Changing the Licensing System

[Hookset]

There's a question I've been wondering for a long time. With all of the O.O.S. posts, poaching posts, and posts about fishing in closed waters I thought I'd ask a separate question instead of hijacking someone else's thread.

 

When you apply for a hunting license you have to pass a test, showing that you can safely hunt, know all the regulations specific to hunting, can identify species, male or female, etc, etc,. I'm no hunter but I believe after you have passed this test, you are approved to hunt for the rest of your life, and only need to apply for tags etc. or update as to new species to hunt for. Like I said, I'm not a hunter but all those hunters that I know feel that the testing / licensing is crucial to protecting their resources (not to mention reducing the chance of getting shot at themselves lol).

 

Here's the question...

 

Is it time that a mandatory test be passed for fishing ? Pass the test then simply pay for your yearly license.

Prove that you know what, when, and where you can fish. Show that you are educated in the resource that

we hold dear. I feel that simply showing up at the bait shop, paying your 23 bucks (or whatever), and being then given the right to fish doesn't cover what an educated fisherman should be. I think a one time written test, and I mean a difficult test that an inexperienced or first time fisherperson would need to study for, would be a great idea. I've been fishing for over 30 years but I bet on a good test there would be lots of things I would need to study for and I bet I would be a better fisherman because of that. Pass the test and congratulations, you are now a lifetime licensed Angler. Pay your yearly fee and hit the lakes / streams. Seems like a small price to pay for a lifetime of fishing.

 

I suppose the real reason I'm asking this is that it continues to get harder and harder to see an improvent to our fisheries. We all have ideas as to what is wrong with the system. How do we really make an effective change ?

This is no doubt way too drastic an idea for some, but maybe we can see constructive replies as to a better idea than mine.

 

Anyway, just thought I would throw this one out there.....

 

 

Hookset.

[Roy]

"With all of the O.O.S. posts, poaching posts, and posts about fishing in closed waters "

 

Same thing happens with hunting.

[Hookset]

Very true Roy, but how bad would it be without the licensing / education.

[Terry]

I don't think having to pass a test would help one little bit

poachers will poach fish and deer either way...

if you buy a fishing license you are required to follow the regs and ignorance of the law is no excuse, so a test wouldn't really help

and a test would be a money grab, nothing more...see boat operator exams to know what I mean...money grab

[bigfish1965]

I think one thing it might do is allow the courts to raise the level of personal responsibility. I'm sure alot of people get leniency because half the regs are incredibly difficult to decipher into English ( or any other language.)

What I would MUCH prefer is a Natural Resources curriculum in our school system. There's no good reason at all that it cannot be included into the High School level electives.

An awareness of the intricacies and interdependence of the varies ecosystems would certainly go a long way to brining about a generation of people who cared about the resources and how to properly look after them.

[98Fahrenheit]

I agree with the testing. Some people can't even tell the difference between fish. Like this past weekend at Keswick .... these Mainlanders caught a perch. They called it a "Long Fish". Then they caught a bass ... they called it a "Long Fish". Next they caught a bluegill ... guess what? They called it a "Fat Fish". They then landed a tiny crappie ... and ... yes ... they called it a "Fat Fish". Of course ... they put every single fish they caught in the bucket. However, they knew catfish ... why? Obviously the whiskers gave them the clue. I believe their is a fishing guide in Chinese printed by the Ministry. But unfortunately they might not understand the stupid guide since it is written in proper Chinese (Traditional Chinese Characters) as opposed to what they were educated in (Simplified Chinese Characters). Sucks not to see any COs around the area ... especially when these losers take everything regardless of size. Pathetic!

[Canuck2fan]

I don't know if it would help or not. The reason it probably won't is because I think that many of the poachers for either sport don't bother with licences of any kind. On the other hand it might stop some inadvertant mistakes, as in some one thinks they know the regs but they actually don't.

 

One reason it will never happen though is that with fishing, there would be a huge language barrier for too many anglers to be able to take the test. To be fair to everyone who had to take the test it would have be done in their native language and if the banks of the rivers I fish on and the number of different languages I hear spoken on them are any indication. The only thing having a test would mean is that they would have to hire about 80,000 interpreters to make it fair for everyone.

 

Now before anyone gets all upset and sees any racism in this, let me tell you why I say this. Two years ago, I got a minor traffic ticket and I fought it. So on the day I had my first appearance with the Crown, I was waiting to go in and see her. I had been talking with a guy who had gotten the same ticket, minor speeding in the exact same spot and he was going to use the same defence I was that the sign indicating the lower of speed was covered by a tree branch..... Anyhow he has a picture just like I did which according to the date stamp on his he took about 2 hrs after I took mine showing the sign being covered..... So I go first and the Crown goes to me no you will have to prove this to the JP I can't reverse your ticket because I don't know the context of the picture, is it accurate did you use photoshop yadda yadda yadda. So I go out and tell the guy I had been talking to to try and change his story a bit. The same Crown calls him in and at the doorway before they go into her office she asks if he still wants to have his case looked after in Ukranian he winks at me and goes Ya. The Crown goes ummmm your interpreter isn't here today your ticket is dismissed. So me being me I get a bit riled and ask to speak to the crown again and had it politely explained to me how in Ontario we are always fair to everyone with different backgrounds under the law..... So with that in mind how long would it be before someone fought to have the fishing test in their own language and then won the right for every angler to expect the same?

Edited April 23, 2007 by Canuck2fan

[POLLIWOGG]

And who is going to give the exam?

 

When Gov. legislated the need for a boating license no gov agency wanted to do it so it was farmed out to the private sector and became an operators card and cash cow for all kinds of shady characters. The oversight has been passed around from coast guard to trans Ca. and they let the examiners stretch the rules in an effort to get everyone licensed and when everyone needs it in 09 talk is it will probably be dropped anyway.

[misfish]

And who is going to give the exam?

 

 

 

 

 

TERRY

[Golfisher]

I suspect the vast majority of violations are committed by people who don't give a s**t about the rules to begin with. So while holding a written test may reduce unfortunate incidents caused by ignorance, it will do nothing when it comes to those bent on doing whatever the heck they want to do, so long as they can get away with it. Enforcement should be beefed up, the penalty of breaking the rules made dearer, so that if and when a person is caught for breaking the rules, he will learn a lesson to never think of poaching again.

 

But then again, I'm probably living in la-la land, given how underfunded the MNR is.

[SlowPoke]

It's not a bad idea.

 

As a truck driver, I need a Dangerous Goods Card to carry pool chemicals in our case. The DG test is dead easy and simply covers the basics in case of an emergancy. I find that the test does not necessarily quiz your knowledge on product or handling so much as it does illustrate your (in)ability to use the guide and apply it to your situation.

 

It's easy to achieve a perfect score if you know how to use the guide - all the answers are there.

 

A fishing test doesn't need to quiz your knowledge on fish identification or zones but to test your ability to use and inturpret the guide.

 

It won't put an end to poaching but it would help those that want to fish within thier rights.

 

-Brian

[Entropy]

I think one thing it might do is allow the courts to raise the level of personal responsibility. I'm sure alot of people get leniency because half the regs are incredibly difficult to decipher into English ( or any other language.)

What I would MUCH prefer is a Natural Resources curriculum in our school system. There's no good reason at all that it cannot be included into the High School level electives.

An awareness of the intricacies and interdependence of the varies ecosystems would certainly go a long way to brining about a generation of people who cared about the resources and how to properly look after them.

 

We had this "Natural Resources curriculum" your talking about, .... It was Environmental Science. I took it and loved it, pursued it in University too.

 

Entropy

[Entropy]

I think one thing it might do is allow the courts to raise the level of personal responsibility. I'm sure alot of people get leniency because half the regs are incredibly difficult to decipher into English ( or any other language.)

What I would MUCH prefer is a Natural Resources curriculum in our school system. There's no good reason at all that it cannot be included into the High School level electives.

An awareness of the intricacies and interdependence of the varies ecosystems would certainly go a long way to brining about a generation of people who cared about the resources and how to properly look after them.

 

We had this "Natural Resources curriculum" your talking about, .... It was Environmental Science. I took it and loved it, pursued it in University too.

 

Entropy

[tonyb]

The problem is that the people that are willing to take the test are not the people that need to write the test.

 

Tony

[gforce]

good idea.

 

kids would be exempt if they are with a "tested" adult.

 

make the test free and make it hard.

 

get kids over 14 to write it.

[huntervasili]

I think that although It would be a good Idea, poachers do not poach beacause they are unaware of the regs but rather they have no concern for them... I also agree as mentioned that Natural resources courses should be manditory in highschool at some level, this would allow young people to gain a new respect for the sport we so much enjoy... That is of course my opinion and many may have different opinions... I just think that the earlier people are taught to respect the resources, and nature the better...

[gone_fishin]

good idea.

 

kids would be exempt if they are with a "tested" adult.

 

make the test free and make it hard.

 

get kids over 14 to write it.

 

 

why would you make it age 14 to write the said test? when in fact it is age 18 to get a license. i would think... if of course this test was passed to be a mandatory requirement to get a license, that you would write it when you go to get your license for the first time?

 

personally i don't agree with having a test for getting a fishing license for one reason, and one reason alone... i have taken many inexperienced friends out fishing who know next to nothing about the regulations... so how would it be fair to say that they have to write an exam just so they can go fishing with a friend who already knows the regulations.

 

and like previously posted, the people who are breaking the laws usually just don't give a poop.

[Terry]

I would think he said 14 because he felt at that age they could be off fishing on their own and at that age they should be adult enough to take a test, I would think seniors would need to take the test too..just because they don't need a licence to fish, doesn't mean they don't need to know the rules to fish...they must obey the rules just like a licenced person, so why not make them take a test....

not that I agree with testing in general

[irishfield]

I'll file this one right up there with the boat operators card. Have had my own boat since I was 6 years old and suddenly needed to pass a test on... not how to drive a boat...but minor rules of the water. How about I give you a written test and then the keys to an airplane and say have fun....didn't think so.

 

As many have already posted... a test isn't going to change the rule breakers/poachers/etc. They all know exactly what they are after.

 

I've also been fishing since I was about 6 years old. Going from a free system to having to buy a fishing licence was enough in my life time, I won't be writting a test to get an outdoors card. I'm quite capable of reading the regulations and species seasons.

[easton13th]

The licencing system our government has adapted as previously stated is money grab....(not fully but I will explain).

 

The boaters licence or Operators Card requires a test, PASS and you are eligible to operate a water craft. Buy a 40ft yacht and sail away, no practical or operating experience. Or even a fishing boat, YES you know the theory of operating but,,,,How do you handle ruff waters for example.

 

The hunters licence, or possession and acquisition card yes you can identify a deer, moose etc. BUT fire a riffle,? You know technically how to load and fire but have you had the experience...Buy a gun and go hunting...hit or wound an animal..miss a target...

 

I do not feel the TESTED fishing licence is going to stop poaching to any extent. If poachers could identify BASS or whatever fish they are keeping OOS or over the limit, that would not stop them if the intent to keep these fish already exists.

 

I feel Locking my house when I leave it only keeps out the people that have the intent to steal from me. The honest people that follow the rules would not bother with my house to begin with.....

 

Education at a young age from school would be amazing BUT I believe far from happening...

WE as the Anglers and Hunters that follow the rules have to educate our youth and some adults that need it. Guide them, inform them.

OUR children will follow our lead, because the experience they gained is practical and practice all their lives. Not info from a book.

 

ONLY WE CAN HELP AND DO WHAT WE CAN THROUGH EDUCATION.

 

I do believe that the licencing revenue being put back into the wildlife and fisheries are definitely a benefit to us all, so I have no problem paying. I would have no problem testing for fishing BUT again I am not going to take OOS fish, Or over my limit...

 

MY $0.02

[Fisherman]

I'll agree like someone else up top wrote, those that would take the test voluntarily are most likely not those who need to take the test to identify species of fish or the open seasons. Those people go to the effort and read the rules and ask questions to make sure they do know them inside out and not run afoul of the law.

Why not teach it in school, a couple periods might suffice. After all, they have given in to teaching everything else that makes the mind boggle.

[Northhunter]

Dead against the idea. It would be a convenient cash grab and that would be about it.

 

We are talking about fishing. Fishing! The grey areas in the regs aside, its one of the simpler pastimes we have left. A lot of the licensing in other areas is safety related. Driving.. pretty self explanatory. The hunter's safety course is less about management and game ID than it is proper use of firearms, outdoor awareness, code of conduct, etc. Kids get tested too damn much now anyway. Making them pay to write an exam they must pass before they can wet a line is probably one of the best ways to hurt recruitment to the sport. Everyone's always preaching "take a kid fishing" - why make it that much harder.

Not to mention all the complications - the free fishing weekends seem to be a hit. What would happen to them? Youths and seniors don't need a license. Are they exempt? If not, what happens to the kid who would like to go fishing and may have opportunities to but doesn't have a licensed "guardian"? You think a 75yr old man who's been fishing for almost as many years is going to rush out and write the test? Please.

 

Take the costs it would take to set up something like this and put it into enforcement. As I write this there are fewer than 200 CO's for all of Ontario. A license does nothing if there is no one to check for it. A lot of the individuals who need the test would probably smarten up pretty quick and change their ways if they actually got caught doing what they do... but they don't and they won't.

[POLLIWOGG]

Trash the license we have now and the CO's can go do some real work and stop wasting time checking for licenses.

[FishFinder]

how about just easier to understand regs

[JerseyDog]

The biggest threat to our fisheries is habitat destruction, pollution, invasive species and to some extent commercial fisheries. While overfishing by recreational anglers can have a negative impact in a specific geographic area most fish populations do and will rebound over time if their habitat is not spoiled by other factors. Keep in mind a single fish may lay thousands of eggs however environmental factors dictate to what extent those eggs become a viable, mature, reproducing fish.

 

While I don't agree with poaching I think the few people who take too many fish are not really the problem.

 

And I am pretty sure most folks who are 30 walleye overlimit know exactly what they are doing and no test is likely to change their behavior.