Woodsman Posted February 29, 2012 Report Posted February 29, 2012 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. In this case the CO would not have the authority to take your licence. Charge you yes. Whether it would hold up if challenged is another story. To the best of my knowledge the removal of your fishing privileges can only be done in court. Never heard of it being applied to single charges on the minor side of the rules (like your example). Now if you have a long history of offenses or are charged with multiple offenses (ie: procession of many fish over your limit, ect)than loss of fishing privileges is quite possible.
pikehunters Posted February 29, 2012 Report Posted February 29, 2012 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> Play the song & read the post's !!!! It'll get ya in the mood Good One!
Gregoire Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Posted February 29, 2012 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.
BillM Posted February 29, 2012 Report Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) Not hard to keep the fish in the water and take measurements/remove the hook. Edited February 29, 2012 by BillM
Sinker Posted February 29, 2012 Report Posted February 29, 2012 I think your being a little paranoid. How are you supposed to know the length of the fish if you don't take possession of it for a measurement? Your worried about being charged for that?? Come on....there are bigger things in life to worry about!!! I'd bet 80% of muskies caught are undersized....and get their photo taken! S.
Spouph Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 The judge would throw that ticket out... Most CO's I've run into are good guys. Totally agree most are good guys. I've made honest mistakes, too many rod, did not read the old regs right. Fined me and believed me because I showed him in the regs the decrepence, but gave me all the tackle back so I did not have too stop fishing for the day. I had to chew the fine but I was in the wrong. If one fish is caugtht and photo/s are taken, prob no big deal, but to do multiple fish, you may be into trouble if you are handleing them poorly or taking too much time. St clair co have had no issues with pic of catch and release. yet again common sense. The co's can see you before you can see them and they take photo's of the infractions from a distance. I have seen them pic boats out of a crowd of 50 boats.
MichaelAngelo Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 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. Consider how many times they actually catch somebody doing something wrong. I'm sure they have a no tolerance policy.
irishfield Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 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. Hell.. there can't be two Bruce Wards!! He'll threaten to charge you for taking a picture of a Musky if you only have a conservation licence! lol
Twocoda Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 interesting.....i too think "possession" should be clarified to the degree that each officer complies to the same definition across the board if a steelheader has two fish (my zone) on a stringer and continues to fish...technically as soon as he sets the hook on another fish...he is over his limit....even if his intentions are to release the fish ...there is still the brief window that he is illegal with 3 fish...and based on this thinking ....he will continue to fish for the entire day...breaking the rules over and over again.... if the definition was more specific...maybe ...just maybe....the meat hunters would leave one empty slot on their stringers so they can continue to fish...with the guarantee of going home with one fish at the cost of not going home with two if they want to continue to fish....or simply quit fishing until there is an open spot on their "possession" limit pos·ses·sion (p-zshn) n. 1. a. The act or fact of possessing. b. The state of being possessed. 2. Something owned or possessed. 3. possessions Wealth or property. 4. Law Actual holding or occupancy with or without rightful ownership. 5. A territory subject to foreign control. 6. Self-control. 7. The state of being dominated by or as if by evil spirits or by an obsession. 8. Sports a. Physical control of the ball or puck by a player or team. b. The condition of being on offense: The home team was in possession during most of the fourth quarter. pos·session·al adj.
BillM Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) So by that definition we shouldn't even be allowed to fish in C&R sections of certain tribs where a Sport or Conservation license has a 0 possession limit. Edited March 1, 2012 by BillM
Twocoda Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 So by that definition we shouldn't even be allowed to fish in C&R sections of certain tribs where a Sport or Conservation license has a 0 possession limit. maybe fish enforcer will chime in hopefully after he consults his superiors
MichaelAngelo Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) So by that definition we shouldn't even be allowed to fish in C&R sections of certain tribs where a Sport or Conservation license has a 0 possession limit. Remember guys, possession is even when the fish is filleted in your freezer at home. I'm not joking, it's in the regs. You have to package the meat so that you can identify the fish (skin on). I totally didn't know this until I read the regs more carefully. I'm curious as to this also, unhooking a fish in your hands when you already have your limit... Edited March 1, 2012 by MichaelAngelo
Twocoda Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 Remember guys, possession is even when the fish is filleted in your freezer at home. I'm not joking, it's in the regs. You have to package the meat so that you can identify the fish (skin on). I totally didn't know this until I read the regs more carefully. I'm curious as to this also, unhooking a fish in your hands when you already have your limit... point and case....the powers to be made a point of this being stipulated.....time to make amendments to suit the need so ALL fish enforcers will operate under the same definition ....it will clear up alot of "grey" areas so we dont have to waste too much "gray" matter on this subject...
BillM Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 I don't have much gray matter left that all the Leaf threads
RSF Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 Very interesting thread, I'd like clarification too. Just sent the question/concern to MNR. S/be about 15 days before receiving a response from them.
MichaelAngelo Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 Very interesting thread, I'd like clarification too. Just sent the question/concern to MNR. S/be about 15 days before receiving a response from them. Awesome, I'll be waiting! lol 15 days, or longer depending on how many meetings they have scheduled (my dad used to work for the gov't)
Gregoire Posted March 1, 2012 Author Report Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) 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. Edited March 1, 2012 by fishgreg
mike rousseau Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 How about culling fish? I like small walleye for eating... But I have a hard time getting small ones... So the first 4 (my limit) reasonable fish I get go in the live well... Then I swap em for smaller fish as the day goes on... As long as they are very lively and healthy...
DoubleDigits Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) How about culling fish? I like small walleye for eating... But I have a hard time getting small ones... So the first 4 (my limit) reasonable fish I get go in the live well... Then I swap em for smaller fish as the day goes on... As long as they are very lively and healthy... This is legal provided that a) the aerator is running the whole time b size limits are obeyed and c) catch and retain limits are not exceeded at any one time Edited March 1, 2012 by DoubleDigits
mike rousseau Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 c) catch and retain limits are not exceeded at any one time This is the "confusing" part... Does this mean if my limit is 4 I can have 4 in the well...catch another and make a switch? Or does this mean I can only have 3 in the well and catch another and make a switch...? The way it reads to me is if your in possession of a limit... You can't fish any more...
DoubleDigits Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) This is the "confusing" part... Does this mean if my limit is 4 I can have 4 in the well...catch another and make a switch? Or does this mean I can only have 3 in the well and catch another and make a switch...? The way it reads to me is if your in possession of a limit... You can't fish any more... No, you may now catch and selectively live release more than your limit, of walleye pike and bass, provided that...(the three points i mentioned above) Edited March 1, 2012 by DoubleDigits
Garnet Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 Buddy was talking to CO recently and found out a family of 10 can posses 20 trout or any game fish. Even if theirs only 1 license in the house.
Rod Caster Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) Buddy was talking to CO recently and found out a family of 10 can posses 20 trout or any game fish. Even if theirs only 1 license in the house. yup, it is legal to gift fish. I do this all the time. For example, I catch my daily limit of 4 walleye, clean them, wrap them, and gift them to my grandma. Now I am done fishing for that particular day as my daily catch limit has been met. The next day I can do the same and gift the fish to anyone else. This possession topic seems a little silly to me...of course a CO will give you time to take a regulated fish off a hook and to return to the water in a reasonable time. Are you guys looking for an exact time limit? "you can do what you want within 20 seconds" GRAB THE CAMERA, WE NEED TO BEAT THE CLOCK! haha. Edited March 1, 2012 by Rod Caster
Fishenforcer Posted March 1, 2012 Report Posted March 1, 2012 maybe fish enforcer will chime in hopefully after he consults his superiors Unfortunately I am involved in other apects of enforcement under Provincial legislation. As with any type of enforcement, officers have the ability to use descetion and to be reasonable when exersing thier powers. Getting compliance is the best end result but sometimes warnings aren't sufficient given the nature of some violations(taking a picture certainly isn't a serious one). Also you get what you give so keep that in mind when dealing with enforcement officials, and people in general for that matter!!!
Mikeyfish Posted March 2, 2012 Report Posted March 2, 2012 A co in my mind should be someone I would like to feel good to be around, respect, trust, have good common sense and catch the people that are really disrespecting the rules. I’ve seen charges laid that are really discussing and embarrassing. I have hunted and fished for 40 years and haven’t been charged with anything yet. I quit hunting because I can’t keep up to the rules, regulation changes, and politics, fishing regulations are enough for me to handle now. As much as I hate to say it, I believe that some co’s power has gone to their head. If looking in the gray areas is the only way they can push their power, on the little guy, it is sad. I fish lots and I try to make sure my ( i s are doted and my t s are crossed ) and still dread the day when I’m stopped because I forgot something.
Recommended Posts