Question on Quality Trout Fishery

[lippy]

I regularly fish in Reesor Lake, Michel and Bullshead - sometimes I like to visit all 3 lakes the same day. Last spring I started at Michel Lake and had caught 3 trout, which were destined for the smoker, and I had put them on ice in the cooler. Before leaving the lake I was checked by the CO out of Cypress Hills Provincial Park. Our conversation led to me stating that I was going to stop off at Bullshead on the way back to the HAT to try my luck. I was told by this officer that I could not do that as I had fish in my cooler from Michel and it would appear that I had taken them from Bullshead - which has a size retention limit of one fish over 50 cm. My question is Can a person retain fish from a lake where the legal limit is 5 ( I had 3 ) and still go to a lake with a 1 fish over 50 cm limit without repercussions - for lack of a better word. I was told - NOT. How can one get around this..The CO told me I had no proof of where I had caught the 3 trout I retained..therefore I could not stop at Bullshead to fish. Any ideas...

[Gust]

Originally Posted by lippy

I regularly fish in Reesor Lake, Michel and Bullshead - sometimes I like to visit all 3 lakes the same day. Last spring I started at Michel Lake and had caught 3 trout, which were destined for the smoker, and I had put them on ice in the cooler. Before leaving the lake I was checked by the CO out of Cypress Hills Provincial Park. Our conversation led to me stating that I was going to stop off at Bullshead on the way back to the HAT to try my luck. I was told by this officer that I could not do that as I had fish in my cooler from Michel and it would appear that I had taken them from Bullshead - which has a size retention limit of one fish over 50 cm. My question is Can a person retain fish from a lake where the legal limit is 5 ( I had 3 ) and still go to a lake with a 1 fish over 50 cm limit without repercussions - for lack of a better word. I was told - NOT. How can one get around this..The CO told me I had no proof of where I had caught the 3 trout I retained..therefore I could not stop at Bullshead to fish. Any ideas...

You could of asked for a written statement from him or something to the effect being that he was a certified witness.

[fishinggeek]

Very simple answer to your problem. Start out at bullshead where the limit is only one over 50cm, then proced to the other lakes where your limit is more than one. you should have no problems jumping from lake to lake, just as long as your catch is less than what is stated on the regs at which lake you are present at.

[Bigtoad]

What about taking a digital pic of you at Michel with those 3 fish. Make sure the markings on the fish are very visible so there is no doubt those are the same fish. Also make sure the pic(s) clearly show that you are indeed at Michel and not somewhere else.

I don't know for certain but I'm guessing they would have a hard time disputing clear pictures that show those fish were at Michel. Just my $0.02.

Cheers.

[TyreeUM]

just leave the fish in the cooler in your vehicle, you can't get into trouble unless you are actually caught keeping fish FROM the lake with special regs...your not breaking any laws, so there is no need to worry about getting in trouble for anything. Most CO's aren't out to "get you", if you obey the laws you are their friend....

[Ray]

Originally Posted by TyreeUM

just leave the fish in the cooler in your vehicle, you can't get into trouble unless you are actually caught keeping fish FROM the lake with special regs...your not breaking any laws, so there is no need to worry about getting in trouble for anything. Most CO's aren't out to "get you", if you obey the laws you are their friend....

Exactly. You cannot be charged(actually you might be charged, but conviction would be very unlikely) if you have not been observed commiting an offense or confessing to an offense.

[walking buffalo]

Wow... lots of attempts to find loopholes in the regs.

The regs are very clear on this. The CO in the op is correct.

Catch Limits

3. When you are fishing at any lake or stream, you may not have in your
possession more fish than the limit, or fish other than those of legal
size, listed for the lake or stream being fished.

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Wow... lots of attempts to find loopholes in the regs.

The regs are very clear on this. The CO in the op is correct.

the problem there is that a fish in your freezer would be in your posession. if it came from reesor and your are standing at bullshead, then by the definition of the regs.....yer in violation.

geek makes the most sense by planning bullshead as your first stop, but soemtimes plans change. toad is thinking along the right lines. the regs are there to keep things right, not to make life difficult on people. i would have to believe that a picture of your fish at michelle with, say, your phone beside showing date and time would suffice. the law might be worded to say nay nay, but i have serious doubts as to anyone giving you grief about it.....kinda like taking your kid out hunting. by the wording in the regs your kid is a criminal, but it is not pushed.

now something that i find even more bizarre is that bullshead has a gas outboard prohibition, yet you see them there all the time. people use electrics to get around, but that gas engine has just as much potential to drip oil and gas into the water not running as it does running. they allow that, and to me at least its more questionable than catching a fish at another lake.

i guess the way to find out is to give roger benoit a call at the parkie office in elkwater. he is the most likely guy you will run into.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

the problem there is that a fish in your freezer would be in your posession. if it came from reesor and your are standing at bullshead, then by the definition of the regs.....yer in violation.

geek makes the most sense by planning bullshead as your first stop, but soemtimes plans change. toad is thinking along the right lines. the regs are there to keep things right, not to make life difficult on people. i would have to believe that a picture of your fish at michelle with, say, your phone beside showing date and time would suffice. the law might be worded to say nay nay, but i have serious doubts as to anyone giving you grief about it.....

I doubt a photo would hold water. You can take any photo of any fish and it does not show where you caught it...only you took a photo of it there.

Why worry about fighting a ticket or making it harder for F&W to protect our waters. Geek makes the most sense...as you stated...start there and move on. If you have a pile of fish from other lakes to make a good meal...why worry about killing a full limit or another for the freezer at Bullshead and risk a ticket or worse?

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

the problem there is that a fish in your freezer would be in your posession. if it came from reesor and your are standing at bullshead, then by the definition of the regs.....yer in violation.

Yes, fish at home count towards your possession limit. If you have five trout at home, you can not legally keep any more trout from any water body.

A question.. If you have two trout at home, Could you be convicted for being over your possession limit by keeping another fish while at a two trout limit water body? This was discussed recently in some Cold Lake threads.

As always, some of our regs need clarification and a KISS (Keep it simple stupid).

Provincewide maximum possession – All fish kept from any lake
or stream, from any Watershed Unit, count as part of the provincewide
maximum possession that must not be exceeded. The maximum number
of fish you may have, including fish at your home and fish caught
under a special harvest licence, for each game fish species or group of
species is listed below:
 Trout and Arctic Grayling – 5 in total,

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

I doubt a photo would hold water. You can take any photo of any fish and it does not show where you caught it...only you took a photo of it there.

Why worry about fighting a ticket or making it harder for F&W to protect our waters. Geek makes the most sense...as you stated...start there and move on. If you have a pile of fish from other lakes to make a good meal...why worry about killing a full limit or another for the freezer at Bullshead and risk a ticket or worse?

i think video would be even better. of course the best solution would be to never kill a fish and release them all.

yes im kidding....i dont kill fish, but have no resentment to those who like to eat the odd one.

the way i see it, he wouldnt be breaking any laws regarding conservation type stuff. the law he would be violating is standing in the wrong place after doing something legal. the law is there to protect the fishery and im sure there is a jackarse or 2 out there who would love to find a way to cheat.....but this seems just silly. i could cite 100 other similar examples of technical silliness. of course you are correct that there is the potential to get into some poop and it would be more hassle than its worth. i just hate stoopidity, and to me this kinda thing is just irritating. like i said....its very much like taking your kid out hunting. technically by definition he would be hunting too.

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Yes, fish at home count towards your possession limit. If you have five trout at home, you can not legally keep any more trout from any water body.

A question.. If you have two trout at home, Could you be convicted for being over your possession limit by keeping another fish while at a two trout limit water body? This was discussed recently in some Cold Lake threads.

As always, some of our regs need clarification and a KISS (Keep it simple stupid).

thats the stoooopidity im talking about buff. COULD you be charged? i dunno.....i have seen stranger things. i guess its a good argument to become a C&R guy only.

[walking buffalo]

^^^^
I agree....

its very much like taking your kid out hunting. technically by definition he would be hunting too.

And a good reason to have your kid carry a camera.

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

thats the stoooopidity im talking about buff. COULD you be charged? i dunno.....i have seen stranger things. i guess its a good argument to become a C&R guy only.

I didn't ask about being "charged", of course a person could be charged.

I asked about being "Convicted".

It's too bad some of our hunting and fishing regulations are written in such a way that they require Judicial decisions for clarification.

[bloopbloob]

I think with newer phones, a picture would be more than enough if the fish is identifiable. My iphone4 stores date/time/GPS coordinates on all pictures i take.

[Speckle55]

Originally Posted by fishinggeek

Very simple answer to your problem. Start out at bullshead where the limit is only one over 50cm, then proced to the other lakes where your limit is more than one. you should have no problems jumping from lake to lake, just as long as your catch is less than what is stated on the regs at which lake you are present at.

Agree or drive home and drop off the three and then come out to Bullshead.. just make sure you are 4(with the 3) or under,, trout at home and you will be ok..even leave your cooler in town with your win number and licence number and cell number or at a garage.. then pick up when heading home..don,t forget to tip the attendant $5.. then when at Bullshead you would only have the one fish and when you had left to go home you would still be under your day limit when you picked up your 3 fish..just make sure you don,t have any fish at Bullshead in your possession,until you leave with your one,, vehicle included..

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bloopbloob

I think with newer phones, a picture would be more than enough if the fish is identifiable. My iphone4 stores date/time/GPS coordinates on all pictures i take.

You would still be breaking the Catch Limit law.

Catch Limits

3. When you are fishing at any lake or stream, you may not have in your
possession more fish than the limit, or fish other than those of legal
size, listed for the lake or stream being fished.

[TyreeUM]

3. When you are fishing at any lake or stream, you may not have in your
possession more fish than the limit, or fish other than those of legal
size, listed for the lake or stream being fished.

I believe the most accepted interpretation of this law by anyone qualified to convict you of a fish and wildlife offence would be that no actual law was broken. Possession is clearly defined as a fish kept that has not yet been consumed, therefore according to your interpretation there would be a direct contradiction in multiple circumstances. For instance, you would never be allowed to fish any lake that had a 0 limit on walleye, if you had a legal possession from a different waterbody cleaned at home. No matter what it "appears" if you were stopped at bullshead with fish from another location, there would be no legal basis to convict you of any offence unless the issuing officer witnessed you catch and keep a fish that would break the regulation. Would it be a hassle dealing with this situation if it ever did come up? For sure! But if the original question was regarding the actual "law", than no, you can't be convicted of breaking a fisheries regulation without definitive proof you have done so.

[michaelmicallef]

Had you gone fishing at Bullshead and gotten checked you would have been in for major hassles for sure. But they would have had to witnessed you keeping fish at Bullshead.

[GaryF]

So I go to bullshead, pull out 4 16" trout, CO's pull up and I tell them I was somewhere else when I caught those and they let me go? Uhm, no. They will take the fish and write you up. They don't have to see you pull em out, you just have to have them on you in the wrong place. Try if you like, just don't be suprised with what happens.

[Photoplex]

Originally Posted by bloopbloob

I think with newer phones, a picture would be more than enough if the fish is identifiable. My iphone4 stores date/time/GPS coordinates on all pictures i take.

Doesn't mean a thing - they are all very easily faked. I could, in a heartbeat, doctor one of your phone photos to say you to were at the north pole when you took it

[TyreeUM]

Originally Posted by GaryF

So I go to bullshead, pull out 4 16" trout, CO's pull up and I tell them I was somewhere else when I caught those and they let me go? Uhm, no. They will take the fish and write you up. They don't have to see you pull em out, you just have to have them on you in the wrong place. Try if you like, just don't be suprised with what happens.

Well since you pulled them out of bullshead, then yeah you would get in trouble. The question isn't if you can get away with lying about where you caught fish. You might get cited, but wrongfully so - which is why it would not hold up if you appealed it. This is absurd...if you had barbed hooks in your tackle box, and a CO saw the hooks, would he say "Sir this is a barbless lake, but I see you have barbed hooks in your tackle box. I didn't see you use them but I sure bet you did, and now I am going to cite you." I am not an idiot, I see how there might be a dilemma...but you are not breaking any rules.

[tacklerunner]

Originally Posted by lippy

I regularly fish in Reesor Lake, Michel and Bullshead - sometimes I like to visit all 3 lakes the same day. Last spring I started at Michel Lake and had caught 3 trout, which were destined for the smoker, and I had put them on ice in the cooler. Before leaving the lake I was checked by the CO out of Cypress Hills Provincial Park. Our conversation led to me stating that I was going to stop off at Bullshead on the way back to the HAT to try my luck. I was told by this officer that I could not do that as I had fish in my cooler from Michel and it would appear that I had taken them from Bullshead - which has a size retention limit of one fish over 50 cm. My question is Can a person retain fish from a lake where the legal limit is 5 ( I had 3 ) and still go to a lake with a 1 fish over 50 cm limit without repercussions - for lack of a better word. I was told - NOT. How can one get around this..The CO told me I had no proof of where I had caught the 3 trout I retained..therefore I could not stop at Bullshead to fish. Any ideas...

I've seen this discussion before. There is nothing in writing that clarifies things and therefore, there is no right answer.

It is F&W discretion as to whether they believe your legitimite (in this case) story. They may, they may not but I have to believe that if you are honest with them it is human nature for them to believe you. I think not mentioning you left them in the truck and getting checked and getting busted even if they are legal is just asking for trouble.

Debate all you'd like but there is no black and white answer and it depends on the circumstance, your attitude and the CO checking you. In this case the CO said NO. Next time it could be different.

[GaryF]

But no one saw me pull them out of bullshead, I just say that I fished somewhere else. The CO's will always look at the fish you have and if they are not legal for the body of water you are at they will take them and write you up, no matter how sincere you are. Poachers would love it if all they had to do was say I was somewhere else at the time.

Oh, and just to clarify, no I don't poach and have RAP on speed dial.

[lippy]

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

the problem there is that a fish in your freezer would be in your posession. if it came from reesor and your are standing at bullshead, then by the definition of the regs.....yer in violation.

geek makes the most sense by planning bullshead as your first stop, but soemtimes plans change. toad is thinking along the right lines. the regs are there to keep things right, not to make life difficult on people. i would have to believe that a picture of your fish at michelle with, say, your phone beside showing date and time would suffice. the law might be worded to say nay nay, but i have serious doubts as to anyone giving you grief about it.....kinda like taking your kid out hunting. by the wording in the regs your kid is a criminal, but it is not pushed.

now something that i find even more bizarre is that bullshead has a gas outboard prohibition, yet you see them there all the time. people use electrics to get around, but that gas engine has just as much potential to drip oil and gas into the water not running as it does running. they allow that, and to me at least its more questionable than catching a fish at another lake.

i guess the way to find out is to give roger benoit a call at the parkie office in elkwater. he is the most likely guy you will run into.

I certainly didn't expect all these responses. Actually it was roger benoit who checked me out at Michel and who suggested it was not a good idea for me to stop at Bullshead as I had no proof of where I had caught the fish. He told me that he would believe me as he had seen me at Michel but the next officer may not. I think I will take the advice of some and fish at Bullshead first...although when the fish are on there I find it hard to leave!!

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by lippy

...although when the fish are on there I find it hard to leave!!

are they ever not? i find them big buggers to be exceptionally cooperative. say hi to me when youre out there. i have the most femmy baby blue boat youve ever seen.....it matches robins kia!