Department of Fisheries Officers

[Haverodwilltravel]

Does anybody know if these officers have a “quota” for violations tickets that they have to reach like traffic cops?

I just witnessed the weakest case that I have ever heard of. A lady got a ticket for fishing with a barbed hook but there was no evidence against her thus leading me to wonder if they cast a wide net just hoping that some people will pay the $500 fine and not fight it.

 

[DuroBoat]

Pretty sure the cops don’t have a “quota” of tickets to hand out lol

 

[wildmanyeah]

I’d say the problem is more the opposite, don’t get their ticket book out enough

 

[Newf]

How did she get a ticket for a barbed hook if they didn’t have evidence? I have a friend who was out on a boat a couple of years where two guys got tickets for this. Both had just put on new spoons and forgot to pinch the barbs. You do the crime you pay the fine.

 

[wildthing]

How did she get a ticket for a barbed hook if they didn’t have evidence? I have a friend who was out on a boat a couple of years where two guys got tickets for this. Both had just put on new spoons and forgot to pinch the barbs. You do the crime you pay the fine.

honest have fell foul on that one a couple of years ago ... still the butt of jokes on the dock but if your trolling for bottom fish what they going to do, unless your reeling in a salmon as by- catch ??????? a barbless hook can still cause damage ..... hence why iam going to be running barbless circle hooks just need to find a nice stainless source for them .....

 

[baddogg]

Does anybody know if these officers have a “quota” for violations tickets that they have to reach like traffic cops?

I just witnessed the weakest case that I have ever heard of. A lady got a ticket for fishing with a barbed hook but there was no evidence against her thus leading me to wonder if they cast a wide net just hoping that some people will pay the $500 fine and not fight it.

No quota for traffic cops. Trust me.

 

[pescador]

Barbed hooks fines is probably the DFO’s number one income generator. When they boarded me at Nootka 4 years ago it was the first thing they looked for and nothing else seemed that important. They were courteous and professional but warned me barbed hook fines were increasing and common infractions.

 

[PEETZcanada]

It truly comes down to observation. DFO can observe you from many miles away. It also comes down to your answers in you conversation. Though it is leagal to catch and retain species other than salmon on barbed hooks it is up to you to take on the burdon of proof. If you are using barbed hooks at the time of the interaction and you claim that you are fishing for species other than salmon and have no salmon on deck, then you probably will be ok. However if you have salmon on deck and make the claim, more than likely you will be fined unless your tackle is obviously used to catch other species. All salmon caught on barbed hooks MUST be imediately relesed with as little harm as possible. Remember the burdom of proof is on you if you have salmon on deck. People have lost rods & reels, downriggers, tackle and received fines. You do have the option of court to prove yourself.

 

[Haverodwilltravel]

This DFO claimed a lady was fishing with, and caught a chinook salmon, on a barbed hook. His evidence was a couple of photographs that he took while inspecting the boat, of barbed hooks on lures that were in a tackle box. She was not even present when he took the pictures.

The Judge on the case is reserving judgement for a couple months. I would be shocked if she was found guilty.

 

[Rad Gumbo]

So I have a Bunch of gear on board in my tackle box that hasn't ever been used but still have barbs and will , until they are used. I will gladly see the DFO goof who charges me in court.

 

[Haverodwilltravel]

Exactly. This is such a weak case built by an overzealous cop. The other scary part is the Crown was represented by a lawyer whom you would think would have the sense not to prosecute due to lack of evidence.

 

[wildmanyeah]

This is why you can easily retain 4 chinook a day, your possession limit.

Burden of proof is on the crown

Show me the pictures of when you seen me catch them

 

[eroyd]

The burden of proof is definitely NOT on the accused. Seems weird a DFO officer would fine someone unless they were sure. Tough job being one of those officers.

 

[Haverodwilltravel]

The burden of proof is definitely NOT on the accused. Seems weird a DFO officer would fine someone unless they were sure. Tough job being one of those officers.

The burden of proof should be on the Crown. But I personally witnessed this court case and listened to the testimony and watched the entire proceeding.
The Crown had no evidence whatsoever.
I am amazed this case went to trial.
I think the DFO officers ego is too big for his waders

 

[scott craven]

This is why you can easily retain 4 chinook a day, your possession limit.

Burden of proof is on the crown

I find this hard to believe.

 

[wildmanyeah]

I don’t really like posting this stuff but if you look at all the fines givin out they are all pretty much for being more than 2 times your daily limit, ie more then your possession limit.

It’s the same for crabs and prawns ect..

You have to look on here in like October as that’s when all the salmon charges show up.

To get someone on being over the daily limit they pretty much have to confess that they caught more that day.

Pacific region

Pacific region convictions

www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

 

[Tips Up]

How about just playing by the rules?

 

[SG2.0]

The burden of proof should be on the Crown. But I personally witnessed this court case and listened to the testimony and watched the entire proceeding.
The Crown had no evidence whatsoever.
I am amazed this case went to trial.
I think the DFO officers ego is too big for his waders

Bet I know his name….

 

[Fizzishin]

I don’t really like posting this stuff but if you look at all the fines givin out they are all pretty much for being more than 2 times your daily limit, ie more then your possession limit.

It’s the same for crabs and prawns ect..

You have to look on here in like October as that’s when all the salmon charges show up.

To get someone on being over the daily limit they pretty much have to confess that they caught more that day.

Pacific region

Pacific region convictions

www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

I don't really understand your premise.

Are you saying that telling a dfo robot that half the catch in your boat was caught yesterday is a viable defense? Sounds like bad advice...

 

[wildmanyeah]

The burden of proof should be on the Crown. But I personally witnessed this court case and listened to the testimony and watched the entire proceeding.
The Crown had no evidence whatsoever.
I am amazed this case went to trial.
I think the DFO officers ego is too big for his waders

After the show CSI came out, apparently Jours started expecting that level of evidence.

When in reality most cases are like yeah I heard timmy say he had a gun and was gonna do, or Timmy was in that area at that time or I seen Timmy with blood on his shirt.

And so a lot of cases ended in miss trials after the show.