Using someone else fishing license.

[GoneFishingEDM]

Hey guys, so I have a question. This weekend my daughter in law was out fishing and Fish and Wildlife came by. She doesn't have a fishing and panicked. She tried to pass off the license of someone else who wasn't fishing as her own. Needless to say she got caught. Both of them have a court appearance under

Authority to conduct activities under a licence
5.1(1) A person who is not the licence holder shall not conduct
any activity pursuant to a licence unless that person
(a) is the person who is identified in the instrument under
section 5(1.1) or (6), as the case may be, or
(b) is specifically authorized to do so by or under the Act or
this Regulation.
(2) The holder of a licence shall not allow the licence to be used by
another person in a manner that involves a contravention of
subsection (1).

First of all I already gave my daughter in law **** for not simply getting her license and second for trying to pass off someone else license as hers.

She's freaking out thinking this is a criminal charge and will carry a massive fine. I can't find anything online what the penalty is for either of the people involved in this. Does anyone know what the this carries and is it a criminal conviction?

[RavYak]

Sounds like she got lucky if only she is getting the ticket... Whoever let her use their license should have got that ticket and she should have got one for unauthorized sportfishing.

According to the following link it looks like it is only $75 fine which is pathetically low imo...

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/laws/regu/alta-reg-63-2017/latest/alta-reg-63-2017.html

Those are only a few of the fines(and covers the act you referenced). Others can be seen here.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-98-246/page-12.html#h-40

I assume since you don't know the value already she has a mandatory court hearing regarding this case. In hopes of her learning her lesson I hope they give her more then the $75.

Hopefully you will step in and tell her not to fish next time if she still doesn't have her license.

As for the conviction I assume this is more like a speeding ticket then say a break and enter etc. Probably doesn't affect much of anything unless she gets caught again.

[GoneFishingEDM]

Thanks RavYak,

Both of them have an order to appear in court. I agree she got lucky, they could of hit her with the $57 fine for not having a license and court appearance for using someone's license.

This freaked her out pretty bad, so I'm sure she's learned her lesson at this point and won't be pushing her luck again.


Thanks again for the links.

[Willowtrail]

She should be proactive as well, Go buy a license and take the valid license to court to help her case.

[GoneFishingEDM]

She should be proactive as well, Go buy a license and take the valid license to court to help her case.

That's a great Idea. I will suggest that for sure.

[Talking moose]

She should be proactive as well, Go buy a license and take the valid license to court to help her case.

That's a good idea.

[DiabeticKripple]

Criminal charges only come from the criminal code I believe, so she should have been charged under the wildlife act and will just have to pay a fine

[GoneFishingEDM]

Criminal charges only come from the criminal code I believe, so she should have been charged under the wildlife act and will just have to pay a fine

That's what I told her, she was upset because the F & W officer told her she wouldn't be able to get into the US with a record and was generally being a hard ass. They don't even appear in a provincial court. it's at some Inn in Red Deer.

[TROLLER]

Same thing happened to a friend and they were fined and lost their ability to buy a license for one yr. Basically a ban on fishing for one full year.

[RavYak]

Same thing happened to a friend and they were fined and lost their ability to buy a license for one yr. Basically a ban on fishing for one full year.

Have heard similar stories before as well(regarding 1 year ban). Might want to save the few bucks and not purchase a license before hand.

[wags]

That's what I told her, she was upset because the F & W officer told her she wouldn't be able to get into the US with a record and was generally being a hard ass. They don't even appear in a provincial court. it's at some Inn in Red Deer.

That's the overflow for court in red deer.

[Grizzly Adams]

Not a criminal offense, but if you can't do the time, don't do the Crime fits. No sympathy here. Guess he could have charged her with impersonating the license holder, which would be a Criminal offense.

Grizz

[GoneFishingEDM]

Not a criminal offense, but if you can't do the time, don't do the Crime fits. No sympathy here. Guess he could have charged her with impersonating the license holder, which would be a Criminal offense.

Grizz

No sympathy here either. She's young, they will learn. Just curious what she can expect. I know she won't ever try and use another person's license ever again.

[Bigwoodsman]

She should be proactive as well, Go buy a license and take the valid license to court to help her case.

This
And get the licence PDQ. Don't wait until the day before court.

BW

[Ken07AOVette]

This
And get the licence PDQ. Don't wait until the day before court.

BW

I am struggling with this one. Is the reasoning that she is such an avid fisherman that she expects she is going to be fishing again before trial? I would think the Judge may think she is trying to pull a fast one, or will tell her that buying after the crime (it is) is pointless.
I would seriously think beyond the box on this one before buying another license.

[Talking moose]

I am struggling with this one. Is the reasoning that she is such an avid fisherman that she expects she is going to be fishing again before trial? I would think the Judge may think she is trying to pull a fast one, or will tell her that buying after the crime (it is) is pointless.
I would seriously think beyond the box on this one before buying another license.

It shows that she fished without a lisence and because she feels guilty for it, went out and bought a license. Even though she is going to be fined.

[Talking moose]

It also shows that even after the fact, she has chosen to purchase a license, contributing to the system and towards conservation.

[Bigwoodsman]

I am struggling with this one. Is the reasoning that she is such an avid fisherman that she expects she is going to be fishing again before trial? I would think the Judge may think she is trying to pull a fast one, or will tell her that buying after the crime (it is) is pointless.
I would seriously think beyond the box on this one before buying another license.

It shows that she fished without a lisence and because she feels guilty for it, went out and bought a license. Even though she is going to be fined.

What Talking Moose says is my reasoning for getting the licence. The licence is good till the end of March 2018. It will show that she intends to fish again and will do so with a fishing licence.

First offence, young, licence in her pocket a judge may just let her off easily.

That being said the one who borrowed her the licence should have her current licence revoked and lose her fishing privileges in Alberta till 2019.

BW

[RavYak]

I don't see any benefit in buying a license right now. The penalties are small and I highly doubt that buying a license would have any sway on a judge in this case.

She is going to get fined no matter what she does. My guess is that a suspension is very likely as well since she lied and tried to fool the officer.

If she had just been caught without a license and she said she didn't realize she needed one then I could see a judge going easier if said person bought a license right after.

That isn't the case here though, the main case is going to be against her blatantly lying to an officer. Buying a license isn't going to help argue that case one bit and it will very possibly be throwing money away if her license is suspended.

Save the money and put it towards the fine imo.

[Talking moose]

She fished. She should buy a licence.
She got caught fishing with no license, she should also be convicted for that as well.
My take.

[RavYak]

She fished. She should buy a licence.

And that helps her in the court case how?

The case isn't going to be about her fishing without a license, I am pretty sure the CO's would have just given her the fine on the spot for that.

The issue is that she lied and impersonated another individual and her friend allowed her to do so. That is why the charge is the one the OP listed and not just unauthorized to fish. This will be the focus of the court case and buying a license does not help explain why she acted this way.

Like I say if it was just because she got charged for not having a license then I would agree with you guys but not in this situation as that isn't what she is even being summoned to court for.

[Talking moose]

And that helps her in the court case how?

The case isn't going to be about her fishing without a license, I am pretty sure the CO's would have just given her the fine on the spot for that.

The issue is that she lied and impersonated another individual and her friend allowed her to do so. That is why the charge is the one the OP listed and not just unauthorized to fish. This will be the focus of the court case and buying a license does not help explain why she acted this way.

Like I say if it was just because she got charged for not having a license then I would agree with you guys but not in this situation as that isn't what she is even being summoned to court for.
Who cares about the court case. She fished, she should buy a licence.

She fished without a licence, she should also pay the penalty.
Maybe she will feel better about herself for buying a licence. I would.

[Isopod]

I don't think the age of the people was ever mentioned. If the daughter in law and her friend are 40 years old and have done a bunch of fishing over the years then the judge is likely to decide they are old enough to know better and were trying to mislead a CO and may come down on them fairly hard. If they are 20 years old and haven't done much fishing and state the truth that they panicked and acted irrationally out of panic then the judge may be more lenient. Not sure how much leeway the judge has in issuing fines and suspensions, but the age and experience of the violators could make a big difference if the judge has some leeway.

[Dewey Cox]

Fishing without a license is hardly anything.
Telling a peace officer you're someone you're not IS a big deal though.

[Tom Pullings]

So they just happened to have someone else's fishing license with them and didn't take it with them planning to use it in case they got checked?

[Ken07AOVette]

Looks bad.

http://criminalnotebook.ca/index.php/Obstruction_of_a_Peace_Officer_(Offence)

If the Officer or Judge is in a bad mood, or she doesn't play her cards right,

Offences relating to public or peace officer
129. Every one who
(a) resists or wilfully obstructs a public officer or peace officer in the execution of his duty or any person lawfully acting in aid of such an officer,
(b) omits, without reasonable excuse, to assist a public officer or peace officer in the execution of his duty in arresting a person or in preserving the peace, after having reasonable notice that he is required to do so, or
(c) resists or wilfully obstructs any person in the lawful execution of a process against lands or goods or in making a lawful distress or seizure,
is guilty of
(d) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or
(e) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 118; 1972, c. 13, s. 7.

[JReed]

Don't buy a fishing licence before court, she's going to get a suspension, and it's not going to sway the judge.

Go to the crown before court, extend regret and tell them you've learned your lesson. Thats about all she can do

[Ken07AOVette]

Don't buy a fishing licence before court, she's going to get a suspension, and it's not going to sway the judge.

Go to the crown before court, extend regret and tell them you've learned your lesson. Thats about all she can do

I agree with this totally. Anything else will make her look sneaky. Not what you want.

[Nederlager]

So many in today's society have twisted ideas of important things. I'd be happy to come and argue the case for her in front of the judge and tell him that society is over-regulated about nonsensical things. A fishing license for a young girl who is visiting. For sure, give her the electric chair! :fighting0074:

[Ken07AOVette]

So many in today's society have twisted ideas of important things. I'd be happy to come and argue the case for her in front of the judge and tell him that society is over-regulated about nonsensical things. A fishing license for a young girl who is visiting. For sure, give her the electric chair! :fighting0074:

and in the same breath, many would say far too many do not care about laws, morals, about important things. What is there to argue? She has no valid defense, she knowingly broke the law and has to pay. What are you going to teach her, how to try to get out of punishment for doing illegal things, no matter if you or she agree with the law? Falsifying ID is a very stupid thing to do, no offense meant to the OP, please do not take it that way, OP.
Your teaching is flawed.
Plus you have absolutely nothing to gain or lose in offering to plea a case, unless you are a Lawy student and are looking for pro-bono work experience.
Why not put the young impressionable person on the right path instead of trying to get her off?

[JReed]

So many in today's society have twisted ideas of important things. I'd be happy to come and argue the case for her in front of the judge and tell him that society is over-regulated about nonsensical things. A fishing license for a young girl who is visiting. For sure, give her the electric chair! :fighting0074:

Troll central^^^^

Good luck with that, because losing a days wages to come submit a non-legal argument is going to win you her case. You sound like one of those guys that doesn't pay taxes and figures the law doesn't apply to them. Too funny :sHa_sarcasticlol:

[Isopod]

Reading the post at the start of this thread, it's unclear to me whether the violators MUST APPEAR in court, or simply have the OPTION TO APPEAR in court.
If they must appear in court, then that makes it sound like a more serious offense, where they may face criminal charges. For example, under the Alberta Fisheries Act, providing false or misleading information to someone enforcing the Act can carry a penalty of up to $100,000 fine and/or up to 1 year in jail.
But by the description of the offense, it sounds more like a simple ticketable violation similar to fishing without a license, which is I think a $100 fine. If that's the case, presumably they can just pay the fine and not have to appear in court, unless they plan on challenging the ticket.
Assuming it is just a ticket, and since they do acknowledge their guilt, I'd say just pay it and move on with their lives.

[Talking moose]

Reading the post at the start of this thread, it's unclear to me whether the violators MUST APPEAR in court, or simply have the OPTION TO APPEAR in court.
If they must appear in court, then that makes it sound like a more serious offense, where they may face criminal charges. For example, under the Alberta Fisheries Act, providing false or misleading information to someone enforcing the Act can carry a penalty of up to $100,000 fine and/or up to 1 year in jail.
But by the description of the offense, it sounds more like a simple ticketable violation similar to fishing without a license, which is I think a $100 fine. If that's the case, presumably they can just pay the fine and not have to appear in court, unless they plan on challenging the ticket.
Assuming it is just a ticket, and since they do acknowledge their guilt, I'd say just pay it and move on with their lives.

Says they have a court appearance for the charges. To me that says mandatory. Not a ticket.

[58thecat]

Thanks RavYak,

Both of them have an order to appear in court. I agree she got lucky, they could of hit her with the $57 fine for not having a license and court appearance for using someone's license.

This freaked her out pretty bad, so I'm sure she's learned her lesson at this point and won't be pushing her luck again.


Thanks again for the links.

Some lessens in life need to be hard lessens, consider it all part of the learning curve...some do and some don't.

[BuckCuller]

Reading the post at the start of this thread, it's unclear to me whether the violators MUST APPEAR in court, or simply have the OPTION TO APPEAR in court.
If they must appear in court, then that makes it sound like a more serious offense, where they may face criminal charges. For example, under the Alberta Fisheries Act, providing false or misleading information to someone enforcing the Act can carry a penalty of up to $100,000 fine and/or up to 1 year in jail.
But by the description of the offense, it sounds more like a simple ticketable violation similar to fishing without a license, which is I think a $100 fine. If that's the case, presumably they can just pay the fine and not have to appear in court, unless they plan on challenging the ticket.
Assuming it is just a ticket, and since they do acknowledge their guilt, I'd say just pay it and move on with their lives.

I would think it would be mandatory to go to court if there is possible suspension involved in the punishment.

[iYearn]

Here is a suggestion that I know has worked for one family member and a couple of friends who had court appearances.

Most court houses will have a time when you can go before the crown prosecutor. Some court houses allow that for only a few hours one day a week.

That is why you would have to call.

And check if the crown prosecutor would deal with this charge. Some charges HAVE to go in front of a judge.

I suggest these two young ladies do that and based on other comments in this thread they should both bring along their fishing licenses.

This would allow them to see what they are up against as charge.

And they should be prepared to plead their case right there to the crown.

My hope in this is that the crown would issue them each a small fine (assuming first offence).

I would also suggest the young ladies say they want to continue to fish (hence getting the license) so that will deter the crown from banning them for any length of time.

Anyone I know who has taken this approach with the crown...which have been mainly for traffic offences...has had both fines and demerits reduced.

My comment here does not indicate I agree with this system, but it does reduce the docket load for the courts.

[Brandonkop]

So I just read about two guys fishing in Manitoba, the extent of the fines were $14,000.

It was all broken down for all their offenses. I was surprised one of the biggest charges was obstructing the Conservation officer.

What she committed is not just fishing without a license. She committed Fraud and mislead an officer, obstructing justice. Usually much bigger price tag attached to that.

Guess she never learned her lesson from the parents that it is always best to tell the truth. Hopefully she gets it this time around and doesn't face a significant fine.

Here is the Story:

Two Manitoba fishermen have been fined close to $15,000.

Local Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry crews have laid fines to two Winnipeg fishermen. The $14,900 of fines have been laid for fishing-related violations under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act.

A conservation officer conducting a fisheries inspection contacted the men at a cottage in Clearwater Bay, Lake of the Woods. In front of the cottage was evidence of recent fishing activity. During the inspection, the MNRF say that both men made multiple false and misleading statements to the officer.

A subsequent investigation by the conservation officer confirmed that both men had conducted illegal fishing activity, including angling for lake trout in a closed area and using restricted fishing gear.

Matthew Slough and Kieran McCormick were each fined:

· $3,500 for obstructing a conservation officer;

· $1,500 for making false and misleading statements to a conservation officer;

· $1,200 for fishing for lake trout during a closed season;

· $500 for unlawfully using fish as bait; and

· $500 for fishing with barbed hooks in a restricted area.

Slough was also fined $500 for fishing without a license. Both men are suspended from fishing in Ontario for two years and their fishing equipment was forfeited to the Crown.

Justice of the Peace Robert McNally heard the case in the Ontario Court of Justice, Kenora, on August 28, 2017.

[Jayhad]

She wasn't brought up knowing this is wrong?
What type of person is this "young lady"?
This is probably inductive of her attitude toward OUR resources, she is stealing from all of us legal anglers in Ab.

I hope she is hit with the maximum as she tried to perpetrate fraud after she already knowingly violated fishing regulations, this isn't a simple "no license" mistake.

[JDK71]

She wasn't brought up knowing this is wrong?
What type of person is this "young lady"?
This is probably inductive of her attitude toward OUR resources, she is stealing from all of us legal anglers in Ab.

I hope she is hit with the maximum as she tried to perpetrate fraud after she already knowingly violated fishing regulations, this isn't a simple "no license" mistake.

nice work no brakes for her she lied she new better

[hayseed]

and in the same breath, many would say far too many do not care about laws, morals, about important things. What is there to argue? She has no valid defense, she knowingly broke the law and has to pay. What are you going to teach her, how to try to get out of punishment for doing illegal things, no matter if you or she agree with the law? Falsifying ID is a very stupid thing to do, no offense meant to the OP, please do not take it that way, OP.
Your teaching is flawed.
Plus you have absolutely nothing to gain or lose in offering to plea a case, unless you are a Lawy student and are looking for pro-bono work experience.
Why not put the young impressionable person on the right path instead of trying to get her off?

^^^^
Agreed. We do have laws in place for a reason. Buying a license to me means ok, ya got me.
But we are all good now right??

And remember, the Officer will be there,well most likely, and he will push for a conviction.
They want convictions.
Call it a lesson learned, step up to to the plate. My two cents.

[Nederlager]

and in the same breath, many would say far too many do not care about laws, morals, about important things. What is there to argue? She has no valid defense, she knowingly broke the law and has to pay. What are you going to teach her, how to try to get out of punishment for doing illegal things, no matter if you or she agree with the law? Falsifying ID is a very stupid thing to do, no offense meant to the OP, please do not take it that way, OP.
Your teaching is flawed.
Plus you have absolutely nothing to gain or lose in offering to plea a case, unless you are a Lawy student and are looking for pro-bono work experience.
Why not put the young impressionable person on the right path instead of trying to get her off?

I'd limit what you had to say but I don't have the time to give to you.
Yes, I'd love to represent this young girl.

xoxo

[Ken07AOVette]

I'd limit what you had to say but I don't have the time to give to you.
Yes, I'd love to represent this young girl.

xoxo

Time to reel up and check your bait.
You aren't catching anyone anymore.
Maybe try knitting.

[Isopod]

I hope the OP comes back and posts what the eventual penalty was. Doesn't seem like an overly seriously violation IMO, so I would expect a fine of maybe a couple hundred bucks, and perhaps suspension of fishing rights for a year or so.

[Talking moose]

Guessing the fishing without a licence part will yield a small fine and no suspension.
The misinformation part could get her in some hot water.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Talking moose]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170921/0547844342199eb42043b4fe13fb2ef8.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Freedom55]

I'm betting that if we were discussing a foreigner or an person with swarthy skin then the tone would be completely different and there would be no forgiveness. Young women never appear on that radar screen.

[58thecat]

I'd limit what you had to say but I don't have the time to give to you.
Yes, I'd love to represent this young girl.

xoxo

Misrepresent...fixed it for you...:sign0176:

She is better to sit, shut up, and don't play stupid...there is a song for this one..I fought the law and the law won...maybe she will just pay a fine and move on...attempt to make a mockery of this and might get the book thrown at ya!

[waterninja]

I hope she simply gets a fine and gets to move on with her life. Fishing without a license doesn't even rank up there with a rolling stop at a stop sign, running a yellow light, or a minor speeding ticket in my opinion. Who among us has never commited a minor vehicle infraction? I mean really, kids don't need a license and neither do seniors and thousands of other people. I don't think we can blame the decline/collapse of fishing in AB on this young lady.
As for the charge of misleading or obstructing a conservation officer, it sounds more like an act of desperation by a silly panicking kid then the deliberate lies of a hardened criminal.
Peace officers are experts at asking questions that can confuse and trip up someone they are questioning. They are also experts at telling when someone is lying. It's a pity the young lady didn't simply get her no licence for fishing ticket, rather then dragging her friend into it and allowing the CO to have a smorgasboard of ticketing options. A person should always try to be co-operative and answer a CO's questions, but even though you are not under oath, if you simply give an incorrect answer or statement to a CO then they can now slam you with a ticket or court apperance.
I too would like to know how this all plays out in the end. I would be very surprised if it dosen't end up with a fine for both ladies and a perhaps a one year fishing ban. I'm hoping OP lets us know how it turns out.
I don't agree at all with some of you who would like to see the book thrown at her, for a minor offence and some silly story. I'm betting she has learned her lesson. Criminal Record? Jail Time? Really?

[Willowayin]

So many in today's society have twisted ideas of important things. I'd be happy to come and argue the case for her in front of the judge and tell him that society is over-regulated about nonsensical things. A fishing license for a young girl who is visiting. For sure, give her the electric chair! :fighting0074:

Also from Cochrane fishing headline.

Regulations are for morons.
Use the maggots. You will never be caught.

Birds of a feather stick together. Nederlager... regulations aren't your cup of tea, they are not meant for you or whomever thinks that society is over-regulated about nonsensical things. Hope one day you will have your day in court and you can argue your case all you want. Maybe another lesson to learn.:argue2:

[GoneFishingEDM]

Just a bit more information for everyone. The young lady who used another person's license is only 19. She panicked when she saw the F & W officer. Her friend who has a valid license wasn't fishing at the time and foolishly thought since she wasn't fishing her friend could use her license. The assumption being that a valid license for the person fishing. Definitely a bad choice, but it was not made with any intent to obstruct.

I will most definitely follow up on this thread with the penalties received. They are both owning up to their mistake and the level of stupidity involved. But I really don't think either of them deserves to have the book thrown at them. Fines, and suspension for sure, but ultimately the intent was not to obstruct, simply one friend not fully understanding the license not applying to a person fishing but applies to the person who purchased it. (Again their fault for not fully understanding it).

[Sooner]

She should explain to the judge that she purchased her licence after the fact to show she wants her $$ to go to conservation for her opps and fully expects her new licence to be suspended.

I would then bet that by showing great remorse, the judge will send her on her way with a talking too and a good fine for trying to pull a fast one.

I have seen F&W check everyone fishing at a popular river and when they caught a pretty young thing fishing without a licence, she played sad, batted her baby blues and said I'm sorry and got a warning and nothing else. The girl in question should have done the same. Sorry officer, I made a mistake and it would probably never had got this far.


From the sounds of the OP, I think she has already got the point of what she did wrong. She should pay some fine but I hope she don't get hit too hard for the mistake.

[Ken07AOVette]

She should explain to the judge that she purchased her licence after the fact to show she wants her $$ to go to conservation for her opps and fully expects her new licence to be suspended.

I would then bet that by showing great remorse, the judge will send her on her way with a talking too and a good fine for trying to pull a fast one.

I have seen F&W check everyone fishing at a popular river and when they caught a pretty young thing fishing without a licence, she played sad, batted her baby blues and said I'm sorry and got a warning and nothing else. The girl in question should have done the same. Sorry officer, I made a mistake and it would probably never had got this far.


From the sounds of the OP, I think she has already got the point of what she did wrong. She should pay some fine but I hope she don't get hit too hard for the mistake.

Good points. Everyone makes mistakes. Heat of the moment that sort of thing. Other than buying a license after the fact I agree.

[does it ALL outdoors]

I'm betting that if we were discussing a foreigner or an person with swarthy skin then the tone would be completely different and there would be no forgiveness. Young women never appear on that radar screen.

Not much sympathy here on this forum for this young lady either. Her skin colour has not been disclosed, and is completely irrelevant

[pikeman06]

Nope. No sympathy. I got nailed when I was young fishing inside the boundary of a fish way and got my ass handed to me. That was over thirty years ago and still lost my gear and a fine and suspension. Very humbled that day dragging my parents and my cousins parents into court and the judge tore us a new you know what and I never messed with law since then. I had my license on me that day. Lesson learned. Smarten up.

[Isopod]

Just a bit more information for everyone. The young lady who used another person's license is only 19. She panicked when she saw the F & W officer. Her friend who has a valid license wasn't fishing at the time and foolishly thought since she wasn't fishing her friend could use her license.
OK... so 19 years old??? Given that info, I don't see this going anywhere beyond a small fine, assuming it is their first violation. If I were the judge I probably wouldn't even give them a fine, just a stern warning. I know you are an adult at age 18 and are supposed to take full responsibility for everything at that age, but c'mon, the judge is probably 60 years old and he/she knows a 19 year-old doesn't see the world in the same way as older adults. This is going to end in a minor fine and a lesson learned.

[CMichaud]

I don't think she should go to jail, be flogged etc. I have thought that some of the responses on this thread thus far have been pretty harsh....however re:

She panicked when she saw the F & W officer. Her friend who has a valid license wasn't fishing at the time and foolishly thought since she wasn't fishing her friend could use her license. The assumption being that a valid license for the person fishing. Definitely a bad choice, but it was not made with any intent to obstruct.

This does not make sense.

Why would she panic if she thought she was allowed to use another person's license and that she was doing nothing wrong?

This is akin to assuming that you can use your friend's driver license if they are not driving the car?

This sounds to me like they have tried to come up with a defence strategy post transgression. If she is 19, she is not stupid and likely quite smart.

Does she even have a WIN card?

[GoneFishingEDM]

I don't think she should go to jail, be flogged etc. I have thought that some of the responses on this thread thus far have been pretty harsh....however re:

She panicked when she saw the F & W officer. Her friend who has a valid license wasn't fishing at the time and foolishly thought since she wasn't fishing her friend could use her license. The assumption being that a valid license for the person fishing. Definitely a bad choice, but it was not made with any intent to obstruct.

This does not make sense.

Why would she panic if she thought she was allowed to use another person's license and that she was doing nothing wrong?

This is akin to assuming that you can use your friend's driver license if they are not driving the car?

This sounds to me like they have tried to come up with a defence strategy post transgression. If she is 19, she is not stupid and likely quite smart.

Does she even have a WIN card?

Just to clear up. the one without a license panicked, the one with the license assumed since she was not fishing the person fishing would be covered. I agree, not thinking clearly.

I explained to her already that had she just told them she didn't have a license it would have been a $57 fine on the spot and her day would have been done.

They both agree it was a stupid choice to be made and they are prepared for whatever the penalty handed out will be. The officer told them it was a criminal charge, which freaked them right out of course. I couldn't find anything stating it was a criminal charge based on the order to appear they were given.

[CMichaud]

Any follow-up on this? What was the outcome?

[GoneFishingEDM]

Any follow-up on this? What was the outcome?

Their court date isn't until Nov 20, 2017. So I will follow up with the results then.

[Xbolt7mm]

Same thing should happen to her as the two metis that were charged for netting without a licence, throw the book at all three of them. What she did was worse than the metis, at least they didn't use another licence from another person.

[Okotokian]

Just to clear up. the one without a license panicked, the one with the license assumed since she was not fishing the person fishing would be covered. I agree, not thinking clearly.



Now I'll tell you what probably DOES happen a thousand times a year.... when the F&W boat is spotted the one with the license just takes the rod... Your dummies got confused and got it backwards.

[Brian Adams]

when the F&W boat is spotted the one with the license just takes the rod

And then has 2 rods.

[CMichaud]

Same thing should happen to her as the two metis that were charged for netting without a licence, throw the book at all three of them. What she did was worse than the metis, at least they didn't use another licence from another person.

I must be missing something. What happened to the metis guys?

Do you have a link or is this an attempt at sarcasm?

[Ken07AOVette]

Now I'll tell you what probably DOES happen a thousand times a year.... when the F&W boat is spotted the one with the license just takes the rod... Your dummies got confused and got it backwards.

They watch with binoculars from an elevated or hidden position or from a distance far enough away so as not to be seen by idiots breaking the law. They are not stupid.

You can throw the rods overboard, they still only have to attest in court that they serveilled the 'alleged perpetrators' committing the illegal act for it to be admissible in court. Or they use a camera or cell phone for proof.

And you are right about dummies. Licenses are cheap and easy to acquire.

[Okotokian]

And then has 2 rods.

If the other person handed the OP's daughter-in-law his/her license, I would assume the license holder wasn't fishing.

[Brian Adams]

If the other person handed the OP's daughter-in-law his/her license, I would assume the license holder wasn't fishing.

You were not talking about the OP.
You were talking about something
else that happens a thousand times
a year.

[Isopod]

I must be missing something. What happened to the metis guys?

Do you have a link or is this an attempt at sarcasm?

I'm not the OP, but I assumed it was sarcasm and that they were referring to this story:

https://globalnews.ca/news/3750312/province-apologizes-for-fish-seizure-at-metis-camp-near-conklin/

[GoneFishingEDM]

So the outcome of all this was a simple fine of $115.00. .

[Albertadiver]

So the outcome of all this was a simple fine of $115.00. .

Bet there was some relief there!

[58thecat]

So the outcome of all this was a simple fine of $115.00. .

And a life lessen.