Curious what your defensive be to the requirement of immediate release?
Printable View
Cant say I have ever heard of a charge being laid for taking a quick pic then releasing a fish. The regs do say immediately, but they also say immediately when tagging an animal. We all know that's an impossibility when party hunting and the shooter is not the tag holder !
It doesn't matter what colour and typeface they use in the regulations summary.
"Immediately" is not defined. The dictionary definition is unhelpful, because it simply means "without delay," and as Rick pointed out this obviously does not always apply. So it's a question of (a) what is the intent of the law and (b) what would a reasonable person say is immediate.
The intent of the law is to deny defences like, "Yes, the fish were in my livewell, but I was gonna release them when I got back to the dock, honest," or "No, I didn't tag that buck, but I was gonna do it just as soon as I got it back to my place, honest." If we don't require that something is done "immediately," we leave a big wide loophole.
Would a reasonable person say you can't take a picture of a fish where the rule is catch and release? No. Because every single angler fishing catch and release is carrying a camera, and not every single one of them can fail the test of reasonability. This is not the same as taking photos of fish caught out of season, as in that case taking photos provides a motive to target the out-of-season species. We are talking about catching a legitimate, in-season fish, which you are permitted to target, and then taking a quick picture of your catch.
I'd be confident of winning this one, if I were charged.