Sorry end to a great last day fishing

[wildwoods]

Also, regardless if HE saw it before filleting and deemed it legal, who is to say the OP doesn't get pulled over again by a different officer on the way to the gas station? How is the next officer supposed to know. Too much red tape to pack a note or place a call. That's why it's not good enough to have an officer on site declare it's legal. Tough luck man. I feel for you regardless.

[NEWB]

Originally Posted by wildwoods

Also, regardless if HE saw it before filleting and deemed it legal, who is to say the OP doesn't get pulled over again by a different officer on the way to the gas station? How is the next officer supposed to know. Too much red tape to pack a note or place a call. That's why it's not good enough to have an officer on site declare it's legal. Tough luck man. I feel for you regardless.

What if the OP never saw a CO on the way back to his house?

Don't play what "if's". Stay with the facts as have been disclosed to us by the OP. You can play out the "what if" situation for both sides of this ticket untill you turn blue in the face.. The facts are what will either withdraw or have the charge stick.

Right now, the facts are as presented by the OP that the CO deemed it legal when first inspected. Species and length were verified. The moment OP went into his vehicle that is when the CO decided to tag him with transporting fish illegally when the vehicle was not in motion and had never left the original position, the park nor entered onto a highway.

If the vehicle was in motion and the OP was pulled over outside the park then yes, his case is weak and should just pay the fine.

[pickrel pat]

Originally Posted by Double_A_Ron

The actual offense I was ticketed for was "Posses game fish other than at permanent residence so that species cannot be readily identified". It wasn't for transporting the fish,

Actually Newb.
After this I've changed my tune, he wasn't at a residence( home or camp stall).

[NEWB]

Originally Posted by pickrel pat

Actually Newb.
After this I've changed my tune, he wasn't at a residence( home or camp stall).

You are correct. He was at the Fillet Station where he was inspected and deemed to be legal. Had he transported the fish to a campsite he would have been ok.

The fact remains he did not transport the fish to neither the camp or his residence. He was not in the process of transportation if his vehicle was still parked and unmoved.

If he had left the park and was in the process of transporting.. then yes. He should pay. He was given a ticket for an offence he had not yet commited..

How can the officer not identify the gane fish if he just verified it and deemed it legal. This is what his charge is for.

The officer either verified it, or did not verify it. If he verified it and deemed it legal, then issued a ticket for not being able to verify it once the OP was in the truck, then the officer is lying. Either way, John Q. Law has lied.

[wildwoods]

Originally Posted by NEWB

You are correct. He was at the Fillet Station where he was inspected and deemed to be legal. Had he transported the fish to a campsite he would have been ok.

The fact remains he did not transport the fish to neither the camp or his residence. He was not in the process of transportation if his vehicle was still parked and unmoved.

If he had left the park and was in the process of transporting.. then yes. He should pay. He was given a ticket for an offence he had not yet commited..

How can the officer not identify the gane fish if he just verified it and deemed it legal. This is what his charge is for.

The officer either verified it, or did not verify it. If he verified it and deemed it legal, then issued a ticket for not being able to verify it once the OP was in the truck, then the officer is lying. Either way, John Q. Law has lied.

I see your point now.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by spinerfisher

Sucks for the ticket, but totally avoidable. Does anyone read regs????????? Its even on this site!! Look up on page 27 and if you did read them you would not be in this situation.

Cleaning and Transporting Fish
Fish caught in Alberta:
8 Fish cleaned for storage at other than your permanent residence, or
for transport to your permanent residence must not be skinned, cut or
packed in a manner that:
l the species cannot be identified,
l the number of fish cannot be determined, and
l the total length of every fish subject to a size limit cannot be determined.
8 2 pieces of fish of 1 species are considered to be 1 fish.
Tips:
l Carry a cooler and ice for storing whole fish for transport to your
permanent residence.
l Leave the head, tail and skin attached to fish subject to size limits for
accurate length measurements. Internal organs and gills can be removed
to preserve quality.
l Fish that are not subject to size limits may be filleted, but enough skin
must be left on each fillet for species identification purposes.
l Never transport fish in a solid frozen block.
REMEMBER: When cleaning fish away from your permanent
residence, DO NOT REMOVE evidence of species and, if size limits
apply, evidence of length as described above, unless the fish are to be
consumed immediately.

Did you even read the previous posts. Like a rod, go get bent!

[spinerfisher]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

Did you even read the previous posts. Like a rod, go get bent!

CO is doing his job, not his fault people cannot read and understand the regs, and just another one trying to fight what is written in the regs!........now move along and go fish your stocked ponds......

[H380]

Originally Posted by NEWB

Strange for sure...

If you can only clean a fish at your primary residence then why have a cleaning station?

There are regs which pertain to the transportation of game fish caught and cleaned. I believe you need a 1 inch x 1 inch patch of skin on the fillet to identify the species.

The officer can also look and measure the fillet to get a good idea about the fish length. If you are a hack at filleting.. You are better to do it at home.

This is a strange situation.

Exactly , why have a cleaning station .. officer is a loser . He knew the fish was legal , grasping at straws to get a chance to write somebody up .. I don't bash officers for no reason ,they have a tough job to do and for the most part do it well . However this guy went too far . As some one said , if he wanted to be picky he could have let the OP GO ROAST IT OVER A CAMPFIRE .. BUT NOPE ,STRAIGHT FOR THE TICKETBOOK .

[GillieSuit]

I agree the regulations are clear, but this whole situation feels like that CO was trying to trap this fellow into a ticket. Its a really ****ty situation and I think if I was in this gentleman's shoes. I would have my day in court and present my case. He felt like he had done everything correct because the CO was right there watching him clean and measure etc. Just a ****ty ****ty deal.

[RavYak]

Originally Posted by H380

Exactly , why have a cleaning station ..

On many lakes cleaning stations are relics of a time when you could clean your fish... Now they can only be used for fish with no size requirement.

[dmcbride]

Originally Posted by rugatika

Dick move by the CO. Fight the ticket.

X2 The Co. knew the fish was legal.

[Winch101]

Take it to court , dress poorly ,don't shave , appear somewhat retarded ,I
Mean dim witted .
Play the victim , speak sincerely to the magistrate , I've done it a couple
Of times on poaching charges .....walked .....play up the part about
The officer setting you up ...

Innocent until. Hung

[The Reel Deal]

Originally Posted by NEWB

You are correct. He was at the Fillet Station where he was inspected and deemed to be legal. Had he transported the fish to a campsite he would have been ok.

The fact remains he did not transport the fish to neither the camp or his residence. He was not in the process of transportation if his vehicle was still parked and unmoved.

If he had left the park and was in the process of transporting.. then yes. He should pay. He was given a ticket for an offence he had not yet commited..

How can the officer not identify the gane fish if he just verified it and deemed it legal. This is what his charge is for.

The officer either verified it, or did not verify it. If he verified it and deemed it legal, then issued a ticket for not being able to verify it once the OP was in the truck, then the officer is lying. Either way, John Q. Law has lied.

"Posses game fish other than at permanent residence so that species cannot be readily identified"

this still trumps whether or not the CO deemed the fish legal size. Even if he was camping there, and going to consume it in a few minutes - he can't remove the 1x1 patch until he gets to his camp or "temporary residence"

I'm not on anyone's side, but its in the regs - you can't "POSSESS" a fish you cant identify, thats what the ticket is for. Even if he is walking to a camp site, he needs to be able to identify the fish. Unless he had a frying pan heated beside the cleaning station, this is a shut case.

[Icatchfish]

You broke the law and got caught. Pay the fine and move on bra

[Graffy91]

This is why you keep skin to determine the species of the fish. Or transport whole.

[pickrel pat]

Originally Posted by NEWB

You are correct. He was at the Fillet Station where he was inspected and deemed to be legal. Had he transported the fish to a campsite he would have been ok.

The fact remains he did not transport the fish to neither the camp or his residence. He was not in the process of transportation if his vehicle was still parked and unmoved.

If he had left the park and was in the process of transporting.. then yes. He should pay. He was given a ticket for an offence he had not yet commited..

How can the officer not identify the gane fish if he just verified it and deemed it legal. This is what his charge is for.

The officer either verified it, or did not verify it. If he verified it and deemed it legal, then issued a ticket for not being able to verify it once the OP was in the truck, then the officer is lying. Either way, John Q. Law has lied.

Not sure why you keep Bolding the word transport. Ticket has nothing at all to do with the transport of fish.

[mickeyjim]

Seems like the guy made a pretty bad judgement call there. The law is the law, but if you can't tell a pike fillet from another species, please kindly return your badge to the cracker jack box you got it out of. Bet your gf will be pumped to get back out on the water too!!

[borchy]

Originally Posted by The Reel Deal

"Posses game fish other than at permanent residence so that species cannot be readily identified"

this still trumps whether or not the CO deemed the fish legal size. Even if he was camping there, and going to consume it in a few minutes - he can't remove the 1x1 patch until he gets to his camp or "temporary residence"

I'm not on anyone's side, but its in the regs - you can't "POSSESS" a fish you cant identify, thats what the ticket is for. Even if he is walking to a camp site, he needs to be able to identify the fish. Unless he had a frying pan heated beside the cleaning station, this is a shut case.

IMO the park is considered his residence if he is camping there. Or so I was told when a CO's manager called us to apologize for his officers behavior when he was threatening us with a ticket for transporting of fish fillets from the cleaning stand to our campsite at cold lake. If you can't ever possess an unidentifiable fish ,then right before you put the fish in the pan you are possessing a fish you can't identify. Whether or not the CO checked the fish doesn't matter in my opinion. I think he was in possession of said un identifiable fish in somewhere other than his residence which is illegal. Just my 2 cents.

[Freedom55]

Originally Posted by Winch101

Take it to court , dress poorly ,don't shave , appear somewhat retarded ,I
Mean dim witted .
Play the victim , speak sincerely to the magistrate , I've done it a couple
Of times on poaching charges .....walked .....play up the part about
The officer setting you up ...

Innocent until. Hung

Or he can man up, admit that he made a mistake and pay the fine. Like an Albertan.

[The Reel Deal]

Originally Posted by borchy

If you can't ever possess an unidentifiable fish ,then right before you put the fish in the pan you are possessing a fish you can't identify.

"Posses game fish other than at permanent residence so that species cannot be readily identified"

[RavYak]

Here is the law... No more misinformation please...

Game fish
19(1) Subject to this section, no person shall have in his
possession other than at his permanent residence any game fish that
is skinned, cut or packed so that

(a) the species of fish cannot be readily identified,
(b) the number of fish cannot be readily determined, and
(c) in the case of fish to which minimum or maximum length
limits apply, the length of the fish cannot be readily
determined.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), 2 pieces of fish flesh must
be counted as one fish.

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to

(a) the skin, fins or eyes removed from game fish which may
lawfully be used as bait,
(b) fish that are not being transported that are being prepared
for immediate consumption, and
(c) the possession of game fish that have been lawfully

(i) acquired from a jurisdiction outside of Alberta or
from a National Park of Canada,
(ii) caught and retained under the authority of a licence
other than a sportfishing licence or sturgeon fishing
licence, or
(iii) removed directly from waters where they were kept
under the authority of a fish culture licence.

In laymans terms, any fish with length requirement can only be gutted (not filleted, steaked etc) unless you are in your permanent residence or if you are preparing them for immediate consumption.

I don't think a camping trailer would be considered permanent residence but you are allowed to take the cleaned fish back to your trailer as long as you plan on consuming them.

The law is simple and clear. The regulations booklet on the other hand only refers to this law in regards to transportation which makes it slightly ambiguous but unfortunately the regulations booklet isn't considered the legal document in this instance...

[CraigJ]

It seems to me that many people are getting hung on the transport aspect of this offence. The ticket was for violating section 19(1)(a);

19(1) Subject to this section, no person shall have in his
possession other than at his permanent residence any game fish that is skinned, cut or packed so that
(a) the species of fish cannot be readily identified,

The exception to this is in section 19(3)(b);

19(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to
(b) fish that are not being transported that are being prepared for immediate consumption,

Transportation has next to nothing to do with this.

From what I recall being previously stated by OP is that he had a successful day fishing and brought the fish to the cleaning station. Fish then checked by by the CO who deems it to be legal. CO leaves (walks away?) and OP proceeded to clean and fillet the fish. OP then get ready to leave with filleted fish (now not identifiable), and is once again stopped by CO. CO questions were he is going, OP tell the truth and says home (not staying here to eat it). The offence now committed.

The elements of this offence as I see it are:
1. OP had a game fish in possession,
2. OP was not at permanent residence,
3. The game fish was not readily identifiable,
4. The game fish was not prepped for immediate consumption.

Had OP said he was going to take the fish site 'abc123' to eat it he would have likely been fine. OP would have lied, but fine.

I am not sure I agree with the call that was made by the CO in this case but when looking at the facts and actual wording of the regulation the CO was well within his authority to issue a ticket. At least you got to keep your gear. My brother in law had all his gear seized once for something similar.

[Lefty-Canuck]

^^^^^

This!

Someone had to go and ruin this pee-pee match with some good ole common sense

LC

[CraigJ]

Originally Posted by borchy

IMO the park is considered his residence if he is camping there. Or so I was told when a CO's manager called us to apologize for his officers behavior when he was threatening us with a ticket for transporting of fish fillets from the cleaning stand to our campsite at cold lake. If you can't ever possess an unidentifiable fish ,then right before you put the fish in the pan you are possessing a fish you can't identify. Whether or not the CO checked the fish doesn't matter in my opinion. I think he was in possession of said un identifiable fish in somewhere other than his residence which is illegal. Just my 2 cents.

You are correct here. The park is considered a residence if camping there, but it is a 'temporary' residence not a 'permanent' residence. I know it seems like a small difference and really it is but in the eye of the law and the court it is a crucial difference.

You actually can possess an unidentifiable fish, provided it is being prepped for immediate consumption. The key word is immediate. You can not possess an unidentifiable fish for later consumption (eg caught in the morning and filleted for eating later that night).

I am certain i had read case law (i just can't find it right now) that states you can take an unidentifiable fish from the cleaning stand to your camp provided it is to be immediately consumed upon arrival at the camp.

[Double_A_Ron]

The CO identified the fish while I was in the process of cleaning it, measured the Skelton and said have a good day. Went back to my truck to finish getting ready to leave and that's where I was ticketed, truck was not started or moved.

I appreciate all the comments, both condemning my actions for not following the regs and supporting my position that it was a legal fish.

Hopefully the next thread I post will be for something positive. Thanks.

[Double_A_Ron]

Just wanted to let you guys know I plead not guilty to my ticket, mailed it in and the judge withdrew it. I won.

I'm happy I won, still a shame that the fish went to waste. Hopefully next time the officer is in a situation like that they will choose education over fines and seizure.

Thanks again for the conversations on both sides of the coin.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by Double_A_Ron

Just wanted to let you guys know I plead not guilty to my ticket, mailed it in and the judge withdrew it. I won.

I'm happy I won, still a shame that the fish went to waste. Hopefully next time the officer is in a situation like that they will choose education over fines and seizure.

Thanks again for the conversations on both sides of the coin.

Good for you. Could have all been handled amicably with a warning. I guess an education for the officer, and for you. I'd consider the fish the cost of your education.

[RavYak]

Good for you I guess. They must be really backed up if you didn't even have to make a court appearance.

I think this thread is a good reminder for everyone that here in AB there are very strict rules regarding the transportation of fish. You must be able to prove length(for any species with length requirement) and species so the fish has to remain intact(guts and gills may be removed) until you get home to your primary residence.

I have forgotten this rule in the past and I don't necessarily agree with it but it is what it is.

[waterninja]

And here was I wondering why this thread from Sept. was re-activated. Glad OP won court case. Don't think this was handled correctly by c.o.

[Chief16]

Originally Posted by RavYak

On many lakes cleaning stations are relics of a time when you could clean your fish... Now they can only be used for fish with no size requirement.

I didn't know this! Don't keep fish regardless but very good info to let people know if you see them using it