Discounted C&R fishing license...

LongDraw · #1 04-14-2009, 09:37 PM

What do you think of a C&R fishing license that gives a small discount of $5?

With the trend towards user pay for government services this makes sense to me, not trying to discriminate in any way to those who bonk the odd fish.

It would also give SRD more of an idea of how many out there practice C&R with the hopes it would create more C&R fisheries.

Fire away!

#2 04-14-2009, 09:45 PM

I'd say the licence is affordable enough, catch and release still puts pressure on the resource and i don't think a slightly cheaper permit would benefit our fisheries.
Rather than a catch and release licence i'd like to see non-resident licence prices increase and a senior licence created. I'd say $26 or so for the resident (current), $50 for a non resident and $15 for seniors. I think this would make it easier to know the actual number of fisherman out there and would increase revenue a bit. Currently i don't support an increase across the board unless the money starts going back to SRD instead of the ACA.

jts1 · #3 04-14-2009, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrs

I'd say the licence is affordable enough, catch and release still puts pressure on the resource and i don't think a slightly cheaper permit would benefit our fisheries.
Rather than a catch and release licence i'd like to see non-resident licence prices increase and a senior licence created. I'd say $26 or so for the resident (current), $50 for a non resident and $15 for seniors. I think this would make it easier to know the actual number of fisherman out there and would increase revenue a bit. Currently i don't support an increase across the board unless the money starts going back to SRD instead of the ACA.

I have had many a conversation about this topic. I think a C&R license should stay the same price it is now maybe with a 1 or 2 fish limit per day. If you wish to keep fish your license should cost you more I believe there is enough "real" fishermen out there that would pay more for there license. I myself would have no problem paying up words of $100 for a year of fishing. But I do a lot of fishing mind you so it would be worth that. Seniors have put there time in and should be allowed to fish for free. The only problem is enforcing the rules that we have now let along new ones. There is not enough wardens out there and way to much area to cover. It is up to the responsible fishermen to start protecting the sport that we all love. I mean honestly how many times have you been check while out on the water. I know of some that have not been asked for a license in many a year. Education with the next generation is key to having a sustainable fishery I guess I had best shut up before I get way to far of topic

gpguy7 · #4 04-14-2009, 10:22 PM

I have to disagree with the idea. I support C&R but there are certain reasons why. In some areas I simply can't keep fish, while others I don't want to eat fish. And then I'll head out for a day of perch fishing and want to keep some. So depending on the lake I fish I don't want to keep them always. So if someone was to buy one of these licenses for C&R, because they dont usually keep them, then they decide later in the year they are going on a trip where there is better fish to eat, they would be forced to spring for a second alberta license?

It's an easy idea in its essence. But in the event that a fish doesnt make it back into the water because of injury or whatever reason for its death, the C&R fisher is going to be dinged with a fine because they don't have the proper license, while others would get away with it. There's just too many logistics to it. The current license system works just fine for me. however what i would like to see if the ability to purchase joint licenses...ie.. instead of paying full price for the parks/alberta licenses, give the customer a deal and allow them to purchase them together. same thing goes for alberta/saskatchewan. Instead of charging 85.00 roughly for both charge them 60.00 if they purchase them together.

thumper · #5 04-14-2009, 11:34 PM

The last time I fished in Ontario they had a two-tiered fishing license, with a discounted license fee for keeping only a couple of fish, or the full fee valid for keeping the full daily limit.
I don't know if they still have that - but it seemed to work there.

Fishin' Fool · #6 04-15-2009, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thumper

The last time I fished in Ontario they had a two-tiered fishing license, with a discounted license fee for keeping only a couple of fish, or the full fee valid for keeping the full daily limit.
I don't know if they still have that - but it seemed to work there.

Manitoba has the same thing. They call it the conservation license. If I remember, it's a little over 1/2 of a normal license, and your limits are quite low.

In a lake with a 10 whitefish limit, you could keep three, for example. I thought it was great, you could save a few bucks and still have the odd meal of fish.

FF

hit_theice · #7 04-15-2009, 01:50 AM

I fished ontario this august and they have a conservation license as well. it is about half the price i think and you are allowed to keep half the amount of a full license. we already have discounted licenses on some lakes for catch and release. if u want to catch and release on pigeon your reg license will do but if u want to keep walleye it costs $8 more for a tag/draw. I am not a fan of this system but the gov't does what they want when they really don't have a clue how to run fisheries in alberta. as for a senior's license i don't think you should need to pay for one. but they should need to get a free license which ensures they get a copy of the regs at least.

as for the enforcement of the regs. the fines should be much stiffer. make the guys want to catch people. i was once told that they wouldn't send anyone cause they couldn't afford the gas. Well if you fine someone $1000 for every illegal fish they have kept then they could pay for gas and use the fines to increase stocking and enforcement and people wouldn't risk it if it cost that much. but if u are going to get fined say $50 for fishing with a barbed hook then who cares. cause that is if u get caught and like u mentioned when was the last time you were checked? i would rather pay $50 IF i get caught then risk losing the fish of a lifetime cause some j@ck@zz with no fisheries background decided that it is a good idea. now if the fine was $100 or more and i actually thought i was going to get checked more then once every 2 or 3 years then i would pinch the barb for sure.

there should be some incentive program for people fishing. like at canadian tire if you buy one of their "blue" products or whatever they call it. then they will plant a tree. something like if u bring in your old fishing line for recycling they will by a fingerling for stocking. or if u want a catch and release license it says so on your win card but if u want to keep fish a portion of your license goes to stocking to pay for what you are taking out. also agree that non-albertan residents should pay more then alberta residents because if we go to any other western provinces we have to pay more to fish then their residents. and again they could use that money for more stocking and enforcement. another thing is they are basically throwing away our money by stocking lakes that winterkill frequently if they aren't going to aerate the lake then don't stock it. it is basically a waste of money it is bad enough that the fish (trout) don't reproduce naturally. think of how much money they would save if they put a spawning channel in carson lake for example. also i was wondering what everyone thinks about the new rule that you can't keep other gamefish from trout ponds, only trout?

enough for my rant. tight lines

driverlong · #8 04-15-2009, 07:19 AM

If you wish to keep fish your license should cost you more I believe there is enough "real" fishermen out there that would pay more for there license. I myself would have no problem paying up words of $100 for a year of fishing. But I do a lot of fishing mind you so it would be worth that.
I myself would have no problem either with paying 100 bucks for a year either....but I pay for my three teens, and my wife. The four of them combined, maybe fish 10 times a year.
That would be 500 bucks. That kinda of money to take the family out would either discourage family outings or increase the number of "non" licensed fishermen.
It still has to be affordable for those who only want to go a few times a year.

BUD · #9 04-15-2009, 07:49 AM

What we need is a HOOK AND COOK license , so we can have a fish fry at the lake again.

McLeod · #10 04-15-2009, 08:01 AM

I am sure many who practice catch and release kill just as many fish as some of the bonkers because they don't how to properly handle and release a fish. Yes they threw it back in the water and it swims away only to die hours later. Instead of discounting the current license of those who want to C and R
reduce limits and add a harvest license for those who want to kill more fish.
Trout stock lakes for example would have a 2 fish per person limit and 5 per person if one has a special harvest license..Charge about 25 bucks a year for the harvest license. Now this is only an idea but really there are much bigger issues. The focus should be on making out fisheries better. How do we do that. Higher catch rates , more opportunites for trophy fisheries, more fishing diversity.These should be the priorites..but we are so slow in this province and getting anything done.

Okotokian · #11 04-15-2009, 09:20 AM

I love it. Let's all try really really hard to think of ways the government can regulate and tax us more than they already are.

Why are we trying to eliminate the long gun registry? What were we thinking? We should support it wholeheartedly and suggest a fee of $200 per gun.

duffy4 · #12 04-15-2009, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrs

I'd say the licence is affordable enough, catch and release still puts pressure on the resource and i don't think a slightly cheaper permit would benefit our fisheries.
Rather than a catch and release licence i'd like to see non-resident licence prices increase and a senior licence created. I'd say $26 or so for the resident (current), $50 for a non resident and $15 for seniors. I think this would make it easier to know the actual number of fisherman out there and would increase revenue a bit. Currently i don't support an increase across the board unless the money starts going back to SRD instead of the ACA.

I would like to see an increase if the $ went to "a true trust fund" for Fish & Wildlife to access for fisheries habitat and inhancement projects, Instead of to ACA.

Okotokian · #13 04-15-2009, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duffy4

I would like to see an increase if the $ went to "a true trust fund" for Fish & Wildlife to access for fisheries habitat and inhancement projects, Instead of to ACA.

Oh god, let's not start that one again. Head back to your favourite thread Duff

happy perch fisher · #14 04-15-2009, 03:57 PM

A catch and release lience would only affect maybe 5to10 percent of the province fisherman. The majority is just going to pay the extra fee. What i wish they would do is hunt down people that keep there limits everyday of the year and charge them a **** load more. I would say less then 20 percent of the people that fish keep more then 80 percent of the fish kept yearly. I'am not going say who they are. But i sure wish they would charge them hell of alot more.

gpguy7 · #15 04-15-2009, 04:54 PM

the half retention idea i kind of like, because its vary rare that I will keep my limit for a day. Usually I don't fish alone, so if I keep 2 of my 5, and my buddy keeps 2 of his, its a pretty good meal for us and a friend or girlfriend. As it sits now, as long as you have a license and keep your limit legally I really don't care if someone practises C&R or not. Stay within the rules and enjoy the fishing.