Fishing Charges?!?! anyone have any experience?! | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Fishing Charges?!?! anyone have any experience?!

OP posted it, they are salmon netting for FUN,
These regulations are the reason why Canada still have a good number of these fish species.
 
Sabex said:
All with good reason also. If there is no more game to hunt, they can't hunt anymore.

You also stay away from babies (and throw the small fish back.) Need to keep something around to grow bigger.


I would also like to add slightly offtopic: ducks unlimited thermal socks. BEST. THING. EVER. Every winter they keep my feet warm and toasty.
Click to expand...

It's the opposite. You keep the small ones and let the big mature ones go so they can spawn.
 
vkhamphi said:
As the OP posted these guys were netting not "fishing".
Click to expand...

For the purpose of the charges laid out in the posted infraction notices, it makes no difference whether it was netting or fishing. There is no differentiation between the two, in either the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act or the Ontario Fisheries Act, where the charges are concerned.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
A quick look at the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act shows that:

92. (1) A conservation officer who is lawfully in a building or other place may, without a warrant, seize any thing that he or she believes on reasonable grounds, (a) has been obtained by the commission of an offence under this Act;

(b) has been used in the commission of an offence under this Act;
(c) will afford evidence of the commission of an offence under this Act; or
(d) is intermixed with a thing referred to in clause (a), (b) or (c).



Penalty
102. (1) A person convicted of an offence under this Act is liable to a fine of not more than $25,000, to imprisonment for a term of not more than one year, or to both.

In other words they may wish to seek counsel and are lucky that they didn't end up walking home, as their vehicle(s) could be considered to have been used in the commission of the offence. It's not unusual.
Click to expand...

Being cooperative may have saved the vehicles. The point here is that laws are not buffets where one gets to choose the ones thay want to obey. We can speculate intents and future intents but what is a conservation officer supposed to do? Guess?
If two are OK then is it three tomorrow?
Was anyone starving?
Did the offenders know the long term breeding patterns of the species?
 
There's a difference between netting and fishing lmao the officers said if they had fishing rods it would've been fine but it was cuz they went into the water and was netting. But there were 8 of them and they just decided to go fishing for fun, bought 2 nets from wal-mart and drove down to bowmanville..caught 2 fish (decided to stop and not be greedy) and then it was over all too soon as they were walking back to the cars. Only 3 guys got charged since they were in the water the most doing most of the "netting" running around in the river. Honestly it was just a group of university students who made a bad decision of going salmon netting without knowing the severe consequences, with NO INTENTION of selling the fish in some kind of black fish market lmfao as if they would have a damn clue that even exists..but yeah the officers said they would have just written tickets but since they saw the whole thing happening while hiding in the bushes, they wrote charges instead :S

8 students --> 2 fish ... first and last time ever fishing. Was not a today 2 fish and then tomorrow 3 fish deal.
 
AGAVE said:
I'm a Canadian citizen, as far as i'm concerned, those fish belong to me too.
Click to expand...

Sorry but just because you live in this country doesn't mean you own all the animals that live in it and can do what you please with them.
 
Bweixz said:
There's a difference between netting and fishing lmao the officers said if they had fishing rods it would've been fine but it was cuz they went into the water and was netting. But there were 8 of them and they just decided to go fishing for fun, bought 2 nets from wal-mart and drove down to bowmanville..caught 2 fish (decided to stop and not be greedy) and then it was over all too soon as they were walking back to the cars. Only 3 guys got charged since they were in the water the most doing most of the "netting" running around in the river. Honestly it was just a group of university students who made a bad decision of going salmon netting without knowing the severe consequences, with NO INTENTION of selling the fish in some kind of black fish market lmfao as if they would have a damn clue that even exists..but yeah the officers said they would have just written tickets but since they saw the whole thing happening while hiding in the bushes, they wrote charges instead :S

8 students --> 2 fish ... first and last time ever fishing. Was not a today 2 fish and then tomorrow 3 fish deal.
Click to expand...

My points are two-fold:

Firstly, this can be a very serious issue. That's why I suggest that they 'seek counsel', ie. hire a lawyer.

Secondly, they may not have ever come back to do it or they might well have, if they hadn't been charged. Even if that wasn't the case their actions might have prompted others to do the same, if they heard that they could do it without any consequences. That's the 2 now, 3 later issue.
 
and you can't catch animals using any means possible, it's just at least giving a fair advantage, especially in a sport/recreational environment when you're already killing them for fun anyways. Spearing/netting salmon is ridiculously easy unless you're diving and spearing fish.
 
They do need to hire a lawyer. They were lucky they drove away.
 
Does anyone know the reason why they got a provincial summons as well as a Form 9 Appearance Notice? I see it's the same court house and two different charges, were they not able to write out all the charges on a provincial summons or not able to write out all the charges on the Appearance Notice?
 
Mikel said:
Does anyone know the reason why they got a provincial summons as well as a Form 9 Appearance Notice? I see it's the same court house and two different charges, were they not able to write out all the charges on a provincial summons or not able to write out all the charges on the Appearance Notice?
Click to expand...

Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act is Provincial, but the Ontario Fisheries Act is Federal. No mixing and matching.
 
Bweixz said:
...since they saw the whole thing happening while hiding in the bushes, they wrote charges instead :S
Click to expand...

As much as I feel sorry for these guys, if they couldn't notice a few park rangers hiding in the bushes...
 
pledge said:
Good luck. Hire a good lawyer, they're gonna need it. Better hope the judge is not a fisherman!
Click to expand...

This.

Seek council.
 
wait whats the reason for lawyer hiring if they're going to just go in and plead guilty..??
 
Bweixz said:
wait whats the reason for lawyer hiring if they're going to just go in and plead guilty..??
Click to expand...

It's called damage control. I've detailed what the possible penalties are for the Provincial charge. I have no idea what the penalties could be for the Federal charge.
 
I have never been fishing in Canada. It is just not my bag of tea.

So, I really do not understand what happened, or why it is wrong. Is it just that they did not have a license?

Why is "netting" a charge?
Why is "illegal transporting" a charge? Do you need a license to transport fish in Canada?

And they got summons! I am completely "WTF" here. Someone please help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom