At the Mercy of an Officer

Post by **dead_weight** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 1:10 pm

This subject came from the "muskies don't deserve that kind of pressure topic" ...

We were wondering what would happen if you accidentally caught a muskie with a conservation license and it could not be revived ... so you are left with a dead muskie that you are not allowed to keep but you also can't simply dump it ...

BM said that you were likely at the mercy of the officer ... he's likely right ... this is a scary situation because it can happen to anyone ... I target pike so one of these days by accident I'll likely hook a muskie ... I'm guessing this has happened somewhere sometime before ... anyone know? Or is there some clause in the regs that covers this? I'm too dam lazy to look.

Post by **Dore** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 1:14 pm

Best bet is to purchase a Sports and not conservative licence just to avoid BS like this on a relaxing day out on the water. For 11 $ more ....

My 2 cents !

Post by **fishin mission** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 1:50 pm

I don't taget musky but if i caught one while targeting pike and couldn't revive it then there would be some happy birds around. Whats a guy supposed to do give it mouth to mouth?

Post by RJ » Wed Aug 11, 2010 2:02 pm

The Conservation license should be abolished IMO...never was a fan of that.

The scenario you are describing is no different then someone who paid the full license fee who catches say a 51 inch fish on the Ottawa that can't be revived....they are in a bad spot but it does happen.....

Huge grey area and it would be at the discretion of the CO if you happen to get caught in that spot.....hopefully none of us ever have to deal with it.

RJ

Post by **steve-hamilton** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 2:32 pm

CO's and JUDGES are two different beasts...

the CO will give you the ticket...it's just the way it is...

however, if you have a level head, and have the ability to go to court (ie, take a day off work), the judge WILL toss it from court....

cause you can't have two contradicting rules....such as the one mentioned here....

NO MATTER WHAT though - RJ is correct. We should abolish the Cons license all together....

Post by **dead_weight** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:18 pm

Well I've always got the conservation license mainly because I mostly catch and release anyway ... and I'm the only one in my family that likes to eat most of the fish we catch around here. But certainly you guys paint some valid scenarios about why a cons license might not be such a good idea. I'll bet there's been more than one fish left to rot since the licensee could not take it back for supper.

Thanks Steve for your input as well ... I've been scratching my head why this loophole would be left open by the ministry and perhaps you have the answer ... they are leaving it up to the courts to decide .. and if the guy getting the ticket pays then more money for eHealth .. wait did I say that !!

Post by **Hollywood** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 5:50 pm

Anytime a peace officer charges you with something he has to believe you have commited an offence. To do that, he has to satisfy mens rea and actus reus in his own mind. (Guilty mind and a committed act). So, if you can reasonably convince him that you were in now way intentionally targeting muskie, then he would be damaging his credibility in a court challenge by giving you a ticket. On the other hand, if you are sitting there with ultra heavy rods and buzz baits the size of a small dog, you might have a hard time convincing him/her

I know from personal experience as a former police officer that all the notes and fancy evidence in the world won't save you if your credibility with a justice or a judge is shot and repeatedly putting cases like this in front of the court is a way to hurt it. It's something that's easy to lose and not easy to get back. In my opinion, any CO who would bring you in front of a JP on a charge like that would be gambling. Gamble too often with your credibility and it's gone. Then you might as well retire.

Post by **Eli** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 6:25 pm

So if I did have a sport license and had a large musky die on me and brought it home, what exactly am I supposed to do with it? No intention of eating toxic meat and no desire to spend the $$ to mount the thing, so whats the point in keeping it? I realize that keeping it would be a legal requirement, but then what?

As someone who almost never keeps fish, I like the idea of a conservation license. I wish Quebec had something similar, but they do not so I pay full price for my PQ license.

Post by **Out4trout** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:58 pm

Agree that Cons license is useless.

When contradictions occur, there is an order of precedence in all laws.

If a fish is not allowed in your possession and it dies, it must still be returned to the water immediately. Possession limits trump game spoil law.

Same thing with deer hunting - you cannot trespass to recover a deer that crossed the line into private posted land. If the property owner doesn't allow you in, game spoils. Trespass law trumps game spoil law.

Post by **Bass Addict** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 8:50 pm

Why even worry about something like that ..........you have a better chance of winning the 6/49..............catching a Snakehead or Asian Carp

Post by **Todd B.** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:14 am

I'll throw my $0.02 in on this one....

Here in Ontario the type of license you fish under simply dictates the number and type of fish one can keep/possess. So legally speaking someone on a Conservation License could target Muskie as long as he/she is practicing catch and release.

Now I agree the whole issue with injured fish is a grey area within the regulations, which is not limited only to muskie. What if you catch an eye that's not in the slot limit and it dies? Same situation.

Even in Quebec with the law that you cannot waste fish, if it's not legal size what then? Fined if you toss it, fined if you keep it? Here in Ontario you're obligated to release it even if it's dead or will die.

On a side note if the province wishes to further manage the various fisheries it could institute tags (i.e. trout tags, salmon tags) as in other provinces/states.

Post by **Woodsman** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:32 am

Hollywood wrote:Anytime a peace officer charges you with something he has to believe you have commited an offence. To do that, he has to satisfy mens rea and actus reus in his own mind. (Guilty mind and a committed act). So, if you can reasonably convince him that you were in now way intentionally targeting muskie, then he would be damaging his credibility in a court challenge by giving you a ticket. On the other hand, if you are sitting there with ultra heavy rods and buzz baits the size of a small dog, you might have a hard time convincing him/her

Another completely wrong misconception. There is nothing illegal in targeting fish which you have no possession limit left for or there is a zero possession limit during an open season.
"If you catch a fish after reaching the daily catch or possession limit for that species, the fish must be released immediately back to the water." (pg. 7 of current regs.)
"It is illegal is to attempt to catch fish for which the season is closed, even if you are going to release them." (pg. 8 of current regs.)

Post by **moonshine** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 12:44 pm

Woodsman wrote:
Hollywood wrote:Anytime a peace officer charges you with something he has to believe you have commited an offence. To do that, he has to satisfy mens rea and actus reus in his own mind. (Guilty mind and a committed act). So, if you can reasonably convince him that you were in now way intentionally targeting muskie, then he would be damaging his credibility in a court challenge by giving you a ticket. On the other hand, if you are sitting there with ultra heavy rods and buzz baits the size of a small dog, you might have a hard time convincing him/her
Another completely wrong misconception. There is nothing illegal in targeting fish which you have no possession limit left for or there is a zero possession limit during an open season.
"If you catch a fish after reaching the daily catch or possession limit for that species, the fish must be released immediately back to the water." (pg. 7 of current regs.)
"It is illegal is to attempt to catch fish for which the season is closed, even if you are going to release them." (pg. 8 of current regs.)

you are leaving out the most important part. this applies to walleye, pike and bass only. try targeting trout after reaching your limit and you will find yourself deep in it up to your neck. in QC??? you don't want to even test it. 2 people in a boat and they have 3 lakers? one person better not be fishing.

Post by RJ » Thu Aug 12, 2010 12:56 pm

moonshine wrote:
Woodsman wrote:
Hollywood wrote:Anytime a peace officer charges you with something he has to believe you have commited an offence. To do that, he has to satisfy mens rea and actus reus in his own mind. (Guilty mind and a committed act). So, if you can reasonably convince him that you were in now way intentionally targeting muskie, then he would be damaging his credibility in a court challenge by giving you a ticket. On the other hand, if you are sitting there with ultra heavy rods and buzz baits the size of a small dog, you might have a hard time convincing him/her
Another completely wrong misconception. There is nothing illegal in targeting fish which you have no possession limit left for or there is a zero possession limit during an open season.
"If you catch a fish after reaching the daily catch or possession limit for that species, the fish must be released immediately back to the water." (pg. 7 of current regs.)
"It is illegal is to attempt to catch fish for which the season is closed, even if you are going to release them." (pg. 8 of current regs.)
you are leaving out the most important part. this applies to walleye, pike and bass only. try targeting trout after reaching your limit and you will find yourself deep in it up to your neck. in QC??? you don't want to even test it. 2 people in a boat and they have 3 lakers? one person better not be fishing.

Where does it state that MS?..Pike, walleye and bass only?

I hope you are referring to QC with regards to fishing after reaching a limit being illegal...because in Ontario it is not......that was changed a few years ago.

RJ

Post by **moonshine** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 3:03 pm

RJ, it is on pg 9 under "catch and retain rules" specifically states it. you can keep your limit and still fish as long as you have live fish in your livewell that you may choose to cull. but if they are all dead, you may not target that species any more. this applies to walleye, pike and Bass only. this probably doesn't apply to trout cause they usually die in 10 minutes anyways.