South West Stream Watch May Report

[adc]

Hi Everyone..........

 

Below is Jeff's report for May........As you know May is pretty slow on the streams........Good news is Jeff hit the ground running and his report for June should be more active.......

 

Al....

 

Stream Watch Report for the Month of May

Jeff Cox

Blairmore District, Southern Rockies Region

 

Hi Allan; everything here is going good. I have got all my equipment back again and ready to go. I just picked up the Stream watch truck yesterday from Barry. Kirk has ordered a radio for the truck so it should be 100% functional soon. This report is for all of May just because there is not a lot to report on in May with DT and getting all the equipment ready along with the truck issue, but that said I am fired up and ready to hit the streams as soon as they are open. I am sure glad to return this year, so now I can hit the road running and not waste any time. Just go out there on the streams right away. My next report will be just after the 15 of June. I guess I will see you at the clean up on the 6 of June.

 

Talk to you soon Jeff

 

March 30 – May 7 – Defensive training in Hinton

 

May 8 - Office work and gathering up all equipment needed.

 

May 9 – DOR 1

 

May 10 – DOR 2

 

May 11 – DOR 1

 

May 12 – DOR 2

 

May 13 – Angler checks on Crowsnest Lake, Crowsnest River, and Burmis area. No violations

 

May14 – May long weekend meeting at Ranger station. Patrolled Castle area. No violations.

 

May15 – Angler check at Burmis area. Check stop on road way into Beaver Mines for 4 hours. Was able to check 6 fisherman and 4 Turkey hunters during check stop.

 

May 16 – Patrolled Castle area. At castle Falls I noticed a small boy and a man beside the river. The boy was carrying a fish. When they where approached the male did not have a licence and did not know that the river was closed. The boy was only 3 years old and did not understand why he could not keep his fish (his first fish he ever caught). So, he was told that if he promised to eat the fish he could keep it. The male was charged with fishing in closed waters and given a written warning for barbed hooks.

 

May 17 – Patrolled Castle area and Beaver mines area. No angler violations

 

May 18 – Statutory holiday

 

May 19 – DOR 1

 

May 20 – DOR 2

 

May 21 – P.A.R.E. test in Lethbridge. Time 3:55

 

May 22 – Checked 3 fishermen at Phillips Lake. Checked 1 fish. No violations.

 

May 23 – Checked all of Crowsnest River. Checked a total of 8 fishermen. No violations.

 

May 24 – Checked all of Crowsnest River for anglers none found. No violations

 

May 25 – Office. No patrols

 

May 26 – Checked a male fishing Chinook Lake upon inspection of his gear he had barbed hooks. He was given a written warning. He caught 2 rainbow trout.

 

May 27 – No patrols. Office

 

May 28 - Patrolled Crowsnest River with fisheries biologist Mathew Coombs and showed him were all the anglers’ fish for his upcoming creel survey this summer.

 

May 29 – Office. No patrols

 

May 30 – DOR 1

 

May 31 – DOR 2

[Jayhad]

That is a good report. No fluff, simple, concise and to the point. It makes it very easy to see the water managment at work with this type of report.

 

I do have a question and I am not saying things were done wrong, this isn't a critisism.

 

Why give written warnings? I think the idea of violations is to teach a lesson so this doesn't happen again. If angler "a" always uses barbs but never gets a violations what is the point. I think barbed hooks are probably the number 1 violation out there so why not hit these offenders where it hurts???

 

Like I said I am not complaining or saying it should be done different I am just wondering, what are your thoughts?

[darrinhurst]

I agree. Barbed hooks are illegal. Period. If they don't do the homework to check the regulations for sportfishing, then that's thier loss. Fines are a great way to get the message across.

 

If the guy had a lisence, don't you think he'd know the basic rules of no barbed hooks?

[trailhead]

I had an interesting experience last year on the Crow, I was fishing at Frank and a CO approached me and asked for my license and to see my hook. I had the license and was fishing a hopper dropper. The CO said I was fishing with a barbed hook on the size 18 dropper nymph. I pinch all the barbs on the flies I tie, and I'd tied that fly. We had a bit of a argument, he had some type of chart and claimed according to the chart my fly had a barb. So he asked to see my flybox, which was full of debarbed flies. So he let me off with a warning. So maybe that is the point of warnings. Anyway I think for smaller hooks I'm going to start buying barbless ones to tie on.

[PeteZahut]

This brings to mind a question that I thought about when I read one of these reports awhile ago. I think he gave him a written warning for possessing a hook with barbs but not catch him fishing it. I believe he would have gotten a ticket if he was actually fishing with the hook with barbs. That is what I got from it (and from a previous report like it).

 

Now, it is not written in the regulations (or point it to me if I am wrong) that it is illegal to carry or possess hooks with barbs so why waste time and paper writing a warning? I am an offender of this as I tend to buy my flies and they all seem to come with barbs. I am too lazy to pinch them all right after buying them and wait until I tie them on. Yes I know, I could forget but I have not forgetton once to date as I have made it a routine every time I string up or tie on a new fly.

 

If the warning is just a way to educate then that is fine, just thought writing a warning out for something that really doesn't provide a consequence is a bit inefficient in my mind.

[darrinhurst]

I suppose in reading the report, it didn't indicate that the fish caught was on a barbed hook or not. Just assumed that it was, which could be short sighted of me. That being said, if the fish was caught on a barbed hook, and it wasn't in the circumstances described above, then a fine should be warranted. If the accused is actively fishing with a barbed hook, they should be fined. If, like Trailhead, he was fishing with what appeared to be a barbed hook that wasn't 100% crimped down, but everything else was fine, then a warning.

 

I guess it's a judgement call, based on the circumstance.

[gustuphson]

I think that warnings are a valuable tool - no need to throw the book at each and every infraction (yes, some need the "book" right across their knuckles but not all), that would would alienate a lot of individuals from the sport via direct experience and word of mouth. I've been looking into hunting and picked up the regulations, I'm well educated and they weren't the easiest read I've had by far. I think the same goes for the fishing regulations but most of us here know them like the back of our hands.

 

Although most of us treasure our fisheries we often only focus on certain issues and at times miss the bigger picture. The probability of Alberta's fisheries being maintained and/or improved is better with more supporters through out the Province, not just avid flyfishers but anglers of all sorts.

 

 

[reevesr1]

I would say that the CO is free to use his discretion. If he thinks the person was making an honest mistake, i have absolutely no issue with a warning being issued. You can be that if it was a mistake, that person will not do it again, which is the desired outcome.

 

For those of you who think otherwise, did you ever say "no thanks" when a officer gave you a warning for speeding??

 

As to efficiency, pizza boy is probably right. But really, he's not seeing that many people in a day anyway, so is the loss of efficiency meaningful?

 

 

 

 

[SilverDoctor]

Thanks for posting the report, nice to see the patrols and actions. Fines at the discretion of the officer at the scene. I like warnings, nice first step not like they where caught poaching.

[PeteZahut]

As to efficiency, pizza boy is probably right. But really, he's not seeing that many people in a day anyway, so is the loss of efficiency meaningful?

 

You are right, probably not enough people seen to measure efficiency. Perhaps I shouldn't check this forum during work hours as I get my work buzz words mixed into flyfishing talk.

[reevesr1]

I really just wanted to say pizza boy cuz it made me laugh.

[adc]

Why give written warnings? I think the idea of violations is to teach a lesson so this doesn't happen again. If angler "a" always uses barbs but never gets a violations what is the point. I think barbed hooks are probably the number 1 violation out there so why not hit these offenders where it hurts???

 

 

Good question..........Our Stream Watch officers take some serious training on how and when to give a ticket/warning and then, in every instance, they need to use discretion......We're lucky to have Jeff for two reasons: 1) He's a bit more "mature" (older) than a typical Stream Watch officer out of college, and 2) He's got experience on the job from last year........It's a fine balance between laying on a ticket and fine or writing a warning and it takes some maturity and experience to assess the situation and make the call............By the way, they issue a written warning so there is a record and if the offender is caught a second time they can determine it's a second offence and that may impact the severity of the fine.........Clive travelled a day with Jeff last year and was very impressed with how he managed the delicate balance of education and enforcement........

[Hawgstoppah]

In the day and age of internet, we dont need a mix of education and enforcement. we need STIFF FINES for any offense. Regs are EASILY available online or ANYWHERE you buy a license....hearing that a fish kept from closed waters and all they got away with was a charge for fishing in closed waters - should have had the whole book thrown at them 3 year old or not that's dad's responsibility to get off his A$$ and check the damn regs.

 

This whole warning thing frustrates the hell out of me. If you dont wear a seatbelt, and you get caught, you get a ticket.

 

If you go fishing, you SHOULD KNOW THE REGS or dont fish! and if you get caught - TICKET.. I am so damn tired of hearing "oh we gave them a warning".

 

LETS GET SERIOUS for frickssakes...

 

Gaaah this ticks me off... what's the purpose of an officer if all he does is warnings. We need results! My 2 cents..

[hopdrop]

we need STIFF FINES for any offense. Regs are EASILY available online or ANYWHERE you buy a license....

 

 

I agree, kind of. Ignorance is not an excuse. For things like keeping a fish out of a closed river caught on barbed hooks, hang 'em high. For things like how de-barbed a hook is (I know, the denim test) it's not so black and white.

 

IMHO it's going to take some STEEP fines for the ignorance excuse to disappear. Word will get out.

 

[Hawgstoppah]

IMHO it's going to take some STEEP fines for the ignorance excuse to disappear. Word will get out.

 

exactly.

 

fines for fishing a closed river or keeping an illegal fish should be in the thousands. starting... yes starting, at about 5000 bucks. word will get out.

 

[dryfly]

Just a note about the "warnings". Each situation is different. I saw Jeff issue two last year. One was to a person who got one ticket (plus the warning); and the other was to a person walking off the Liv and happened to have a barbed fly...but was not seen fishing with it..even thought the fly was wet. (A ticket would not have held up in court anyway had the guy challenged it.)

 

Both warnings were appropriate under the circumstances. The guy who also got a ticket actually thanked Jeff after the incident. Jeff could have given him two tickets and his two kids one ticket each for barbs. If Jeff had issued four tickets (which he could have done), then would have made life-long cop haters out of the two teens fishing with barbs. As it was, the two teens rec'd "info packages" and a free debarbed fishing lure ... it all made sense.

 

The most important thing is that every warning, encounter and ticket is logged into the central database in Edmonton. The officers are in immediate radio contact with "control central" and call in for checks when they find a "perp." If a guy got a warning before then he will get nailed the second time. Sometimes tickets are issued the first time and sometimes not. It depends on the regulation or regs being broken.

 

Warnings have a place. Tickets have a place--obviously. It is indeed a balance between education and enforcement.

 

"fines for fishing a closed river or keeping an illegal fish" .. I tend to agree that fines should be automatic for some laws..no warnings ever. The value of the fines is not up to the officers. Those rates defined by politicians and senior bureaucrats. The fine for one bull trout is a mere $50. For an illegal sheep it is more like $5,000...and up to (waht?) $100K or something like that. Mammals are warm and fuzzy and fish are cold and slimy and covered up with water and even eco weenies can't see 'em. THAT makes a big difference. It should not, but it does. (In the oceans, net caught-salmon for example suffocate to death in the holds of fish ships...a slow death and no one cares or says anything..they are fish. Cute, fuzzy, baby seals are clobbered and most die instantly. Yet which case draws media and eco-weenie attention? The cute seals of course.)

 

Clive

PS: That's the first time I've heard of officers having a "chart" regarding barbs.

[PeteZahut]

I really just wanted to say pizza boy cuz it made me laugh.

 

I wasn't sure if anyone actually realized that my handle was a play on words and not my name. Good on you for catching it.

[rhuseby]

Those who are ranting about no warnings should arrange to accompany a fish and wildlife officer on patrol sometime. You may get some perspective on everything that is involved in the protection of our fish and wildlife resources. If you insist that massive, maximum fines for every single violation are the only way to go, make sure that you never ever make any kind of mistake.

[reevesr1]

Those who are ranting about no warnings should arrange to accompany a fish and wildlife officer on patrol sometime. You may get some perspective on everything that is involved in the protection of our fish and wildlife resources. If you insist that massive, maximum fines for every single violation are the only way to go, make sure that you never ever make any kind of mistake.

 

Agreed. I learned a long time ago to try not to question other's job performance if you've never had the job yourself.

 

[Hawgstoppah]

If you insist that massive, maximum fines for every single violation are the only way to go, make sure that you never ever make any kind of mistake.

 

isn't that the whole point I am trying to make??

 

bring a deer home in the back of your pickup truck right now and try to tell the C.O. it was a "mistake". same damn thing.... I don't know why alberta continually gives it's fisheries the shaft.

 

Every time I bring this up people disagree, but the ONLY WAY anything will EVER CHANGE... is to bring in STIFF FINES and ZERO TOLERANCE. Period!

 

[rundleff]

Every time I bring this up people disagree, but the ONLY WAY anything will EVER CHANGE... is to bring in STIFF FINES and ZERO TOLERANCE. Period!

 

You're the guy going to cop school right? You gonna pull over everyone going 1km over the limit? It's part education, part public relations and part enforcement. There has to be some grey area. I agree in the fines, but I'd like to see those who willfully and knowingly break the law get the biggest and hashest of the fines. Bigger fines may just mean better poachers.

[Hawgstoppah]

You're the guy going to cop school right? You gonna pull over everyone going 1km over the limit? It's part education, part public relations and part enforcement. There has to be some grey area. I agree in the fines, but I'd like to see those who willfully and knowingly break the law get the biggest and hashest of the fines. Bigger fines may just mean better poachers.

 

you cant compare driving to breaking a fishing regulation. that's like comparing driving to dealing drugs. breaking fish and game regulations needs to be treated more seriously. The fact that your putting it on the same level with driving 1km over the speed limit saddens me. This is serious stuff folks! Speak up! Make your opinions heard!

 

There are no grey areas in the regulations. It's written out for you in a easily available book. Most streams have signs on the paths and accesses to them. Read 'em or dont fish, if you got questions ask BEFORE you fish. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

[Taco]

perch too peace??

[orvisonly]

you cant compare driving to breaking a fishing regulation. that's like comparing driving to dealing drugs

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

How about just plain ignorance?

 

There are no grey areas in fishing. That's a good one. If I can point out a few grey areas in the Alberta regulations, would that satisfy you?

 

Start with the term 'barbless'. If one bends the barb back is it really barbless? Some officers have developed their own measure of barbless, but what regulation is this based on.

 

Let's say you are fishing in Lower Kananaskis and you hook a large bull trout that pulls your fly well inside the no fishing line. Then you lose the fish. What do you do then? If you try to reel in and get another fish, should you have to book thrown at you?

 

If you crash land in a remote area near a stream or lake that you know is closed to fishing and then catch and eat a fish (using bait and a barbed hook), how many fines should you get?

 

Downstream of the Carseland Weir is closed, upstream is open, what about the stream that is flowing over the weir? What do the regulations say?

 

Regulations say cutthroat must be released but all other trout, limit is 2. You catch a cutt-bow. Can you keep it.

 

I think you will make an excellent police officer.

[rundleff]

Thanks Orvis

 

There must be some grey areas, or even regs that are confusing to read because I see a few questions about the regs on here all the time. What if I can't read english? I may make a few mistakes in the translation.

 

Barbless is a good one to start with as it wasn't a law until recently and I run into a shitload of people using barbed hooks. If I see it, I say something about it and let that person know they are fishing out of the regulation. If they pinch down the barb, cool, but if they tell me FO, I'm gonna call RAP.

 

breaking fish and game regulations needs to be treated more seriously.

 

I don't disagree with that, but I think getting all Big Brother on the situation isn't the right approach. We are headed in the right direction though, and this board is a big part of helping out the CO's with thier calls. Poaching should have a pretty low tolerence level, but for some other violations.... Just saying there are some situations that call for a warning and others that call for fines. The fact they the warnings are recorded means that they can track repeat offenders on some level.

 

I'm pretty sure we are all playing for the same team.