manitoubass2 Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 (edited) They hand out fishing regulations or have then for free for those that need them on the counter of most places I have bought a license some people never take one or open it up. Fishing at an area pond I had a dude walk up to me and show me the Rainbow trout he had caught, they were sunfish. On vacation at the Georgian Bay one time and a couple guys show me and my buddy the huge Largemouth bass they had caught and asked if it was good to eat, Ya go for it! It was a bowfin. At local lakes here I have seen people fishing from shore put what ever they catch in their bucket, " if it`s big enough to bite? it`s big enough to eat? " and species was no concern to them. A former friend of my dad`s tried to come back here one time with 27 northern pike between him and his friend, he got busted and whined about it, we laughed at him. With the increase in population in a lot of areas the fishery becomes more fragile, some one needs to do something to protect it? Perhaps warning signs? " a fishing rod is not a license to be stupid ". I shouldn't laugh, but a similar thing happened to me yesterday with an older fellow who had caught a sucker and thought it was a lake trout. Unfortunately around here, alot of those people fishing from shore that keep everything, are status natives and can legally keep them fish. Even though I'm sure he had no idea how to prepare his "lake trout" That being said, I think anglers should follow good moral practices and worry more about how they treat the resource. If every responsible angler takes good measures to protect the fish, that's a healthy start. The problems that arise from new licensing practices etc usually don't work out to be any better than things are currently, and often times makes things worse. One thing I despise about society today is the blatant over complication on everyday things. And complicating this and that just compiles new issues. Just my two cents... Edited June 6, 2011 by manitoubass2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrison Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 (edited) Forget about the testing. I think we should have a program where all rods must be registered. This way the police would know in advance when rolling up on a residence there could possibly be criminal activity and to check the freezer. Edited June 6, 2011 by Harrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manitoubass2 Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 This might sound like a horrible idea, but maybe on larger bodies of water and at public access landing, there should be shacks, employing summer students or the likes, where anglers are required to check their catch before leaving the lake/river etc. This could be employed by a government agency in certain places, and maybe by resort/landing owners etc in other locations. Insentives could be given to those that choose to employ this method? Things like that might help We all know there can't be enough CO's on the water to stop over fishing or illegal fishing practices Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookslav Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 Forget about the testing. I think we should have a program where all rods must be registered. This way the police would know in advance when rolling up on a residence there could possibly be criminal activity and to check the freezer . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctranter Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 If this discourages the white bucket brigade, I am all for it. Couldn't agree more!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckrb2007 Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 Absolutely not. That's why they have the regs in plain print and online and in several different languages. Do I know EVERY single species, slot sizes, limits and seasons out there?? Definitely not, but I do know all the particulars for the body or water, area and species that I will be fishing for at any given time. I strongly agree with many people on here who said the penalties should be far more severe then they are........and that comes down to an enforcement issue, not only from the CO's, but from the courts as well. In my opinion, the only reasons for not "obeying" the law is pure ignorance and complete disregard FOR the law(s). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garry2Rs Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 Why is it that those who have a licence to do something always want to make it harder for everyone else to get one too? We weren't born smart, we learned by trail and error. Lighten-up on the newbies, most of them are voters and we need them on our side if we want the government to listen to us. I read that for the last 20 years or more, in North America, there have been less fishing licences sold each year. The fact is the Game-Boy and Play Station crowd don't know anything about fishing and have little or no interest. I think a large part of the problem is the cost. If a guy recalls the fun he had as a kid fishing, and wants to take the kids out on Saturday morning, he has to buy $20-$30 worth of paper before he can go to the conservation area...Want to bet he opts for a Disney movie instead? If we want the government to spend money on fish related issues, we need more voters involved. Therefore, we need to make it easier for folks to go fishing, not make it harder. As for the bucket brigade, we all started somewhere! Personally, I think these folks do more to improve the fishing than to hurt it. Who really cares about a couple of OOS bass when they are taking hundreds of hungry pan-fish out of the lake every weekend? What about doing a way with the fishing licence all together? Some of you must be old enough to remember that back in about 1973 Premier Bill Davis scrapped the Ontario Resident fishing licence, calling it a nuisance tax. As I recall the cost of printing and selling licences ate all the revenue. Today, in my area, it's hard to buy a fishing licence. Many small places say there are too many headaches involved and it isn't worth their time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manitoubass2 Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 (edited) Why is it that those who have a licence to do something always want to make it harder for everyone else to get one too? We weren't born smart, we learned by trail and error. Lighten-up on the newbies, most of them are voters and we need them on our side if we want the government to listen to us. I read that for the last 20 years or more, in North America, there have been less fishing licences sold each year. The fact is the Game-Boy and Play Station crowd don't know anything about fishing and have little or no interest. I think a large part of the problem is the cost. If a guy recalls the fun he had as a kid fishing, and wants to take the kids out on Saturday morning, he has to buy $20-$30 worth of paper before he can go to the conservation area...Want to bet he opts for a Disney movie instead? If we want the government to spend money on fish related issues, we need more voters involved. Therefore, we need to make it easier for folks to go fishing, not make it harder. As for the bucket brigade, we all started somewhere! Personally, I think these folks do more to improve the fishing than to hurt it. Who really cares about a couple of OOS bass when they are taking hundreds of hungry pan-fish out of the lake every weekend? What about doing a way with the fishing licence all together? Some of you must be old enough to remember that back in about 1973 Premier Bill Davis scrapped the Ontario Resident fishing licence, calling it a nuisance tax. As I recall the cost of printing and selling licences ate all the revenue. Today, in my area, it's hard to buy a fishing licence. Many small places say there are too many headaches involved and it isn't worth their time. Lots of good points there, and I agree on alot of them. No offence to anyone, but I find the OOS bass and nesting issue quite ridiculous, and mainly for the simple fact that only one part of a large chain is being discussed. Big fish, small fish etc all forage on eggs, minnows etc, thats nature. If I made the same argument for crawfish, I'd be laughed at, yet, it is the EXACT same thing. One thing to ponder specifically for bass, is that although many target them, how many anglers actually keep bass to eat? I'd be willing to bet not many, at least not frequently. Now reverse that with walleye. Seems the populations are fine, even though these fish are kept much more frequently than bass, correct? Should I also target pike mainly to keep another fishes populations "under control", in a completely non scientific aspect? The fact is, there probably isn't one of us on this board that actually knows these things about a certain body of water. It's all speculation, all of it. If I keep a female walleye tomorrow, that alot of eggs that won't get made next year, correct? It's really not the case at all. Seem to me that an argument, whether right or wrong, needs to take all species into account to make a sound decision. Edited June 6, 2011 by manitoubass2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Bob Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 STUPID IDEA ! ! ! What about all those 2, 3, 4, and 5 years old kids...since they can't even read yet...NO FISHING FOR THEM....Can't go fishing with Grampa because you can't pass the fishing test... And not to mention handicap folks with autism...they also wouldn't be allowed to fish. So sometimes the laws are broken or stretch.....it happens...get over it...people do all kinds of crazy stuff and if it's just keep a illegal fish because they don't know better, well then it's up to us to help them learn and understand. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garry2Rs Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 If a given lake can carry 2 tons of fish, I know that it can't all be 50" musky and 7 pound bass, but I'm saying that I would prefer that most of that weight not be panfish, especial big ones that are 99% safe from predators...So bring on the bucket brigade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutdoorDan Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 If a given lake can carry 2 tons of fish, I know that it can't all be 50" musky and 7 pound bass, but I'm saying that I would prefer that most of that weight not be panfish, especial big ones that are 99% safe from predators...So bring on the bucket brigade. You can't just take out part of the food chain and expect the monsters to hang around. As for having a test, I'm really split on it. Theoretically I think it is a good idea, but in practice the way the test would be done and administered would be butchered by our wonderful government, so I would rather avoid it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutchy Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 Its all down to enforcement. We need more COs, having a test does nothing. Simple question, how many people on here stick to the speed limit when they are driving? It doesn't matter unless you get caught and that is the attitude we take with that. Other people just choose to ignore the rules when they are fishing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Caster Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 More enforcement. OPP should enforce fishing laws (or do they already) and designated lake/area watchdogs should be allowed to lay fines with photo/witness evidence. There are not enough CO's and they need help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigugli Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 I'm sorry, Junior can't go fishing until he is 12 years old and capable of writing the junior anglers test. most of us started at a wee age. Should we deprive future generations of another simple pleasure because adults behave like !!! I could just as easily argue that no one operate a canoe/kayak without ORCA II, or better, certification. Campers should have to take a class in woodcraft, and all should have basic first aid before being allowed loose in the great outdoors. I mean, really folks! If we are going to be s we might as well go full out. A test, certificate, license, will never impose or bring about compliance. Enforcement does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crossover Posted June 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 (edited) STUPID IDEA ! ! ! What about all those 2, 3, 4, and 5 years old kids...since they can't even read yet...NO FISHING FOR THEM....Can't go fishing with Grampa because you can't pass the fishing test... And not to mention handicap folks with autism...they also wouldn't be allowed to fish. So sometimes the laws are broken or stretch.....it happens...get over it...people do all kinds of crazy stuff and if it's just keep a illegal fish because they don't know better, well then it's up to us to help them learn and understand. Bob I don't see why people keep mentioning how children won't be able to fish as those under 18 and over 65 don't require a license. People with disabilities also do not require a license. Edited June 7, 2011 by crossover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhickey Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 Can we get back to reallity. A licience is desinged to controll people from breaking laws . It is also desinged to inform people of the laws. A fishing licience is the only licience that I can think of that anyone can buy regardless of knowledge. AS for children fishing.The current system does not allow them to fish without being in the presence of a leagal adult with a fishing licience. If we as schooled anglers have trouble inturpreting the regs how can we expect some one that cant tell the difference between a sunfish and a bass to act responsably? The rules and basic knowledge of how to use the regulation handbook should be manditory. In My Hummble Opinion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irishfield Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 AS for children fishing.The current system does not allow them to fish without being in the presence of a leagal adult with a fishing licience Absolutely untrue! They can fish alone... allowed a Sport limit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhickey Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 (edited) <BR>Absolutely untrue! They can fish alone... allowed a Sport limit!<BR><BR><BR>ARE you shure ?<BR>I just checked the regs and it doesnt mention kids under 18 yrs .? <BR><BR><BR><BR>DISSREGARD..<BR><BR>IT DOES SAY YOU ARE CORRECT. Edited June 7, 2011 by saltydawg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I think people have lost their minds. Since when are kids required to have a license if under the age of 18? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjgraham Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 If you implement a test then that means less people will fish, and buy licenses. If thats the case that means less money to pay CO's and we all know that there aren't very many around to begin with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhickey Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 <BR><BR>ARE you shure ?<BR>I just checked the regs and it doesnt mention kids under 18 yrs .? <BR><BR><BR><BR>DISSREGARD..<BR><BR>IT DOES SAY YOU ARE CORRECT. What happened ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irishfield Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I don't know Don.. it was fine when I read it earlier.. you did something editing it I guess! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sinker Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I think people have lost their minds. Since when are kids required to have a license if under the age of 18? I think people who think there should be a test for a fishing license have lost thier minds!! Good lord, we've been fishing since the beginning of time to survive, now we need a license, and now you want to have a test to get that license?? Give your head a shake. We're on a short enough leash as it is! Whats next?? S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adempsey Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I personally don't think it will make any difference. Today, the destruction of freshwater fisheries is the result of habitat loss from things like damns, pollution and invasive species. I don't think the average "uneducated" weekend warrior has much impact. Ultimately, having to take a test would make little difference to me personally; but much like everything else the government does, I am sure it would raise the cost of obtaining a license substantially. That money wouldn't be going back to conservation either. It would be going to all the extra employees required for managing the testing program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Bob Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I think people who think there should be a test for a fishing license have lost thier minds!! Good lord, we've been fishing since the beginning of time to survive, now we need a license, and now you want to have a test to get that license?? Give your head a shake. We're on a short enough leash as it is! Whats next?? S. I think Sinker hit the nail on the head....everyone should be required to read this three times....oh, wait....another mandate.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now