Barbed or Barbless in 2014

[Triton177]

Just previewed the 2014 Alberta Fishing regs online.Couldn't find a definitive answer to whether or not barbless hooks are mandatory?

[WayneChristie]

voluntary

[Triton177]

Thanks Wayne

[browning375]

Just to warn everyone, if you are fishing cold lake, please be aware of Saskatchewan regulations, as per barbless. You will be checked and fined if you choose to use barbs while fishing sask side of lake.

[RavYak]

I thought it was a mistake and that they were going to change it back... Guess not.

[Isopod]

If they aren't going to reinstate the barbless-only rule, it would be nice if they would state that. I'm happy staying barbless for pike and burbot, but for gentle mouth-biters like whitefish, trout and goldeye, I wouldn't mind the option of barbs. Took me forever to de-barb all my hooks when the barbless rules came out years ago, be a shame to buy new barbed hooks and then have to go through the same de-barbing routine in another year or two.

[dopemop]

Barb for keep, Barbless for C and R
is what is should be imo.. but i fish barbless. all the time..

[Geezle]

I thought it was a mistake and that they were going to change it back... Guess not.

The mistake was made on the federal side of things...until the way the fisheries act is worded changes barbless will continue to be voluntary.

[35 whelen]

You only have to barb hooks you are fishing with not your whole tackle box ,

[fishdude17]

I changed all of my barbless treble hooks to single barbed hooks when word of the regulation change came out. Much easier to get a fish unhooked with a single barb. When we do eventually go back to barbless, which will happen as I have been told by 3 different FWL Officers, I think Alberta should follow BC's law of "single barbless only" in rivers and streams. When we do become barbless again, I will continue to use single hooks...barbless of course.

[Fish face]

I like the single barbless. Nothing worse than a pike with 2 barbed trebles twisted up in a net.
yech. What a pain in the butt!:angry3:

[RavYak]

The mistake was made on the federal side of things...until the way the fisheries act is worded changes barbless will continue to be voluntary.

It can't be federal otherwise the other provinces would be the same. SK has never been strictly barbless and now still has barbless only lakes.

No reason AB couldn't have changed things themselves if they thought barbless was that important. They just chose not to I guess. Fine with me though as I prefer having a barb in certain situations(trout mainly).

[Donkey Oatey]

It can't be federal otherwise the other provinces would be the same. SK has never been strictly barbless and now still has barbless only lakes.

No reason AB couldn't have changed things themselves if they thought barbless was that important. They just chose not to I guess. Fine with me though as I prefer having a barb in certain situations(trout mainly).

Yep it was the Feds that made the change.

http://mywildalberta.com/fishing/regulations/barblesshooks.aspx


Barbless Hooks

Fishing

The Government of Alberta is asking Alberta’s anglers to keep barbed hooks out of our waters.

Last fall, an inadvertent federal amendment to the Alberta Fishery Regulations removed the barbed hook ban. The omission was not immediately noted and has affected about 600 Albertans who were ticketed for using barbed hooks.

Officials from ESRD and Justice and Solicitor General are working to rectify the problem by withdrawing charges and reversing wrongful convictions and fines for those individuals affected since September 2011.

We’re working with the Government of Canada to determine the appropriate next steps as we consider the current lack of a barbed hook ban.

In the meantime, we encourage Alberta’s anglers to continue to use barbless hooks and remember that we are promoting proper handling techniques for all fish to best ensure their survival once released.

[RavYak]

I still don't believe it. Why would the feds be changing a provincial regulation(Alberta Fishery Regulation)? And why didn't the province fix it, or get the feds to fix it if it truly was a mistake.

Saskatchewan makes their own regulations on the subject so I don't get why Alberta wouldn't do so as well.

[Donkey Oatey]

I still don't believe it. Why would the feds be changing a provincial regulation(Alberta Fishery Regulation)? And why didn't the province fix it, or get the feds to fix it if it truly was a mistake.

Saskatchewan makes their own regulations on the subject so I don't get why Alberta wouldn't do so as well.

Fisheries Act is Federal. All regulations made under that Act are Federal. The Alberta Fisheries Regulations allows for the Province to have its own Fisheries (Alberta) Act which is still reliant on the Federal Act for direction. So if the Feds made a change to the Alberta Fisheries Regulation there is nothing Alberta can do about it until the change is fixed at the federal level.

[BeeGuy]

Anyone here bothered to look up the actual legislation?

[huntsfurfish]

The mistake was made on the federal side of things...until the way the fisheries act is worded changes barbless will continue to be voluntary.

Nope. The mistake was making it barbless in the first place.:)

[RavYak]

Anyone here bothered to look up the actual legislation?

I tried but I can't even find where it said anything about barbless in the old fisheries act let alone see what it was changed to. Would actually really like to see the legislation wording instead of just these claims that the feds deleted it on mistake...

Fisheries Act is Federal. All regulations made under that Act are Federal. The Alberta Fisheries Regulations allows for the Province to have its own Fisheries (Alberta) Act which is still reliant on the Federal Act for direction. So if the Feds made a change to the Alberta Fisheries Regulation there is nothing Alberta can do about it until the change is fixed at the federal level.

Unless I am wrong there is a fisheries act and then an Alberta fisheries act just as you say. The province has the ability to make their own requirements as long as it still meets to federal requirements. That is why SK has a completely different system for barbless as well as other rules. There is no way shape or form that the feds would be in control of AB or SK's individual regs as that would require them to do work to know which lakes need special attention etc.

I think the AB government either doesn't care about barbless or is just too lazy to fix it(if it even was a mistake as is claimed).

[huntsfurfish]

I tried but I can't even find where it said anything about barbless in the old fisheries act let alone see what it was changed to. Would actually really like to see the legislation wording instead of just these claims that the feds deleted it on mistake...



Unless I am wrong there is a fisheries act and then an Alberta fisheries act just as you say. The province has the ability to make their own requirements as long as it still meets to federal requirements. That is why SK has a completely different system for barbless as well as other rules. There is no way shape or form that the feds would be in control of AB or SK's individual regs as that would require them to do work to know which lakes need special attention etc.

I think the AB government either doesn't care about barbless or is just too lazy to fix it(if it even was a mistake as is claimed).

Or that it was a mistake to implement it in the first place.

[RavYak]

Or that it was a mistake to implement it in the first place.

I am starting to wonder if there ever was a law in place since I couldn't find anything in the old version of fisheries act that was mentioned in articles on the subject.

If so they should have been reimbursing charges back to 2006(saw this date somewhere but not 100% sure that is when they started)not just back as far as 2011 when they claim the act was revised.

[Teamprotz]

Wonder why Sask went barbless on Cold lake when Alberta went the other way ?

[cube]

Wonder why Sask went barbless on Cold lake when Alberta went the other way ?

Sask was just trying to be consistent with Alberta so introduced it for Cold Lake. The year that it went through though the Alberta law became unenforceable because of the way Alberta tied it to the federal legislation, which changed. At least that is what the Sask Fisheries guys told me when I asked that very question.

[58thecat]

Well Barb was a red head who left me so I guess I will go Barbless this year!:sHa_shakeshout:

[BeeGuy]

Fisheries (Alberta) Act

and

Alberta Fishery Regulations

are 2 different pieces of legislation.

If you compare the 2 newest versions of the AFR to the pre-2012 (ie 2006-2011) version you will see in sections 23/24 how schedule 7 was changed and the barbless requirement Jan1 - Dec 31 was dropped.

The full text including older versions are all available online for your reading pleasure.

[RavYak]

Fisheries (Alberta) Act

and

Alberta Fishery Regulations

are 2 different pieces of legislation.

If you compare the 2 newest versions of the AFR to the pre-2012 (ie 2006-2011) version you will see in sections 23/24 how schedule 7 was changed and the barbless requirement Jan1 - Dec 31 was dropped.

The full text including older versions are all available online for your reading pleasure.

Thanks for the pointer, I found it now.

In short the Alberta Fishery Regulations obviously isn't the only law on the subject and must be over ruled by something else because

a) It states that the quota for each species of fish other then sturgeon is 1 in all waters...

b) States that bait is prohibited from Nov 1 to Aug 15...

And more...

AB government is useless in this regard and could learn a lot by looking at how SK and BC handle things...

[BeeGuy]

You must be misinterpreting it.

[RavYak]

You must be misinterpreting it.

How?

This is the old table which says that up to 2011 not only were barbed hooks illegal but so was bait...

http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb267/murtyl/ABReg.jpg

Here is the table now which still shows bait being illegal most of the year(and then confusingly has certain types of bait being illegal for less time...

http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb267/murtyl/ABReg2.jpg

All in all it is very poorly worded and obviously not followed 100%.

[BeeGuy]

Read Part 1 General Provisions.

Legislation is written in a specific fashion.

In this case, the AFR provides a legal basis for our specific regulations that are communicated to us in the annual fishing regulations magazine.

So, yes, you have misinterpreted it.

[RavYak]

Read Part 1 General Provisions.

Legislation is written in a specific fashion.

In this case, the AFR provides a legal basis for our specific regulations that are communicated to us in the annual fishing regulations magazine.

So, yes, you have misinterpreted it.

That clears up the limits and seasons by making the regulations the governing law on that subject but it doesn't explain section 7 claiming it is illegal to use bait for most of the year as the law doesn't state that the regs are the governing documents in that case.

[verado eyes]

Sask follows alberta regs on cold lake, Sask F&WL said it will always be this way as the size of lake and the population is coming from the ab side.

[Wild&Free]

That clears up the limits and seasons by making the regulations the governing law on that subject but it doesn't explain section 7 claiming it is illegal to use bait for most of the year as the law doesn't state that the regs are the governing documents in that case.

Attempting to understand legalese is trouble.

I think there's an act out there that states that only members of the law society can understand it, which is why representing yourself is often a mistake.

Fisheries Acts have nothing on the Income Tax act. 2499 pages of gibberish.