Salmon Regulation Help

[Reeldeal]

Ok so here’s the question I catch a chinook salmon in an area that can be kept legally. I now want to fish a different area that’s open for coho and lings but not open for chinook can I legally do so or do I have to only fish in an area open for chinook?

Thanks

 

[Tighthead]

Ok so here’s the question I catch a chinook salmon in an area that can be kept legally. I now want to fish a different area that’s open for coho and lings but not open for chinook can I legally do so or do I have to only fish in an area open for chinook?

Thanks

Not a problem. Wouldn't hurt to keep a GPS track and/or take some kind of pic though.

 

[pescador]

Your license will note the area you caught the Spring in. Always write down Springs as you catch them. Your GPS breadcrumbs will show where you’ve been. As long as that aligns to your catch on board you’re good. Nobody can reasonable argue otherwise.

 

[ziggy]

If you can prove where you caught the fish you’re golden, if not it comes down to if the CO believes you. I’d suggest it’s up to you to prove where the fish was caught or even that you fished the open area?. I’m sure you can see where people could just say the fish was from an open area even if it wasnt.

 

[RiverBoy]

if you take a picture of the location with your phone it literally drops a pin on a gps location. i have a halibut spot off shore that i saved in this manner because i forgot to throw a pin down on my fish finder

 

[eroyd]

I'm sure in the instance of the Becher Bay opening, many people travel from Pedder or Sooke by boat to get there and fish along the way. If you retain a fish in the open area there is no reason you can not go out and try to find some coho, pinks or whatever. Last time I checked the onus is on the prosecutors to prove you guilty, not you to prove yourself innocent.

I have know doubt however there are a few that take advantage of the difficulty the DFO officers have proving anything they do not actually witness. DFO is well aware of boats doing the "token" 20 min troll through the open zone on their way out or in.

 

[scott craven]

I have know doubt however there are a few that take advantage of the difficulty the DFO officers have proving anything they do not actually witness. DFO is well aware of boats doing the "token" 20 min troll through the open zone on their way out or in.

I'm sure it happens all the time, unless witnessed there's nothing to stop people from writing a fish on their licence using the open area #
(Except maybe their own honesty )

 

[Reeldeal]

Appreciate the responses!

RD

 

[brutus]

I do it all the time,even got boarded by DFO, coast guard 2 weeks ago with 4x dead spring from 21 fishing for lings in 20, they checked the fish and licences and off they went

 

[A-a-Ron]

If you can prove where you caught the fish you’re golden, if not it comes down to if the CO believes you. I’d suggest it’s up to you to prove where the fish was caught or even that you fished the open area?. I’m sure you can see where people could just say the fish was from an open area even if it wasnt.

Accepting anything that has a “guilty until proven innocent” premise goes against everything we supposedly stand for.

Sure, people take advantage and it’s good to have a picture or tack on your gps, but as long as it’s correctly marked on your license (the only actual legal requirement I’m aware of) then the onus is on them to prove guilt. Not on us to prove innocence. We’re still a free country, for now.

 

[ziggy]

Accepting anything that has a “guilty until proven innocent” premise goes against everything we supposedly stand for.

Sure, people take advantage and it’s good to have a picture or tack on your gps, but as long as it’s correctly marked on your license (the only actual legal requirement I’m aware of) then the onus is on them to prove guilt. Not on us to prove innocence. We’re still a free country, for now.

Well you are in an area with a fish that it is illegal to retain in that area, so there is that. I would assume the case would be that you were in possession of an illegal fish.They have your position and your possession as evidence so I’d guess the onus is on you. It’s not really that strange of a situation if you get caught with stolen property you don’t think they’ll ask for a bill of sale or ask you to prove where you got it? Frankly I wouldn’t risk trying to argue in front of a judge that it’s not to you to prove the fish was legal.

 

[A-a-Ron]

I hear ya, but still disagree on the onus being on me to prove it. There’s no rule against transporting your fish across other areas (or continuing to fish while doing that) so anything alleged to be “illegal” is them making assumptions. I’d say that would be an easy argument to make.
Tons of guys cross over to get lingcod as well. By the same logic, should we be ready to prove we didn’t catch that over on this side?
Same as an overnighter trip, which I’ve done. Bonk one day 1, bonk another on day 2. (Daily 1, possession 2) DFO could allege that both were caught same day if they wanted to… but if properly marked in my license, the onus is not on me. Common sense to me, especially considering the principle of innocent until proven guilty.

 

[ziggy]

I hear ya, but still disagree on the onus being on me to prove it. There’s no rule against transporting your fish across other areas (or continuing to fish while doing that) so anything alleged to be “illegal” is them making assumptions. I’d say that would be an easy argument to make.
Tons of guys cross over to get lingcod as well. By the same logic, should we be ready to prove we didn’t catch that over on this side?
Same as an overnighter trip, which I’ve done. Bonk one day 1, bonk another on day 2. (Daily 1, possession 2) DFO could allege that both were caught same day if they wanted to… but if properly marked in my license, the onus is not on me. Common sense to me, especially considering the principle of innocent until proven guilty.

I think you are missing the point. You are offering you license as your proof of where and when you caught the fish. The CO can either accept that as proof or if they have some doubts bump it up to the courts to decide whose proof they accept.

 

[Newf]

I think you are missing the point. You are offering you license as your proof of where and when you caught the fish. The CO can either accept that as proof or if they have some doubts bump it up to the courts to decide whose proof they accept.

Not sure who is missing the point but IMO unless they have “solid proof” that you didn’t catch it where you said you did they would be idiots to bump it up to a court. What are they going to say to the judge? “We think he is lying”. They can”think” all they want.

 

[EstevanPoint]

Ok so here’s the question I catch a chinook salmon in an area that can be kept legally. I now want to fish a different area that’s open for coho and lings but not open for chinook can I legally do so or do I have to only fish in an area open for chinook?

Thanks

Totally fine if you mark the fish on your license. Which you should be doing any way, so you'd be totally fine.

 

[ziggy]

Not sure who is missing the point but IMO unless they have “solid proof” that you didn’t catch it where you said you did they would be idiots to bump it up to a court. What are they going to say to the judge? “We think he is lying”. They can”think” all they want.

I’m not going to beat this to death, but as I mentioned if you are caught with stolen property you could be charged if you have no proof of paying for it and in all likelihood it would be confiscated. If you refuse a breathalyzer you are charged because you failed to provide proof of sobriety. In neither case did they require “solid proof”, just suspicion! As to what are they going to say in court, “we checked this boat in a closed area with a fish we believe is illegal” .As I stated you would then be required to refute their evidence, maybe with a license or a gps trail. The saving grace would be a CO who believed you because you showed your marked license or your GPS track, but make no mistake you need IMO to convince them. Anyway I’m not telling people what to do, they can feel free to work the system at whatever level they are comfortable with.

 

[A-a-Ron]

All good bud, agree to disagree.
Like they say, opinions are like a**holes. Everyone’s got one, but mine is the best.

 

[brutus]

I’m not going to beat this to death, but as I mentioned if you are caught with stolen property you could be charged if you have no proof of paying for it and in all likelihood it would be confiscated. If you refuse a breathalyzer you are charged because you failed to provide proof of sobriety. In neither case did they require “solid proof”, just suspicion! As to what are they going to say in court, “we checked this boat in a closed area with a fish we believe is illegal” .As I stated you would then be required to refute their evidence, maybe with a license or a gps trail. The saving grace would be a CO who believed you because you showed your marked license or your GPS track, but make no mistake you need IMO to convince them. Anyway I’m not telling people what to do, they can feel free to work the system at whatever level they are comfortable with.

DFO on the water officer are not stupid, they know the rules are a mess, if you have nothing to hide and did nothing wrong, licence in order they are nice, that’s my experience with them, I’ve been boarded and checked all over, Ukee bamfield, port Renfrew , never had 1 hick up, always first classs interactions, know your regs, and stay within them and you will be fine, you think they want to spends days in court???play stupid games if you dare, then you should be ready to pay the fines. Believe me I don’t want to run 25 miles into 21 when I could fish 20, but if I want to keep a few fish that’s what I have to do, catch- kill- record, and away i go