Question I was asked...

[TJQ]

Please tell me if it is legal to use flurescent glow sticks that are weighted as fish bait attracters?

 

They are sold at the dollar stores and glow different colors. You would tie a small sinker on them and let them sink and retreive them when your done fishing.

 

A similar product is sold at Cabelas that uses batterys and also is advertised on the net.

 

Thx for any info,

 

Anyone got any answers??

[misfish]

Interesting. They do sell lures these days that glow and flash and jingle and and and.................................

[Terry]

from what I read

if it is part of the lure it is legal

if it's separate from the lure, it is considered illegal

so, now I could be wrong, cause we all know how the MNR makes their rules clear..

so near or on a lure ..ok

but a hook and live bait..not ok

a lure that wouldn't need livebait on it to work, but has live bait on it..ok

 

jigs that hold light..like if you shine a light on them..is ok for live bait

but if it produces light like a flashlight or glow stick..not ok for live bait

 

hope that muddies the water even more

but it's what I got from reading about it

Edited February 7, 2007 by Terry

[Kirk]

after we figure that out, my question is can we post pics of the 'glow' sticks in action

[misfish]

after we figure that out, my question is can we post pics of the 'glow' sticks in action

 

 

Your the lawyer,you tell us,sheech,what we paying ya for.LOL

 

[pikehunter]

Your the lawyer,you tell us,sheech

 

There ya go! The regs are so complicated even our consulting lawyer can't even get a grip on them! Hope the new revised regs are easier to decipher, whenever they get published.

 

As for trying out glow sticks as bait, go ahead and try them. If you get busted then we know the answer.

[bigfish1965]

I think Terry is quite right. You can't attach a glowing or lighted object to a lure or bait. Glow paint is okay.

[camillj]

Good thread ... its something I have wondered myself and several conversations with Co's havent really shed any more light on the subject

 

From what I understand the regs were there to prevent people from using artifical lights to attract fish (eg in the olden days ...when I was young) people used to take highbeams and shine them into the water to attract baitfish and in turn the predators ... this would pull in fish from great distances ... and was banned.

 

The question beyond 'artificial light' on baits/lures would be a tough one to differentiate since the luminous baits whether charged by light, electricity or chemical reaction are still producing artificial light ... so I wont go there ... and frankly I would be the first one to say shoving a little glowstick up a (plastic) worms butt would be a cool experiment

 

But the question that has always concerned me is the lighted floats (and in my case I tape a glowstick to my rod tip and tip ups at night) and the lanterns (which have a similar if not as dramatic) ability to attract baitfish and in turn the predators ... havent yet been told that we MUST fish in complete darkness .... but always wondered where the line was drawn from a legal perspective.

[Roy]

Great reflections folks. I don't believe a CO is able to give you a clear answer on this. At any rate, with a catch/posession limit in place, why would it matter?

[DMASSE]

Lst year I was fishing for walleyes and had a glow stick 18 inches from my lure and a CO stopped us and check our rigs, he said what a great idea, asked me where i got them and said happy fishing.

 

we sell glows in our store and the box has picture of them attached to the line but not to the lure...

 

I will call Wil Wagmen today and find out for sure

 

Dave

[Kirk]

The problem with getting a legal opinion is time and money. Also, posting general advice can get you sued if someone says they read it and it turns out their case, facts or jurisdiction makes your written answer inapplicable, if they misunderstood it or was outright wrong.

 

For an opinion, you would have to

 

1) look at what it says in the statute or regulation (ie written law) and what it says in the summary (which is a summary of what the law but the summary can be used as a defence in certain circumstances if it is misleading, inaccurate or ambiguous).

 

2) you would also have to look up how each key word is defined in the law

 

3) you would also have to look at how courts have applied or interpreted the law or definitions of the words in specific cases where people are charged and defending their case in court.

 

4) then there are charter or constitutional issues, eg. whether there is any defence related to how evidence was obtained, voluntary vs. involuntary statements ('confessions'), discrimination, overbroad or ambiguous laws, rights to counsel violations etc.

 

So, the short answer is not too many lawyers do all of the above for free.

 

If I were to hazard a guess, ignoring my own advice not to post advice, if we are talking about Ontario, with the limited enforcement resources, they would probably limit their enforcement dollars to prosecuting blatant 'jack lighting' poachers with 100's of fish overlimit rather than nailing grandpa trying out a new widget he bought at the dollar store. Intention may also be a defence and there is also a 'de minimus' argument as well if there is a violation but it is so minor it doesn't justify a conviction (the microscopic amounts of cocaine in your possession if paper money is closely analyzed).

 

Also, with CO's being human and having different interpretations, in grey areas, you may be charged with an offence and faced the burden of 1,000.00's in legal fees to defend the charge and even if you win you are out of pocket for.

 

So, if you don't want to risk the hassle, expense or inconvenience of a charge, if you are unsure or the law appears unclear, don't use it, people having been catching fish for 100's of years before the internet gadgets started being advertised.

 

I hope this post enlightened a subject which some may be in the dark about. (sarcasm and puns are always free)

Edited February 8, 2007 by Kirk

[pikehunter]

Kirk, that's the best advise yet. Why tempt trouble.

[Garyv]

Before I purchased two of the lighted lures below at a fishing show I asked the MNR people if they were legal and was told yes. If the light is in or part of the lure there OK. If you note the two top units attach to the lure so if that's the case I can't see why a glow stick would be any different. But then it is the MNR and it is their regs so............. They went on to say you can't use a light shining down in the water. The top two are actuated by a ball switch floating back and forth as the lure moves. The bottom lure has two sensors top and bottom that when in water complete a circuit.

[cisco]

The amswer is not hard to obtain.

 

Background:

 

MNR via transfer payments from the Feds enforces the Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) regulations.

Remember that the Federal gov't has the mandate to manage fisheries and the MNR only has the mandate through legal contract with DFO. Makes sense right? I mean, why have the Province enforcing wildlife regulations when they can at the same time help enforce DFO fisheries regs.. No sense having federal fisheries officers wandering around along with MNR's CO's for wildlife reg enforcement.

 

The Ontario gov't also has the final say re whether and to what extent it choses to enforce Federal regs.... take for example where the Provincial gov't has decided not to enforce the Fed firearms regs so the MNR nor the OPP will do the dirty work of the Feds by charging anyone with not having their sporting arms registered.

 

Anyway, back to the issue.

 

Call Head Office MNR in Peterborough or email the MNR Minister's office clearly explaining what you want an answer to.

They will email back or maybe telephone to give you their position on the matter. On an issue such as this, it is best to get a written position.

 

Keep this position on hand and no CO or Enforcement Co-ordinator will mess with ya. And even if one does, the letter will vindicate you if the matter does go to court. Crown will drop it like a hot potato since the issue would meke em all look inconsistent.

 

Quite frankly, many DFO regulations aren't upheld by the MNR except under certain circumstances.... namely, when MNR feels it needs to enforce in order to nip something in the bud, or to discourage someone from abusing the resource.

 

Bottom line, the laws are only as strong as those who choose where and when to enforce them.