Fisherman Caught With 40 Extra Trout In Maragree! - Fishing in the News - Nova Scotia Fishing

Jump to content


Photo

Fisherman Caught With 40 Extra Trout In Maragree!


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#1 Edward

Edward

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • LocationCape Breton

Posted 07 October 2013 - 05:30 PM

He better be made to pay the entire fine!

 

http://www.capebreto...long-Margaree/1


  • 0

#2 caper40

caper40

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 255 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:29 PM

i agree he should never be allowed to fish again and pay the full fine also he got caught this year whos to say this was the first time he took over the limit


  • 0

#3 SalmoSolar

SalmoSolar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 135 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:54 PM

make an example out of him bigtime.   give him a time frame to pay within and if not give the scab jail time


  • 0

#4 csft

csft

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 07:06 PM

The full fine and a lifetime ban on fishing and hunting privileges would be a good start. Poachers are criminals and need to be dealt with as such !!!


  • 0

Chasing Silver Fly & Tackle Shop, Truro, NS

 

https://www.facebook...315855245116155


#5 50 cal

50 cal

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 07:39 PM

He should have to pay fine in full and the money should go to the Margaree river association and he should be put in a chair at the sportsmans shows  with a sign hung around his neck saying I'm a poacher and a thief to all that fish


  • 0

#6 scottw

scottw

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • LocationBridgewater, NS

Posted 07 October 2013 - 07:46 PM

So, so common.

Like it or not, the average trout fisherman will keep more than the legal limit if given the chance.


  • 0

#7 fivepoundtrout

fivepoundtrout

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts
  • LocationDartmouth

Posted 07 October 2013 - 08:54 PM

So, so common.

Like it or not, the average trout fisherman will keep more than the legal limit if given the chance.

I tend to agree, BUT, keeping like six or something is vastly different than keeping 45.  love how the attorney says he got carried away, thats a little mor than getting carried away, in some systems in nova scotia that would decimate the population. If the fine is reduced people will think "ah well its not so bad", unfortunately for this man hes the one who got caught, and they should make an example. That way people might think about the fact that some extra fish arent worth paying $4000+. and honestlyhe probably shouldnt be allowed on that system anymore. Just my 2 cents.

 

catch and release!


  • 0

#8 -----

-----

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1040 posts
  • LocationAnywhere that fish are and people are not

Posted 08 October 2013 - 05:53 AM

So, so common.

Like it or not, the average trout fisherman will keep more than the legal limit if given the chance.

No Scott, I totally disagree with that blanketed, paint all with the same brush statement. What you are implying is that the average Trout Fisher is also a Poacher. That is a bizzare statement. I realize it happens, make no mistake, however what you are saying cannot be supported with any concrete proof. Add to that most Trout Fishers that I know also Salmon Fish, so therefore they must be taking more salmon too, at least with your same analogy?

Please do not turn this thread into an Anti rant against one type or species or Fisher over the other. There is far too much of that crap on this site to begin with. This guy is a Poacher, not a Fisher.


  • 0
I keep my head held high and smile, because there are people who will kill to see me fall.

#9 csft

csft

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 08 October 2013 - 06:13 AM

So, so common.

Like it or not, the average trout fisherman will keep more than the legal limit if given the chance.

That is complete and utter BS and you know it, that is the same as me saying all tournament bass anglers will play bucket biologist.

 

The amount of anglers who willfully break the laws is a very small minority.


  • 0

Chasing Silver Fly & Tackle Shop, Truro, NS

 

https://www.facebook...315855245116155


#10 902

902

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 319 posts

Posted 08 October 2013 - 06:52 AM

That is complete and utter BS and you know it, that is the same as me saying all tournament bass anglers will play bucket biologist.

 

The amount of anglers who willfully break the laws is a very small minority.

Key words here: "anglers" and "willfully"

 

I completely agree most avid fishermen (self proclaimed anglers) would not willfully break the laws that keep our sport alive.

 

On the other hand, in my experience, a LOT of people who just fish occasionally don't even own a license, let alone a handbook and based on what I've seen they couldn't care less if they don't get caught.

 

THAT BEING SAID....

 

What it comes down to for me is: 

Blatant disregard for the law, and the impact it has on the system. 

 

6 Trout once a year from a guy who rarely fishes is a lot different than 45 from a guy who's been doing this for ages most likely and definitely knows the laws. 


  • 0

#11 Perry

Perry

    Moderator

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1353 posts

Posted 08 October 2013 - 07:46 AM

The two brothers were caught with 50 trout. One brother claimed five and the other had 45 in his bag. This was just a ploy that avoided two charges. A question for me is the bag limit a conservation effort or a shareing of the resource. Thinking that fifty dead trout is putting the trout resource in danger would suggest the bag limit is a conservation effort. Allowing 10 anglers to keep their bag limit that total 50 trout and that is legal suggests the bag limit is a sharing of the resource. Our outrage would then be a matter of greed and taking more than his share. Remember he could come back ten times with his brother keep their limit each day and be legal. Trout resource is fragile in some waters and not in others but the bag limit is the same with a few exceptions. I believe the trout resource in watersheds that are accessable to average anglers that are in decline is a death by a thousand cuts not one!

All that said throw the book at him!


  • 2

Just because you fish a lot doen't mean you are great or even good. It just means you fish a lot!!


#12 SalmoSolar

SalmoSolar

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 135 posts

Posted 08 October 2013 - 09:35 AM

The two brothers were caught with 50 trout. One brother claimed five and the other had 45 in his bag. This was just a ploy that avoided two charges. A question for me is the bag limit a conservation effort or a shareing of the resource. Thinking that fifty dead trout is putting the trout resource in danger would suggest the bag limit is a conservation effort. Allowing 10 anglers to keep their bag limit that total 50 trout and that is legal suggests the bag limit is a sharing of the resource. Our outrage would then be a matter of greed and taking more than his share. Remember he could come back ten times with his brother keep their limit each day and be legal. Trout resource is fragile in some waters and not in others but the bag limit is the same with a few exceptions. I believe the trout resource in watersheds that are accessable to average anglers that are in decline is a death by a thousand cuts not one!

All that said throw the book at him!

very well said.

the regulations here are very general in nature and really do nothing to protect the resource or create trophy fisheries but serve more to keep the people happy that want to eat what they catch.  


  • 0

#13 darren

darren

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 171 posts
  • LocationSeabright NS

Posted 08 October 2013 - 10:19 AM

Yes, for every poacher caught there are so many still on the loose. It's a wonder we have any trout left in Nova Scotia. I'd be very happy to see more catch and release waters, fly fishing only, or at least restricted tackle. I fear for Wooden's river next year if the proposed changes are implemented, there are already fish being taken from that system and I have noticed a significant difference just this past spring.


  • 0

#14 zymtoot

zymtoot

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 344 posts
  • LocationCape Breton

Posted 08 October 2013 - 11:12 AM

What a slap in the face to all of us who spend our time,money,blood,sweat and tears to protect and conserve a fishery only to have people like that to do their best to wipe it out.These type of people disgust me,they dont care about the consequences of their actions on the rivers so i hope the judge thinks the same way i do and throws the book at him,if he gets off easy other poachers will think... well... if he got off with a slap on the wrist thats all that will happen to me if/when they caught.Set an example on this punk. 


  • 0

#15 Edward

Edward

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • LocationCape Breton

Posted 08 October 2013 - 11:48 AM

It would be nice if we could make the judge aware that in fact this is not a matter to be taken lightly, and there are people out there who agree with and support the law, in this case anyway. It seems that this is the attitude they are putting forth by even delaying the ruling. Absolutely ridiculous.


  • 0

#16 scottw

scottw

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • LocationBridgewater, NS

Posted 08 October 2013 - 06:59 PM

No Scott, I totally disagree with that blanketed, paint all with the same brush statement. What you are implying is that the average Trout Fisher is also a Poacher. That is a bizzare statement. I realize it happens, make no mistake, however what you are saying cannot be supported with any concrete proof. Add to that most Trout Fishers that I know also Salmon Fish, so therefore they must be taking more salmon too, at least with your same analogy?

Please do not turn this thread into an Anti rant against one type or species or Fisher over the other. There is far too much of that crap on this site to begin with. This guy is a Poacher, not a Fisher.

I should rephrase; instead of "average" trout fisherman, I should have said the "majority". For every one fisherman that will stop at a limit, often a forum member or staunch C&R fisherman, there are ten people that will take ten fish rather than five, given the chance.  The vast majority of people that buy a license have never heard of or considered C&R, or feel that "catching a few extra" is really a problem. The mindset seems to be that they only get out fishing a few times a year; why shouldn't they keep a few extra?

I have a very large number of aquaintances at my workplace; many who fish. Common discussions that come up are "went on a trout fishing trip yesterday; caught 15 nice ones". Did you throw 'um back? "Yeah, right. lol".

Catching 45 over the limit is ridiculous, and deserves the maximum fine.

I would fully support C&R only for any trout waters, but the gov't isn't ready to accept an 80-90% drop in license sales.


  • 0

#17 -----

-----

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1040 posts
  • LocationAnywhere that fish are and people are not

Posted 09 October 2013 - 03:54 AM

I should rephrase; instead of "average" trout fisherman, I should have said the "majority". For every one fisherman that will stop at a limit, often a forum member or staunch C&R fisherman, there are ten people that will take ten fish rather than five, given the chance.  The vast majority of people that buy a license have never heard of or considered C&R, or feel that "catching a few extra" is really a problem. The mindset seems to be that they only get out fishing a few times a year; why shouldn't they keep a few extra?

I have a very large number of aquaintances at my workplace; many who fish. Common discussions that come up are "went on a trout fishing trip yesterday; caught 15 nice ones". Did you throw 'um back? "Yeah, right. lol".

Catching 45 over the limit is ridiculous, and deserves the maximum fine.

I would fully support C&R only for any trout waters, but the gov't isn't ready to accept an 80-90% drop in license sales.

Again I disagree with you. Trout Fishers are also Salmon Fishers who are also Bass Fishers. This in a great "Majority of cases" what you apply to one, surly then applies to the others. Because some Poach, does not mean the "Majority do". Do you Poach?  I Trout fish and do not retain more then five, sometimes, many times retaining less or none. I am not a C and R fisher, but certainly release many. Contrary to many posters here, C and R has Mortality attached to it. Trophy Fisheries, as also was suggested, will, if they ever get introduced, be Reserved for the Wealthy.  Have a Look at the system in PQ, have a look at the Queen Charlotte Islands, have a look at NFLD Moose Hunting. Regardless,another thread that singles out one form or species of Fisher over the other. There was even the suggestion of the typical elitist "Flying Fishing only" statement within a post here.  This when the thread was started, pointing out a poacher caught, it  having nothing to do with method, or type of fisher. Off the rails as so many threads go here and as usual dividing fishers.


  • 0
I keep my head held high and smile, because there are people who will kill to see me fall.

#18 scottw

scottw

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • LocationBridgewater, NS

Posted 09 October 2013 - 06:26 AM

The only reason I said "trout fisherman" is because that's our traditional local freshwater fishery. If people get a taste for bass, then the same logic will apply until the old way of thinking changes.

I can only repeat what I've seen and heard over the last 40 years. Many people here are expecting adherence to the law based what they FEEL should be happening and what they would do rather than what the public at large will actually do.

A meat fisherman walks an hour and hits the big bite. He's throwing bait, and 10 minutes later he's got five fish. Does he stop there and walk out? Rarely.


  • 0

#19 csft

csft

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 06:36 AM

As the owner of a fishing tackle shop i can tell you that my experience in dealing with the fishing public on a daily basis is the complete opposite of what you experience. Far and away the majority of the people i talk to everyday are conservation minded anglers who keep the odd fish for a feed but are mostly C & R anglers. 


  • 0

Chasing Silver Fly & Tackle Shop, Truro, NS

 

https://www.facebook...315855245116155


#20 raven4ns

raven4ns

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 492 posts
  • LocationDartmouth

Posted 09 October 2013 - 08:25 AM

This is why the trout population is in the shape it is...over fishing, blatant disregard for the resource, no respect for the laws that govern over-cutting along streams etc. Where is the cut off for prosecuting individuals, companies for ignoring laws that were put in place to try and prevent this kind of occurrence.  You can't legislate away stupidity, greed, ignorance or similar afflictions, the best you can hope for is to punish those who demonstrate these kinds of behavior. If the laws are ignored or watered down by the judiciary what is purpose in having them?
 This man will have committed this same offense year after year for countless years but he is one of many, unfortunately. To let him get away with this is to give the rest of the violators carte blanche to do as they please. This is not the message that should be sent to people who ignore the law. The message that should be sent is if you break our laws you will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Tim


  • 0

All the best

Tim

The measure of a man is not how many times he gets knocked down....but how many times he gets back up

 

https://www.flickr.c...s/[email protected]/

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users