Mandatory course for a fishing licence?

[Blake]

In a now closed thread, just dave mentioned that maybe there should be a mandatory course for a first time angler. Something similar to the course a first time hunter takes.
With the limited resources here and the angling pressure I personally think a course or even a one time test would be a good idea.
It would eliminate the "oh I didn't know" excuse and would reinforce the idea that fishing is a privilege and not a right.
I'm not one to usually accept more rules, restrictions or laws with a big smile on my face but in this case I think it may be beneficial.
Thoughts...

[Geezle]

My thoughts are that this thread is going to be another amusing read...

[Badback]

IBTL....This is the first time that I used that acronym...lol

[double haul]

I agree... should be an interesting read.

[Paul C]

In a now closed thread, just dave mentioned that maybe there should be a mandatory course for a first time angler. Something similar to the course a first time hunter takes.
With the limited resources here and the angling pressure I personally think a course or even a one time test would be a good idea.
It would eliminate the "oh I didn't know" excuse and would reinforce the idea that fishing is a privilege and not a right.
I'm not one to usually accept more rules, restrictions or laws with a big smile on my face but in the case I think it may be beneficial.
Thoughts...
X2 It would help weed out the mentally dis-functional wishermen.
Some "people" in this world are self centred and only care about raping our waters.

[spinmat]

There is a test for getting a drivers license, people still speed. In my opinion the only thing a written test will do is increase the number of people who fish without a license. Just because people know the rules doesn't mean that they will still follow them. And how would this test apply for small children who are still too young to take the test? Will they be exempt and be allowed to catch too many fish/keep fish that are illegal?

[Lefty-Canuck]

I think it would be simple...teach people how to read a tape measure and teach them how to count fish....if you can master these 2 skill you can separate yourself from being an ignorant dillhole....:)

LC

[SnoochyBoochy]

In a now closed thread, just dave mentioned that maybe there should be a mandatory course for a first time angler. Something similar to the course a first time hunter takes.
With the limited resources here and the angling pressure I personally think a course or even a one time test would be a good idea.
It would eliminate the "oh I didn't know" excuse and would reinforce the idea that fishing is a privilege and not a right.
I'm not one to usually accept more rules, restrictions or laws with a big smile on my face but in this case I think it may be beneficial.
Thoughts...


I 100% couldnt agree with you!
Fishing is a privaledge?? Wow the government has got you wrapped around their little finger havent they. I wonder what the law of Nature has to say about that? or even the Common Law for that matter. I am a MAN and it is my God given right to fish hunt and provide for myself and my family!
Just because a Liberty stealing politician wants to tell me that I have to bend over and buy all their GMO food at stuffmart to float their economy, doesnt make it right. And its attitudes like yours that hurt the idea of protection and sustainability not help it.
Can Anybody say NANNY state...another test, sheesh.

Being a man also carries the responsability to respect and care for the source of said sustinance. If you see someone being a tool kindly inform themand the next time report them, they will learn.

my 2 obsolete cents
CHEERS
Snooch :acigar:

[BeeGuy]

No course needed.

[Lefty-Canuck]

I 100% couldnt agree with you!
Fishing is a privaledge?? Wow the government has got you wrapped around their little finger havent they. I wonder what the law of Nature has to say about that? or even the Common Law for that matter. I am a MAN and it is my God given right to fish hunt and provide for myself and my family!
Just because a Liberty stealing politician wants to tell me that I have to bend over and buy all their GMO food at stuffmart to float their economy, doesnt make it right. And its attitudes like yours that hurt the idea of protection and sustainability not help it.
Can Anybody say NANNY state...another test, sheesh.

Being a man also carries the responsability to respect and care for the source of said sustinance. If you see someone being a tool kindly inform themand the next time report them, they will learn.

my 2 obsolete cents
CHEERS
Snooch :acigar:

I can smell the irony in this post....

NO to the nanny state its a right to fish not a priviledge!!!.....but you had better follow the rules laid out by the Nanny state or expect to be called in and dealt with BY THE NANNY STATE!!!

LC :)

[npauls]

I think if they start making people take a test before getting their license they could also up the penalties also.

There would be no excuse anymore as to why they were breaking the law.

I would love to see some higher penalties. Poachers wouldn't be so brave to do whatever they wanted if they knew what kinds of fines they would be facing if caught.

[Redneck Renagade]

Course or no course there is still going to be ass hats that are still going to fish the way they want, when they want, and how they want. A course isn't going to change that. If a course was implemented its just another way for the government to grab even more money out of our hard earned pockets and I for one am against it. Every angler, hunter, and trapper should do our part and protect our given rights and report every non-legal act that can be reported.

[Geezle]

It's delicious. :)

[just_dave]

Actually, I'm not even sure why we need a license at all.

[hal53]

Actually, I'm not even sure why we need a license at all.
That one is easy...so the funds can go into "general revenue", then they can cut the SRD budget again because there is no tracking of the dollars fishing and hunting brings in.....Glad I could help....sigh!!!:(

[just_dave]

That one is easy...so the funds can go into "general revenue", then they can cut the SRD budget again because there is no tracking of the dollars fishing and hunting brings in.....Glad I could help....sigh!!!:(

Perfect, then we can finally get rid of those silly regulations. It's like they think we wouldn't just be morally conscience outdoormen/women. We would just catch what we need and leave the eggs behind.

[hal53]

Perfect, then we can finally get rid of those silly regulations. It's like they think we wouldn't just be morally conscience outdoormen/women. We would just catch what we need and leave the eggs behind.
yup.....wasn't all that many years ago, it was like that....and then.........

[michaelmicallef]

I think the majority of avid fishermen know more about fish I.D and proper release techniques then some CO's. Actually I know this for a fact. I have seen the way some people release and handle bull trout at upper K , the Bald Eagles are happy. And I have talked to a few fishermen bragging about the nice speckled trout they have caught, when in fact it was just an average sized Bull trout. So some kind of education would not be a bad idea, but charging people for a course will never fly. I think a 20 dollar increase in license fees for people who don't have a fishing coarse would be more realistic. Just my opinion, I hate paying for more government crap and would it really make any difference, maybe it would just end up being a waste of time. But some people really need some "edumaction". Fishing in most of my part of this province is a result of stocking and man made ponds and lakes. Fish are not that plentiful a resource as compared to other provinces.

[Okotokian]

As evidenced from the last thread on this topic, the prevailing views are no, no, no, no, no, and hell no.

But we now know where all the gun registry busybodies migrated to. Got to regulate and control SOMETHING.

[just_dave]

As evidenced from the last thread on this topic, the prevailing views are no, no, no, no, no, and hell no.

But we now know where all the gun registry busybodies migrated to. Got to regulate and control SOMETHING.

That's what I'm saying. There wouldn't be poachers if there weren't rules/regulations. So quit trying to control and regulate fishing with rules and licenses and there wouldn't be fish poachers because there wouldn't even be rules to break. Darn busybodies, hey.

[Okotokian]

That's what I'm saying. There wouldn't be poachers if there weren't rules/regulations. So quit trying to control and regulate fishing with rules and licenses and there wouldn't be fish poachers because there wouldn't even be rules to break. Darn busybodies, hey.

LOL no, I'm not saying no rules or laws. I'm saying enforce the rules, don't make everyone jump through additional bureaucratic, costly new hoops that are unnecessary for the vast majority. Anyone who wants to can read the regs.

[SnoochyBoochy]

I can smell the irony in this post....

NO to the nanny state its a right to fish not a priviledge!!!.....but you had better follow the rules laid out by the Nanny state or expect to be called in and dealt with BY THE NANNY STATE!!!

LC :)

Created irony, by scratching half the suggested process...First kindly inform the tool that they are being a tool or irresponsible and then turn to the folks who deal with unteachable folks to deal with them...I find it works better then stuffing fists in peoples eyeball sockets.
But I understand your need to be a part of the convo ;)

[Speckle55]

This is Redneck Alberta .. less rules not more

you can take my fishing rod from my cold dead hands

David:)

[just_dave]

LOL no, I'm not saying no rules or laws. I'm saying enforce the rules, don't make everyone jump through additional bureaucratic, costly new hoops that are unnecessary for the vast majority. Anyone who wants to can read the regs.

*Being serious now.

I agree, the majority doesn't need someone to hold their hand to ensure responsibility. But many do. More needs to be done about those many without affecting the already responsible majority. Implimenting a manditory course and test would be drastic and would come with issues, (like youth fishing) but it certainly would educate anyone that doesn't understand or pretend not to know the rules. I don't think we're their yet though. If avid fishermen and women don't find the problem to be out of control, as in, fish aren't being depleted due to people not following the rules, a manditory test for all to obtain a license isn't necessary.

I vote for higher fines and more banhammer of poachers first.

[pikergolf]

Makes me wonder how the I didn't understand the regulations plays out in court. It is said that ignorance is no excuse, I hope that's the way a Judge would see it. Double the fines and make it worth it for a witness to follow through in court. Sad but money talks. Poaching is a serious problem that requires a serious response, without the courts help it's all for naught.

[schmedlap]

This kind of Nanny State thinking just makes it harder for the people who follow the rules. Just like "boating licenses" and firearms regulations, it just makes it harder and more expensive for the average, law-abiding guys, and the criminals (Poachers in this case) won't give a damn, because there is no enforcement or any real possiblity of future large-scale enforcement. The rewards of ignoring it will far surpass any risk of observance. It would just be another bonus for some empire-building bureaucrats, paid for by the usual suspects (never the offenders).
The only way this situation will improve is with some innovative and positive efforts to alter culture in certain areas and communities. It has to be "uncool" to be a poacher (?)
Instead of pretending that "the government" will ever be able to "improve" this situation, perhaps the people who actually care about this could come up with some innovative, "high profile", ways to educate the offenders who might actually care, if they had the education and information to compel them to do so. Isn't that, in the end, how many of us came to hold the recreational importance of this resource above our own selfish interests as "carnivores". I can compare my own approach 40 years ago to now and very clearly come to this conclusion.
How about we hear from some people with ideas on how to "embarrass" the non-criminal public (i.e., the ignorant, not the criminal) into recognizing the value of this resource, to themselves and their progeny if not just to the public. Forget about the real criminal element - the only thing they understand is very harsh enforcement, and it is unlikely to happen. Until they "get a missile in the teeth" they are not going to be deterred.
Ideas?

[just_dave]

Ideas?

Having to pay a fine, then take a course and test after breaking the rules would be uncool. So to avoid that, don't break fishing regs. The amount of fine would pay for the course, test and any other costs for breaking the law. One idea.

And I can tell you, had this been in place when I was younger, I would've had those regs memorized. Because I didn't learn until a few times of fishing one spot, that it didn't open until later then the rest of the area. Oops. Ran into a Park Ranger in a blue Park truck on my to the spot one day. He didn't fine me but I was totally ready for one and totally deserved one.

[Okotokian]

it certainly would educate anyone that doesn't understand or pretend not to know the rules.

Come on Dave. It would educate someone who was pretending not to know the rules? Pretending is a conscious act of avoidance or deceit. By definition it is practiced by someone who does know the rules. A course would do nothing.

I agree with licensing when it's a matter of public safety... driving obviously and perhaps even gun ownership. But there is no public safety risk with regards to fishermen. Given that, we can expect fishermen to read the regulations. They aren't complicated. If an individual doesn't follow them then they can and should be ticketed and fined. Issues like proper fish handling and release are better dealt with by public education than by licensing.

[just_dave]

Come on Dave. It would educate someone who was pretending not to know the rules? Pretending is a conscious act of avoidance or deceit. By definition it is practiced by someone who does know the rules. A course would do nothing.

Can't tell if being serious.

But yes, the course would ensure that people could no longer pretend not to know the rules.

[Okotokian]

Can't tell if being serious.

But yes, the course would ensure that people could no longer pretend not to know the rules.

how's that? Do people get off now if they say they didn't know? They could still say they didn't know after they got a license. Maybe they got that particular question wrong. Fish cop going to go back over their 7 year old exam results and say "Damn, you DID get it wrong... so you didn't know. Ok then, on your way, sorry for the interruption".

You are proposing to have hundreds of thousands of Albertans jump through a regulatory hoop so that when some poacher says "I didn't know" a fish cop or judge can say "yes you did!" and then hand out the same penalty they would have anyway? Where's that face-slapping smilie when you need it?????

I think that what you really want is education, and I support that. But you don't need licensing to have an effective public education campaign.

[just_dave]

how's that? Do people get off now if they say they didn't know? They could still say they didn't know after they got a license. Maybe they got that particular question wrong. Fish cop going to go back over their 7 year old exam results and say "Damn, you DID get it wrong... so you didn't know. Ok then, on your way, sorry for the interruption".

You are proposing to have hundreds of thousands of Albertans jump through a regulatory hoop so that when some poacher says "I didn't know" a fish cop or judge can say "yes you did!" and then hand out the same penalty they would have anyway? Where's that face-slapping smilie when you need it?????

Hey, calm your inner self my friend.

They may not get off. But some ignore to learn regulations (ignore the regulations) as they feel keeping themselves unaware is a good defence.

But whatever. I've made my point that a course for law breakers could be an effective deterrent.

Have sweet dreams good Sir. I'm-a go ni-night. lol.

Peace everyone.

[QIsley]

Would be good to have to pass a violators test after being convicted of a fishing offense before being eligible to renew a fishing licence like people that are convicted of some Wildlife Act offenses have to....

[Lefty-Canuck]

Would be good to have to pass a violators test after being convicted of a fishing offense before being eligible to renew a fishing licence like people that are convicted of some Wildlife Act offenses have to....

X2.....I think that is a great idea.

LC

[pikergolf]

On further reflection I think a course would be an awesome idea! Break the law and you need a semester of fishing rule courses, full course load. Passing grade 95%.

[Geezle]

Would be good to have to pass a violators test after being convicted of a fishing offense before being eligible to renew a fishing licence like people that are convicted of some Wildlife Act offenses have to....

X2.....I think that is a great idea.

LC

Yup.

[Okotokian]

But whatever. I've made my point that a course for law breakers could be an effective deterrent.


The test as punishment for law breakers. OK, I'm with you on that one 100% I just wasn't in favour of punishing all anglers.

Ok, goodnight. I should hit the hay too. I have a flight in... oh crap, 5 hours.....

[huntsfurfish]

Dont need test, dont need to up fines. Just need more enforcement!:)

[adaras]

In my opinion both fishing and hunting activities are sufering from people with no respect and aducation to the game i strongly believe that. The only way someone to get educated is to understand that there must be fishing and hunting for the next generations to come and enjoy the outdoors. No mater how much the fines will be or no matter how many lisences someone has if there is no respect then everything is useles and waste of money. Just my thought

[Blake]

Would be good to have to pass a violators test after being convicted of a fishing offense before being eligible to renew a fishing licence like people that are convicted of some Wildlife Act offenses have to....

Good idea. That would certainly be more practical.

[ogre]

How about we hear from some people with ideas on how to "embarrass" the non-criminal public (i.e., the ignorant, not the criminal) into recognizing the value of this resource, to themselves and their progeny if not just to the public. Forget about the real criminal element - the only thing they understand is very harsh enforcement, and it is unlikely to happen. Until they "get a missile in the teeth" they are not going to be deterred.
Ideas?

Having to pay a fine, then take a course and test after breaking the rules would be uncool. So to avoid that, don't break fishing regs. The amount of fine would pay for the course, test and any other costs for breaking the law. One idea.

Funny that I was thinking something along the same line as Schmedlap, but Just_Dave beat me to the idea of re-educating the proven violators before allowing them a probationary license after their court-imposed suspension is served. The course, naturally would be paid for by these "criminals", for lack of a better word, to generally take into account people who are just clueless and don't care enough to check the fishing regulations prior to dipping their line(s). I do agree that hardened criminals will need a much more severe consequence.

Another idea which I've been mulling over would be, to have photos/descriptions of the proven lawbreakers' vehicles posted in a thread or sticky on the forum. I believe as eyes and ears, we'd be more aware of a potential threat to our resources when we recognise the presence of these individuals. (Yeah, I am taking into account they may have more than one vehicle, or will switch vehicles, but over time that would be additional hassle and cost for them.) Especially for people here who worries about ruining a clueless, but innocent first-time offender's day. The F&W officials are stretched thin as it is, and additional reinforcement is probably not a realistic expectation. We should help in any way we can without putting ourselves at risk, or violating the due process of the law while doing so. Since I don't know if posting these photos would violate any existing law(s), maybe anyone knowing for sure could clarify the issue?

[Paul C]

Would be good to have to pass a violators test after being convicted of a fishing offense before being eligible to renew a fishing licence like people that are convicted of some Wildlife Act offenses have to....
X2 Mr. Isley

[Paul C]

Dont need test, dont need to up fines. Just need more enforcement!:)
Bs The fines need to be increased and doubled at the least. Money is always a wake up call.

[Redneck Renagade]

Would be good to have to pass a violators test after being convicted of a fishing offense before being eligible to renew a fishing licence like people that are convicted of some Wildlife Act offenses have to....

X? Well said sir. That's the best one I've seen yet

[Geezle]

Bs The fines need to be increased and doubled at the least. Money is always a wake up call.

As long as there's enforcement there to catch offenders and apply said fines...

[SnoochyBoochy]

I would like to offer a wider view to the devastation that our waters and lands have had to endure. Okay granted the guy who is pulling two walleye out for his family is a criminal and should be tarred and feathered hahahah BS!
How about the over fishing of our waters by governments foreign and domestic. Or the devastation that the tar sands has had on wildlife....
I am not against development or growth but I would say that if money were the issue I'm sure these companies and their counterparts pay heavy penalties for the burden they are, yet the burden still exists ie low fish populations in the oceans and the endangerment of Canadian Northern wildlife.
My point is this there are bigger fish to fry then the little Asian dude who goes to the river once a week to feed his family fish. Its the ol' Kansas City Shuffle! If you believe that even if 1000 people province wide pulled "illegal" fish out that it makes even a fraction of a problem compared to the mass devastation going on then I have some snow I'd like to sell you during this heat!

[nekred]

Here is an idea, I think one of the biggest problems I see out there is improper fish ID.

A simple online course a person has to sign in and do off of the AlbertaRELM website that is free and and adds it to your WIN card record. If you have this course on your WIN record then you get 5$ off on your fishing license. So then you have choice whether or not you do it...and an incentive to do it!...

if you don't want to...then pay full price for license... if you choose to do it then license is cheaper....

[Pincherguy]

:angry3:Great idea!!!!!! Lets give the feds some more money, god knows I have too much. :sign0161:

[Geezle]

I would like to offer a wider view to the devastation that our waters and lands have had to endure. Okay granted the guy who is pulling two walleye out for his family is a criminal and should be tarred and feathered hahahah BS!
How about the over fishing of our waters by governments foreign and domestic. Or the devastation that the tar sands has had on wildlife....
I am not against development or growth but I would say that if money were the issue I'm sure these companies and their counterparts pay heavy penalties for the burden they are, yet the burden still exists ie low fish populations in the oceans and the endangerment of Canadian Northern wildlife.
My point is this there are bigger fish to fry then the little Asian dude who goes to the river once a week to feed his family fish. Its the ol' Kansas City Shuffle! If you believe that even if 1000 people province wide pulled "illegal" fish out that it makes even a fraction of a problem compared to the mass devastation going on then I have some snow I'd like to sell you during this heat!

Really? REALLY?! :lol:

[TyreeUM]

I would like to offer a wider view to the devastation that our waters and lands have had to endure. Okay granted the guy who is pulling two walleye out for his family is a criminal and should be tarred and feathered hahahah BS!
How about the over fishing of our waters by governments foreign and domestic. Or the devastation that the tar sands has had on wildlife....
I am not against development or growth but I would say that if money were the issue I'm sure these companies and their counterparts pay heavy penalties for the burden they are, yet the burden still exists ie low fish populations in the oceans and the endangerment of Canadian Northern wildlife.
My point is this there are bigger fish to fry then the little Asian dude who goes to the river once a week to feed his family fish. Its the ol' Kansas City Shuffle! If you believe that even if 1000 people province wide pulled "illegal" fish out that it makes even a fraction of a problem compared to the mass devastation going on then I have some snow I'd like to sell you during this heat!

"tar sands" classic!

How much is the snow? AVB might be interested in purchasing enough to replace what has been lost in the arctic (haha sorry buddy, just a friendly jab!)

I say we pin a red "P" to the shrits of all convicted poachers, that way everyone knows who they are and what they did!

[Pincherguy]

As evidenced from the last thread on this topic, the prevailing views are no, no, no, no, no, and hell no.

But we now know where all the gun registry busybodies migrated to. Got to regulate and control SOMETHING.

Well said my friend!!!!

[walking buffalo]

I 100% couldnt agree with you!
Fishing is a privaledge?? Wow the government has got you wrapped around their little finger havent they. I wonder what the law of Nature has to say about that? or even the Common Law for that matter. I am a MAN and it is my God given right to fish hunt and provide for myself and my family!
Just because a Liberty stealing politician wants to tell me that I have to bend over and buy all their GMO food at stuffmart to float their economy, doesnt make it right. And its attitudes like yours that hurt the idea of protection and sustainability not help it.
Can Anybody say NANNY state...another test, sheesh.

Being a man also carries the responsability to respect and care for the source of said sustinance. If you see someone being a tool kindly inform themand the next time report them, they will learn.

my 2 obsolete cents
CHEERS
Snooch :acigar:




SB is on the right track in standing up for the Right to fish. We do have legislation that states Albertan's have the Right to fish, but it can be taken away with a penstroke.

Adding more legislative retrictions to a person's Right to fish is going down the track to losing this God given Right, ( and by God, I mean Morton).







Would be good to have to pass a violators test after being convicted of a fishing offense before being eligible to renew a fishing licence like people that are convicted of some Wildlife Act offenses have to....


Albertan's convicted of specific Wildlife Act Hunting violations have had to pass mandatory tests before being allowed to obtain a hunting licence again.

The framework is already in place to include specific fishing violations, there simply needs to be a strong public request for this to happen.

[SnoochyBoochy]

Really? REALLY?! :lol:

Naw your right Geezle, your right...all the "real" problems have actually helped nature and I am a lunatic troll who should be given a test before fishing for comments online, but just after my test for breathing because of my CO2 emmissions and how its killing the planet Naw your right lets all go back to sleep our government loves us.

[Rick.]

I say no way. Would not make a difference in the long run and would turn into another tax grab. WIN card and license and boat operator card are all examples of government dipping into our pocket. I happily will buy a license but I've seen how much smarter the boaters are after acquiring a pleasure craft card. It's almost funny to watch. I would support a tax on marine stereo equipment. LOL Rick.

[WayneChristie]

Would be good to have to pass a violators test after being convicted of a fishing offense before being eligible to renew a fishing licence like people that are convicted of some Wildlife Act offenses have to....

this is the only test Id agree, too. most of the fishing offenders could care less about rules and regulations. spend money on enforcement not exams

[FishlessFool]

I think what it would cost to implement fishing exams would be better spent on more COs to actually enforce.

Some people you can tell them untill you're blue in the face, but they will never get it untill you kick them in the ass.