What are some rules/regs that are easily broken? Either in the field or in your back yard (with concerns to hunting/bows/etc).
Printable View
What are some rules/regs that are easily broken? Either in the field or in your back yard (with concerns to hunting/bows/etc).
The one that I have heard about a few time is hunting in the wrong WMU. The Hunter thought they were in one unit and they were in another.
That can easily happen, where I hunt the map says you are in one WMU and GPS says you are over the line in another WMU. A difference of 200 yards.:silly:
forgetting a case and walking out after dark with out it ,D
Not paying attention to other open seasons and carrying the wrong type of firearm. For example, try convincing a CO that you're coyote hunting if you get caught carrying a centre fire rifle during moose season without a moose licence.
Scroll down to the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act (17.5 - 17.10) and scroll through the the various Schedules. You'll be amazed at how many laws there are and how easy it is to trip up on so many of them.
http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/how-...s/set-fines-i/
When muzzle load hunting deer, after removing the primer and casing my rifle I sometimes forget to remove the powder and bullet before storing for the night.
Forgetting to remove / delete Turkey Sound Ringer Wave File from cell phone during turkey season.
Then have a Text message, Email notification or Phone Call come in at the very moment the CO is questioning you on your hunting activities
Not encasing a bow or gun before and after legal hours. I don't really know anyone that actually does this.
I do. Sock or soft case depending on the situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
That is true. I think only a low % of people withs bows actually do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
Let me re-phrase. I don't know anyone, outside of responsible OOD members, that follow this rule. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
I believe there are alot of stupid rules they enforce and i think these rules need to be updated to get with the times, cases after dark, and the immediate tagging rule just to name a few. I do not think that just because someone wants to take a pic of a deer first before tagging that he or she has any intent on breaking a law. well this should get things going.
hunting with unlicenced dog, don't know anyone who buys a licence for their dog, don't know the point in having to licence the dog, pure cash grab. Told the dog it needed a licence, hope she doesn't get charged cause she has no money to pay the fine.
Pretty sure once the primer is removed and the gun is cased your legal, don't believe you have to remove powder and bullet every dayQuote:
Originally Posted by ysyg
I agree totally. The literal interpretation of "immediately tag" is ridiculous. Moving your big game or Turkey before tagging is one thing, but taking a photo at the kill site before tagging should not be treated as an offence. I think this is simply a case of an enforcement officer being naive about the intent of the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishing1
If you mean an MNRF license, then dogs must be licensed for hunting, deer, moose, bear, raccoon and I think turkey. We always license our deer dogs.Quote:
Originally Posted by double lung
Suppose to be unloaded completely for storage. Removing primer is only legal for moving from one hunting place to another.Quote:
Originally Posted by bushman007
Must have changed this recently...Removing the primer has always been OK in past....Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
The removal of the primer makes the firearm unloaded as far as the FWCA is concerned. Not removing powder and bullet is contrary to the firearms regulations with respect to storage. That one is a criminal offence !Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
Not according to the Firearms Act.Quote:
Originally Posted by patvetzal
Thank you as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Man, this one is almost as tiresome as "you can bring 5000 rounds in from the States."
Having flesh of game kept over from one season to the next.
Same with fish--having fillets in the freezer then going out and getting another catch.
....confusing Provincial regs with Federal laws (ie: Provincial Offense Act/FWCA/HTA with Criminal Code/Firearms Act). The latter may land you in jail while the former is a fine (usually).
Well would you look at that! This one is new to me!Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
So it's illegal for me to have moose or deer in my freezer for more than a year?
Perfectly legal to do in Ontario.Quote:
Originally Posted by ysyg
Walking down or crossing a road (even in a remote area) with a loaded gun.
I did not know that. Could you provide more detail please. Not that I will ever bag enough grouse or ducks to have then in my freezer for more than a few months, but this reg seems odd. Is the issue possession limits or spoilage or?????Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
Agreed, I am referring to storage at end of the day.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Violation under the FA. (criminal offence)Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
I would like to hear more about this as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
Unless you are just talking about possession limits for birds, fish, small game.
Many years ago we used to get a small pocket size booklet with the whole act, numbers and everything. A lot of the regs were not included when they went to the comic book sized rules. The one about possession of fish and game beyond the legal season was not included in the new copies. We used to have to eat all the venison etc by a certain date...
Slot size limit on fish. Give me a break! You are hurting the wiggly fish more trying to put a tape measure to it and if it doesn't meet the criteria, back to the water it goes thus declining it's chance of survival.
Zone 18
Walleye & Sauger or any combination
Jan. 1 to Mar. 1 & 2nd Sat. in May to Dec. 31
S - 4; Must be between 40-50 cm - (15.7– 19.7 in)
C - 2; Must be between 40-50 cm - (15.7– 19.7 in)
I don't believe that regulation is still in effect. It must have been a very long time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by patvetzal
I would guess the biggest hunting one would be sunrise/sunset times and being encased.
Party hunting for waterfowl.
"Party" fishing.
I remember this as well but it was some time ago when I read it. Whether it is still in effect not sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
But as I remember it was actually less than a year (ie: 6 months).
The problem with the requlations is there is the condensed versus we see then there is the inforcement official versus the MNRF go to when they want to rack up the charges to ensure a conviction.
Would be an interesting question to ask a number of COs suspect there would be a wide range of responses.
Besides it is not good to keep your meat any longer freezer burn and spoilage would be an issue.
Which the issue of spoilage then could be a chargeable offense.
Especially if the MNRF is carrying out a search warrant of your premises for suspected violations.
Costly process which leaves no rock unturn to recoup the investigation costs
I agree the "dusk/dawn" is an easy mistake to make. I have friends who have pushed the limit and so have I. When a huge buck is standing right there the adrenaline kicks in and the fever rages, oooooooh boy does it ever! savage308
Suspect enforcement when it does occur is usually a result of being compliant driven.Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
Passer by reports seeing a hunter with their firearm uncased before and after hours.
I would bet that most charges with regard to this are as a result of a CO observing someone walking out to their vehicle after the end of legal shooting time without a case.
Your supposed to encase a bow? That's dumb.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
I find discharge and Sunday gun hunting regulations to be the most cumbersome. Discharge laws being municipal yet all other regs being provincial or federal. Also, the requirement for written landowner permissions is different in each municipality.
I have a spot on a river that is the boundary between two municipalities. One has Sunday gun hunting and one has no Sunday gun hunting. I asked both municipalities and the cws and conservation authority and they all told me they didn't know exactly where the boundary was in this case, but it's typically centreline of river.
This means late season (ie January, and late February) I can stand on one side of the river and shoot geese and not on the other side and on Sunday's I can only stand on one side of the river. I hunt an island in the centre of this river and where the boundary lies on it I'm not too sure.
In a case like this, you wouldn't likely be charged and would never be convicted in court. It would be up to the crown to prove you were in the wrong area.Quote:
Originally Posted by bowj
Bow is considered a firearm for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by topher
When the old Fish & Game Act was re-written and became the Fish & Wildlife Conservation Act in 1997,many of the old regulations were not "brought over" resulting in on-going confusion by older hunters and anglers that still swear on a stack of Bibles that the old regs are still in place when,in fact,they aren't. Download copies of the FWCA and searches of Ontario Regulations are a finger tip away. In short,if the regulation isn't there,it's no longer in force.
I believe it has to be a "maintained" road in this bylaw.Quote:
Originally Posted by hollywood
They train CO's to know all the game laws and must pass some kind of proficiency test I assume or at least I hope that's where my tax dollars go ? How do they expect a layman to know all the laws ? I have heard and been witnessed to charges being laid ( and of all things those being charged were newbies) when a stern lecture and a warning would have been a more proper way to handle the minor infractions. Shame on the MNR for lowering their men in the field to the point where they are looked upon as meter maids whose job is to hand out tickets and meet their qouta ! Also with GPS and satellite mapping available why is our goverment bodies handing out inferior maps ?
Probably one of the MOST violated rule is "unloading and reloading when crossing a barrier"
....Never seen a guy stop and unload to cross a fence in all the years I have been dogging with the gang.
Well put...Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Where is that regulation/law??Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
Or when you say rule, do you mean firearms safety rule?
Is that any different than what most police do, they lay charges and then let you fight it out in the courts, often times they are wrong but it is up to you and your lawyers to "prove them wrong" and this can bet an expensive situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by longpointer
Well I called it a rule Brent....so will go with B, since it was an option by the OP...:)Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
Brings up a good observation....MOST hunting deaths/accidents that I can remember off hand were the direct result of a violation of one the Firearm Safety rules. Probably something that should be stressed more than just the Regs that only cost you money.Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
Agreed.....charges pertaining to safety are usually laid as a result of an incident.
[QUOTE=double lung;883432]hunting with unlicenced dog, don't know anyone who buys a licence for their dog, don't know the point in having to licence the dog, pure cash grab. Told the dog it needed a licence, hope she doesn't get charged cause she has no money to pay the fine.[/QUOTE
If you listen really closely that little whine was " you ll do the time for me won t you"
MikePalQuote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
the reason it s written down as a rule is common sense ain t so common. who ever got killed by a loaded gun ?
Lets hope the MNR isnt tracking this thread lol
Think you got it a bit wrong. They lay charges if warranted and its up to you too either man up an admit your guilt or pay a good lawyer to weasel out of the charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
Lol. That's a funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by finsfurfeathers
Sometimes yes, the OPP have it right.
Sometimes they don't.
I vacuum seal most of my meat now and it keeps for a long time. I found some beef tenderloin that was 3 years old and it was fine. No freezer burn or bad taste. So spoilage is not an issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by chameleon
Cheers
Professionally wrapped in butcher paper lasts a long time too. I don't worry about spoilage in my freezer.Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty55
There was a debate a couple of years ago on a bird hunting forum I used to be on regarding party hunting for waterfowl. I ended up getting a hold of the CWS and asked and they replied that yes, it's perfectly legal. I printed a copy of the email and used to carry it with me when duck and goose hunting in case there was ever an issue in the field.Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
I have not seen it in writing that you can not party hunt birds ,we were on a goose hunt last week for the late season 5 guys shot 50 birds we were full limit by noon .and i am sure i shot my share and a few more haha ,hard to tell who hit what for sure when you have 20 birds in the decoys and 5 guys shooting and only 2 birds leave ,this is just a example ,but i never heard that this would be illegal ,as long as we did not go over are 10 birds per man or 50 bird limit ,Dutch
http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/k...306_122821.jpg
Any chance you can forward a copy of that email??Quote:
Originally Posted by TPM
I don't doubt you have it, but I think it is inaccurate.
Congrats....I hope with 10 geese you'll have enough to make some Rookworst...a Dutchy's favorite :)
You are correct...there is nothing about party hunting. But it does outline what daily and possession limits are on a per hunter basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchhunter
I'm surprised no one has said this one....bringing a non licensed family or friend out hunting/fishing so they can see if they'd like it. It can cost a pretty penny to get started.
Some info to consider......
Question: What license or permit do I require to hunt migratory game birds in Canada?
Answer: To hunt migratory game birds in Canada, you require a Federal Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permit (MGBHP) with an affixed Wildlife Habitat Conservation Stamp. A single MGBHP is required in Canada for hunting in different provinces and territories. It is not transferable and must only be used by the person who completed and signed it. The MGBHP must be carried with you at all times when hunting or when in possession of migratory game birds in a place other than the holder's residence. The Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permit must be shown to game officers upon request.
Question: May I purchase a Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permit for another person?
Answer: Yes. It is permissible for one person to purchase a Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permit for another person. The permit for the other person will need to be filled out with the information for the person who will actually hold and use the permit.Only the person whose information is indicated on the permit can use the MGBHP for hunting.
Question: May I buy multiple Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permits to increase my allowable take (daily bag and possession limits)?
Answer: No. A person cannot increase their allowable take by purchasing additional Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permits. The daily bag and possession limits apply to the person and not to the permit.
Question: May I give my Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permit to a hunting partner if, for some reason, I cannot go hunting?
Answer: No. Your Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permit is not transferable it must only be used by the person whose name and information is indicated on the permit.
Question: What is the difference between the daily bag limit and the possession limit?
Answer: The daily bag limit is the maximum number of birds which a hunter may harvest during any single day of hunting. The possession limit is the maximum number of birds which a person may have in their possession; for a hunter, this means the maximum they may possess after having hunted for more than a single day and includes birds they have at their residence as well as in the field. The possession limit applies to all persons (including non-hunters who may receive birds as a gift), and for all birds.
Its totally legal as long as they are not directly involved with the hunt. (just an observer) Happens all the time, even by CO's.Quote:
Originally Posted by JayStyles
Been beat to death here over the years.
I'll see if I can find the email. I don't waterfowl hunt anymore so I don't think I have a hard copy anymore. If I remember correctly the gist of the email was per man daily limit times number of guys in the group equals the number of birds the group can take. She did mention to be careful to maintain good communication between hunters so as not to go over as you approach the limit.
Again TPM, I don't doubt you have it, but I am almost 100% sure it is incorrect. I wonder what the position of the person you spoke to was.
I found a couple of old ask a CO questions and in both the CO's state NO to party hunting Waterfowl.Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
Hi. Just to clarify - I have taken the stance with a couple of other hunters that party hunting for waterfowl is not permitted. Each person in the party is permitted to shoot their daily limit but not fill out someone else's in the group once they've finished their own. Am I right on this?
Asked August 20, 2003
Answer from the MNR
I hope you put money on it because you are correct! Check out question 110 under FAQ/Game
A recent posting to a fishing message board referred to an ice fishing party where in total they had less than the party limit of whitefish but individually some had caught more and some obviously less than their individual limit. The ones catching more were charged. When I read the posting I assumed there was probably more to the story such as the party was not physically fishing from the same hut. However a response to the posting referred to Question #49 in the FAQ Fish section wherein the CO answer stated that it is illegal to party fish. This comes as a real surprise to me and I wondered if the same applies to waterfowl hunting. Two licensed hunters hunting from the same blind shoot a limit of 12 ducks..one hunter shot 7 ducks and the other 5 ducks. The hunters are leaving the marsh and are stopped by a CO. Would a CO even ask the question who shot what?
Asked February 20, 2001
Answer from the MNR
You cannot "party fish" for any species of fish, nor party hunt for ducks, rabbits, grouse, turkey or any other small game. The only species for which you can "party hunt" for are deer, moose or bear.
You are so right. Many hunter-fishermen, who I know do the same thing, do not think it wrong, and view themselves as responsible hunters. :shades:
Hunting after sunset I would imagine is quite common.
It absolutely is in writing. It tells you how many birds you are allowed to shoot, not how many of yours and your buddies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchhunter
Your location says BC so maybe the rules are a little different there, but we can legally hunt here until 1/2 hour after sunset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkatac
This has always been the rule i followed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quack_Kills
The party hunting for rabbits is also something that was really prevalent in ON, until the populations were decimated.
Seems like some guys are just running with second hand information that their grandfathers essentially made up. I was invited to another multi-county coyote hunt this winter and passed on it as i couldn't get straight answers from the participants as to the legalities of several of their actions.
Something tells me that coyotes also can't be party hunted.
Something tells me that coyotes also can't be party hunted.[/QUOTE]
You are correct. Its clearly stated in the regs under the definition of party hunting and in the wolf coyote section.
You are correct. Its clearly stated in the regs under the definition of party hunting and in the wolf coyote section.[/QUOTE]Quote:
Originally Posted by Quack_Kills
This only applies when hunting in an area where a Wolf/Coyote tag is required. In southern Ontario,we can hunt in a party because no tags are required and there's no bag/possession limit.
This only applies when hunting in an area where a Wolf/Coyote tag is required. In southern Ontario,we can hunt in a party because no tags are required and there's no bag/possession limit.[/QUOTE]Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Yes it would depend on the area but hunting in a party is different than party hunting. Party hunting is when you are hunting as a group under another persons tag. In the regs under party hunting it states "the term party hunting means two or more persons hunting during an open season for moose, elk, deer or black bear under all the following conditions....." Hunting in a party means going out in a group and hunting together and not hunting under another hunters tag or limit.
So technically, when in a group, you are not "party hunting" for wolf/coyote where only a small game licence is required.
I remember that rule when I lived in Pembroke. My dad insisted we had to have the venison done before the next season but I think that was just so the game wardens could tell if youd taken a deer out of season.Quote:
Originally Posted by patvetzal
Dan O.
Last year opening day of duck season, I watched two guys get written up for "party" hunting ducks, among other things such as baiting. They had 11 ducks, and both guns still out. At that point, as per the CO, one gun should have been put away, as one persons limit was already filled, and there is no party hunting.
While I don't agree with every rule / law, I follow them to a T, it's not worth the fight, hassle, and potential to lose the privelage of hunting for, despite how minute you might think the infraction is, or that you won't get caught.
Allot of guys think "I'm on my own, or someone elses private land" no one is going to come bother me / find me.
As well last year, we had a CO come into private land while goose hunting and check us all out, and one guy got nailed for no small games license (claimed he didn't know).
So don't think because you're somewhere protected, they won't come looking for you / at you.
I know it sure can be tempting, and I've had "offers" to circumvent a rule/law, (the birds are already back at the house, lets head back out, etc) but I love this sport way to much to jeapordize losing the prividlage, so before you head out, make sure you know the ins and outs surrounding what you're hunting, and where you are hunting.
If there's a law or a rule that you find silly / doesn't make sense, rather then break it and risk the losses, band together and fight for change.
They must have said that one had shot more than the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie
Having your gun out when you have a limit of ducks is not illegal, there are probably other species legal at the time, maybe geese or snipe, grouse, possible woodcock.
The number of times I see people going ice fishing with their 3 kids, put out 8 lines and only the father works the rods. No way are the tiny kids actually fishing those 2 rods each.
When there are no geese for miles around, and you're sitting in a duck blind, on the marsh, with decoys, and calls going, hard to justify the second guy was hunting anything but. They plead guilty and took their lumps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
Just opening it up a bit, maybe they said the one guy shot 7, not 6.Quote:
Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie
Anyway, I know of a guy who dropped a ruff grouse into his duck decoy set, kinda funny to come out after a duck hunt with no ducks and 1 grouse.
For sure I get what you're saying, and we come home with grouse after our fowl hunts as well, as we often see them on the drive in and out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
But in some cases, like this, when you're already breaking a few laws. Baiting, hunting to close to bait, then have 11 ducks and 2 guns still out, in a marsh over gear etc... I don't think you have much of a leg to stand on when the CO rolls up.
Never thought about that for waterfowl.
I have a friend that I swear every time he shoots at a bird when I do, he claims he got and I missed it. We'll see if he's that quick to claim it when i let him know he's on his last one.
I don't want to find out but I'm wondering how it works when both hunter shoot at the same duck. Who killed it?!?!Quote:
Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie
Even more difficult when they are five guys hunting together and blasting at the same flock.....
I think the whole party hunting waterfowl is kind of a pointless discussion. No you're not allowed to do it but like mentioned above most of us do it all the time as we are hunting the same flocks of birds coming in with 4 or five guys. We try to establish fields of fire when out but after that first shot and the birds are going every which way it's pretty hard to sort it out. Anyone that says they do it any differently is probably telling a fib. Been checked by COs doing just this and it has never been an issue.
I've found this is especially true for waterfowl hunting. It's not difficult for them to hear the sustained shooting, and then drive around zeroing in on it, and finally finding you to make a visit.Quote:
Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie
Much less likely when large game hunting as it's usually just a quick shot or two and then silence.
I think we would probably all agree, that the CO's probably don't enforce this one too heavily, based on how the rest of the conversation goes. If everyone is playing nice, and abiding, then I would assume, the LEO probably doesn't even think twice about it, on the other hand, if things turn nasty, I would think the LEO would probably start doing the math pretty quick.Quote:
Originally Posted by skeeter1
As long as the number of ducks equals the number of hunters without exceeding the bag limit,no LEO will question it. It's just not worth the aggravation to knit-pick. Most hunters divide the bag equally,so,who's to say which is which unless the LEO literally sat in the same swamp and counted each time a hunter shot at a bird and kept track of hits and misses. NOBODY would do that,at least,not outside a mental hospital.
This is one of those charges that are generally the result of someone failing the attitude test !Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
And if they are sitting there watching and 3 hunters poke at the same bird......who killed it?
And if I cripple a bird and you finnish it off....who's gets the bird?
I wouldn't worry about it as long as everyone's sitting in the same blind.
I'm late to the thread, but:
I assume sawbill was just referring to possession limits for small game and fish. There's no regulation limiting how long you can keep meat in the freezer, but if you shoot your limit of squirrels for example (10) when you still have some squirrels in the freezer from last year, you've gone over your possession limit.Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthernGrouse
One rule that I've broken because I didn't know it exists is that while hunting deer or moose you can only carry a firearm that's legal for them at the time. I've gone moose hunting with a .30-06, and on another occasion deer hunting with a crossbow, while also carrying a .22 in case I saw a smaller critter. No harm no foul, I guess, since I got skunked both times.
Another thing that I've seen a lot of anglers not seem to realize is illegal is keeping fish alive until they catch more and then releasing the smaller ones. Only legal if using a mechanically aerated livewell on a boat that meets certain specs. (Edit: and even then, only allowed for pike, bass and walleye.)
This is a great thread. Informative, staying on topic, linear. Perfect for new and old hunters alike.
Should be stickied.
Say you have a conservation fishing liscence , should you be able to target muskie ? Its my understanding the limit is zero muskie may be taken under such a liscence. Thoughts.
My guess would be no. In any case you wouldn't be allowed to take a picture of it. With the regs highlighted in red and worded out of season fish and fish that can not be lawfully possessed must be released at the time and place of capture think this may become an issue this year. One may argue if you take the time to take a picture you are no longer releasing a fish at the time of capture. There's got to be a reason why they did the change.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
I don't think you should specifically target muskie if you have a conservation license. If a muskie dies in your possession you are now in illegal possession of that fish. If you chuck it then your charged with wasting game suitable for consumption.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
Agree with the last 2 posts.
The limits listed are for catch and keep. There is no limit on catch and release.
Here in lies the problem as this only would apply if the musky was of legal size. Even with a sports license if its under sized you are obligated to release it even if its dead or dying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quack_Kills
You can target muskie for C&R only. It's the same as targeting sturgeon in areas where there's a season, but a 0/0 limit. Or, for that matter, fly fishing for trout in streams with a 0/0 limit. I agree it's not a perfect system, since a muskie could come in badly hooked and dying, but the same can happen with an undersized muskie if you have a sport license (Edit - as finsfurfeathers said while I was typing). Anyway that's what the rule is - if it's in season but a 0 limit for your license, you can fish for it C&R. Single barbless hooks are probably a good idea, even if not required.
The "pose for a photo" thing does confuse me though. I mean I understand you shouldn't do that with an OOS fish, but if it's a fish that's in season but has to be released (due to its size or your limit), I kinda feel like you can... do people catching sturgeon up north or trout in C&R rivers not pose with their catch?
If that was the case than you would be able to fish for out of season fish as you would be catch an released right?Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
No, not at all. You cannot target OOS fish. If in season, you can catch and release until your arm falls off !Quote:
Originally Posted by finsfurfeathers
With the c and r trout streams I believe you are mandated to use single barbless hook and no live bait so the chance of killing a fish becomes quite small.
Yes, that's why I used sturgeon and undersized muskie as examples of fish that could come in dying yet must be released even with a sport license. With the C&R trout, there's still the photo op question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
finfurfeathers - there's no LIMIT (numbers) on C&R, but there are SEASONS. That's why even sturgeon up north, and trout in C&R rivers, have set seasons even though the limits are 0/0. During the season - catch as much as you want, but release it all; outside of the season - you may not target the species.
[QUOTE=tweedwolfscream;886235]Yes, that's why I used sturgeon and undersized muskie as examples of fish that could come in dying yet must be released even with a sport license. With the C&R trout, there's still the photo op question."""
The difference in the two photo op scenarios, is that with an OOS fish, it must be released immediately. Keeping the fish long enough for a photo, could be in violation of the "immediately" aspect. With a C and R, in season fish, it only has to be released in a manner as not to cause harm to the fish. This is likely why photo ops with an in season Cand R fish don't violate the regs..
[QUOTE=rick_iles;886240]Quote:
Originally Posted by tweedwolfscream
Conservation Fishing Licence Tag: A reduced catch and possession limit licence tag that is ideal for anglers who want to live-release the majority of fish caught. Under this licence tag, anglers must immediately release muskellunge, Atlantic salmon and aurora trout. In this summary, C - refers to limits under a Conservation Fishing Licence (e.g., C - 2 = catch and possession limit of 2).
So after reading this I interpret this as being you may fish for musky however if you catch 1 you must release it immediately so no picture of it.
[QUOTE=finsfurfeathers;886242]You would be correct, in that case.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
yeah for small victories. However sites getting boring with all the good behaviour.
Up in Parry Sound there is also a catch and release season for lake trout. The season there is open from Jan 1 to September 30 in the Big Sound. From Jan 1 - Feb 7 it is catch and release only. From Feb 8 - Mar 31...catch and keep 1 fish 24" or less. Apr 1 - June 23 .... catch and release. June 24 - Aug 31...catch and keep 1 fish 24" or less. Sept 1 - Sept 30...catch and release. Oct 1 to Dec 31....closed. When we catch a big one during the open season, we keep it out long enough for a photo then let it go. I'd fight that one in court!!
Curious what your defensive be to the requirement of immediate release?Quote:
Originally Posted by redd foxx
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 !Quote:
Originally Posted by finsfurfeathers
I agree never heard of a charged laid however why than bold it in red this year? Sure wouldn't want to be the first if they are about to make a statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
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.