believe it is an issue that should be clarified. Being an active member of this forum does not mean you have to comment on every open thread. You are free to leave this topic alone and only comment on threads that you think are not stupid. I would actually prefer if you did that.

I think right now we are arguing back and forth for the sake of argument. I am saying that I would like the MNR to clarify the rule so that a CO cannot charge someone who removes an in season fish that is outside the size limmit for the purpose of a photo. You are probably right that no CO would charge someone for doing so, but I would feel better if this was written in to the regulations. If you read my posts closely you will see that I am asking for clarification in the regulations. In my mind this mean taking an issue thta is grey and making it black or white. At least that is how I see it.

My concern here isn't out of season fish, but fish that are in season but outside a size regulation.

I don't know, but the fact that they could bothers me, in case you haven't noticed. I just think that this issue should be clearly stated in the regulations as it is a common practice.

As I just indicated I think this particular issue is Black and White. Any fish that is caught in season but falls outside of a size restrictions. Either you are allowed or not allowed to remove the fish from the water for a picture. I do not think that a CO should be given discretion to give a ticket that would be thrown out by a judge in every situation that I can think of.

I agree with your point, but I think you are missing mine. If a judge would throw out a ticket for briefly removing a musky that is smaller that say 44" in the Kawartha's than a CO should not be able to lay the charge in the first place. This matter should be clarified and not left up to a CO to determine. Maybe something like "An angler catching a fish that is in season but can not be kept due to size restrictions can briefly remove the fish from the water for a photo. If an angler removes an out of season fish for a photo, he/she can be charged with violating the Ontario Fishing regulations. " To put my opinion in other words: I do not think that anglers should be subject to a charged if they are doing something that is commonly accepted and seen as having little harm on the fish. I hope I didn't just open another can of worms with that last comment.

And that opinion if fine, but it is yours. Some people will agree and some will not. I am not saying that you purposely did this, but sometimes when people have different opinions about things we attack them rather than the opinion. Whatever your take on this issue as long as you are not intentionally targetting OOS you are not doing anything wrong, for lack of a bette term.

It is the fact that I would have to appeal to a judge, take time set and travel to a court date, and not be able to fish untill the issue has been resolved that bothers me. I think we need clarification on what possession and immediate means. I would like the MNR to declare that removing a fish from the water for a quick picture is not a violation as long as the fish is in season, despite the fact that it may not meet size requirements. Just to add to this issue, it is not always to remove, or cut hooks in the water. If a fish takes the hook deep sometimes you have to remove it from the water in order to remove the hook, especially if you do not have the proper landing gear. In this case you would be in possesion of the fish and possibly face a fine when all you are doing is trying to remove the hook.

I think we can all accept that while fishing for certain species sometimes you catch a different species. I personally have witnessed fisherpete pull in 2 beauty bass on musky gear. There is nothing wrong with the occasional catch of an out of sesason fish if you are not intentionally targetting them. Whether you consider it a PB is a personal matter. We are not always going to agree on everything, but it is important to respect others opinions and realize that no matter how passionately we believe in something others do not always feel the same.

It just strikes as unfair that a CO for whatever reason could choose to fine you and take away your fishing liscence for something like taking a picture of an in season fish. I know it is unlikely to happen but the fact that it could makes me uncomfortable. Loosing my fishing equipment would not be as serious to me as would be loosing the previlidge to fish. Has there been a push to clarify the regulations? Or is this a situation where someone with money or influece will need to be charged and then challenge the Regulations in court untill the MNR is forced to clarify this issue.

I imagine there are some people on this site who would pay to go musky hunting with you. I definitely count myself lucky to have been out with you for my first ski, as I would have tottaly botched the landing and handling of that fish without your guidance. Hopefully that PB won't last another season, and I defintely appove of your goals for the year.

So at worst case a fine, and maybe confiscation of equipment. Could your fishing liscence be revoked as welll?

That makes total sense. Who determines the fines? Is there a set fine for specific violations as there is for traffic violations?

So it is just a fine...If it is not a criminal charge why do you have to appear in court. I also remember reading something about the Ontario Fishing Regulations being enforced according to the fisheries act, which is a federal act. Wouldn't that mean that the regualtions are in fact enforceable as law?

Hi all, This question came up on another board, and I did a google search, but could not really find the information that I was looking for. My Question is: Is breaking an Ontario fishing regulation an criminal offense. So would you have to go to court, or is it more like a traffic ticker where you can just pay a fine. This question came up as a result of a discussion on whether it is legal to take a photo with a Musky that is unders the size limit. I am just wondering if a CO does charge a person, which he may be able to do, what the charge would be a what possible consequences one could face.

It's not just Kijiji where you can get the run around. I've had people back out of sales on this and other sites. It's the nature of thing. I think EC1 has it right, show up with cash in hand as soon as possible to get a deal, and if you're selling let people know that the first person to show with cash in hand will get the item. Overall my experiences have been positive.