rhare Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 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. Has anyone actually been charged after the photo was taken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishindevil Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 daveMC has is correct,you have to release a out of season fish immediately and not take a photo or you can be charged fish must be released right away without any delay when some guys got arrested on our lake back in the spring for over limit crappies,as well as out of season bass,i asked the CO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 Has anyone actually been charged after the photo was taken? 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 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. How is it black and white? You just stated in a previous reply about having it out of the water for a certain amount of time to remove a deeply hooked fish. There are way too many variables to even consider this a black and white issue. Time out of water, reason for it being out of water, handling of the fish while it's out of the water, etc etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Bob Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 Has anyone actually been charged after the photo was taken? My "guess" would be NO.......but think about this.....what takes more time....trying to settle down a musky for measurement or taking a quick photo....that would be my defence if I ever got a ticket for taking a picture of a illegal fish....what if it's a quarter inch too short...should you be fined for measuring it and then releasing the fish.....I agree....this is a stupid thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 daveMC has is correct,you have to release a out of season fish immediately and not take a photo or you can be charged fish must be released right away without any delay when some guys got arrested on our lake back in the spring for over limit crappies,as well as out of season bass,i asked the CO My concern here isn't out of season fish, but fish that are in season but outside a size regulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 How is it black and white? You just stated in a previous reply about having it out of the water for a certain amount of time to remove a deeply hooked fish. There are way too many variables to even consider this a black and white issue. Time out of water, reason for it being out of water, handling of the fish while it's out of the water, etc etc etc. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 Perhaps the MNR should define the word 'Possession' a bit better for us. I'm sure that would answer a lot of the questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) this is a stupid thread. 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. Edited February 29, 2012 by fishgreg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 Perhaps the MNR should define the word 'Possession' a bit better for us. I'm sure that would answer a lot of the questions. agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Bob Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 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. OK....not a stupid thread if you're that concerned about the answers you request......then I would contact your MNR for the correct answers....here on this forum you will only get opinions and that is what I gave you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhare Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 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. I'm sorry but it's really hard to understand what is going on here... But I agree we should re-write the regulations because you feel threatened by the possibility of getting a fine for having a picture of a musky that isnt with in the slot size but is in season... seems like money well spent to me... It's defiantly one of the big issue we have today on our lakes and rivers. In all seriousness, if it's that big of a concern to you then just don't do it. The simple fact that it's done ALL THE TIME and no one has ever been charged is good enough for me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) OK....not a stupid thread if you're that concerned about the answers you request......then I would contact your MNR for the correct answers....here on this forum you will only get opinions and that is what I gave you. 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. Edited February 29, 2012 by fishgreg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 I'm sorry but it's really hard to understand what is going on here... But I agree we should re-write the regulations because you feel threatened by the possibility of getting a fine for having a picture of a musky that isnt with in the slot size but is in season... seems like money well spent to me... It's defiantly one of the big issue we have today on our lakes and rivers. In all seriousness, if it's that big of a concern to you then just don't do it. The simple fact that it's done ALL THE TIME and no one has ever been charged is good enough for me... 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike rousseau Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 The world is not black and white. mmmm... the black and white cookie.... a perfect balance of harmony on a cookie... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) 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. Edited February 29, 2012 by fishgreg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solopaddler Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 Yup, set fines.. Don't ask me how I know this, lol Only on this side of the border, in the States it's up to the judges discretion. But you already knew that. Here's a song for you buddy <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NU-Iod_a57Q" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 They love me in NYS as well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhare Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 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. The fact that it has never been an issue in... well, ever makes me think that it's not likely something that needs to have any resources what so ever put into it. You can't just clarify a part of possession with out having it written somewhere.I'm sure it's not as easy as just tossing a new page in the regs. There would be some serious cost involved. Anyways, futile argument. I'm sorry it bothers you that it doesn't say in writing you can take a picture of your fish. I think it's a common sense issue. Not to insinuate that you have no common sense, I just think that they leave areas like this out so its a small reg book not the holy bible of regulation that takes 30min to find something in. tightlines Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solopaddler Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 They love me in NYS as well! Fair is fair, as they say stuff happens. Here's my song. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/cIuToLUn3-I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishenforcer Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 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? There are set fines for offences or the Provincial Offences Officer can 104 summons you to court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solopaddler Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 There are set fines for offences or the Provincial Offences Officer can 104 summons you to court. Welcome to the board. Are you involved in fisheries enforcement? Would be great if we had our own in house member to answer these questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 Rogue CO's? We better watch out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
express168 Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 I don't see what is difficult about determining possesion, if you remove a fish from the water it is in your "possession" until returned to the water. Logically a CO would give you a reasonable amount of time to properly return the fish to the water based on each circumstance. It is not black and white, if it states it is ok to photograph the fish in the regs does that mean 4 people in the boat can do it, if your batteries are dead can you wait to change them before returning the fish etc etc. By the way how would you be charged if you photographed an undersized fish and released it, the CO wouldn't have the fish to prove it was undersized. If the fish is out of the water long enough for the CO to come over and check its size before you release it I would say that is a bit longer than a quick picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts