Sports Fishing Guide gets off charges.

[bigdogeh]

I'm sure there are many dfo that act with integrity but imo it seems there are a few (too many) dfo that act without also. the ones that don't seem to be doing a very good job protecting the environment and wild fisheries resource from invasive species (atlantics) and seem to do a better job protecting corporate interests (open net fish farming) over the general public and first nations. If the rules are subject to interpretation and bending to suit a poaching then maybe the rules need to be changed or as also mentioned the dfo need to step up their game. innocent till proven guilty. they're the ones making the rules. make them so they work. or make sure you have sufficient evidence before wasting taxpayer's hard earned money.

 

[Cuba Libre]

Interesting bigdogeh "...imo it seems there are a few (too many) dfo that act without also. " Well perhaps you can tell us who they are ????

 

[ziggy]

I believe the Crown Prosecutor is responsible for the laying of charges,not DFO! So it appears that if there was a Case, which they( legal experts) must have believed they had in order to lay charges, they pooched . In essence they would have reviewed DFO's evidence, determined they had a reasonable chance of conviction and decided to prosecute. For what ever reason they took it before a Judge and lost.
To lay this all on DFO is erroneous IMO, this should have been subject to review by the legal system prior to going to trial and somehow made it through

But as mentioned by others on here, I'm sure they will have their ducks in a row next time

 

[bigdogeh]

Interesting bigdogeh "...imo it seems there are a few (too many) dfo that act without also. " Well perhaps you can tell us who they are ????

I think I already did. The ones that have decided to put the profits of the mostly foreign corporately owned fish farms ahead of the health and well being of the wild salmon runs (and the people, and other animals and organisms that are part of the food chain that depend on them) that have existed for thousands of years.

Imo (in my opinion)


When I see the word integrity and dfo in the same sentence I don't always tend to see that as being as simple as black and white. I tend to question where there priorities lie.

 

[fishingbc]

I believe the Crown Prosecutor is responsible for the laying of charges,not DFO! So it appears that if there was a Case, which they( legal experts) must have believed they had in order to lay charges, they pooched . In essence they would have reviewed DFO's evidence, determined they had a reasonable chance of conviction and decided to prosecute. For what ever reason they took it before a Judge and lost.
To lay this all on DFO is erroneous IMO, this should have been subject to review by the legal system prior to going to trial and somehow made it through

But as mentioned by others on here, I'm sure they will have their ducks in a row next time

Not the case at all
I knew I was right and hadn't broken ANY laws.
I filed the dispute at the provincial court house in COURTENAY the next morning
Just like a traffic ticket , it up to the person charged to dispute it

 

[Bent-Tip]

Not the case at all
I knew I was right and hadn't broken ANY laws.
I filed the dispute at the provincial court house in COURTENAY the next morning
Just like a traffic ticket , it up to the person charged to dispute it

So thanks for that. I'm glad you were right. I'm happy you didn't have to pay your $300 fine. Your ethics meter seems a bit off kilter for me but as I said I'm happy for you. You at least got to be right......

 

[Aces]

I'm sure there are many dfo that act with integrity but imo it seems there are a few (too many) dfo that act without also. the ones that don't seem to be doing a very good job protecting the environment and wild fisheries resource from invasive species (atlantics) and seem to do a better job protecting corporate interests (open net fish farming) over the general public and first nations. If the rules are subject to interpretation and bending to suit a poaching then maybe the rules need to be changed or as also mentioned the dfo need to step up their game. innocent till proven guilty. they're the ones making the rules. make them so they work. or make sure you have sufficient evidence before wasting taxpayer's hard earned money.

Where are these Atlantics living that you mention?

 

[ziggy]

Not the case at all
I knew I was right and hadn't broken ANY laws.
I filed the dispute at the provincial court house in COURTENAY the next morning
Just like a traffic ticket , it up to the person charged to dispute it

What, that is absolutely the case? You say the Prosecutor doesn't review the Charge recommended by DFO? You may want to try and explain this new legal system.

 

[fishingbc]

What, that is absolutely the case? You say the Prosecutor doesn't review the Charge recommended by DFO? You may want to try and explain this new legal system.

Whether the crown reviews it or not I still get to dispute the charge. End of story.
They don't have a choice. I get my day in court.

 

[Bret]

I troll for halibut all the time with salmon gear and down riggers. I use barbless hooks. As far as I'm concerned if your hooked up to downriggers you should be barbless.

 

[Aces]

I troll for halibut all the time with salmon gear and down riggers. I use barbless hooks. As far as I'm concerned if your hooked up to downriggers you should be barbless.

Yes, agreed.

 

[noluck]

x2 as above

 

[ziggy]

Whether the crown reviews it or not I still get to dispute the charge. End of story.
They don't have a choice. I get my day in court.

It's not "Whether the Crown reviews the Charge", the Crown does Review the Charge, prior to laying the Charge. If they thought there wasn't a reasonable chance of conviction, it doesn't go to court and no charge is layed. So they certainly have a choice.

 

[halimark]

When trolling for cod I use my flashers, blue meanie hootchie, any of 30 spoons, or 7" tomic with BARBED hooks, when trolling for salmon I use my flashers, blue meanie hootchie, any of 30 spoons or 7" tomic with BARBLESS hooks, or I change hooks each time specie dependant. Man my tackle box and I are organised, and I never get mixed up on what hooked lure, place or species that I am primarily after.

Wonder what an unanounced view of the tackle box would have displayed a few days prior to all this?

Im out.

HM

 

[Prairie Locked]

Wonder what an unanounced view of the tackle box would have displayed a few days prior to all this?

Everything barbless except anything that is brand new and yet unopened. This also including everything for bottom fishing.

 

[fishingbc]

It's not "Whether the Crown reviews the Charge", the Crown does Review the Charge, prior to laying the Charge. If they thought there wasn't a reasonable chance of conviction, it doesn't go to court and no charge is layed. So they certainly have a choice.

Wrong
If I wanted to dispute the ticket issued that day , I can and did. It's up to the crown to prove my guilt which they did not. It's not a murder charge. You watch too much TV. I have the right to dispute it regardless of what the crown or DFO think.
We live in a democracy and it's a right WE ALL HAVE.

 

[bigbruce]

It's not "Whether the Crown reviews the Charge", the Crown does Review the Charge, prior to laying the Charge. If they thought there wasn't a reasonable chance of conviction, it doesn't go to court and no charge is layed. So they certainly have a choice.

C'mon gang, we're not talking about a criminal charge here. We're talking a violation ticket - like the one you get when you are caught speeding or parking in a no parking zone. I can't recall seeing a prosecutor in a police car approving the issuing of a speeding ticket. The person receiving the ticket has the right to dispute the ticket - as fishingbc did - and have his day in court.

 

[wildthing]

just like me going through an amber light
thought i was not going to be able to stop in time so drove through a clear intersection
the cop sat on the blind side other side of the road came speeding up behind on a sunday morning quite main road
and issued me a ticket which i told him was a joke
explained my side and got issued a ticket anyways
seen him in court 18 months later only for it to be dismissed..... before it went to the judge
who would have thrown it out anyways ......

or i would have had points and more insurance to pay ripoff ' ICBC ' afterwards.....

loophole that needs to be address or it will be used again as middle finger to DFO....

 

[saltydawg]

Had his day in court, found innocent, let it go. Don't get me wrong, it's unbelievably suspicious (and he could of been using targeting salmon) but the court had all the info and innocent, no need to keyboard warrior slander someone on here after the court ruled IMO. Way worse things done on the water than that (tens and tens of rockfish caught daily by certain boats in Vancouver or even on the island) so let it go...

Hey. He was the one chirping on a public forum about DFO officers lying (IN CAPITALS) while all they are doing is enforcing guidelines we all agreed to. Besides, what else we got to do before the nice fishing weather returns again.

 

[bigbruce]

I think most here know exactly what game was being played here - and fortunately, most have high enough ethical standards that they do not play it.
There are a few, however, who will and will ultimately see the regulations changed to close the loopholes.
How about - if you're under power - i.e. trolling - barbless hooks. No power - i.e. jigging - barbs OK.